Misplaced Pages

User talk:Bhockey10: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:04, 7 April 2013 edit198.84.241.55 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit Revision as of 23:58, 7 April 2013 edit undoFishbert (talk | contribs)287 edits Undid revision 549215885 by 198.84.241.55 (talk) rv disruptive editor; per Misplaced Pages policy, sock puppet tags are only to be used on blocked accountsNext edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
{{sockpuppet|Fishbert}}

{{archive box|auto=yes}} {{archive box|auto=yes}}



Revision as of 23:58, 7 April 2013


Archives

1, 2


Welcome to my talk page, please add your new comments, concerns, etc.. at the bottom of this page. Thanks, Bhockey10

ACHA

Hello, back in December you had said that you were indifferent to who MUST be included in the notable player list. However you insisted on the players with the stand alone pages stay. I conformed to your request and further kept the players who did not play 100 games at the echl or above, but were close (in some cases not really). Now you are trying to add more players to the list which don`t meet the standard and who you agreed to keep off the list. I ask that you respect the policy governing notable people and refrain from adding players who do not meet the min of 100 echl games. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.84.241.55 (talk) 20:58, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree that there was progress made with the list, there were a number of players prior to Dec 2012 that should not have been on, i.e. played a handful of games in leagues lower than the ECHL... You have chose to select pieces of the guidelines for the notability of sports players for stand-a-lone articles, players that have played significantly in minors, won league awards in minors, played in European leagues that are the highest in the respective country can be included on the list. Many of the players on the list are fairly close to be notable for stand-alone articles. Also The player that played 100+ AAHL games that you continue to remove- the AAHL in question is not the defunct semi-pro league of 2008, it is the minor pro league that eventually became part of the ECH. That player is definitely notable for the list and would be notable for a stand-alone article. Bhockey10 (talk) 02:32, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, the AAHL is nowhere close to the ECHL. Furthermore, notable standards are clear, and yet you fail to acknowledge them. 100+ games at the ECHL is the standard, not just for standalone pages but for everything. I have keep the players who came close, but in fact they do not meet policy and should not be there. Finally, please standby your December statement that you are indifferent to the players who do not meet the wiki standard. Please stop cherrypicking and start following policy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.84.241.55 (talk) 23:28, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Can I get some support in the ACHA page with this 198 fellow? It's starting to feel like the ACHA page is a ping-pong match between the two of us, and that's not much better than his unilateral edits. He is also claiming that you two have reached a civil agreement on a standard for inclusion in the 'notable players in professional leagues' list... but judging by the "discussion" in the article talk page, accusations of edit warring in the edit comments, and the discussion just above in this talk page, I am at a loss as to where this "civil agreement" was struck (am I mistaken?). He also continues to press the Misplaced Pages notability policy line, despite you, me, and TheOriginalSoni pointing out that he is mis-applying a policy he appears to not understand. I feel like the only way to resolve this is with A) brining in admins (ANI request), or B) deciding upon an explicit and clearly-defined standard for inclusion/exclusion in the list (198 would be free to participate civilly in such a process... but I'm not holding my breath that he will deviate from his consistenly-unilateral course). I'd much prefer option B, and have attempted to start just such a discussion in the talk page for the article. I see you are part of this "College Ice Hockey Task Force" ... perhaps we can get some of the other folks on this 'task force' involved in crafting a clear page standard for the 'notable players in professional leagues' list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fishbert (talkcontribs) 20:22, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:RCJaguars logo.png)

Thanks for uploading File:RCJaguars logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC)