Jump to content

User talk:Baseball Bugs/Archive004

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

DEC 2007 - JUN 2008

The Star-Spangled Banner

See that article's talk page for the reason that I used a super-scripted "C" on "McHenry". Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 19:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are entirely missing the point. The reason I put it in superscript was to make it clear to those who insisted on trying to put an apostrophe there. Now, you're going to start that cycle all over again. Thanks for nothing. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 19:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, you are missing the point, unless you have a reference, you are engaged in WP:OR. Anybody that puts an apostrophe there would also be engaged in OR unless they have a reference. Either way, their/your edits will be reverted.- (User) WolfKeeper (Talk) 19:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A reference? It's in the document. Some folks with less-than-keen eyesight were switching it to an apostrophe, in fact the image name itself has it that way, which is incorrect, but that can't easily be helped. You're basically creating unnecessary extra work down the road. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 20:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
When or if someone starts putting the apostrophes back in again, I'll let you handle it. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 20:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good, I enjoy banning people.- (User) WolfKeeper (Talk) 20:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Banning them over whether a tiny character in an 1814 document is a superscript "C" or an apostrophe? Tell me another one. I need some more laughs today. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 21:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The decline and fall of practicall everybody

Haven't we been through this before? I reverted you addition to Thutmosis II. I didn't find it funny or relevant, sorry. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 03:34, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And now I reverted you own addition. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:34, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thank you very much! I'm glad I could help. Bláthnaid 13:47, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have added rationales to about 1,000 images by this stage, so I've had a lot of practise :) Bláthnaid 14:18, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are examples of some fair use rationale templates here, which you might find helpful. Bláthnaid 14:43, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I fixed a few of them. I don't want to do too many, as I fear the deletionists will still clobber them. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 23:10, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you go through the images you have uploaded in the past and make sure that each one has a copyright tag, a source, and a fair use rationale, the images won't be tagged for speedy deletion. I realise that it is tedious, but it is important that Wikipedia's images comply with the non free content criteria. If you need help with doing that, feel free to leave me a message and I'll help as best I can. All the best, Bláthnaid 13:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Baseball players article

There was no way that article could have passed WP:NOT#IINFO. Tell me how it can and I won't next time. Kwsn (Ni!) 19:44, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not, it wouldn't last long before it hits CFD. See WP:OVERCAT as well. Kwsn (Ni!) 19:47, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Adding information to individual player articles instead, if not already there. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 23:10, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have now passed the line with your disruptive editing techniques and habits towards other Wikipedians, which is made up of a list headed by: personal attacks; incivility; relentless and abusive comments directed at a small group of users.

Your contributions have repeatedly demonstrated an inability to edit constructively and work alongside other editors, rather than against them. Further to this, I have blocked you for 5 days. During the block, you should reconsider your editing habits here, and I strongly advise you to drastically amend them.

Anthøny 22:03, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I need the time off. Thank you for granting my wish request. [1] :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 22:54, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to see ya blocked. Oh, well, it's only a temporary one that will last for a few more days. . . . The proposed "Looney Tunes on TV" article discussion will continue unimpeded, and, I hope, by the time your back, we'll soon have reached consensus on what to do. — Cinemaniac (talk) 19:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind. There was a fairly intense response, but agreement has been reached: there will be no individual article concerning the Looney Tunes television broadcast history. . . . Oh well—at least we tried. — Cinemaniac (talk) 01:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Wizard of Oz

In the article on this film, you added The Wicked Witch of the East to the parts played by Margaret Hamilton. Actually, only the legs of the WWOTE are shown in the film and she has no speaking lines, so I don't think this addition would be correct.Thomprod (talk) 13:49, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That was Hamilton on the broomstick flying outside the window. Dorothy's song indicates that was the witch she saw out her window, the witch of the east, upon whom the house fell. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 13:59, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Good point--I hadn't thought of that. Thanks. Thomprod (talk) 14:02, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your kind note on my talkpage. I don't think I could retire even if I wanted to! I was a bit stressed about things unrelated to Wikipedia that day, and consequentially overreacted and blanked my userpage when {{db-spam}} was put on an article I had just created. I'm not usually so melodramatic (at least I hope I'm not!). Merry Christmas, Bláthnaid 22:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stop vandalizing

Please stop vandalizing the Gopher football board. Your change has been reverted multiple times and you keep changing it back. Teams "compete" in conferences. Saying that a team "competes" in the Big Ten is an accurate description and is not a POV issue. You want to make a joke about a team having a bad year which is putting your POV into the article, an obvious violation of NPOV which has no place in Wikipedia. Gopherguy | Talk 19:08, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I call it like I see it. You came to the Gopher football page and changed the word "compete" to "play" and left a comment of "Let's not overstate the situation" as your reason for the change. You decided to make a joke at the expense of the Minnesota football program due to their bad season this year. That is the very DEFINITION of an NPOV issue. Then, after it was changed back, you changed it again with the comment (and I left your misspelling in) "The do play in the Big 10. Saying they 'compete' is POV-pushing, especially for a team that finished 1-11" showing that yet again, you were making the change in order to demean the program.
Your statement that I am a POV-pusher because of my name is ridiculous. Yes, I am a fan of the Gopher football team. If Wikipedia barred anyone who had an interest in a subject from editing a page on that subject, the pages would be pretty small and uninteresting. My name is irrelevant - the issue is you trying to force in your "hilarious" joke that a team that has a single bad season doesn't "compete".
Finally, your statement that you're using "neutral terms as used in other articles" is wrong. Sure, some articles use the word "play" instead of compete. However, use of "compete" is just as common. See Michigan Wolverines football, Iowa Hawkeyes football, Michigan State Spartans football, Indiana Hoosiers football, Purdue Boilermakers football, and Illinois Fighting Illini football as examples of this. Are you going to go to all of those pages and change "compete" to "play" too? Or do you only do it to teams you want to insult?
Leave the Gopher football page alone. Your sarcasm has no place on that page or in Wikipedia.Gopherguy | Talk 09:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have as much right to edit that page as you do. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 09:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for alerting me to the other pages. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 09:46, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And I reiterate that while "compete" is generally a valid English word, in the case of college football its usage amounts to sales-and-marketing hype. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 10:08, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And stop calling me a vandal just because you don't agree with my viewpoint. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 10:29, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You obviously have not paid attention to how sporting teams describe themselves. Saying that a team "competes" in a division, conference or league is the standard way of referring to the team. It is much more accurate than saying that they "play" in the league. The English word "play" doesn't necessarily imply that there is any kind of win/loss competition going on, but "compete" does.
If you're not a vandal, why don't you explain to me the comments you accompanied your edits with? Please try to make a case that you weren't violating NPOV. Until you can do that, you have no basis to keep making these edits.Gopherguy | Talk 17:33, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My comments are a mixture of satire and fact. I've been on here almost 3 years, so enough already with the "vandalism" garbage. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 17:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Your comments confirm the reason why you made the change in the first place. Wikipedia is not a comedy showcase, it is an online encyclopedia. If you keep editing that page, then it is time to start a discussion on the talk board so we can put this to an end with a consensus. Gopherguy | Talk 15:11, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Gopher it. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 16:55, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've also undone your edit of Iowa Hawkeyes football. Competing is different than playing. Just to let you know, your persistant vandalism has been brought up at WikiProject College football. Now would be a good time to let go of your little joke. Users with the power to suspend/ban your account will get involved. Iowa13 (talk) 19:48, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. I'll do just that. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 20:21, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Look familiar?

Jose cartagena... Even includes SABR edits. —Wknight94 (talk) 18:27, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image removal

I see you removed the Chris Young photo from Wrigley Field. Do you believe it is malplaced in the article or malplaced within the article? Note it demonstrates both the playable foul territory bullpen and the scoreboard. I realize it is an opposing player. However, the image was from a very memorable day if you recall the Young-Derek Lee brawl. Get back to me and let me know what you think.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 23:25, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how many WP:FPs are included in the article, but this was a good opportunity to add at least one. The point of the picture is not merely to illustrate the bleachers, but also, the scoreboard, and the unusual bullpen location. I believe that this picture will be on the main page on Opening Day, so it is a decent picture for a baseball article. Do you think there is a section where it would be appropriately placed?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 02:38, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why don't you throw out a caption that you think would be appropriate to demonstrate that this is a relevant photo despite being of an opposition player and tell me what section you feel it would be best placed in. I would appreciate the feedback on both.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 02:45, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
At 1024x768 the images aren't overstacked to the point that they flow out of the section. This is the most common resolution from what I am told. I prefer to veiw at a much higher resolution where it is a minor problem, but I think the images should be reduced to 150px anyways. I have captioned the image. Let me know your thoughts. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 04:15, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am becoming an exposure hog, but I am going to add the picture to scoreboard which could use an old hand operated board.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 04:26, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Since I took the picture it is free. You can see looking at the image page it is already on a lot of pages.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 07:18, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duck Soup

As you can tell by viewing the current revision of this article, I've made quite a bit of progress with it. I think I've sourced everything that really needed to be sourced. D'you think I should remove the "refimprove" tag now? — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 17:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And the same goes for Zeppo Marx's page. What should I do there? — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 18:50, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say most—if not all—of the sources I referenced on both pages are all quite reputable, so I'll go ahead and remove the tags. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 21:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of which, could you review the following pages: Duck Soup, A Night at the Opera, Monkey Business, and Zeppo Marx? I think I expanded the articles fairly well, although I'm sure there are other—and, I have no doubt, better—ways to present the information they contain. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 01:49, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've now submitted Duck Soup for peer review in order to find out some better ways to improve the article's (and other Marx Brothers articles) quality. If you're interested in leaving feedback, you can go to the article's talk page and follow the link. Thanks. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 21:42, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So far, there's only been one response to my submission of Duck Soup for critiques. However, the editor supplied some good observations, and even stated that "this article has good potential for Featured Article Status". Well, there's my New Year's resolution: Improve Duck Soup to FA quality and get it nominated. It would be nice to have the Marx Brother's magnum opus as a featured article, eh? I'll need your help, though, in that regard, as well as assistance from others. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 20:48, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wrigley Field

I rearranged the stacked pictures using {{double image}}.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 03:44, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stop!

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Minnesota Golden Gophers football, you will be blocked from editing. Consensus has been reached that "compete" is the correct term - it's time for you to accept that and move on.

The above warning also applies to your vandalism of Iowa Hawkeyes football. Iowa13 (talk) 16:40, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And Michigan Wolverines football. michfan2123 (talk) 19:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would, indeed, welcome the chance for a wider audience to have the chance to weigh in on this semantics issue. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 19:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Compete vs. Member

I no longer care what you have to say about the matter. Stop vandalizing or I will have you banned. The fact that you are a Wikipedia veteran does not give you the right to persistently vandalize. Iowa13 (talk) 18:13, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would, indeed, welcome the chance for a wider audience to have the chance to weigh in on this semantics issue. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 19:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is your responsibility to accumulate a wider audience. The WikiProject College football talk page is open to everyone. No restrictions were made on who could weigh in on the issue. Anyone could speak up, and, of the seven who did, seven spoke for "compete". This has been going for a week now, and there is a complete consensus against you. If you bring someone else to the table who agrees with you, we may reopen the discussion. Until then, it is considered closed and any further changes you make to the discussed articles are considered vandalism. Iowa13 (talk) 22:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Example

This editor is not an administrator and does not wish to be one.

Note to self: Customize own version to take away the "anti" part. Not anti-administrator. Just don't want to be one. Power in the wrong hands... >:) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 20:23, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Contact the authorities?

Per this pleasantry, you might want to contact the authorities. They're more than happy to pay a visit to people who make threats like that. —Wknight94 (talk) 21:12, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me bugs, I would like to applogize the guy that said to that on his behlaf, He is my idoit friend that has been being idoit. I just had a "stern" talking right now for saying that. He hacked my name and pw. Okay, he was using my ip address. I said to him you better not do that again okay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eldorado91 (talk • contribs) 22:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Baseball Bugs, I am appogizing on behalf of my idoic drunken friend that is stupid enought to say that. He was drunk listing to the Doors- The End song; you might know has the f word, and says kill okay. He was being stupid to listen to it on Itunes okay. He was not going to hurt , he cant fight okay. So he is an idoit. Okay , he was drinking to early for new years eve okay. So on behlaf of my friend I am sorry for this incident. He was the one that keeps editing that Bhutto page also. He knew my pw some how, he found it somewhere. I'm applogzing on behalf he is the one that posted that bullcrap. Okay. So wknight94 , I appolgize for the dammage my friend did . Okay , I just talked to him right now, told him to get out of my house , he is not welcome there for a while. He is was just drinking too much. Okay.Eldorado91 (talk) 23:06, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Excuse me , Baseball Bugs. I asked you to give this "user" that made those "threats" on your user page a second chance. This might sound a little unorthodox , but this person said on your talk pages , and on Wknight94 talk page they were sorry. Baseball Bugs, if this person didnt have a heart or didnt show a emotion to what they did why did they say they were sorry on your talk page. They must have a heart. People in the world they make mistakes , but deserve second chaneces. And also this person if was this "big bad tough" pyscho they would gone and done this again. Also, I think the person should be given a second chance I dont think they would do it again. Iron Valley (talk) 19:39, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]





IM sorry

Bugs, I'm appoligzing on behalf of my idoitic friend who thought it was stupid enought to listen to The Doors song THE END and drinl some beers while on my computer . I didnt he was on there , I was away from my pc. He was just an idoit having the end on his i tunes playlist for 5 times. If you know the song it says the f word , and kill in the end. He was just being an idoitic moron typing that pretending he was Jim Morrison okay. So on behalf of him I am sorry for this okay. Also Baseball Bugs, he was spaming the Behnzhair Buhtto page, on this name. He seem to know my passwords I never give them out. I dont know who Bhutto is until I herd on Saturday who she was okay. Okay, I didnt spam the talk page of that okay. My friend was the one that messes around with that stuff I dont do that okay. He is just a moron that doesnt have a girlfriend and spends his afternoons at my house to get on the pc while wathc movies on the other room. I told him everyday dont mess with my pc , or its settings he doesnt respect my rules. I told him reeateldy "ddue quit your crap". Okay So in behalf of my moron friend I'm for "those threats". Anyway , he wouldnt do it. He is just to stupid to say it okay.Eldorado91 (talk) 23:20, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


No worries.

