Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Beneath the bridge (talk | contribs) at 08:13, 11 July 2007 (→About the redirect). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Misplaced Pages ads	file info – show another – #18

Archives

1. November 27, 2006–March 21, 2007
2. March 25, 2007–April 17, 2007
3. April 20, 2007–May 23, 2007
4. May 23, 2007–June 22, 2007
5. June 23, 2007–present

Re

With regards to your comments on User talk:Hornberry: Please see Misplaced Pages's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. John254 21:16, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

2007 Los Angeles Dodgers season

Thanks for making the leaders organized in a table.— Preceding unsigned comment added by LADodgersAngelsfan (talk • contribs) 21:50, May 31, 2007 (UTC)

Confusion

Now it may be slightly immaterial, but would you consider edits to Around the Horn and PTI "sports-related" or more "entertainment-related". I ask since I only like my edits to be sports-related. Thanks Soxrock 23:11 13 June 2007 (UTC)

2007 Tampa Bay Storm

I read it. But, as I've said, and not the old habits die hard one, I like to do edits in a series of edits instead of generally large ones. Soxrock 23:01 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

THANK YOU! I'VE BEEN WAITING FOR ONE FOR SO LONG I WAS GOING CRAZY! THANK YOU FOR GIVING IT TO ME! I'LL DISPLAY IT PROUDLY ON MY USERPAGE. YOU HAVE SERVED JUSTICE FOR ME AND I THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR GIVING ME A MUCH-DESERVED BARNSTAR! AGAIN, THANKYOU! SOXROCK 29 June 19:30 (UTC)

Sorry, it's just my hard work lately has earned me nothing until you gave that barnstar to me. It was just, in my mind, too long a time I waited. Again, thank you Soxrock 29 June 19:34 (UTC)

Storm

Yeah, I was there, and those penalties and the missed extra point killed us. I really thought we would win easily, especially because we were at home. Hopefully I won't send you a bad feelings message on Tuesday. I will stay up late to watch your Avengers, or at least make my most committed effort. Good luck to your Avengers, and please root for Columbus to get their ass kicked by Dallas next week :). Soxrock

Yes, I really was, even though the seats weren't the best. And, if I were you, the reason I would be concerned on Monday is because your 0-2 vs. Utah this year, not because your at home. Then again, that's my opinion. Good luck and have a better time than I did! Soxrock 20:27 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Now, I've never been to the Staples Center, but is your section (205) in the second deck? Or is that the first deck, because I had seats behind the endzone. And, for ESPN, were the announcers Mark Jones and Merrill Hodge? I only ask because I think I saw the ESPN press box (2 people were wearing fancy suits with ties). Thanks Soxrock 20:33 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Ironically, that is about the same angle from where I sat today. But it was definitely farther away from the field. And Schlereth/Wischusen are doing the KC/COL game Soxrock 20:48 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I'm gonna do some more AFL related work now. Again, have a good time on Monday, I'll be rooting for LA. Soxrock 20:55 June 30 2007 (UTC)

Sorry it took awhile (I was busy updating and am still busy after the COL/KC epic finish), but I like the image, but do you have a larger image of that? Images that users here take and upload do not need resizing as much as a fair use image does. And since you took it and is thus non-fair use (it does not require limited usage), it can be larger than 160 x 106. Just wondering if it can be made larger as well because it's fairly hard to see the play. And yes, please put the image on the Avengers 2007 article. Soxrock 21:50 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about that :( Message me when your back. Soxrock 22:04 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Bonds

Whoops, my bad. I thought I'd heard he went deep last night. I guess I misheard or something :(. Soxrock 11:58 June 30 2007 (UTC)

Avengers

Ok, first off, GO AVENGERS!!!

Now, for maybe individual player pages, I'd recommend trying to get pictures of Sonny Cumbie, Kevin Ingram and/or any other high profile Avengers players. As for the 2007 Avengers article, I'd maybe get a picture of a touchdown celebration or something. Something that would depict something good for the Avengers, as images that generally aren't showing something good are removed. Soxrock 20:24 July 2 2007 (UTC)

Assistance

Do you have AIM or something similar? I want to discuss an issue with you.►Chris Nelson 20:37, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

What about your Yahoo name? It's not that I want to keep it private, it's just that it'd be easier to discuss through IMing than back and forth on talk pages.►Chris Nelson 20:42, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I've sent you an email detailing the issue. If you don't have time to reply to it tonight, don't worry about it. Just get back to me when you can. Thanks.►Chris Nelson 20:59, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

So that Wizardman guy never replied to me.►Chris Nelson 16:39, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

WTF?

