Jump to content

User talk:The Writer 2.0/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Tebow

I'm wondering why you reverted Tebow, you didn't give an explanation. The dinks 18 (talk) 05:30, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Because that information is necessary to understanding who he is and why he gets the attention he does. Quotes are used all the time but that doesn't mean you have to be an ardent supporter, it's just the general consensus as to why he gets that amount of attention. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 11:16, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I think it would be more prudent to just write something like "Tebow is noted for his Christianity and blah blah blah." He's really more famous for that than he is a good quarterback (not saying he's bad, just not great) — Preceding unsigned comment added by The dinks 18 (talk • contribs) 23:38, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

First of all, without him being a pro quarterback, no one would care about his beliefs. And his ability to win games in dramatic fashion, despite so-so statistics, is all part of it. It's proven to me that God watches only the last five minutes and overtime. :) --Wehwalt (talk) 23:43, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
Exactly. Without being an "unconventional" pro quarterback with what ESPN calls 'thrilling' last minute wins and having such an unusually large amount of faith, Tebow is just another name on a roster. For now though, he's our headache. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 01:56, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh ok thanks for the Information. 24.227.93.118 (talk) 23:58, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

thanks for the undo

at 54th Regiment Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry. I undid the same thing a few days ago, so if we needed to do it again that's three strikes and we can call in some heavier firepower. It's not really a big deal but I am inclined to stick with our approach. This note is for, as we say in my house, "Now two of us can forget it instead of just one." Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 14:18, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Sources

This is a generic templated citation, but all the details are there for whatever format you want: {{cite book|last=Piascik|first=Andy|year=2007|title=The Best Show in Football: The 1946–1955 Cleveland Browns|publisher=Taylor Trade Publishing|location=Lanham, MD|isbn=978-1-58979-571-6|ref={{sfnRef|Piascik|2007}} }}

Page 268: "But Brown was also a management reactionary, someone who believed more firmly than most in the personnel relations of the time that so overwhelmingly favored owners in every way. His dealings with [Otto] Graham during his best player's brief holdout underscore that fact as well as anything. It was both just and necessary that management could cut, trade, bench, blackball and own in perpetuity anyone and everyone that it wanted, according to Brown. But any player who sought to better his means by negotiating in an open market was violating some sacred trust ... As players and observers have noted, Brown's attitude toward personnel relations is the main reason that Browns players were a key force in the origins of the NFL Players Association. 'I'll tell you what kind of negotiator he was,' Dub Jones said of Brown. 'You took a cut in salary and felt happy about it.'" This is all from the same page. I'll get a source for the Halas thing when I can find it. --Batard0 (talk) 08:20, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

NFLPA

I'll certainly have a look; if not later tonight, then definitely during the weekend at some point. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:01, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Web archive

Could you by any chance take this image and webarchive the source, Liberty Numismatics, and put the URL on that page? You seem to understand how to do these things.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:09, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Certainly. The site seems to be down at the moment but I'll try again later. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 12:47, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. Otherwise as the guy's inventory changes ...--Wehwalt (talk) 13:22, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
All done. I replaced the current link with the archive. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 18:17, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:59, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

New York Jets' rivalries

Thanks for your comments. When I said the rivalry sections were "ballooning out of control" I wasn't just referring to the Jets. The rivalry sections on sports articles are relatively new, and recently they've been expanding more and more to the point of ridiculousness. Take a look at the edit history of the New England Patriots and you'll see that I recently removed a large chunk from the rivalries section, because it ultimately listed the Patriots as being rivals with practically every team in the NFL! A rivalry needs something more to define it. If it can be backed up with either adequate citations or links to a main article that contains such citations, then I'm fine with it. Otherwise, if it doesn't meet the Wikipedia standards for reliable sources and notability, then I don't think it should be there. I'm not sure how long you've monitored the sports pages but rest assured I'm not the only editor who feels this way. Please don't take it personally. TempDog123 (talk) 18:52, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

That's reasonable enough. I was just a bit miffed at first that they just disappeared however, I can understand the sentiment. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 18:19, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

NFLPA

I'll take a look at the modified lead tomorrow, if that's all right. Going off for the night to watch some college football. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:20, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

I adjusted the writing in one area of the paragraph, but otherwise it looks good to me. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:12, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
Congrats on another FA!--Wehwalt (talk) 10:08, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Congrats on your FA! Nice job!! Keep up the good work! Dreadstar ☥ 17:48, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you both for your support and input. It certainly is gratifying but there is still plenty of work left to be done. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 17:50, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
True, true. We need to get back to Davis some time, and of course there are many Jets topics needing improvement. But it's OK to appreciate a good job.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:25, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

TFA

Ball rolling --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:59, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Looks to be in fine shape for the front page. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 20:29, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: National Football League Players Association

This is a note to let the main editors of National Football League Players Association know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on December 3, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 3, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

The National Football League Players Association (NFLPA) is the labor organization representing professional American football players in the National Football League (NFL). Founded in 1956, it was established to provide players with formal representation to negotiate compensation and the terms of a collective bargaining agreement. In the early years of the NFL, contractual negotiations took place between players and management; team owners were reluctant to engage in collective bargaining. A series of strikes and lockouts have occurred throughout the union's existence largely as a result of monetary and benefit disputes between the players and the owners. League rules that punished players for playing in rival football leagues resulted in litigation; the success of such lawsuits impelled the NFL to negotiate some work rules and minimum payments with the NFLPA. It was recognized by the NFL as the official bargaining agent for players in 1968. In addition to conducting labor negotiations, the NFLPA represents and protects the rights of players, ensures that the terms of the collective bargaining agreement are adhered to by the league and the teams, and negotiates and monitors retirement and insurance benefits. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Precious

National Football League

Thank you for quality articles, written solo and in team, on American Football, such as National Football League Players Association, and its people, such as coach Rex Ryan, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:43, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Good award!--Wehwalt (talk) 14:16, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Thank you Gerda, I'm flattered. I take pride in working on this project and I'm happy to help make it better. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 15:53, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
more ;) (I could say a lot about being rather ashamed of the project when it comes to treating people, but let's stick to content.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:41, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Yay! Yes, that's a conversation we could go on for hours about with the amount of drama between editors but as you said, I'll keep to the content. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 18:15, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

My apologies for scheduling two of your articles in close succession: the NFLPA article looked to be something different, particularly when the main page hadn't had a US sport article for a while, and then while working through the list of FAs to see what was there I noticed the approaching milestone birthday for Ryan, which seemed like too good an opportunity to miss. I didn't realise that they were both the work of the same author. <Looks up what else you've written> I also enjoyed reading the Heidi Game when it was listed at "On this day..." a few weeks ago. Best wishes, BencherliteTalk 22:08, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

No need for apologies, I'm fine with it. I appreciate your kind words. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 13:07, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Rex Ryan

This is a note to let the main editors of Rex Ryan know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on December 13, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 13, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegates Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), Gimmetoo (talk · contribs), and Bencherlite (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Rex Ryan

Rex Ryan (born 1962) is an American football head coach for the New York Jets of the National Football League (NFL). After serving as an assistant coach for 22 years, Ryan attained his first head coaching job in the NFL with the Jets in 2009. He is the son of former Philadelphia Eagles and Arizona Cardinals head coach Buddy Ryan and is the fraternal twin brother of Rob Ryan, defensive coordinator for the Dallas Cowboys. Upon graduating from Southwestern Oklahoma State University, Ryan spent the next 22 years serving as an assistant coach on different teams at both the college and professional level. At the behest of their head coach Brian Billick, Ryan joined the Baltimore Ravens in 1999 and spent nine years there. In 2005 he earned the title of defensive coordinator and in 2008 became the assistant head coach. Hours after the Ravens lost to the Steelers in the 2008 playoffs, Ryan accepted a contract offer from the Jets for their vacant head coaching position. He has become well-known throughout the league for his outspoken manner, boisterous attitude and success with the Jets, and his teams are highly regarded by critics for their defensive capabilities. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Super Bowl III, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Tom Mitchell and Jerry Hill (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:36, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

SBIII

I'm away from home and don't have any refs with me so it will probably be mid to late May before I can do much.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:22, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

No worries. It's been put on the backburner until around mid May for myself as well so hopefully we can get the ball rolling then. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 23:23, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Geno Smith