Always a pleasure to get rid of crap like that :-) - It's my personal opinion (on the above), that one should always press these matters to the authorities. People have to learn that making threats is a serious business. But that's just my view. Tell me what you decide to do! Good luck, take care and Happy New Year! ScarianCall me Pat 01:13, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would be incredibly ironic if that was where I got it from... But dang, sorry. "What's up Doc?" reminds me of... that blade of grass that I picked last summer... it doesn't really, but I thought I'd be original somehow, rather than killing the obvious :-) Take care, friend! ScarianCall me Pat 01:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sockpuppet?

What are you talking about I am not a sockpuppet okay. I am just asking for forgiveness. If I get a pardon. I am going to make a promise to make sure this never happens again. It was my friend that this. And also I dont know what a sockpupper is. What are guys talking about "sockpuppets". I never herd of it. Okay. I am sorry this to happend. If that knight94 blocks me right now, tell him I'm sorry for this happend.75.13.16.43 (talk) 15:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Peaceful Solution..

Baseball Bugs, I am asking for a peaceful solution to this matter. Can we have a mediation please. We can solve this calmly okay. Just calm down okay.75.13.16.43 (talk) 16:05, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reference to the above stuff: [2] Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 17:11, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Black Sox Scandal

The reversion of Black Sox Scandal I made restored a good deal of content which had been removed by an unknown vandal long ago. Any particular reason you removed it all again? --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 05:38, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Palace01.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 05:50, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


The "threat"

Baseball Bugs, I think the person that placed a "threat" on your user page deserves a second chance. Why, because if the user in question said an apology then they should be forgiven. The user in question if they were this "crazed-Rambo" user they would have done it again on that "user name". Maybe, the user had seen what he did and typed a apology on your talk page. However, you claimed he was "abusive sockpuppet"; the only thing this person was doing was apologizing to you , and you didn't see this you were to see this. Baseball Bugs, do you have any mercy and forgive people. I believe a person deserves a second chance if they say they were sorry on their actions.Iron Valley (talk) 12:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Superman (1978 film)

While I support your enthusiasm, you have to know that the article is already way too long to have what you called "a summary of the tedious detail that follows in the same section." Also, you have to actually prove your claims, meaning you can't leave anything unsourced like you did with this statement:

"Even at that, some of the blue-screen mattes had problems on the initial release, as the suit sometimes took on a greenish tinge (most noticeable in a shot of Superman flying toward Hoover Dam). That kind of problem, also visible in the early VHS tapes of the film, was eventually fixed digitally for the DVD releases."

I hope you'll understand. Peace. Wildroot (talk) 15:26, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please be more careful

Your edits to WikiProject College Football have become disruptive. You have been informed that you are being disruptive and that no one supports your interpretation of how these articles should be re-written. Your response has been to lash out at other editors.

Please remember that WP:NPA states that you should "Comment on content, not on the contributor...comments should not be personalized and should be directed at content and actions rather than people.", yet you continue call your fellow editors names such as "fan boy".[3] You are also violating WP:AGF by claiming without providing any evidence that other editors are attempting to WP:OWN these articles.

Future behavior such as this could result in your being blocked from editing. At this point, it is not productive for you to continue these methods at the WikiProject. If you wish to see continued discussion of the matter, I suggest you consider Wikipedia:Requests for comment. Thank you, Johntex\talk 17:51, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crimea River. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 14:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Answer to your question about mascots

Well, there's Notre Dame Fighting Irish, the Univeristy of Louisiana Lafayette Ragin' Cajuns, University of Northern Colorado Fighting Whites intramural team and the Vancouver Canucks to name a few. There's a link to a parallel page that provides a more complete list: List of ethnic sports team and mascot names. Sf46 (talk) 13:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Natural sources

Baseball Bugs, I am not "issuing threats" and am sorry if that's the perception I created. I am just pointing out tasks that should be done to improve The Natural article. You asked that since "Many of the items refer to other articles or to specific episodes," why don't I consider those sufficiently referenced. Here's the reasons. One example is the Simpsons episode that is said to contain "satirical and comedic" uses of the score or "other plot elements." There are two significant problems with this: (1) Wikipedia cannot cite itself (that is a WP rule; it states "Articles and posts on Wikipedia may not be used as sources."); (2) Even if citing WP was allowable, then there has to be something in those articles that supports the statement "Satirical or comedic uses of the score or other plot elements have included: The third-season episode of The Simpsons, titled Homer at the Bat." I looked and there's nothing in the article that remotely supports the assertion. Think of some high school student who is doing a term paper or essay on satire and takes that statement in The Natural at face value and places it in her paper. She ends up with egg on her face and a low grade (even though Jimmy Wales says not to cite WP).

So to make that statement in The Natural article we have to find a reliable source that supports it. WP:Verifiability states, "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Sources should be appropriate to the claims made." There may indeed be someone credible who has said that "Homer at the Bat" makes "satirical or comedic uses of the score", but we need to find that published source and cite it properly in the article. Otherwise it comes out or is challenged and flagged with a cites-needed tag: Wikipedia:Verifiability#Burden of evidence specifically states, "All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation." The guideline continues, "Any edit lacking a reliable source may be removed, but editors may object if you remove material without giving them a chance to provide references."

As for the DVD source, the article says, "a re-edit of the film [on the DVD] that adds some previously cut footage, and expands and re-arranges the first part of the film substantially." I wasn't questioning the fact that a DVD was released (although a cite is normal for this in a film article to verify the release date and any special features with it), I was noting that someone had made the analysis that a re-edit of the film "re-arranges the film substantially." If a WP editor decided the change was "substantial", that may be original research which is not allowed. By adding the {{Fact}} tag, I was pointing out that we need to find a source that makes that assessment, which I've been trying to find. I did find this which has some descriptive commentary that could support such an assessment, but the website, "DVD Verdict: Judge Ryan Keefer's Blog" is a blog and therefore not a reliable source. There still may be hope of finding something.

I hope this answers your questions. Just so you know, most of the entries in the Cultural references section of the article are not significant or truly encyclopedic, and should be removed. I'm not saying that the references to the film in pop culture aren't significant, but the fancruft list should be summarized and supported with appropriate citations to a third-party, reputable source.
Jim Dunning | talk 02:11, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Baltimore

Howdy i don't know if i'm doing this properly as i'm new to editing wikipedia. Did i include the source right? I probably won't figure out how to view your response can you message me at bill|at|williamwheatley|dot|com so i can figure out how to do this right thanks!. User:Bwheatley —Preceding comment was added at 16:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


It's the story my dad told me growing up and then was verified to me that he wasn't making it up when we were at camden yards on the club level and pop introduced me to Frank after telling frank i'm the brother of the kid (My uncle billy) who caught the ball you hit out of memorial stadium. So how would i put that into the article? could you help this is all new to me.

Ortiz Edit War

I've just gotten the reverter blocked, but I can't revert his last changes without violating 3rvv myself. If you feel like it... PhGustaf (talk) 22:52, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recruitment is against the rules. However, I was going to do it anyway. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 23:37, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Natural edits

You are now in violation of the 3RR policy. Please be advised that should you revert the material again, you will be blocked in accordance with that policy. I strongly urge you to discuss your edits or, if you feel mightily picked upon, that you seek out the advice/counsel/etc from an admin. A big ol' list of them can be found here. Please consider this your only warning. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 00:30, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have assumed ownership of the page. Fine. It's yours. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So, if I am to understand correctly, we came over to your house, pointed a howitzer at your head and made you revert yet again? I bloody well think not, my friend. Unless you are possessed of a fairly unique problem hitherto unknown in the annals of science and medicine, you chose to violate 3RR all by your lonesome and without the guided assistance of any other editor.
You will note that I said you violated 3RR. I did not say I was going to report you for it - even though, as you have been registered here for since May of last year, you are well aware of the rules. My notifying you of your violation was to get you to calm down and step back a little bit. Jim told you to read WP:CITE. I told you to read the same thing. Perhaps now is that time to actually do what two, different, experienced editors are telling you to do - not to screw with you, but to help you avoid the craptastic jackpot you seem determined to get yourself into.
Lastly, you need to grow up just a bit more than a little. Jim and I were trying to help you; accusing us of violating wiki policy is a sure way to ensure that you get zero rhythm when you need assistance. You had best start thinking about how your behavior is going to alienate your fellow contributors as you edit past your one year mark and beyond. Because I don't believe in disposable people, it doesn't matter if you take The Natural off your watchlist; I am going to put you on mine, and check out your edits for a little while. I am here to help you, if you ask nicely. I am also here to make sure you don't get rude with other editors. When you demonstrate that you can handle both criticism and the editing environment better than you have today, you will have improved yourself.
You can say 'thank you' for not reporting the 3RR. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 00:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Star Spangled Banner

You're right. To be honest I skimmed right past "Performances" because I thought that paragraph would be about notable or memorable performances: Rosanne Barr, Borat. Maybe it'd be best to merge my lines into that section and retitle it "Criticism"? (I don't think the title of the section needs to be more specific than that.) Tempshill (talk) 07:03, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Natural

BB, I'm sorry to see you abandon your interest in The Natural, and that you took my interest in improving the article as a personal attack. I asked Arcayne to review our difference of opinion on that "cultural references" section not to gang up on you, but to let me know if 'I' was off-base. If he opined that either my approach or understanding of WP guidelines was wrong, then I would have adjusted one or both and continued to work on raising the article's usefulness and quality. I certainly wouldn't have picked up my ball and glove and left the field in a huff.

Which brings me to a suggestion: please review and take to heart WP:CIVIL, WP:AGF and WP:CONSENSUS. I have already recommended closer study of policies regarding sources, citing and verifiability, but a review of your edit history shows you are well aware of them (or at least cite them) when deleting other editors' contributions. It is also ironic that you accuse two editors of owning the article when we just began editing it within the past couple weeks. You, on the other hand, have been editing it since August. Who's sense of ownership is getting in the way here? And shame on anyone who has been aware of the dismal state of an article about a film by Barry Levinson, screenwritten by Robert Towne, based on a story by Bernard Malamud, and starring some of the world's best known leading and character actors! Although the film received mixed reviews and certainly has its critics, the article should have no trouble finding material for interesting and significant Production & Development, Themes, and Adaptation sections, completely absent up to this point. That, by the way, is the genesis of my interest in improving this article.

If you disagree with my methods, that's not only fine with me, but I welcome it. The best articles in WP are developed through the contributions of multiple editors through the vehicle of consensus. And, you're right: I did not like the list format or contents of the disputed section. It, other than the overly-long Plot section, was the largest section of the article. It's fancruft content, suitable more to IMDb trivia, is what I would expect from a tenth grader when the teacher asks about the significant aspects of the film. That list is painful to look at when a treatment of the themes of myth and hero and baseball in American culture would serve so much better. In fact, a quick academic search shows there are numerous scholarly papers that discuss how the changes made in the adaptation process significantly affect the themes Malamud — one of the most important writers of the 20th centruy — focused on. The fact that Hobbs hits a home run at the end of the movie and reunites with Iris and his son are key changes from the original and are worthy of much more attention than a masturbatory trivia list. So, guilty as charged.

And being nice to people has benefits. Here's why: as I looked at your edits so I could better understand your practices (with the goal of ameliorating the dispute), I started looking at articles on which you've worked; due the viral nature of WP, it's impossible for me to not become interested in them and improvement of their quality. It's very possible we will meet again. Maybe we can collaborate rather than argue. A benefit of others taking WP:CIVIL to heart is that not only did Arcayne not hit you with a 3R violation, I did not as well; in fact, I refrained from making a justifiable edit that I knew would cause you to violate the rule. Instead, I continued to try to engage you in a productive discussion, which you rejected. You're welcome for not likely causing you to be benched for a couple days (which, given the volume of your edits, probably would have been distasteful to you). Good luck, and I look forward to working productively with you in the future.
Jim Dunning | talk 15:00, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

respond to Bugs in a paramount pitcure

okay I read that in a picture called Jasper Goes Hunting where a character named Jasper is hunting. he finds a scarecrow they spot a rabbit hole and its indeed Bugs Bunny saying Eh, What's Up Doc and the scarecrows says Why It's Bugs Bunny and he says Hey I must be in the wrong pcture and dives in the hole. Mel Blanc supplied Bugs' voice and Robert McKimson anmiated the Bugs sequence

[[User:MrJanitor1|MrJanitor1] 16:42 January 13 2008 (UTC)

3RR violation

You've been reported for your 3RR violation. Magnanimity is best reserved for those capable or willing to appreciate it. Your continued attacks indicate that our good will is not enough to assist you. Have a splendid day. - - Arcayne (cast a spell) 16:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

where I read about Bugs' cameo in a paramount picture

I read it on Big Cartoon Database and Internet Movie Database

MrJanitor1 16:53 13 January 2008 (UTC)


Roller derby

(I responded on my own talk page, but here it is again just in case:)

Well yeah, I would rather include it all, as we did previously, since that appeases the monthly stream of contributors who want to add one tidbit or another. But someone got a bee up their butt about excessive "trivia" and tried to kill the whole section, so the compromise was to remove all the music info, under the theory it was likely to keep growing, whereas the other info was pretty stable. Apparently that person hasn't visited any of the articles about popular TV shows or any number of other pop culture topics, and decided to pick on the roller derby article that day. Also I feel it should all be included because who are we to assume a researcher will not find the info of value?

If you wouldn't mind, could you add a note of support to Talk:Roller derby#Roller derby songs again? Maybe point out that the length of the article is not so much of an issue anymore, since we've spun off the history section into its own article. —mjb (talk) 04:52, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Amcaja

Sadly, our constant Wiki-associate Amcaja retired from Wikipedia last week. Let's bid him a fond farewell. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 20:40, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:BubbaGumpMOA5.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. B (talk) 05:11, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:BubbaGumpMOA4.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. B (talk) 05:12, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Animation Wiki-Project?