Have yuou tried editing the "Vandalism" section directly on User talk:PrincessKirlia? -Jeske 01:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Misplaced Pages better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 02:37, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Avengers

I didn't hear the pregame (I was watching Yankees/Twins at 7:00 and it ended right on time), but during the telecast the announcers (Mark Jones and Mark Schlereth) were talking about the Avengers daunting defense witnessed last night and Utah's quick-strike ability. They said near the end of the telecast that, if any Chicago officials and/or players were watching that next week's game won't be easy for Chicago.

As for the game itself, Josh Jeffries was amazing. The only blemish for him was that fumble. Soxrock 14:18 July 3 2007 (UTC)

Reply

I've replied on my talk page. It's simpler for me to keep the conversation in one place. - BillCJ 06:59, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Smile!

WarthogDemon, whom will like talking in the future tense, has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Suffice to say, I hope this will brighten your day. Or tomorrow. ^_^ -WarthogDemon 03:51, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Atlanta Braves Roster Template

As I mentioned on the team page's talk page, thanks for cleaning that up. I wasn't sure how to format the link for the template.

Another apology

I was just looking at the 2007 Atlanta Braves season‎, and realized you had not removed the Wild card standings after the last tiem I put it there. I honestly thought you had, but with the sevreal pages back and forth, I got mixed, and never did check back till tonight. Sorry. I was pretty hard on you for having to have the last revert, when it wasn't the case. I just wanted to let you know I had realized my mistake. Sorry! - BillCJ 07:22, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Jr.

MLB.com rosters trust you to know Tony Gwynn, Sr. or Ken Griffey, Sr. aren't currently playing for the Brewers or Reds, respectively, so why can't we here? I think the rosters here should be identical to the official ones.►Chris Nelson 17:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I think it's safe to say that anyone who is aware of both Griffeys would know which is currently on the Reds when viewing the roster template.►Chris Nelson 17:54, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I actually agree with Ksy9 on this one, though I have an additional reason: If the article name includes "Jr.", why add unnecssary piping? Clarity in most cases is best, except when doing so is over-complicated, which is it not in this one. If the name were on 3 or more lines, tho, Chris might have a point. But as all the other names are on 2 lines anyway, why bother piping the link? While I will add that any reader clicking to the article will immediately see it's the son, not the father, I still think the piping is unnecessary. - BillCJ 18:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

That's fine. I really don't feel that strongly about this.►Chris Nelson 19:05, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism on your User page

Did you make somebody mad? Corvus cornix 18:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I've seen mentions about that on a couple of other User's pages. Such fun. Corvus cornix 20:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

July 2007

Please do not assume ownership of articles such as Mudkip. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you.  Kai  07:29, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Chris Young

I can tell you are a very serious baseball editor, but I do not see any biography experience. The edits you have made do not take this article in the direction of a WP:FA bio. I woke up to do a copy edit and saw what amounts to blanking from my perspective. I appreciated your peer review comments, but have expressed disagreement and willingness to discuss. This will be up at WP:FAC with two weeks where major changes are very appropriate. I would suggest userfying (at somewhere like User:Ksy92003/ChrisYoung your version for comparison when this goes to WP:FAC. I will be reverting this to my highly cited and extensive version later today. You can see in the edit history that I have been actively editing this article this weekend. I am going to get a copy of my last edited version from before I went to sleep and reverting after editing offline within about 4 hours. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 10:53, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate your effort to improve the article. If you want to shorten the article to the bare essentials, the article could read Chris Young is a baseball player. However, that would not improve the encyclopedia. It is cute that you attempted to use my argument against me about going to sleep after editing and being disappointed to see the article hijacked in a major new direction when you awoke. I will make 4 points.