Where's the source for Smith's Wonderlic score? I'm pretty sure they don't even release them any longer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.57.15.120 (talk) 23:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

You found it on an opinion website under "draft rumors"? And you feel that's reputable? Good grief. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.57.15.120 (talk) 01:49, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Submission

Can you review this article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Mark_Popek 71.180.91.32 (talk) 02:45, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

April 11 Bart Scott edit deletion - an explanation would be nice

So why were my April 11th posts about Bart Scott deleted? How can you consider it "vandalism"? Everything was truthful and contained multiple citations. An explanation would nice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.133.105 (talk) 17:25, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Here's why because them losing to the Steelers has nothing to do with Scott's career but if means that much to you then put it in. Quite frankly I'm sick of this back and forth and I don't want to hear about anymore. Sufficient? -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 17:36, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

No, not "sufficient". losing to the Steelers sums up Scotts career - he talked a lot and threatened a lot of people, but never won anything. You are correct though, i dont know how to properly cite because i don't spend 24/7 on wiki. it is somewhat disturbing though that people like you get angry by other people simply exercising my right to free speech. And no, I am not sick of this back and forth, i can go on and on...You cant stop my edits because you couldnt stop a nosebleed. CANT WAIT to read your response when i get around to it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.133.105 (talk) 02:53, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Ok. So, you continue to argue about the point about the Steelers why? It's in the article. If you checked my contributions, you would also notice I do not spend 24/7 on Wikipedia however, I do apply what I have learned. As for the Scott line, is that supposed to be some sort of threat? If you're trying to act cute, it's not working. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 03:00, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

I feel like i'm reading commentary posted by a Jets equivalent of the main character from Patton Oswalt's "Big Fan", and it's quite entertaining. As for acting cute, i feel it's working quite well. I mean you are taking time out of your day to respond to me ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.133.105 (talk) 02:57, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

That still doesn't answer my question as to why you continue to harp on a dead issue. Besides, I'm not really taking time out of my schedule. Just figured foolishness shouldn't be ignored. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 03:08, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

The fact that you picked a fight with me in order to slavishly defend a guy who, in his own words, thinks jets fans are nothing but losers who were picked last at dodgeball (his words last november, not mine) is not a dead issue. All I did was post facts backed up with citations, and you tried to squelch my first amendment rights. It is the very definition of tyranny! I will not be silenced! No Justice! No Peace! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.133.105 (talk) 01:29, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Submission

I have a article for review. Just to check to see it's good. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Aaron_Hester 71.180.91.32 (talk) 03:34, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Not much I can really do with this one given the notability concerns by previous editors. Perhaps you should slow down a bit with the UDFA bios? I know it's tempting but half of these guys will likely not make it out of training camp let alone be on an NFL roster by midseason. Technically speaking, these guys shouldn't even have a bio until they meet WP's football notability standards or have had a relatively successful collegiate career. Hester, no offense to him, seems to have been middle of the pack, at best. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 12:22, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

My bias?

My "Bias" is "disturbing"??? No, what is disturbing (and downright creepy) is your slavish loyalty to a guy that openly despises honest, hard working fans. Everything I posted about Scott were facts backed up with citations, and you've tried (and mostly failed) to protect this guy from those facts. And if you think it's bad now, what are you going to do in 2-3 years if he ends up like Joey Porter, whos so broke he's getting thrown into jail for cutting bad checks to casinos and getting his mansion foreclosed on? does the thought of that make you tear up?

Anyways, I've made my point and exposed Scott for the paycheck stealing, pampered thug wannabe fraud that he is. Despite your best efforts, I would say about 80 percent of my edits have stayed. I'll be monitoring to make sure my current edits stay on the page, but as long as they are left alone I have no intention of additional posts on scott's page.

There are many Jets and Jets alumni that are worth defending - If i was posting embarrassing facts about Joe Namath or Curtis Martin, I could maybe understand your seething rage - but Bart Scott is not one of them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.133.105 (talk) 02:52, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh and for the record - there is no "sock puppet" stuff going on. a.) there are 6 billion people in the world, and i highly doubt im the only person that knows about Scott making a fool of himself all of last year and b.) if you look at my user history, you will notice ive never had a problem using my IP address to post whatever facts i feel like posting.