I was just wondering if you ever considered becoming a member of the animation wikiproject. Considering the retirement of two of our most active participants and the recent joining of another editor, you'd certainly be a big help. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 23:00, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What would I need to do? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 20:40, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's actually extremely easy. All you have to do is go to WP:US-TOON#Participants and sign your name under whatever section ("Active", "Inactive", "Supporter") you wish.

We definitely need more members, and the project page is in dire need of an update. Hope we can all do something about it. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 20:53, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for joining the Animation Wikiproject as a supporter! It looks like the project is starting to grow! — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 13:56, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just not sure what a "supporter" does, but I reckon I'll find out. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 14:37, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not too sure, either, but apparently you're supposed to assess articles and contribute to the coverage of animation throughout Wikipedia. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 01:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Duck Soup

Sorry. I just did some Web-surfing, and it wasn't Roger Ebert who said that. It was online film critic Danel Griffin, who works for the University of Alaska Southeast. Ebert does admit, however, in his own review of Duck Soup, that, while he enjoys many of the routines in A Night at the Opera, he must "fast-forward through the sappy interludes with Allan Jones and Kitty Carlisle. In Duck Soup, though, there are no scenes I can skip; the film is funny from beginning to end."

Danel Griffin also has an excellent, critical website, called "Film as Art", which you should consider giving a look. I think you'll agree with his analyses of Marx Brothers films. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 00:48, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Natural image thanks

BB, thanks for jumping on the fair-use issue with Image:TheNatural.jpg. Those things are such a pain. At least they've made the initial upload process much more intuitive than it was. I also reduced the size of the file and re-uploaded it; the powers-that-be seem to like that as well.
Jim Dunning | talk 12:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rooftopbleachers image

I've replaced the disputed fair use template on Image:Rooftopbleachers.jpg. The picture can't be PD-1923 if the crowd had gathered, according to the article, to watch a 1929 World Series game. --Onorem♠Dil 15:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That PD-1923 could be a code, I'm not sure. It may also be some sort of thing that might have been placed by someone else. NoseNuggets (talk) 3:37 PM US EST Jan 21 2008 —Preceding comment was added at 20:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. Guess I shouldn't have assumed the article caption was correct. Glad to see it's all straightened out now. Sorry for any inconvenience. --Onorem♠Dil 12:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Lineup for Yesterday"

I've reformatted the quote and sourced at Lou Gehrig. Let me know what you think of it, before I go ahead and do the same for all of the other players' articles, eg, Ruth, Cobb, Dean, Hornsby, etc. Is it a home run or a foul bunt? Cheers, JGHowes talk - 16:41, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At Ogden Nash, I've also added this New York Times article as a ref [4]. Altho it doesn't quote the poem in full, it does provide reliable verification. JGHowes talk - 16:58, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done at all 25 baseball player articles, plus some article clean-up along the way here and there. JGHowes talk - 15:17, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Nash animal quotes made my day! JGHowes talk - 18:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ballpark Photos

I got the first one from a library archive of which I can't remember off hand. The second one I got off of an old postcard from 1902. --Randall311 (talk) 21:39, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I really wish I could remember what I changed the names from. I am 99% positive that this image is from the first construction of league park. The one you have up there now is the second carnation of league park but before the palace of the fans. I wish I could find the original source of this picture. --Randall311 (talk) 21:32, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

For awhile, I wasn't sure just what to award you with, but I hope this cookie will suffice, since...well...everybody likes cookies! I'll always be grateful for you and Amcaja welcoming to the project with such enthusiasm, as well as helping me on contributing to articles and settling disputes. Enjoy! ;-) — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 21:03, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Preston Black

A tag has been placed on Preston Black requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. JohnCD (talk) 12:32, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Amen, now play ball.

That's how he begins his sermons. (read my response to your comment on my user page) Also, I like your user box about sock puppets be damned darned. I'm dealing with that right now. I created an account about 3 weeks ago, and this is my first run-in with a SP...and it's a beeotch.--AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 13:42, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs, speaking of socks, you may want to check out Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Sports Nuggets. Our buddy apparently shifted to articles not on our watchlists and caused some havoc. —Wknight94 (talk) 14:10, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I filled out one of those sock puppet form things...how long does it take for someone to look over it and decide whether or not to take action?--AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 14:19, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure. I don't venture there too often. I think it can get quite backed up though. Admins are limited in what they can do without checkuser permissions. I can spot a Liebman sock w/o trying - Roitr as well - but the rest are challenging and dangerous to deal with sans prior knowledge. —Wknight94 (talk) 14:42, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reference?

Do you have a reference for this statement? Jeepday (talk) 04:42, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Their own website [5] says "The Wall Drug Store got its start during the Depression years by offering Free Ice Water to thirsty travelers." Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I added it as a reference. Jeepday (talk) 04:54, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Misc page for deletion

I hope my edit is not considered disruptive. I just thought the tool provided would be useful —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.4.248.49 (talk) 01:46, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note to self: Don't touch the above. It's about Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:BQZip01/Comments. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:34, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hah, hah!

Cool user page. It pretty funny too. Basketballone10 02:34, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Danke. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:36, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:3RR sign.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 05:31, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to add "PD-self". Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:59, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cincinnati

Please provide a verifiable source for your assertion that the Cincinnati Red are not descended from the Cincinnati Red Stockings. That descent is widley held "common knowledge." See the Reds timeline at http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/cin/history/timeline1.jsp Pzavon (talk) 04:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

STOP

stop vandalising cincinnati ohio we have all found that your continued edits are wrong. What you are doing is vandalism.meckstroth.jm (talk) 04:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

wrong

see reds.com's history page I think that shall shed some light on my point of veiw. Since the team is stating what I said is true,(talk) 11:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cincinnati

The wording I have makes more sense and I don't say the mlb started in 1869 I say they are the first mlb team and cincinnati was home to the first profesional baseball team..meckstroth.jm (talk) 10 February 2008 (UTC)

You are correct about the current Reds not starting until 1882. However, I must point out (although I am not going to change the year) the current Reds take their name and some their traditions from the original Red Stockings. So there is a connection. --Cincydude55 (talk) 00:19, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's a connection of city heritage. It's just confusing because there was relatively little time that passed. No one claims the 1962-to-date New York Mets are the same team as the 1880s Mets, for example. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:27, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

what?

what do you mean "The current team dates from 1882, not 1869 or 1876" that was never sated in the text that we are arguing about, so when you reverted something have a good reason don't make up ones - User talk:72.49.88.101 01:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your version is almost correct, but it's too wordy. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:09, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User RfC on CC

Thanks for the comment, but this in a section designated for me to write in. You are correct that they shouldn't have been in comments, but in the future, please leave me a note on my talk page or this one's talk page. I know there was no malice intended. Thanks for the honest feedback. — BQZip01 — talk 04:17, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! :-) — BQZip01 — talk 04:34, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

mediation

Yeah, I already accepted. CC hasn't. But more to the point, it is not just the content, but his behavior. I invite you to read all the edits in the hostility section. IMNSHO, he is trying to get his way (inconsistent with policy) through bullying and threats. He ran into me and, quite frankly, I wasn't some rank amateur Wikipedian who just caved into his demands. His intentionally malicious characterization of me (like claiming I use my position in the Air Force to justify my edits...that is a crime for me to do so BTW) is extremely damaging to my reputation. Since there is no retraction of such comments, I see little recourse other than to seek admin assistance in stopping this abuse. — BQZip01 — talk 04:34, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To answer your question, if I use my position in the Air Force for personal or financial gain, it is illegal. — BQZip01 — talk 04:57, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Larson

Jack is convinced Reeves took his own life. He's told me that a number of times, and he swore to me that he's never doubted it, no matter how he's been portrayed or his remarks misunderstood. There's a 2003 interview with Jack at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9082219842800579949&hl=en. He says the same thing there, about 30 minutes in, that he believes it was suicide but that almost everybody else he knows disagrees. Hope this helps. Monkeyzpop (talk) 23:40, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

cubs article

Well, Shadow Jester apparently feels that it is too long and most of the content regarding franschise history belongs in the main article History of the Chicago Cubs. I have been discussing this with him for weeks and, although I am not really happy with our agreement I am going to re do the History page and make it more through and edit down that section of the cubs page, while adding a small snipit on wrigley itself. It will take me a while, and any help you can offer is greatly appreciated. Thanks for the question. for all i know someone undid my deletions, but it is alright as I got sidetracked by my personal life mid-revision. Wjmummert (talk) 02:32, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

February 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Cincinnati, Ohio, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. This is especially important when dealing with biographies of living people, but applies to all Wikipedia articles. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are already familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add your reference to the article. Thank you. Just as a note, even though you may have specified it in the edit summary, be sure to add a inline reference pointing to the specific page that it is located on, to avoid original research. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 05:03, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The editor apparently knows nothing about the subject. In any case, the Reds' own website uses the expression "Cincy" frequently. [6] Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 05:20, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IP

Looks like they have quit. But I'll keep an eye out for them. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 11:45, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Gun nuts"

I just wanted to let you know, that it is INCREDIBLY offensive, to refer to people as "gun nuts". It also makes you appear pretty bias'ed. SQLQuery me! 17:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You fail to recognize satire when you see it. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 17:28, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I didn't find it funny, then. I suppose I wasn't looking for humor on the discussion page for a recent mass murder. SQLQuery me! 17:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marx Brothers on Religion

If you haven't read this page before, you should. A very interesting read—it's an excerpt from Glenn Mitchell's The Marx Brothers Encyclopedia that deals with the Brothers' varying thoughts on religion. If you've ever really wondered about the Brothers' religiosity, here's your chance to find out. If you take a look at that page you can find many other links to book excerpts. Glenn Mitchell's Encyclopedia has long been an out-of-print collector's item, unfortunately. Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 02:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Controversy"

You asked what user:Aminz is seeing that you're not seeing. He's also being remarkably coy about answering, isn't he?:-) He claims on his user page to be interested in mathematics, psychology and environmental science... but his contribution history tells the real story. rudra (talk) 09:47, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In plain and forthright language: Islam is somehow associated with that picture, and he doesn't like that. rudra (talk) 10:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I'm getting the picture, so to speak. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 11:02, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually..

This is not very correct. See Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Maintain Wikipedia policy. Friday (talk) 15:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i just want him to admit he violated the NPOV policy, then i will drop the argument. thanks in advance! 12.39.2.83 (talk) 21:44, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have filed an ANI [7] for the IP address' trolling behavior. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 21:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see where Bugs violated Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#behavior that is unacceptable, and our anonymous IP friend clearly violated Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Editing comments. It's insulting that he/she thinks they own a talk page. joshschr (Talk | contribs) 21:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
removing a personal attack against david koresh. i swear, you have to make an honest effort at being this dense. 12.39.2.83 (talk) 21:59, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have blocked User:12.39.2.83 for 31 hours due to disruption. Sure, he could disagree - and he has a right to - but that does not call for shenanigans such as these. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 22:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 22:06, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Username

Ha, thanks. I think it confuses most people. Always glad to bump into someone new who shares an appreciation for their unique flair for... uh... ameriachi. Tijuana Brass (talk) 01:50, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiability

You need to check Wiki's definition of verifiability. Grossman is not a verifiable source. He's a secondary source -- not a tertiary source. He has an interest in selling his Superman book and that makes him biased. Third party sources are non-biased, uninterested parties -- newspapers, magazines, university publications, peer-review journals, encyclopedic publications. Overjoyed (talk) 20:35, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Overjoyed

Hold on, maybe there's more: See User_talk:JzG/wp-stuff#Overjoyed and [8]. Btw: Could you move your posting from User_talk:JzG to User_talk:JzG/wp-stuff? If you look through the user's main talk page, you will see why. User:Dorftroffel 12:40, February 21, 2008

I meant this posting, I've moved it to the subpage. Reason is here (and directly above that). User:Dorftroffel 14:05, February 21, 2008

Overjoyed

What's he been blocked for? I don't see any big problems (a few tiny ones) with his submissions. My only gripe (aside from the fact that I agree with you on the Grossman thing) is the vast number of edits that suggest he is going back and forth over this thing, not sure exactly what he wants to write. I'm not necessarily in favor of reverting everything, as I don't see much that I actually disagree violently with. I may have missed something, as I'm not sure what his block was for. Monkeyzpop (talk) 23:51, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hector Lopez picture

I would guess the guy in the picture is in his 50's too, but it is very hard to tell with the hat on and no hair being visible. If you are just guessing based on age that is not really what I am looking for. I am sort of looking for someone who would recognize Lopez if he/she saw him, but thanks for the guess.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 04:55, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He does not look like that guy from the 1966 baseball card, but few people look like they did when they were a professional athlete over 40 years ago. I still think there is about a 30% chance this is the guy, because it appears he is some sort of celebrity endorser in the picture.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 05:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adlai Stevenson

Baseball Bugs. Your continual removal of a link to an educational website can only be described as malicious.

