User talk:Shamedog18

NFL playoffs

I know what you're trying to do, but please stop. It's not crystalballism to put a team ahead to the next round when they're ahead by 9, with the ball, with 2 minutes to go in the other team's zone. Why do this, when in 5 minutes there's not even a wikilawyering reason to do it? Don't fall asleep ^zzzzzz 00:43, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Even if there is a 99.9999999% chance a team is going to run the clock out and end the game, the game is still not over. On the "edit" page, it specifically says not to add scores before the games are over. And please do not ask me to stop following guidelines. Thank you. Shamedog18 (talk) 00:50, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is what wikilawyering is. There's no need to beat people over the head with the rules solely for the sake of beating people over the head with the rules. And, gee, look at that, the Eagles won. What a surprise. Don't fall asleep ^zzzzzz 00:51, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not beating anyone over the head with rules. I'm simply responding to somebody who is asking me to stop following them. Hey "big surprise" the sky will probably be blue when you wake up tomorrow morning. Why don't you go ahead and write a Wikipedia page about that sometime tonight? Shamedog18 (talk) 00:54, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are absolutely beating people over the head with the rules, unless you really think that updating the page with 45 seconds left in the game hurts wikipedia (and, of course, you'll say you do). And what the hell are you talking about, write a page that says the sky is blue? That has absolutely nothing to do with anything. Perhaps you'd like to revert List of Presidents of the United States, which says Bush will leave office on January 20. I'm sure there's only a 99.9999999% chance that he won't be assassinated or die of a heart attack before then, so clearly that's crystal ballism. Don't fall asleep ^zzzzzz 01:00, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, but a perfect example would be as if you were to go on Obama's page and list him as the current President of the United States when he still won't be for 16 days. And you go ahead and use the argument that the Eagles hold on to win as if it is at all relevant to the argument. It's not. I'm not beating any rules over your head. YOU were the one who came to ME, and asked me to stop following them. All I was doing was simply reverting the edits. In the grand scheme of things, it is not a big deal, but I don't understand why I'M the one getting the complaints when I'M the one following the guidelines. Shamedog18 (talk) 01:06, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilawyering is pitiful and it helps no one. That's my only point. I'm sorry if anything I said on this talk page offended you, but I'm not sorry I asked you (nicely) to stop reverting the correct updates to the NFL playoffs article. And I'll gladly do it again if need be. Don't fall asleep ^zzzzzz 01:12, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was not reverting CORRECT updates. Next time a team has a 9 point lead with 3 minutes to go, look up the score on the ESPN page or the nfl.com page. I'll bet none of them are going to list those games as final. You even had the ACTUAL SCORE of the game listed as final with three minutes to go. How do you know an Eagles player is not going to break a few tackles and score another touchdown and make it 30-14? That's not a stretch by any means. You can call it "pitiful" or whatever you want, but don't accuse me of reverting "correct" edits as if I am the one not following guidelines. Thank you. Shamedog18 (talk) 01:16, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And by the way, I just realized you had originally listed the FINAL SCORE of the game as being 23-14. The final score turned out to be 26-14. Now you know exactly why I was reverting those edits. Shamedog18 (talk) 01:24, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]