1. I know all about WP:OWN. The fact that I reverted to the direction I have been taking the article with a hopeful mid month WP:FAC nomination in mind. I have over 20000 edits without a WP:3R violation on me or against any editor I have worked with. I have worked out every disagreement I have had in my 20000 edits without the type of war meaning that I understand what other editors are trying to do and have worked with them to smooth things over when I disagree. Since we want to go in two directions with the article I have given you a solution. The solution is to take it in your direction as a userfied article and when I post at WP:FAC I will post a link to your version asking if they would prefer yours as an alternate direction. I did not say that explicitly in my prior communication. I have never had a case where anyone wanted to take an article in so completely different a direction than I did before. However, I have given you a solution that I think is the best one. I encourage you to userfy your version. We can essentially nominate with an either or choice for the WP:FAC community.
2. I did not revert your edits. I worked from my prior version offline. See this diff.
3. I did read your version. It cut out every interesting fact that would make the article broad enough for FAC success.
4. I have discussed my thoughts on citations and said I would bring it up at WP:FAC where the experts on encyclopedic excellence would render an opinion. This article just completed its WP:PR on July 4th. Within 2 weeks from that date I intend to get this up at WP:FAC. You can come at me with all your suggestions then. That is really the best way to go since you prefer the 20KB light version and I prefer the the 61KB stout.

I apologize, but I am going to revert and suggest you userfy your version again. This is a very special case of disagreement where because it is likely to before a judging community in a very short period of time disagreement resolution is not as necessary as it would be. Please be patient and watch at WP:FAC to make your comments.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 20:20, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for userfying your version. Within 10 days and probably by next weekend a discussion will be up at WP:FAC on Young. I appreciate your patience in advance. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:10, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I am not denying you the opportunity to edit. In this unique case the direction you want to take the article is so different than the direction I want to take it that when combined with the fact that we will have numerous people evaluating the article in the near future this unique solution is probably the most beneficial. I am comfortable with most of your edits to . I think in general you have got a good idea of what wikipedia is all about. I just think in this case, the 20KB and 61KB versions are so different that we should keep them separate until we can get some feedback. Stay tuned. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:19, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I see I agree with you in one edit at Chris Young...or at least part of your edit...a very little part though...I agree with you for the most part of the revision. It doesn't look as good. Hornberry 03:46, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

(unindent) I had at one point edited the article with respect to Misplaced Pages:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Numbers in preparation for WP:FAC submission. I think your changes may conflict the manual of style. If you get a chance look at this and revert as necessary. I will get to it later this week if you do not.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:46, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

You cropped an image that is linked to 5 or 6 other articles in a way that affects the other articles. Do not crop out the scoreboard (especially the clock).

2 reasons 1. Starting pitcher makes no sense if you do and Bullpen may lose some context as well. 2. Artistically it looks crappy. Have you taken a look at reeditting the numbers stuff I mentioned above? You can see other editors are complaining about how the numbers are written now in the baseball talk page discussion.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 22:40, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

The reason they did not tell you directly is that with all of the editing it is difficult to tell who screwed up the numbers. However, you and I know it was you. Please fix them when you get a chance. Read the caption on the image at starting pitcher and try to convince me you aren't smart enough to know why the clock needs to be in the picture.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 23:06, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Um, i'm pretty smart, and I still can't figure out why TTT insists on the clock being in the picture??? Bjewiki 00:50, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

You seriously took a high resolution photo with a nice crop and turned it into an awkwardly cropped image that is 300px wide.++aviper2k7++ 01:02, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Dragonfire (Yu-Gi-Oh GX)

NO reason has to be given for removal of a prod. Can't be reinstated. Should be taken to AFD. I did that for you already but you should state your case there. 172.149.41.100 23:11, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Nolan Ryan

I reverted your edit because he should include the California Angels colors as they were in the 1970's - which was red and gray. That is where he had his greatest success. Pascack 17:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Nolan Ryan

hmmm... you may be right. However, when I look at those colors, it looks as if you are instead portraying his time with the Texas Rangers.Pascack 17:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

ok, I'll leave as is then, and I also changed Frank Tanana to reflect those colors as well. Pascack 17:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Nolan Ryan

The kind of debate on that page is what I ran into (from the same user and/or sockpuppet) on the Casey Stengel page. It would probably be best not to use team colors in the retired-players template. Baseball Bugs 17:53, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Colors

Sorry they lost. And for Nolan Ryan, I agree with you. The colors should be of when they played, not current day (I'm going to change all the Astros colors for players who played during the navy and orange days, they shouldn't be tan and black. Soxrock 19:03 11 July 2007 (UTC)