Western Union

Hi, I removed the trivia because it needs an actual citation, otherwise it's just OR. WP:V is non-negotiable and unsourced info can be removed at any time. Even if sourced, it seems irrelevant anyway, thanks. Spellcast (talk) 05:13, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Films are their own source, because they are verifiable. Not personally liking something is not grounds for deletion. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 05:53, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Information must obviously be sourced. This is a last warning - I don't want to block over this, but unsourced info that is challenged can be removed at any time - see WP:V. Only citing the film or song itself without an actual citation is original research. Spellcast (talk) 05:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There's nothing controversial about removing unsourced info. That's why Template:Uw-unsourced1, Template:Uw-unsourced3 etc. exist. Making an original observation from a film or song is original research unless a reliable source has written about it. Spellcast (talk) 06:09, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding this, it'd be true, but it's still OR. Spellcast (talk) 06:11, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's not plagiarism to cite published sources. If Wikipedia is the first place to publish an observation, it's OR. Take an example from the section: "In the Mobb Deep song 'Temperature's Rising', Havoc raps 'I know you need loot, so I send it through Western Union'". There are no reliable sources whatsoever that have made that observation, so it's OR. All those examples are miscellaneous facts. I wouldn't of removed the info if it could've been merged in the article, but none of those examples could've been merged or sourced. Spellcast (talk) 07:21, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The same way you describe everything on Wikipedia - through "reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy" (WP:RS). Spellcast (talk) 07:50, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Through sources that write about the plot summary. It's not a copyright violation to use sources. It's only a copyvio if you copy large portions word for word. Besides, what has this got to do with unsourced and unmergeable trivia? Spellcast (talk) 08:00, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just going with what's written in WP:RS. I rarely edit film articles, so I don't know if people regularly cite the film itself when describing its plot summary. I edit music articles and when describing a song, I know third party sources are used instead of the song itself. I assumed it was the same for films. For example, Transformers (film) uses this ref in its plot summary. Anyway, do you believe any of that trivia is mergeable? If so, it can be reinserted and tagged with {{trivia}}, so someone can hopefully merge it with sources. Spellcast (talk) 08:16, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Citing the liner notes is fine. Writing unpublished observations on the soundtrack isn't. And unlike the trivia above, a track list can be found in reliable sources. Spellcast (talk) 09:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I guess there'd be no choice but to use the cd. The main issue is whether the info can be integrated or not. If you think it can, please do so. Spellcast (talk) 07:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Whether you can use it or not, there's still the issue of whether the info is relevant. I'd like to see this resolved asap, so please merge the info if you think it deserves to be, cheers. Spellcast (talk) 07:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you think there's a problem with using sources for pop culture, a good place to bring it up is WT:RS. I'm only concerned about whether those 3 dot points of trivia can be integrated, and I don't think it can. Spellcast (talk) 07:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On being an idiot

I don't apologize for being an idiot either. I see being an idiot as my unalienable right. :) Jonneroo (talk) 23:24, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Duh, yup! Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:13, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3RR warning on Superman music

Warning
Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing at Superman music. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheRealFennShysa (talk • contribs)

This user proceeded immediately to report you on the three revert rule noticeboard. While all reasonable steps should be taken to stop editors with a conflict of interest skewing articles, their contributions are not necessarily to be reverted immediately; a more long-term view needs to be taken. Reversions of potential conflict of interest edits are not an exception from the three revert rule. Thank you for alerting the community to the potential problem on Superman music, but I think it would be better to engage in further discussion about which aspects of the expanded page are worthy of keeping rather than starting again. With that in mind, and the fact that discussion is ongoing, I'm going to close the three revert rule report as 'warned'. Sam Blacketer (talk) 21:52, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Croctotheface silencing the truth

I'm sure it is not shocking to you that Croctotheface has deleted you comment on it's talk page because it doesn't like it. Please continue to fight this injustice and other injustices that that vandal has caused. MJD86 (talk) 19:27, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. Probably old news at this point. I think it was something from December. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:53, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Duck Soup for Good Article Nomination?

"Take up the tacks"? How about taking up the carpet? :-) On a serious note, d'you think we should push for the Duck Soup article as a good article nominee, or is it too early? I think the article is pretty comprehensive overall, don't you? Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 04:48, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I'm the one to judge. Maybe you could ask a friendly admin? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:52, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Thanks for the advice. Man, if only my old admin pal Brian were still here. . . Best wishes to you, Brian! Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 05:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Cinemaniac left me the same message, and I came over here just to check out your conversation -- in the meantime, let me compliment you on your user page, not only for the formatting, but the content. I especially liked your section on editing philosophy, which comports well with my own.

BTW, what cartoon is it that Bugs is reading a book backwards, from back to front? I think it's one of the Tortoise/Hare cartoons, the one that starts off in a steam room. I've always wondered if the animators got confused left-to-right, or what. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 05:47, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I don't know offhand. I bet cinemaniac knows. And thanks for noticing the page. I just ry to be funny, mostly. I had someone gripe about my editing philosophy. No more. He got blocked. (Not for that reason, though.) :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 05:50, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't help overhearing... :) For future reference, the name of the short is Rabbit Transit, a late-1940s Friz Freleng cartoon that featured Cecil Toitle. Sharp eyes there, Ed; I wear glasses, and I'd never noticed that! Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 05:53, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That same cartoon is currently available, uncut and restored, on the Looney Tunes Golden Collection: Volume 2. You can get it at Amazon.com for $40-$60. . . if that's any help. Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 06:03, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wait a sec... back to front? Maybe it's Bugsy that's Jewish! Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 05:51, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Bugs being Jewish? I dunno, there are all these rumors going on around Hollywood about that. . .

However, a quick Google search generated an interesting point, and I'll provide this quote from a website:

David Kaufmann makes the case for the Jewishness of that wascally wabbit: "The spirit of Jewish vaudeville inhabits Bugs’s slight frame, down to the lightning puns, double-meanings and gloriously underhanded tricks that he’s lifted from folks like Groucho and Chico Marx, as well as the manic physical mayhem that typified acts like the Ritz Brothers."

Hey, there's a Marx Brothers connection here after all! Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 06:08, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Think of Hair-Raising Hare. He actually does Groucho at one point, walking with that stoop and flicking his eyebrows. He also did Groucho (in makeup) in the one with the Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall bit; I've forgotten the title just now. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 06:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Reading that same article again, Kaufmann brings up some very valid points that support and contradict his argument:

But hold on, buddy. Comic books might have been created by Jews; Hollywood might have been invented by Jews; the Warner brothers who put out the "Looney Tunes" shorts might themselves have been Jews, but the creators of Bugs Bunny were not. Sure, Mel Blanc, "the man of 1,000 voices," was Jewish, as was the director Friz Freleng, but we have to concede that most of the writers and directors were decidedly not. Look at their names: Chuck Jones, Michael Maltese, Tedd Pierce. Look at Tex Avery, a director with an exquisite sense of both timing and the gloriously absurd. No self-respecting Jew, not even Kinky Friedman, ever called himself "Tex."

As if this weren't enough, Bugs's creators originally tried to call him Happy Rabbit, a totally goyish name. (Think Happy Rockefeller.) Thankfully, Mel Blanc suggested "Bugs Bunny." "Bugs" as in crazy. As in crazy like a fox. As in — just maybe — Bugsy Siegel.

Can we find the rabbi in the rabbit? As far as I can tell, Bugs never uses a word of Yiddish, but he does have a yidisher kop. He has the gift of gab as well as a fine command of Acme products. Poor Elmer — was there ever a Jew named Elmer? — never stands a chance. Of course, it is well known that Bugs comes from a long line of tricksters. He is an Eastern Anansi, an American Hershele Ostropoler. He’s even distantly related to Isaac Babel’s Odessa gangster, Benya Krik.

Sure, Elmer Bernstein. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 11:34, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't doubt it. Another thing to keep in mind is that people did all sorts of ethnic humor in those days. Look no farther than Chico Marx, who always did an Italian schtick, although he was about as Italian as gefilte fish. The point being, again that someone like Daffy doing a bit of Jewish schtick doesn't make him Jewish. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 06:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's a very interesting concept of the hare that's a little fascinating—if not maddening—to ponder. Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 06:20, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, the name of that cartoon you referred to is Slick Hare, and it, too, is available on the Looney Tunes Golden Collection: Volume 2. I remember Bugs's Groucho imitation: He's sitting there at a table with Harpo and Chico, when suddenly Harpo's revealed as Elmer Fudd! Fudd takes out a hatchet and dices Bugs's cigar to bits. Bugs then takes Fudd's hand and shakes it vigorously, stating a typical Groucho-ism: "I hope you won't mind waiting while I remove these wet things and slip into a dry martini!" Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 06:21, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds right. And you're right, it was Rabbit Transit. It was a "steam bath" at Yellowstone. One of the hot springs looked like a gigantic baby-bottle nipple or maybe a coffee percolatur. And the telegram delivery guy delivered the "GO!" to Cecil on a "Western Bunions" telegram. That reminded me of that ridiculous argument I had with somebody on the Western Union page, so I decided to quit there. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 06:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, I have all 5 volumes of the Looney Tunes Golden Collection. But I appreciate the tips in where to find things. There are like 50 or 60 cartoons in each volume. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 06:29, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, folks, very entertaining conversation - made me smile, which is worth gold these days. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 06:35, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. And hence the term "Golden Collection", yes? :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 06:37, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This occurence proves that one can have a legitimate, intriguing discussion dealing with ethnicity and religion on Wikipedia without diving headlong into heated quarrels. You're very welcome, Ed, and thank you both, gentleman.

P.S. To reiterate what I've said before, I still haven't been able to buy the fifth Golden Collection volume, despite having been able to get my hands on the previous four DVD sets. Finding out where I can scrounge up $50 with my current budget is another thing. Perhaps I can find some comfort in the fact that I have some of these cartoons on DVD already (in cheap, unfurbished form, yes, but still there for my viewing pleasure). :-) Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 06:50, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Outdent) Thanks for the entertaining read, guys. Jonneroo (talk) 07:03, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As Chico Marx would probably, "Pray-goh, it's no-thing!" :-) Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 00:55, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Baseball Bugs, while I'm at it, d'you think that you could take a look at this new article I created? Since you have the fifth LTGC DVD, you'd probably contribute more to that article than I could. Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 04:07, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll see what I can do. It might not be tonight, though. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personal request: Mike Lupica squabble

I hope you'll forgive the unsolicited nature of this post, but perhaps you'll be amenable to overseeing a dispute. There has been an editing disagreement on the Mike Lupica page since early January. It's all about published criticisms of Lupica by his fellow sportswriters, and the attendant news coverage.

The editing dispute has already been taken to WP:BLP twice, and to WP:EAR once, but has gotten limited response. You can see the particulars of the argument(s) on the Lupica discussion page, as well as these: http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=183164546#Mike_Lupica and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BLPN#Mike_Lupica and http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Editor_assistance/Requests&action=edit&section=55

I'm writing to you because you appear to have had an online rapport with WKnight94, and also with myself. You and I have "collaborated" on a few baseball pages, notably Cy Young's-- see the June 2007 discussion; my IP changes periodically and it was 208.120.224.97 then. The Cy Young tussle involved a problematic editor named Tecmobowl, who was subsequently banned. (Oddly, I had much better luck compromising with Tecmobowl a year ago than I'm having now.)

As for Mike Lupica: after a series of edits were made to his/her various specifications, WKnight94 unilaterally elected to delete or obscure all the material under discussion, then announced that he/she no longer cares to address the subject. The chronology and circumstances of this shutdown are making it difficult to maintain an assumption of good faith. I would certainly appreciate any observations or advice you would be good enough to offer to either of us. Particularly if there is anything I've done wrong or incorrectly, or if there's anything that I should be doing. And I will certainly understand if you don't wish to consider this dispute at all. As I said, I only thought to contact you because you've interacted pleasantly with both WKnight94 and myself. Thank you in advance/sorry to have bothered you (pick one). 208.120.227.142 (talk) 01:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see where it merits more than 1 line in the Lupica article, with a link to an external source for the "half-full" story. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 09:25, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

University of Florida Baseball players

  • You had mentioned you had a baseball card of Casey Wise. If you take a picture of the baseball card then I think it's okay. Also if you want to add any other UF athletes pictures then feel free as well. Thanks Jccort (talk) 00:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats!

I am a wiki scout looking for people to join the WikiProject. I've noticed that you have contributed most of the time on Red Sox pages. I am inviting you to join the WikiProject Boston Red Sox. You are my first invite. If you have a question about the project, feel free to ask on my talk page.--RyRy5 (talk) 03:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please accept this invite to join the Red Sox WikiProject, a WikiProject dedicated to improving all articles associated with the Boston Red Sox. Simply click here to accept!
I am wondering if you are thinking of accepting the invite. People are wondering if a new member will arrive soon. Please respond to this on my talk page.--RyRy5 (talk) 19:26, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I hope you can at least help a little to red sox articles on occasions. Happy Trails bugs!--RyRy5 (talk) 19:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Point of contact

Hi there - thanks for your comment here - can you please let me know your point of contact for the foundation in the Superman music case?--VS talk 20:05, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This: [9] Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:04, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

VP Bug

Sorry it looks like it's a bug in VP which has manifested itself in the last few days, I'd had a few until yesterday but now I'm getting htem practically every rollback. I've stopped it for now but apparently there's a new release soon so that should clear it. BigHairRef | Talk 00:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Superman music

Hi, I am not commenting about my case but with respect to the case that you brought up at ANI. I did look at the article and I found references to the CD set kind of Spammy. I think it would be better to make reference in one place of the page not in many number of places on that article page. Also you need to take into consideration is the editor one purpose account to work on that article or is the editor a productive member of the Wikipedia community and spends many hours of their time contributing to different areas of Wikipedia. Just food for thought! Igor Berger (talk) 01:04, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TimmyTruck/Overjoyed

Hi. I noticed the similarities in both TimmyTruck & Overjoyed too. Having dealt with the now-blocked Overjoyed, I find it quite the coincidence that another editor popped up on Gidget, reverted both of our edits (which were perfectly acceptable), uploaded the same screenshot, and has the same editing style (lots of unexplained edits in a row). I like to assume good faith, but yeah, it's a little too similar. Pinkadelica (talk) 08:08, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Why don't you have Rollback? Would you like me to grant it? Pedro :  Chat  21:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your past is not perfect, but I believe you have learnt from it. I also see no warnings since January. Answer me honestly - would you benefit from rollback; and would you let me down by using it for anything but simple vandalism reversion? Note It's no shame on you to answer that you do not feel ready for it. Pedro :  Chat  23:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Granted. Please use WP:NAS to test it out. All it does is give you a one click reversal of all edits by the last editor on a given page - handy for serial vandalism unless another editor has made changes in the meantime. Again, remember to only use it for vandalism or it will be revoked. I'm sure you'll do the right thing. Best. Pedro :  Chat  23:38, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New section

I was thinking we should start one that would list reports of particularly vivid dreams of perfect games. Gooden pitched some beauties for me back in the '80s.—DCGeist (talk) 05:37, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ANI thread on Wikipedia's new "founder"

Sometimes you founder on the bolders.

I read that sitting at my desk and laughed loudly enough that the guy in the next cubicle peeked over the partition. For the record, I consider myself the founder of a fraction of 1% of Wikipedia. Thanks for the laugh! --SSBohio 13:58, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You laughed. Awesome. Mission accomplished. :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 14:07, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adventures of Superman: Images

I'm wondering why the side-by-side images of the "Look Up in the Sky" moment from the show are critical to this article and exactly what do they demonstrate/illustrate/prove? Both images are small and of poor quality to begin with and look almost exactly alike. I don't understand why they are incuded here. Could you explain? Also, I'm having the same problem with the image of Lois Lane making an exit through a door. What is this image intended to illustrate/prove/demonstrate? A single television article cannot be filled with countless images of every frame of the show. In order to "balance" text and images per Wikipedia's guidelines, I'll be forced to delete images of the cast in order to accomodate images that are (IMHO) useless and vague. For my own part, I believe readers would be more interested in having access to images of the cast rather than doorways and vague crowd scenes. We could just as easily include images of the speeding train, the tall building leapt at a single bound, Perry White's office, Jimmy Olsen's blue sweater vest, and countless other elements, but to what purpose? Please discuss your rationales for including your images. I'd really like to know because they're quite inexplicable to me. TimmyTruck (talk) 19:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they can be moved elsewhere as far as I'm concerned. But you don't explain why two images of the crowd are necessary. And the doorway? It's a doorway. So what? Every frame of the show is a "fact" but that doesn't mean that every frame of the show should be included as images in the text of the article. TimmyTruck (talk) 19:44, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism warning

I am not vandalizing. You are removing a valid AfD template. 24.124.109.67 (talk) 10:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eve Carson

Oops, I goofed. I intended to have the first deletion page deleted since it wasn't listed on WP:AFD, and nominate it for deletion with my opinion about the deletion. BlueAg09 (Talk) 10:08, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problem has been fixed by admin; it's now linked to the proper deletion entry on the template. Please add your comments there. BlueAg09 (Talk) 10:16, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I saw the duplicate and figured it was a Twinkle error or something. Don't see any reason to close the anon's nomination, it's a legitimate point. BTW I'm not an admin; anyone can use {{AfD top}} and {{AfD bottom}}. cab (talk) 10:18, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rename for Baseball parks of Toledo, Ohio?

Baseball parks of Toledo, Ohio → List of baseball parks in Toledo, Ohio? Seems like the going thing per WP:STAND. Looks good BTW.  :) —Wknight94 (talk) 18:51, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Year in film" template

Because I got tired of writing out all those "year in film" wikilinks, I've written a little template which may be useful: filmyear or fy. It expands, for instance, {{filmyear|1999}} or {{fy|1999}} into 1999. I've tried it out, and it seems to work. Of course, I know nothing at all about template writing, so... Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 06:13, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eve Carson AfD

You continue to ask the same questions and to apparently misinterpret my comments despite my various efforts at response and clarification. If you have some problem with what I am saying, please bring the discussion to my talk page - Fritzpoll (talk) 18:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Sparky the Wonder Bot"

Sure. Glad you like it ! -- No Guru (talk) 20:51, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. That's a classic picture. Does it have a proper fair-use rationale ? ;) -- No Guru (talk) 21:29, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Duck Soup GA on hold

Ed Fitzgerald and I are having a rough time figuring out how to address the GA reviewer's recommendations for Duck Soup. If you can help us out, click here and here. Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 02:52, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at it, probably tomorrow. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 03:22, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks! Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 03:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Afro-American image deletion

The image that is up for deletion was uploaded some time back as a citation to show that John Henry Lloyd did indeed die in 1964 instead of '65; this was during one of the many Liebman Floating Edit Wars (TM). As long as we don't also revert Lloyd's date of death to the incorrect one, I have no problem with the image being deleted. -- Couillaud (talk) 12:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem with the deletion, as this was not really a typical image upload. The image was uploaded because Liebman was changing the death date without citing any verifiable resource. I uploaded this one and cited a second, and the change was implemented. IIRC, Liebman continued even after that to incorrectly insert other unverifiable references without needing to do so.
The odd thing is that I've sent these same references to SABR to correct Lloyd's death date, and they still have not been acted upon. -- Couillaud (talk) 15:05, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Victims of crime proposals

I've started trying to flesh out some ideas at User:Fritzpoll/Victims_of_crime_guideline - once we have something that a number of us can agree on, I'll pop it in the right namespace and we'll see if we can settle all this madness by obtaining consensus. Fritzpoll (talk) 17:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eve Carson move question

I see that you are very much involved with this afd. A question I have for you, do you think the article should stay as "Eve Carso" and should be both about her life and the circumstances of her death, or do you believe it should be redirected to something such as Murder of Eve Carson and should be primarily about her death? The problem with the current AFD is I think many are getting caught up on having an article about a person who is notable for a single event. I think if the article was initially titled Murder of Eve Carson this whole thing would have gone much smoother.Gwynand (talk) 18:04, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how you could possibly come to the belief that the Eve Carson disappearance is more notable than the Natalee Holloway case; I'm truly confused by that statement. Eve Carson was murdered and found on the very same day. Natalee Holloway has been missing for three years, and in addition to the last three years of news coverage, the case has been the subject of news reports including full hours on Dateline and 20/20 within the last month. There's simply no comparison. As for the name itself, there is no hard and fast rule, and each article is best judged on its own merits. The Holloway article has been the subject of numerous naming discussions, and there has never been an agreement for it to be moved. You can see my reasoning here. Also see my comments here - auburnpilot talk 21:02, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did I miss something?

Could you expand on your change summary "Reverting self-promotion." Are you referring to the name of the jpeg file, "Sears-tower-panoramic-night-bob-horsch.jpg". Does that in itself constitute 'self-promotion'? Reason I'm concerned is the recent dust-up re: David Shankbone. Shenme (talk) 02:38, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I should have investigated a little more, but I see now the situation is still developing (conversations after my posting above). I myself have a hard time differentiating between overdone enthusiasm (hey, I've got this great stuff that could go here!) and blatant exploitation (hey, here's another place I can put my stuff!).
I was just cueing on the possibility it was more of "this filename has someone's name in it, and that's bad...", which was entirely overdone with respect to David Shankbone. To the point where someone got overwrought saying "hey, this one has his face in it too!" when they could have just compared with the pictures on his user page to see it was someone else completely! (sigh) Shenme (talk) 05:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Event name semantics

Interesting point you raised, and something I'm trying to cover at the policy proposal I mentioned earlier. The draft is far from complete (or satisfactory), but the discussion on the talk page is...lengthy! :) My feeling is that maximum community consensus can be reached if:

- articles are based on the crime itself, the "event", rather than the victims' biographies. This, to me, means less focus on the victim than Joseph suggests on the draft guideline discussion page, since the media coverage (our reliable sources) is based on the crime, not the activity of the victim - to that end, naming them appropriately, with redirects as necessary to facilitate users finding the information, per your comments to my talk page some days ago

Naturally, such a guideline will not (and should not) prevent nomination for deletion, but will lend weight in the debate if the AfD is frivolous, or might allow a non-deletion result such as move and redirect. I would particularly appreciate *your* help on this, as I believe you and I may inadvertently be moving towards a consensus on this... :) -Fritzpoll (talk) 15:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:ParamountLogo1930s.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:ParamountLogo1930s.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (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 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" 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. BJBot (talk) 06:53, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In for the long haul - RfC on the guideline

I've read over a few of the old AfDs and the few comments that are emerging on the discussion page, and tried to merge them in places with existing policy. The guideline is now sufficiently mature to be more widely publicised to obtain a wider consensus via debate and editing, and I have started by opening an RfC on it (I hope I have done this correctly!) - where is best to publicise it further, do you think? Fritzpoll (talk) 16:47, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lauren Burk and WP:RM

Hello, Baseball Bugs. I noticed you undid my removal of the Lauren Burk entry at Requested Moves. The article was AfD'd, and closed as "delete" Whether you agree with the deletion or not is irrelevant, please do not disrupt Wikipedia to make a point. If you think the article shouldn't have been deleted, there's always Deletion Review. Regards, Parsecboy (talk) 00:40, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed your comment on my talk page. First, I had nothing to do with the deletion, so don't don't accuse me of anything of the sort. It's assuming bad faith, and moreover, incivil. I merely removed a listing that no longer needed our attention at WP:RM. Parsecboy (talk) 00:42, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Look, Baseball, I just removed a listing from WP:RM, because it was irrelevant. There's no page to move. The page no longer exists. Therefore, the listing at WP:RM doesn't need to be there anymore. I didn't delete anything. I fail to see how my conducting house-cleaning activities at WP:RM can be described "part of the problem". Having a listing at WP:RM isn't going to make the article be recreated, I don't see why you're so up in arms about it. Again, please stop assuming bad faith on my part. Parsecboy (talk) 00:49, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've warned you about personal attacks; if you continue to make such comments, you will be blocked. Parsecboy (talk) 00:55, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for clarifying your comment. Still, I don't see how they do. Perhaps you can explain what you mean. Again, I deleted nothing, I am far from a deletionist. I just removed an irrelevant listing for an article that is no longer in existence. If you do seek deletion review, and the decision is overturned, I'll be more than happy to move the page to a title that fits conventions. Parsecboy (talk) 01:02, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I understand the need to vent sometimes. Yeah, but I think that is part and parcel of the Wikipedia system as a whole; guidelines can be created, but if no one is willing to follow them, what good does it do? For example, I'm currently engaged in a discussion about the Serbian tennis player Novak Đoković. The article was created with standard English characters (Djokovic instead of Đoković), moved without discussion, a move request was done a month or so ago to move it back, it succeeded, and a week later, it was moved back to Đoković without discussion, warranting the current discussion that I've become involved in. Regardless of the fact that every source provided uses "Djokovic", and what WP:UE states, people are still arguing to use the special characters. Sometimes it gets very frustrating. Is there a discussion about the proposed guideline? I'd like to take a look at it, and perhaps add a comment, if I have anything valuable to say. Parsecboy (talk) 01:13, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, there was never any intention of not having a redirect for the non-standard characters, or to not explain the difference in spellings. We're working on a compromise, so hopefully that will bear fruit.
Back to Lauren Burk, I re-deleted the talk page, and left a note for the anon user to use legitimate channels to voice his or her opinion. I also notified him/her of the proposed guideline on Fritzpoll's userspace, if s/he wanted to make a contribution to the discussion. Parsecboy (talk) 03:42, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No need to apologize, that's just part of the joy of Wikipedia. I've already got two "friends", one who's been creating impostor accounts, posting personal information online, and conducting various off-Wiki harassment, and the other who's been following me around since about May of last year, vandalizing pages I edit. In any case, I did assume good faith with this anon, and despite his claims that he just wants to be "[dealt] with as a human" in disputes, it's evident that he's just here to cause trouble. And yes, I do have the trump card, if he wants to continue acting as he's been. Parsecboy (talk) 04:58, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notifying of move to Wikipedia:Notability (criminal acts)

Per comments on the talk page, I have moved the guideline into project space for wider discussion. Just letting you know as a contributor to this page Fritzpoll (talk) 16:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you hate Scott A. Brown?

Why do you hate Scott A. Brown? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.205.0.181 (talk) 22:32, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cincinnati Reds

the cincinnati reds team I belive dose have connections with the1869 team because at all reds games hats, shirts and sings all say est.1869. The reds stat book has records from the 1869 team that they still use today. User:Davidkinderosu1 03:33, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Might need to keep an eye on J10254g [10]

I dont know whats up with this guy, but he hit up quite a few other pages of arenas and stadiums with made up nicknames, incorrect nicknames, or wrong names for arenas or stadiums. Figured I would say something to you since you had caught one of his edits, and I had to undo a few of his edits myself. Whammies Were Here 03:39, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Fishwrapper news"

You do know what I'm saying, yeah? Nothing about the reliability of the source. Will (talk) 16:13, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I'm saying, it's nothing about the reliability of the sources. Basically, I'm saying it's quickly forgotten and of no longterm interest. Will (talk) 16:43, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To you, anyway, and that's all that matters, ja??

New policy proposal that may be of interest

I'm tapping this message out to you because you were involved at the AfDs of Eve Carson or Lauren Burk. Following both of these heated debates, a new proposal has been made for a guideline to aid these contentious debates, which can be found at WP:N/CA. There is a page for comments at Wikipedia talk:Notability (criminal acts)/Opinions should you wish to make a comment. Thanks for your time, and apologies if this was not of interest! Fritzpoll (talk) 16:16, 19 March 2008 (UTC) (I know you comments contributed to the form it currently has, but I'm just dropping this on the pages of all potentially interested parties!)[reply]

League Park

Hi, Baseball Bugs. In my clean up work of succession boxes I happened across the article League Park and see an issue occurring regarding dates. While this is irrelevant for the main portion of the article and I do not wish to get involved in that portion of the discussion, the guidelines for succession boxes specify that dates should not be wikified within succession boxes unless there is a specific value add (i.e. in a succession box for the mbl all-star game, linking the year to the article about that year's game.) Hope this helps relative to that portion of your discussion. Gwguffey (talk) 15:10, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for stopping by and you bring up a great point. Succession boxes have been neglected to the point that getting them roped back into the guide specifications is going to take some time. Gwguffey (talk) 00:53, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spring Forward!

Happy First Day of Spring!
A Beautiful Cherry Tree in Spring Bloom
Theres nothing like seeing a field full of spring flowers.