How did i "lie" to you about my user history?? I said I never had a problem using my ip address to post facts (even if it means i get banned for a few hours like a political prisoner!!), and thats proven in my user history. And I remember that other freedom hating editor who censored me very well and i make no apologies for exposing him for for what he was. My banning was the same as someone in a third world country being thrown in jail for standing up for freedom, and i am proud of it!! I stand by that edit, and thank you for referring to it as a "gem" ;).

As for your accusation (which you couldnt even accuse me of outright, you went around me to the wiki editors like a Bolshevik going to the NKVD to rat on someone that was being counter revolutionary), I neither know, nor care who this other person was, and have not looked at the edits and dont care what this person said. I'm not responsible for and will not be persecuted for other peoples actions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.133.105 (talk) 00:34, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Please continue to lie. Your rants amuse me. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 00:39, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I'll continue to tell the truth. Your similarity to a cross between Patton Oswalt on Big Fan and a soviet politburo member amuses me. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.133.105 (talk) 21:23, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Good. While you do that, I'll continue to ignore any and all ignorant statements you make henceforth. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 01:16, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

Can you delete Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tivola? Tariqmudallal (talk) 23:06, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Following up on NFLPA Game

Hello Writer (if I can call you that), I just wanted to follow up with you and see if you still thought you'd be able to look at the mess that is NFLPA Game. It's been pretty challenging to find an editor to help out with this, so if you do have time, it would be very much appreciated. For convenience, my two proposed replacement drafts can be found at the bottom of this thread. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 16:01, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

I've been busy but I have some time over the next few days so I'll give them a look through. You're welcome to call me that or whatever you want to! -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 20:48, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Your RFPP request

Hi there. I just declined your RFPP request, because we don't usually protect pages preemptively. However, I do think we need to do something about all of the non-notable articles. I'm thinking we should maybe nominate them at AfD, but if there are a lot of them it may be a better fit for one of the admin noticeboards. Could you make a list of the articles that Pmaster12 has made that you think fail WP:ATHLETE? I think it will be easier to judge the next step after we've done that. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 07:08, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

I've compiled a list below with articles I have found to be of questionable notability. I have included those of User:71.180.91.32 who I believe is another account Pmaster has been using (see Marcus Davis: there is a one minute difference with Pmaster and the IP making consecutive edits). There was a separate IP (whom I believe is unrelated) who created several new articles back earlier in the year and I have included those articles as well.
Thanks for drawing up the list. I've decided to ask for advice at the administrators' noticeboard - you can find the thread here. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 05:40, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
I've closed down the thread, as we already had a good number of suggestions. Personally, I'd be inclined to go with Blackmane's suggestion - choose three articles from the list above that you are relatively sure should be deleted, and make a group nomination at AfD. It would be a good idea to link to this discussion or to the AN discussion when you do this. We can work out what to do with the other articles after people have had some time to discuss the initial batch. Does this sound like a good way forward to you? — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 20:19, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
I have no complaints. I'll start the nomination shortly. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 20:36, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Comments

I understand that but what meant was that if there are someone locally or anyplace they are trying to find an individual to read or do a project that's all. Also if really trying to accomplish something here, the New York Jets roster navbox is not the only one with all their players biographies no no. Take a look all around. I can name one the Tampa Bay Buccaneers roster navbox and their are probably others too. So don't look at certain articles, look around that's all I was trying to just to make sure you are not targeting me and my work on articles. That's all. The reason why I have not said nothing because I did not understand what's issue is all about bottomline is I didn't think it was an issue. I'm sorry for the late response and thanks for let me know what your concerns were. Again sorry for the misunderstanding. Pmaster12 (talk) 22:15, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

I was just saying I'm doing the best I can but I understand your concerns and about the polices. I trying to attack anybody I just felt I had to defend myself a little bit because I know other editors have articles that are below standard or above standard. So I understand you and other users are trying to make things right. But I'll continue to try my best. Pmaster12 (talk) 03:46, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Teahouse Invitation

Teahouse logo
Hello! The Writer 2.0, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse. The Teahouse is an awesome place to meet people, ask questions and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us! 
Tariqmudallal (talk) 15:44, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Domonique Foxworth