How do you handle retirees who can't be easily defined as being with one club (which Ryan can't be) and what about if the colors changed while they were on the team? Baseball Bugs 18:09, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Some bozo put the modern Cubs bright red-and-blue on the Cap Anson page. Gimme a break! Baseball Bugs 18:11, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

That's what happens when you edit an article... you catch the attention of anyone watching it. Even if your only interest is in the Angels' colors, you could still provide valuable input as to whether it's appropriate to try to include past colors, or to just skip it altogether. Baseball Bugs 18:32, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I am in full agreement with disabling colors on retired player templates. So, we could either wait for someone to decide, on the project page (where it seems to have drawn very little interest), or someone could just take it away from the retiree page and see who complains. What do you think? Baseball Bugs 19:21, 10 July 2007 (UTC) Baseball Bugs 21:48, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

If you remove that line from the template, doesn't it simply take it down for everyone automatically? Also, I don't detect much interest on the project page. But if, instead of asking about it there and getting no response, if I say "I think I'll do this in the next 15 minutes", maybe that will catch someone's attention. As long as they don't accuse me of turning into Tecmobowl. 0:) Baseball Bugs 21:57, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I should maybe point out that I have NO experience messing with templates. But given my approach to programming, I would probably make a copy of it, change it, and test it in ONE article or maybe just on my own talk page to see how it behaves, before doing something drastic that will get everyone mad at me. (I don't want to get anyone mad at me without a good reason.) Baseball Bugs 22:20, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

The key issue, based on my ignorance of templates, is what happens if you simply comment out the stuff about colors? If a page refers to that template, does it just ignore any parameters that no longer work? I'm thinking that's true. If you feel confident in doing that, you could just open one window to the template and another to a sample page (Nolan Ryan, perhaps), then change the template, refresh the Ryan page, and see how it looks. If it looks wrong, you can quickly revert back. Then hope nobody noticed. :) If you're wanting to do so, go ahead. As I said, if it either doesn't work or if somebody yells at you, you can always go back to the previous version. And don't worry about IP addresses. You have the right to make a fair change, and others have the right to make fair complaints. Just don't get into an edit war. 0:) Baseball Bugs 23:09, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I created a template called Mlbretiredtest, in which I hard-coded black for background color and white for fontcolor within those background colors, except for the Hall of Fame part which I left as-is. Please give it a try on any page (without necessarily saving edits, just do a "preview") and give suggestions. Baseball Bugs 00:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Don't create an entirely new template. Just use default colors or I can code default colors in if you guys really want.++aviper2k7++ 00:16, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I already created one, as noted, and using default colors. But ultimately, I don't want any colors "selectable", or it will be a source of POV-pushing and edit-warring (as it already has). Baseball Bugs 00:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

What you did was really not that bright. First of all you made a test template outside of your userspace. Having a second template is a bad idea, because it is essentially the same thing and you'd have to replace the name of it, instead of just deleting the colors all-together and having the default colors display.++aviper2k7++ 00:35, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, you're right, it wasn't too bright, so it's fitting that I made the background colors black. My intent was to experiment with it, and if it looks good, and if it's acceptable to others, I could replace the current one with the contents of the new one, and then have someone delete the test one. Baseball Bugs 00:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

"repairing"?

In this edit you said you were "repairing" a link to a disambiguation page. I would think that would mean linking to the appropriately disambiguated article---in this case by putting in a link to personal identity (philosophy). But you merely destroyed the link instead. Michael Hardy 00:32, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

... and maybe in this case leaving the link to the disambiguation page intact would be the better course. Michael Hardy 00:34, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

In this edit and, I think, some others, you definitely picked the wrong one. This one should obviously link to personal identity (philosophy). Michael Hardy 00:38, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

...and this edit is weird. It is misleading. The section title is "philosophy". Obviously that leads the reader to expect certain things. Moreover, in this case the phrase is not embedded within a sentence, thereby requiring concealment of the article's exact title from the reader. I've edited it so that links to both articles appear, with the titles fully visible. Michael Hardy 00:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

About the redirect

• WHY DID YOU FIX THAT REDIRECT?! IT WAS FINE THE WAY IT WAS!!! I DON"T WANT TO COME BACK HERE AND WARN YOU AGAIN, UNDERSTOOD?!?!?!?!

AND BY THE WAY, IT'S "THREATENING," NOT "THREATING!!!!!" GEEZ!!!

I DUNNO, I JUST DON'T LIKE YOU!!!!!