Just wishing you a wonderful First Day of Spring {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}! ~~~~







If you live in the Southern Hemisphere and are entering the season of Autumn not Spring then I wish you a happy First Day of Autumn {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}!
To spread this message to others, add {{subst:First Day Of Spring}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 01:12, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re:ANI

Hey Bugs, I just marked this resolved, and realized that you had another question mixed in there (I was getting lost in all the colons and replies:-) Generally speaking, you're right. Talkpage comments should not be shifted from one article talkpage to another article's talkpage, unless it is because of a pagemove where the article is moving as well. I wouldn't have a problem with reverting thsoe changes. I would also warn though, it isn't worth getting in a content dispute over, and certainly not worth 3RR or a block. This place is too big to hone your focus in so tightly on one thing that you lose the overall mission of the place. Cheers, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:35, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your sensible reply. I'm also a huge baseball nut by the way. Can't wait for the grapefruit league crap to get over. Let's get on with it!!. Once you visit my userpage, you'll learn quickly who I firmly believe will be the next World Series champs, with or without the overpaid "talent". Nope, I'm right. Don't even try to argue with me. It can happen to any team, no matter the regular season record. Cheers, thanks for staying cool about all this. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:53, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The statistical chances of SI picking either the Twins or the Cubs as winner-take-all is probably less than 1%, looking at their rosters and in some cases, "history". Which means that would be a great midwest matchup! Similar to Twins v. Cardinals in '87. What fun that would be! As far as your "game 7" prediction, please do keep in mind that the Twins have yet to lose a home game in the World Series. Ever. In their history. Go dome! At least, go dome for at least a couple more seasons...Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
1965? Ancient history. I meant in the dome of course. I'm one of the few people in Minneapolis (as far as I can tell) that is banging his head against the wall about building an open air stadium. Good grief. The Old Met was replaced by HHH because of our climate. That's how it got sold to taxpayers: "Twins games live, in the comfort of a climate controlled environment!". Now, we're getting a stadium without a retractable roof? Assinine. Today is the 2nd day of spring. My house just got dumped with 5 inches of snow. We always get snow in April, usually in May, and once or twice in June. In fact, July is the only month in Minnesota history not to have snow. Open roof stadium? Assinine. I like the dome too. (Maybe its because I found a really really good parking space that isn't metered, isn't monitored, and is free, even though its only a block from the dome) Most parking (the dome is downtown) are 10-15 bucks a car....Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:29, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you "remember" it, that officially makes you (slightly) older than me. The '87 series was vivid to me because of my age, which I've never given out on-wiki. I will say, though, 1965 I wasn't even a thought in my parents' minds. You're older, perhaps, but not necessarily better. Just older. :-) Cheers, BB. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:09, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

cubs page

futility theories.... its not done yet.... i work 55 hours a week and have 3 kids.... it takes timeWjmummert (talk) 14:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Copyrights

Yep. What license have they released it under? Without that info, we cannot host the files.--Nilfanion (talk) 02:57, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all. The warning is to tell them that there is a problem with the licensing and to tell them to fix it. That means they have time to add the license of their choice: PD, GFDL, CC, whatever. However, we cannot choose the license for them. Read Wikipedia:Copyrights and Wikipedia:Image copyright tags. From the second of those pages: "the license must permit both commercial reuse and derivative works." Without them choosing a free license those rights are not released, and the images are non-free.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The deletions, unfortunately, will be warranted if the user does not fix the license (under WP:CSD#I4). There is a big difference in legal terms between "Self-made" and "PD-Self". One says "I made this picture" the other says "I made this picture and release it into the Public domain." By saying that they are equivalent you are actually denying their rights, copyright law is designed to protect the creator of the works. Releasing to PD means they choose to waive all those rights, which they do not have to do (they can demand attribution for example).

Incidentally, the warnings state "Thank you for uploading X. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image." The 4th sentence states exactly what the problem is.--Nilfanion (talk) 11:12, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually yes. If they rant at me, it means they have got the message and I can explain to them. And they have all got warnings on their talk pages which is aimed at the user.--Nilfanion (talk)
Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Example.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. That is the warning they are getting... It says what to do!--Nilfanion (talk) 11:42, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So... The first half explains the problem with links to detailed legal information. Then it says how to fix it: Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#For image creators is straightforward. And then if you still have problems it tells you to go to the relevant help page. Where's the problem? Oh and I'll reiterate, they do not have to release as PD-self, that is one of the acceptable options. That is why the drop-down licensing box on the upload page has a few choices, and part of the reason why a message like "Hey, add {{PD-self}} to this page or the file will have to be deleted" isn't any good. For example, today's featured picture Image:Tamarin portrait 2 edit3.jpg is tagged {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} very different to PD-self.--Nilfanion (talk) 11:59, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is what the upload form is for: All these images did not have a license selected on upload. They have to choose a license (from a number of choices) before we can host it, these users forgot to on upload. Casual users are unlikely to know other editors so cannot "contact an admin" like you would. The messages, if they read them, tell them the issue and the give links to the relevant information so that they can fix it. If they do not understand that information, or how to act on it, they have a link to a help page where they can ask for help or they can contact me. If they contact me confused, great - I can answer specific queries then! I suspect most of the users will not return, and so their files will have to go.--Nilfanion (talk) 12:12, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you not see the drop-down box immediately above "Upload file" labelled "Licensing:" with "None selected" in the box? If you click on the box you get the options... That's a fairly standard user interface across a lot of software...--Nilfanion (talk) 12:27, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming you went to the own work upload form. "PD-self" is wiki-nonsense which is short for: Public domain, self-made. So, "Public domain" is the relevant option in the drop down (the bottom one). If you select one of the options, a preview of the license tag is visible below the drop-down.--Nilfanion (talk) 12:58, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

I'm sorry. What I meant was that I would ask for her to be my adoptee when I am an admin. From now on, I will be more careful of what I say. Also, are you an admin?--RyRy5 talk 20:41, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 21:18, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Idea

you might want to check this out--Yankees10 01:42, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No holidays...??

You don't need to believe in supernatural gods or goddesses to celebrate holidays with your family and friends. For example, I'm still hungover from my friends' easter party on Sunday.VatoFirme (talk) 06:05, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Self-puppeting

I'd ask you to use preview more often? Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 14:57, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:ParamountLogo1930s.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:ParamountLogo1930s.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (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 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" 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. BJBot (talk) 12:22, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I dont think so

All infomation contained in my edit of the Wrigley field page was paraphrased from the JOINT press release which was actually issued by the CUBS!!!! Check the footnotes. I was more worried about plagarizing the Cubs than advertising for the CBOE. Don't worry though, I replaced what you removed and will continue to do so. If you would like to reword the paragraphs, you are obviously more then welcome to. I would ask that you please try to use correct grammar. LMusielak —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmusielak (talk • contribs) 14:45, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I have no issue yet. I just spent a good deal of time assuring mine was correct when I added that information. As such, I was just kindly requesting that you do the same when editing my contribution. No insult intended. My apologies if it came off as harsh. LMusielak —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmusielak (talk • contribs) 14:54, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will repost it and will file a report on you. Do you really want to play these childish games? Get a life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmusielak (talk • contribs) 14:59, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did have citiations, you deleted them. Also, the CBOE doesn't have any seats. The CUBS have the seats. I would tell you to read the release from the Cubs that I posted but you deleted them. Google "cubs" and "CBOE" OR actually read what I actually wrote and not what you think it said. The best part of the whole thing is the single game auction that will allow regular people to buy front row seats for one game even if they can't afford season tickets. Seriously, why would I want to advertise for the CBOE?

If by "bare superscripts" you mean "link to actually release" (again lets repeat it was the Cubs that sent it out...), then yes I had "bare superscripts". Thank you for pointing out my error. I am new to this wikipedia thing. It is offensive and laughable that my first real contribution is being censored by the baseball article Nazi. Seriously are you over there just saying "No post for you!!" like the soup nazi on Seinfeld? --Lmusielak (talk) 15:16, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no lawyer. I would rather put more than is necessary to prevent possible legality issues later.--Lmusielak (talk) 15:19, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its not advertising. They are facts. I'm going to repost it. Report me. I'm more then confident I will win that argument. Thanks for your input but you are not the be-all end-all of wikipedia. I'm not going to bow down to you just because you feel it is advertising or you feel the article is too long.--Lmusielak (talk) 15:27, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wally Phillips

When I first came across the article today, there were no references whatsoever, so I started finding them and adding additional information along the way. At some point, in between, I added the {{refimprove}} tag to reference some of the information that was already in the article. Since then, I've found sources for most everything, so it's probably not really necessary at this point. However, I'm going to be AFK for a bit, so I don't have time to check right now. It could probably be removed, however I'm sure there are still things that need sources. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 16:27, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've nominated Wally Phillips, an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Wikipedia:Did you know. You can see the hook for the article at Template talk:Did you know#Articles created/expanded on March 27, where you can improve it if you see fit. Thanks, Jauerbackdude?/dude. 16:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forecast for gametime:

4-6 inches of snow today. Strong northwest winds, blinding conditions. Car accidents everywhere. Opening day. I've heard at least three local TV news anchors say "good thing it's indoors!". The same ones that blindly coddle for an outdoor stadium, that will be open in three years. What, opening day 2011 will be mid-May? Or maybe global warming is really accelerating? These TV fools, no doubt, on a beautiful early June evening, will have forgotten today, and say "Tonight's Twins game is indoors - won't it be great to have it outdoors in 2011?" We are fools. We just got sold a monorail. Sorry to clutter your talk with my grumblings, I needed to vent. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 15:51, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Uh, yeah, but!

Re: [this diff] : Too much on my watchlist! It's up to 4,594 right now, and it takes all half the day to troll though it. What with my other Wiki-projects, I can only do so much at one time, and I had a Category page move to get done too, and that has to be done manually. THanks for reminding me I'm not Superman, but I'm not likely to turn into him so yet either! And, sincerely, thanks for finding the link. I did intend to get to it eventually. :) - BillCJ (talk) 05:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wally Phillips

Updated DYK query On 3 April, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Wally Phillips, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Jauerbackdude?/dude. 17:39, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:leave it to beaver

Centralized deletion discussions are at articles for deletion. There are actually two deletion processes, the one I used is called proposed deletion which doesn't require a discussion, but any editor can contest deletion by removing the PROD tag. Mister Senseless™ (Speak - Contributions) 04:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion is not unilateral, any user can remove the tag to contest the deletion. All PROD means is, "I (in my own personal opinion) don't think this article meets the criteria for inclusion because _________" Its sort of one of those "silence on the part of other users is a form of consensus" situations. The fact that the author is on vacation is irrelevant, content belongs to the community per the GFDL license. Mister Senseless™ (Speak - Contributions) 19:40, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the PROD tag and took the article to AfD instead. The discussion is here. In the future, you can simply remove the PROD tag yourself if you do not agree with the article's deletion. Mister Senseless™ (Speak - Contributions) 19:45, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cubs

hey man. as you know, i have been editing this page for a long time. now i am attempting to source it. i dont know who this bozo tool2die4 is, but he is doing a great job of p!$$!n9 me off. I do not want to get involved in an edit war but.... Wjmummert (talk) 16:20, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cubs

Fred McGriff taking a month to come to Chicago is neither bold nor an assertation. As I mentioned, I'm in the process of sourcing. Site an example of what you are talking about.Wjmummert (talk) 01:08, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Cubs

Thanks for the kind words. I will take a look at the History page sometime in the near future. I am sure I will have some small battles to fight on the Cubs page that I will need to attend to first. As you pointed out, there's still work to do anyways. Best regards. Tool2Die4 (talk) 14:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Perils of Superman Steve Mitchell Michael Fox.JPG

Thank you for uploading Image:Perils of Superman Steve Mitchell Michael Fox.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr If you've written a quality article... 14:23, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

champ drought

other than the work playful i like the way you wrote that.... good job. However, realize that what you may see as "fanboy writing" I see differently. We need to work together on this. If you recall, go back and look at the slop-job half a$$ crapppy shape this page was in during the summer of last year, before I started editing it.Wjmummert (talk) 17:11, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stooges entries

Hey there - I just want to thank you for all the additions you are making the Stooge film entries. I just have one request: when adding comments about where a film title originates from, please place it in the "Notes" section of the entry. I am trying maintain consistency throughout all the entries. Thanx so much...Oanabay04 (talk) 20:02, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

admin

I'm attempting to go for admin status here. I'd appreciate it if you could give me your support, that is, if you feel I would be a fit candidate. Obviously I wouldnt ask if I didnt, but I dont want to assume. My page line is Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Wjmummert and thanks in advance.Wjmummert (talk) 01:05, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks either way.Wjmummert (talk) 00:11, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Duck Soup is on its way...

Hey, Bugs! Duck Soup is nearing its good article candidacy and we only have a few more days before the ultimate decision is made, but a new reviewer has left some suggestions at the talk page. Click here to go to the new discussion. Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 19:37, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of MLB individual streaks

Hey. You mentioned that you had a Baseball Almanac that broke down consecutive fielding chances without an error by each position. Is it possible to add this to the list? (Not that I want to marginalize the accomplishments of sure-handed Stuffy McInnis). Whoppersnapper (talk) 01:27, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll check it when I get back from my business trip. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:44, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From last year's Sporting News Baseball Record Book. Don't know if any of these were eclipsed in 2007:

  • 1B - 1,700 - Stuffy McInnis, during 1921-22
  • 2B - 479 - Manny Trillo, 1982
  • SS - 543 - Mike Bordick, 2002
  • 3B - 257 - Don Money, 1974
  • P - 273 - Claude Passeau, 1941-46
  • C - 1,565 - Mike Matheny, 2002-04
  • OF - 938 - Darren Lewis, 1990-94

Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 23:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Deletion log

I'm deleting unnecessary talkpages today. I have no idea why these deletions are showing up in your watchlist - perhaps some of them are associated with a page which was moved after you started watching it? east.718 at 11:53, April 13, 2008

The talkpages that I'm deleting are orphaned redirects without any histories. Being orphaned, they have no internal value (nobody will ever stumble across it from a link; we don't search in the Talk: namespace), and only amount to clutter that is prone to foolishness (another admin recently went through everything in Image talk: and found a horrific amount of unchecked vandalism). Another unwanted effect of keeping these redirects around is that they may prevent future pagemoves. Since all the pages have no history aside from the creation of a redirect, it's impossible any discussion ever took place on them. I'm just performing good housekeeping - the next step will be to identify talkpages that are in the wrong places and then do some move repairs. :-) east.718 at 12:02, April 13, 2008
I'm not deleting talkpages with any content - if anybody ever edited the talkpage, I skip over it. The only thing I'm cleaning up is unnecessary redirects that 1/ nobody will ever visit, 2/ are open to vandalism, 3/ prevent future pagemoves, and 4/ waste resources whenever the redirect needs to be fixed. An example of a page I'll be deleting can be found here. east.718 at 12:09, April 13, 2008
OK, I see. When a page is moved, the talk content moves with it, leaving a redirect from the article (which makes sense) and a redirect from the talk page (which is "not needed", for reasons you've stated). Roger. Carry on. :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 12:12, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1954 World Series

Hi what was the thinking behind this edit? It looks to me the image fails criteria for inclusion #1 Fasach Nua (talk) 11:18, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Warning

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --216.229.227.142 (talk) 00:13, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Block

Just FYI - I filed on 216.229.227.142 at WP:AIV and they've been blocked for 48 hours. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 00:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Midgets and dwarves

I was under the impression that "midget" was simply a colloquial term for those suffering from a certain form of dwarvism. The Wikipedia articles on both are relative messes. Anyway, either term is far better than "little person"! --Badger Drink (talk) 07:08, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Laughing

I just wanted to let you know that when I read this edit last night I probably laughed for a solid 3 minutes straight. My wife had to tell me to stop. I'm getting giggly now just thinking about it. Very nicely done. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 17:26, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm that quote sounds familiar. My uncle Keyser always used to say it. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 17:53, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL! that it is funny! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.229.227.144 (talk) 18:39, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs Bunny

Hey this is a little heads up telling you that you need to:


LOOSEN UP AND STOP HELPING THE DEVIL!