Hey The Writer 2.0, I hope you're doing well. You'd previously mentioned that you might be able to help out with the article for Domonique Foxworth. I've prepared a new draft of the article and uploaded it to my userspace, and left a note at Talk:Domonique Foxworth with what's changed. It contains a bit more information, and a few more reliable sources, and although not much longer I think it's still a worthwhile improvement. If you have a second, do you think you could take a look and, if all looks OK, move the article over into the mainspace, reenabling categories when you do? Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 14:53, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

This has been  Done. WWB Too (Talk · COI) 14:31, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Very good. Apologies for my lack of response, I've been inundated with work. Anyways, my goal is to bring it to FA standards however, what is currently in place is an excellent start and hopefully I can do some editing with it in the near future. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 18:14, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Right on, and that's no problem—there's only so much time in the day. If and when you do develop the Foxworth article more fully, I'd be happy to help. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 18:27, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Precious

National Football League

Thank you for quality articles, written solo and in team, on American Football, such as National Football League Players Association, and its people, such as coach Rex Ryan, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:43, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 323rd recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:27, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Articles for creation March 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello The Writer 2.0:

WikiProject AFC is holding a month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from March 1, 2014 to March 31, 2014.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1800 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

A new version of our AfC helper script has been released! It includes many bug fixes, new improvements and features, code enhancements, and more. If you want to see a full list of changes, visit the changelog. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks.
Posted by Northamerica1000 (talk) on 02:12, 28 February 2014 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk), on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation

Patrick Scales

Hi,

I don't necessarily disagree with you about the ultimate fate of the article, I wouldn't mind if you PRODed it, and I wouldn't like its chances at a new AfD. The fact remains, though, that the original AfD debate based his deletion on the fact that he was a non-notable collegiate athlete. His status as a professional constitutes a substantial change in circumstance, so the CSD G4 criterion doesn't apply. You might think I'm being a bit of a "process wonk"; I just want to give the article its due time, so that extra eyes can evaluate whether he meets the notability guideline. It may just be that some clever observer finds sources to prove his notability in the meantime. If that doesn't happen, and the article is deleted again, I wouldn't mind in the least. Best wishes, Xoloz (talk) 20:28, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Motto of the Day Help Request April 2014

Motto of the Day (WP:MOTD) is in a state of emergency and really needs your help! There are not enough editors who are reviewing or nominating mottos at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/In review, and this probably means that you will notice a red link or “This space for rent” as our mottos for the next weeks and months.

Please take a moment to review the nominations and nominate your own new mottos at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/In review and Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/'Specials. Any help would be appreciated! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

This message has been sent by pjoef on behalf of Motto of the Day to all editors of the English Wikipedia who are showing MOTD's templates on their pages, and to all the participants to MOTD: (page, template, and category).

Davis

Back at work on Al.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:39, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

And stopped again. I'll be away much of the summer. I see our boy is still going on Scott. If he keeps doing this, I will ask another admin to look in.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:05, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello The Writer 2.0. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.

The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.

If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)

If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.

Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.

I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).

       Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Precious again

National Football League

Thank you for quality articles, written solo and in team, on American Football, such as National Football League Players Association, and its people, such as coach Rex Ryan, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:43, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Two years ago, you were the 323rd recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:37, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2016 New York Jets season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Punter. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Request on 12:38:59, 29 July 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Phpkb


Hello Writer 2.0

First of all, thanks for taking the time to review our contribution. I would like to bring it to your notice that the URL from where the content has been copied is our own website and we own the copyright to that content. We want to have a page about our product on WikiPEdia and that is why we made this submission. Please let us know what can we do to prove that its own content and we own the rights to it.

With best regards, Ajay Chadha

Phpkb (talk) 12:38, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, The Writer 2.0. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Four years ago ...
National Football League
... you were recipient
no. 323 of Precious,
a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:20, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Five years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:13, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, The Writer 2.0. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, The Writer 2.0. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:14, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Jets AFL All-Time Team

Template:Jets AFL All-Time Team has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:34, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Always precious

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:42, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Featured article review National Football League Players Association

I have nominated National Football League Players Association for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:31, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:The_Writer_2.0/Archive_2&oldid=1257195452"