I have enjoyed reading your contributions lately and I hope you can help me with some html editing for the articles listed below:

Micronesia Palau Dmitri Shostakovich

If you could give me some advice or something to help me be able to edit this properly, that would be tremendously beneficial.

--216.229.227.141 (talk) 16:21, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

POOF! You gone. [11] Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 16:36, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


They Stooge to Conga

Hello - please be mindful of adding information and facts that are duplicative of present information. The comment title being a play on the play She Stoops to Conquer was already included. Please review the article thoruoughly before submitting. Thanx! Oanabay04 (talk) 00:20, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Baseball cartoon

Hey, I'm watching TCM, MGM Parade, and it's got a baseball cartoon - obviously MGM, but no title card, featuring "Harvey Houndog" a character I don't think I've ever heard of. (But then, I'm not much of a fan of MGM cartoons.) It's in B&W, but that's probably because MGM Parade was shown on TV. It's got some jokes that are similar to "Baseball Bugs" ("One, two, three strikes your out", but with the pitcher throwing three balls in quick sucession, and no multiple batters; and a catcher talking back to the pitcher "That's the stuff, boy..." etc) but I've no idea if it came before or after (probably after, I think). Are you familiar with it? Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 09:41, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never heard of it before. I don't think I have TCM. I'll see what I can find about it. One thing is certain - writers steal from each other all the time. One of the more notorious cases was Bugs vs. a mouse in Rhapsody Rabbit, and a Tom and Jerry cartoon that was the same idea. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 09:49, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re: Dodger Stadium

While RFK Stadium was operating, Dodger Stadium was the 5th oldest. When Nationals Park opened, Dodger Stadium reverted to being the 4th oldest. Somehow, that fact got overlooked by those of us watching it. Thanks for fixing. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 17:05, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I knew about RFK, but the article said it would be third after Yankee Stadium AND Shea closed, implying Shea was olderVader47000 (talk) 17:19, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Native American

Read the article in the March 4, 2002 issue of Sports Illustrated. They have a poll in which an overwhelming majority of Native Americans say they don't find the nicknames offensive, and most Native Americans living off reservations like the Tomahawk Chop at Braves games. So while most Native American activists find the names offensive, the rest don't really care, and in fact a lot of them like the usage.Tracer Bullet (talk) 20:53, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Omaha AA team

Thanks for the response. Neither the NYT article nor the WP article mention the name of the Omaha team at its inception. Do you have any suggestions on where I could find that? • Freechild'sup? 08:33, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on me

Hi. Just wanted to point out that an RfC has been filed on me, and invite you to participate (one way or the other) if you're interested. Thanks. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 19:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw. I'll take a look at it. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 19:06, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Talk: Children of Men

Apparently, he became a lot less civil when he noticed us talking civilly. Maybe if we shouted at each other and used choice swear words, he'd like you again. That whole, 'enemy of my enemy' thing.' ;) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 16:08, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He finally got around to answering my question, and he won't take my advice otherwise, so there's nothing more I can say to him. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 16:12, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He was the first editor I really disagreed with after making WP a regular part of my day. You are preaching to the heavenly choir, my friend.
Enjoy the movie, if you get a chance to see it. Drop me a line and tell me what you thought. :) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 22:40, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the other matter, wasn't it Buffalo Gals? but the folk were singing Auld Lang Syne - Arcayne (cast a spell) 05:04, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but he got to kiss Donna Reed. As I grew up fairly sheltered, one of my first crushes was on her. Since then, I've had a thing for heart-shaped faces. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 05:39, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, Donna Reed didn't age well, either. But I am going to have to disagree with you regarding Ingrid Bergman. Grace Kelly and Lauren Bacall has that distinction for me. Or Diane Lane, who I fell in love with after seeing A Little Romance on video at the tender age of 9. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 06:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


--
I don't really want to talk about Ed's problem, and certainly not on my UserTalk page. I have enough Crazy™ on my plate at this time. Keeping focused will help me keep my cool. I am trying to hold my temper nowadays. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 06:18, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BB:Answering your question - I filed at AN/I about 2-3 day ago, I guess. It's been archived by now. I agree that AN/I was the wrong place -- too complex and not sexy enough. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 06:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(ec)Thanks. I don't want to shunt Ed off, but I don't need to talk about any other large-scale disagreement, spanning multiple pages right now. I appreciate that he found the time to post elsewhere, but I cannot handle as many issues as he clearly can.
Speaking of which, I just came from the RS Noticeboard. Wow, that was pretty nutty. First the accusation that I am making sock-puppets without even an attempt at RfCU, and then, -poof- you become my meat-puppet and or sock as well. I wonder if Jimbo responded, would he make the same accusation? Clearly, the guy doesn't know we've clashed before (and nice to know we are at least past that, btw), and we just happen to agree on this topic. Sigh. Anyway, I am out for the night. Take care. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 06:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For reference if User:Viriditas [12] claims I'm a sockpuppet or meatpuppet of User:Arcayne:

January 13 - 3RR warning from User:Arcayne about The Natural (film): [13]
March 5 - Caution from User:Arcayne to admin User:Pedro about giving me rollback rights: [14]
Maybe it's this: [15] No, it isn't. Arcayne needs to supply URL.

Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 07:31, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs, my good fellow, I'm afraid you're being trolled. There's no such claim that "poof you become my meat-puppet and or sock as wel" and you'll never, ever find one. Arcayne has a long history of making wild accusations that can never be substantiated, and I can prove that with diffs. When he gets called on it, he makes up some lame excuse and backpedals. So Bugs, tell me, what are you going to do when you realize that there isn't any evidence for what Arcayne is saying? He's banking on the fact that you'll just get tired and give up. Please, don't do that. Follow through on this. Keep the pressure on. Follow your nose. But, I can already tell you what's going to happen. Arcayne is going to reply that you must have misunderstood him and that he meant something else entirely. He's pulled that a few dozen times already. So, I appreciate that once you begin to figure this out, you follow up on your promise to remove the off-topic comments from the talk page. Oh, and btw, I support you getting rollback rights. However, if you want an admin to give them to you, show them that you have a history of only using the undo/revert for vandalism and promise that is all you will use it for. Obviously, you will need to build that history and stop using the undo/revert feature during edit wars. If you need any support, let me know. Viriditas (talk) 14:23, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, thanks for explaining. I had no idea you already had rollback. Glad it's working out for you! Have a great day. Viriditas (talk) 15:40, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Bugs, I just came here to back-pedal, and tell you how you misunderstood me and how I meant something else entirely. Could I bank on you getting tired of this and just give up? (insert exasperated laugh here)
But before you do, maybe I could get you to take a gander at the following diffs. It would appear that I went a bit far in claiming his specific accusation of you as a sock-puppet. Perhaps it was this comment (1), wherein I was retroactively accused of sock-puppetry for events over a year ago, and implied I was 'socking and 'meating now. When you seemed to respond favorably to my posts, his resultant accusations of wikistalking (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7) and his personal attacks on not just you (8, 9, 10, 11) but myself as well (far too many instances to list here), I think the two coalesced into a large mass of uncivil behavior on V's part. The last time he actually accused someone of being a meat-puppet of me, it was discovered that the kid (it was a 14 year old) was a newbie who had never heard of either of us before and just popped a comment into the CoM discussion...much like you did. The noob nearly left the Project over the matter, and V was tendered a warning over the matter.
So, I'm apologizing for mixing the incivility and personal attacks with the accusations of sockpuppetry. If apology equals back-pedaling, then I guess I am doing that. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Roger. I don't think there's much else I can do at this point. I'll just have to let you two keep slugging it out. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 22:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:N/CA

Because of the limited discussion, this proposal was marked rejected. It can be resurrected at any time, and may become useful in the future, but for now, just wanted to thank you for your contributions. Best wishes Fritzpoll (talk) 15:51, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Talk Page

I have a right to blank it, so mind your own business. 12.39.2.83 (talk) 15:52, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Logo galleries in TV station articles

We have had a year-long dispute on this issue, with administrators such as A Man in Black being the main enforcer of this so-called "Wikipedia policy". Those of us who edit and maintain these articles believe the images (logos) are important for informational and historical purposes, and we don't agree with the technicalities of the free-image policy which A Man in Black (and other administrators) seeks to shove down our collective throats.

While I appreciate your efforts to fight back, we can't risk being counter-productive in our efforts to fight this form of censorship. Please join the discussion and give us your opinion on this issue at the Television Stations WikiProject. Rollosmokes (talk) 17:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"The deletionists always win, because the inclusionists lack the will to continually fight against their relentless desire to delete anything they don't like."
Which is precisely why we have to keep fighting them until they give in. Rollosmokes (talk) 17:49, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chief Wahoo

The bot removed the image in this article because both Cleveland Indians and Chief Wahoo weren't linked in the fair use rationale on the image description page. I've corrected the problem and the bot (probably) won't remove it again. Cheers, Cumulus Clouds (talk) 05:43, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, the bots are designed to look for images that have no summaries, or summaries that lack one of the ingredients of the nonfree content criteria. All fair use images must have rationales which link the articles they're used in. This is what both Fairusebot and Betacommandbot look for when they assess fair use images. The bot itself can't make any assessment as to what function an image serves in an article and in fact, they're both very good at removing lots of images that aren't use. That kind of work would be very tedious for a human to do, so personally I'm glad to have them around, but yes it can be aggravating sometimes to fight with code instead of human reason. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 18:26, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:ParamountLogo1930s.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:ParamountLogo1930s.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (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 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" 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. BJBot (talk) 12:17, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 13:07, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

82.45.126.198

The thing is, is that WP:AIV is only for active vandals (per the instructions at the top). It's an IP. He's made one bad edit today. Then no more. That's simply not active. Please note the IP is from Telewest an ISP and therefore is probably dynamic. We can't be sure that this is the same user as the one who edited two days ago. Blocks are preventative. No more damage was occuring so there was no need to block. I'm sorry, I know it gets frustrating, but blocking has to be done with a fine touch at times and there was no reason for me to block here. Pedro :  Chat  10:47, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Below, I bequeath two of my most trusted tables! They're quite handy on your user page, I used to find. Regarding warnings, in theory if a vandal is active you go through stages 1,2,3,4 then report after the final warning. But discretion is the watchword. A clear nasty bit of vandalism should get a {{subst:uw-bv}} followed by test 4 then AIV. Equally you might move from test 1 to test 3. Use common sense. But when reporting make sure that not only has the vandal been warned, but that warnings are current (e.g. a test 1 from the 12th April, test 2 from the 15th April and test 3 on the 21st April with a report on the 30th april is not really good enough) It also depends if the account/IP has been blocked in the past (serial long term school IP's can be blocked with just one warning shot, and not even that). Accounts that are vandalism only but have allways stopped after a test 4 are another complication as well. If in doubt it's better to report, but try to follow these guidelines if you can, and remember that if an IP is dynamic it really has to be vandalism that is persistent and happening right when you report. Hope that helps, but feel free to ask me anything else. Pedro :  Chat  11:04, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, I saw your personal warnings. No problems there given what you're doing - analysing a pattern before stepping in. I sometimes rollback without feeling the need to warn editors - there's a clear difference between out and out vandalism and editing "tests", and I think we can deter people from becoming productive if we slap templates on their pages to readily. I hope you find the tables useful. I'm often around 07:00 - 16:00 Wikipedia time (weekdays) if you need admin action on something, but WP:AIV is normally well attended and for vandalism it's best to go there direct. Pedro :  Chat  11:24, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nope! I'm a brit but I've had this nickname in RL so when the opportunity came to usurp it I couldn't resist. But I get a lot of editors asking me that question, or if I speak Spanish (which I don't, I'm afraid to say!) Pedro :  Chat  12:03, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You've piqued my interest. Not before my time, but yes not a british thing so I've never heard of him before! Pedro :  Chat  12:15, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I love it. Now I need to work out a awy of getting "'S'all right! Close the box!" into an edit summary! Pedro :  Chat  12:46, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for those links - I'll look later when I'm not behind my work firewall !!! Pedro :  Chat  13:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Administrator Intervention
Wikipedia Help Desk
Requests for Page Protection
Requests for Adminship
Articles for Deletion
Criteria for Speedy Deletion
Templates for Deletion
Miscellany for Deletion
Requests for comment
Images for Deletion
Redirects for Discussion
Barnstars
Administrator Noticeboard/Incidents
List of Policies
Articles/media for speedy deletion
List of Guidelines
The Three Revert Rule
Requested moves
Wikipedia Logs
File:Crystal Clear app advancedsettings.png
 User Warning Templates
Requests for Checkuser

Warning Templates

Click here to show warnings
Hover over the curly braces to see a summary of the contents.
Don't forget to substitute these templates (more information)
Description Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 4im
Editing tests {{subst:uw-test1}} {{subst:uw-test2}} {{subst:uw-test3}} Escalate ↓ Escalate ↓
Vandalism {{subst:uw-vand1}} {{subst:uw-vand2}} {{subst:uw-vand3}} {{subst:uw-vand4}} {{subst:uw-vand4im}}
Page blanking, removal of content or templates {{subst:uw-delete1}} {{subst:uw-delete2}} {{subst:uw-delete3}} {{subst:uw-delete4}} {{subst:uw-delete4im}}
Adding spam links {{subst:uw-spam1}} {{subst:uw-spam2}} {{subst:uw-spam3}} {{subst:uw-spam4}} {{subst:uw-spam4im}}

Rollback discussion

You may want to give some input here Pedro :  Chat  10:26, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probation

How would I be put on the admin probation? Computermadgeek (talk) 13:53, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The above editor was just blocked indefinitely for disruption. [16] Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 14:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Funny Joke!

NOT!!! Retro Agnostic (talk) 10:41, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there

It's me again, the guy with THOUSANDS of socks. Just to let you know that I wasn't lying about that, I have a plentiful supply, and I don't ever intend to stop until all you admins have gotten what you deserve —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonathan Howarth (talk • contribs) 10:56, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cal Ripken, Jr.

Hi, Could you take a look at Cal Ripken, Jr.#1991 where it says:

"His 1991 season is the fourth-greatest in baseball history (second among non-pitchers) as measured by WARP3 at 17.0 wins, bested only by Walter Johnson's 1913 (18.1 wins), Babe Ruth's 1932 (18 wins), and Amos Rusie's 1894 season (17.6 wins."

What the heck is "WARP3"? (other than an old IBM PC operating system). And Babe Ruth hadn't recorded any pitching "wins" since his Red Sox days in 1918. It's a redlink and a quick search only finds it mentioned on one or two other baseball players articles, so I'm wondering if this is some non-notable cruft that ought to go (at best), or perhaps even a hoax? JGHowes talk - 00:14, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll check it out when I get the chance. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:18, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Soxrock to Missing Wikipedians

Just thought id let you know, on his page he states you as one of his friends. Hopefully he will come back, (do you know anything?) but is on an indefinite wikibreak, at a crossroads as he stated. Certainly deserves to be on the list, i didn't know him that well but an incredible contributor to sports projects. Feel free to add any extra info here Thanks Roadrunnerz45 (talk 2 me) 14:52, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Mike Post CD cover.JPG)

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Mike Post CD cover.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (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 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Polly (Parrot) 22:05, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ty Cobb

Greetings. You can at least have the courtesy of spelling my screen name right on Badger Drink's page. As far as your issue with the use of pennants on Hall-of-Famers' info boxes, it's true that players themselves don't win them, but it's their contributions that win them for their teams. As an authority on the Detroit Tigers, all I have to do is look at Cobb's stats in those three seasons to see how it was largely his on-field performance that won the Tigers three pennants in a row. Helping a team win a pennant, let alone a World Series, is alone a remarkable accomplishment that I think should be recognized. I'm more than willing to listen to other points-of-view, but you'll have a hard time convincing me that helping your team win a pennant is not a significant achievement. I think we'd all be better off if we assume good intentions. I hope we can work something out and make everybody happy. Mdb1370 (talk) 22:47, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't buy it, but the consensus on the project page seems to support your take on it; in fact, I was going to revert Badger "pending project discussion", but you kind of beat me to it. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pennants

I don't really have the time to get sucked into Wikidrama, but I think it's fucking ridiculous to list pennants in player accomplishments. We don't mention national events (such as wars fought) in the "accomplishments" section of people who happened to be serving in Congress. It's not a matter of WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS - it's a matter of WP:NODUH. Teams win pennants. Players contribute, but the worth of their contributions cannot be objectively measured. You'd be hard-pressed to find a single source that considers "pennants won" a worthy statistic for a player. Anyway, there's my $0.02, feel free to quote me in any relevant discussions - but there's nothing more frustrating than having to justify common sense. 20 morons on a project talk page can still be completely wrong. Cheers and Cobbs - --Badger Drink (talk) 04:44, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fenway Park

DO NOT change the edit I made to Fenway Park. This will be your only warning.--Esprit de corps (talk) 06:44, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The citation does not support the claim. See the Fenway talk page. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 06:53, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I DONT HAVE TO SEE IT. I'm right. YOU ARE wrong.--Esprit de corps (talk) 06:55, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Baseball uniform

May I have your opinions on it? I created it, it's a DYK by the way.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ Review) 07:02, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fenway Park

Just a reminder that being right doesn't make you exempt from 3RR. What you're dealing with is a content dispute, not vandalism, so you are still bound by 3RR. If you're right, your position will be implemented without edit warring. So I'd recommend just backing off and letting the situation cool off a bit. Thanks. Kafziel Complaint Department 07:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Mike Post CD cover.JPG

Replaceable fair use
Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Mike Post CD cover.JPG. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Polly (Parrot) 01:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to separate article about the CD, as per Polly. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 09:38, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism warning

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been removed or reverted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks.

Vandalism warning

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been removed or reverted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 11:46, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 12:00, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are in violation of the three-revert rule. Stop edit-warring or you may be blocked. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 12:30, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3RR notice

You are in violation of the three-revert rule. Stop edit-warring or you may be blocked. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 12:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spam notice

File:SpamInACan.jpg Stop spamming or you may be blocked. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 12:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ron Possible?

Do you think these have a Ron-esque flavour? --Ebyabe (talk) 21:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Baseball uniform

Thank you for your help with the above article. It looks like a quality article now. If you didn't know, there were some copyvio in the article. Me and User:Kingturtle copyedited the article but I think there was still some left. While improving the article, did you fix the copyvio problems?--Ryan Cross (talk ♠ Review) 20:14, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't tell where it would be. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 20:23, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You should go to Talk:Baseball uniform. Most of it is in the cap section of Baseball uniform.--Ryan Cross (talk ♠ Review) 20:59, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help with tags

Hi Bugs. The three imgaes I have are:

1. A photograph of an Ulster Defence Regiment cap badge (beret insignia someone called it).

2. A photograph of an Ulster Defence Regiment female soldier, tending a wounded man at the Enniskillen bombing. It was taken from an amateur video and transmiited on various TV stations around the world and reproduced in the press.

3. A photograph of the entrance to an old army barracks which has now been demolished.

Also, the logo which is at the top of the article, which wasn't placed there by me. It is a reproduction of the regimental crest. GDD1000 (talk) 21:28, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Air Force

Ok, no big deal. It was sung with "terrible" back in the Army Air Corp days, but now (in the modern day Air Force) it is definitely "Hell of a." The lyrics given to me in basic training, Airman leadership school, Officer training school and numerous other occasions ALWAYS says "Hell of a roar." That footnote gave me the impression that there's still some contention as to which one is used...that's all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Novadogg (talk • contribs) 02:07, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Up for a re-write?

Greetings sir! (Hopefully you are a "sir") I've seen you around on various baseball related articles and thought this may intrest you. I was looking around on various articles for my next project and stumbled upon Honus Wagner, which is suprisingly only a "Start" class article. I have just finished getting PNC Park up to a GA and didn't really know if I wanted to do another baseball article, but I thought if I could work with someone it would go quicker and Honus seems like a topic which is worthwhile to improve. You can just leave a messege on my talk page as of your intentions, and if you know anyone else who may like to help let me know! Thanks! Blackngold29 02:20, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have to do it right now, when is your trip? I am sure I could find something to keep me busy among the 2000000 articles out there, until after you get back. I don't know very much about him either, but I think I have a biography about him laying around somewhere that I could read until you return. As you seem interested in the topic I think it would be more beneficial to the article to wait until you get back, (as intrest in the topic I am sure will produce a better result) I will also go to the Baseball WP and see if we can recruit a few more people. Blackngold29 02:36, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I turn 20 this year so the words "Pirates" and "Winning" in the same sentence still brings a confused smile to my face, but they have video evidence that it happend so... I caught a few hours of documentaries about the '70s teams on TV the other day which I would really like to see again sometime. I think someone on the team said that when other teams were up by three on the Bucs, they would be happy even though the Pirates had already won; they just hadn't scored yet. It would be awesome to watch a team with that kind of confidence play everyday. And Honus and Cobb would be insane to watch, the way players then used to go into second "spikes up" every time; it's like full contact baseball. If you want a fun baseball read check out this one, my dad got it a few years ago and I skimmed through it, Waddell was one of a kind (not many pitchers today wrestle alligators the day before they start). Anyway, this is the Wagner bio that I have. When you said "trip" you meant it, but I still think I can wait until you get back. One habit that I get into is adding citations to like every sentence; so I can go through the current article and do that, which should take some time. I'll save any heavy writing until last, hopefully you'll be back by then. Blackngold29 03:08, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll start looking over it and seeing what I can do, but I don't see myself writing something as big as the Ty Cobb or Babe Ruth article alone; I'd be here until Christmas probably. I should have atleast a solid outline by the time you get back, I've been wanting to write a Featured Article and this might be my chance; I'll have to read more on him before I start though.
Did you see the Sox pitcher, Jon Lester, get his no-hitter tonight? I caught the end when they interupted the game on ESPN. I think he hugged every other player and coach on the whole team. Pretty cool stuff. Blackngold29 03:43, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I started my fact collecting process in my sandbox, I sense that this will be the longest article that I've ever written. If you have anything in particular just add it to the list and I'll sort through them later. I left a note on the WP:Baseball talk page, but no biters yet. I started reading that Honus Wagner: A Biography today, it said he played every position except catcher and most people said he could've been a Hall of Famer at any of them, just crazy. I don't know how I forgot this last night, but My neighbor grew up right down the street from Wagner, when he was older. She was pretty young, but he was a nice guy who would sit out on his porch at night, and they knew at one time he had played baseball at one time, and that's all they knew. Talk about missed oppurtunities, lol. Blackngold29 23:56, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Riccardo Ingram

Hey Baseball Bugs, could you give me a hand on Riccardo Ingram? I want to shrink the picture down to the size it is uploaded as, because it looks blurry and crappy now. Any ideas? Thanks. Philatio (talk) 04:02, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

flag

The flag does move a little when the astronaut passes by it about 2:38. Bubba73 (talk), 19:12, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attack

I view this as a personal attack and request that you remove it. Impugning my good faith effort to write a featured article and implying that I have commercial interests in the company is crossing the line. --Laser brain (talk) 18:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your complaint has been noted and logged. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 19:26, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is a personal attack as well as a breach of WP:AGF. I recommend striking, apologizing, or otherwise making amends. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:56, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not agree that it was a personal attack. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 23:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I assume that it was meant to be ironical, but it can be viewed as a personal attack. Cenarium (talk) 00:12, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am very much opposed to spam on wikipedia, no matter how well-written it is. And these writers' continued over-defensiveness suggests that I'm on the right track. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFPP.

Replied here. Cheers, · AndonicO Engage. 16:19, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You'd be surprised how many people hate rats. ;) Amusing userpage, by the way. · AndonicO Engage. 16:29, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I can't say I've heard of Mikey Rodent or Darnold, no. As for userpages, I don't want to know how much time I spent on mine... probably over three hours. · AndonicO Engage. 20:29, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, looks amusing. As for my userpage, the layout is copied (but took me hours to make it work), and nearly everything else is original. I used to edit my userpage way too much... · AndonicO Engage. 00:05, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hehe, I had to ask on the help desk (not very often that someone who's been here nearly two years does that). :P · AndonicO Engage. 09:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Copyvio on WP:ANI

I get it now. Thanks for informing. Have a nice day.  S3000  ☎ 10:42, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, looks like the administrators are doing an FBI job by linking up users! It must take time and knowledge of several admistrators to solve a case like this. Being the first of such a case I've come across, I'm surprised at you saying it happens 'all the time'!
You wrote with the IP address blocked, it will be interesting to see if Rosencoment also disappears for awhile; What's the big deal?! All he has to do is switch off his modem / restart his computer and he'll have a new IP address! I get a new IP address every day! I don't see how's this going to solve the problem.
Thanks for updating me.  S3000  ☎ 14:12, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Please update me on any significant progress if you get it from the admin; if you have time to spare. I'd love to see how this case goes. Thanks and have a good day.  S3000  ☎ 14:22, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lolz.. that gave me today's first laugh! I should also check out that page when I have time.  S3000  ☎ 14:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ekajati et alia

I could fill you in on the background if you'd like. I am, however, an involved and probably biased party to this 18 month old dispute. Still, I think I could give a reasonably neutral and brief description if you want. Cheers, Pigman☿ 20:50, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right: The User:Ekajati Sock farm/hydra is not User:Rosencomet. Ekajati has actually been more of a problem overall than Rosencomet. He has rather strenuously defended Rosencomet's actions, sometimes quite viciously, including harrassing and attacking other Wikipedians. Witness the IP recently calling the current ANI report/discussion a "gangrape" as an example. Without Ekajati's participation, I suspect this ongoing situation could have been cleared up long ago, very likely without Rosencomet facing the strong possibility of a lengthy block. Unfortunately, Rosencomet seems unable to shake the poor early influence of Ekajati on his attitude toward Wikipedia. He has yet to repudiate Ekajati's actions and has complained several times about lacking "defenders" now that Ekajati is mostly out of this particular picture. Rosencomet continues to make his own bed, so to speak, and is responsible for sleeping in it. Sadly, at this point his attitude toward Wikipedia may be beyond repair.
On other matters, your participation/work on AIV and ANI is always welcome. I'm guilty of checking in less than I should but there's only so much time for editing and such. Most of my admin work is the grunt work of closing WP:AfDs, processing expired prods and deleting WP:CSDs. Being an admin is not a romantic job. If anything comes up you need help with, don't hesitate to ask me. Third opinions, copyediting and article structure seem to be my strong points at the moment. Cheers, Pigman☿ 23:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't necessarily think your impulse for a quick trigger finger is bad. It's unfortunate that many admins tend to get a bit shy of quick and decisive action. Well, I'll just speak for myself: I'm cautious about bringing the block-hammer down because I don't want to make mistakes or do an injustice to an editor. I'm of the mind that, if I've been entrusted with the extra buttons, I also have a responsibility to use them judiciously and equitably. Unless someone is doing vandalism this minute and it needs to be stopped now, I tend to investigate rather than act fast. I tend to doubt everyone's version of events until I've looked for myself and weighed the evidence. And I really know what you mean by the "California mentality" or "liberal mentality". I think of it as a USA East coast/West coast thing because I've often seen it play out geographically that way. I see it as a mushy, ill-defined sort of over-tolerance where there's no absolute wrong or right action or thought, just different perspectives and points of view. People afraid of judging others or being judged. On Wikipedia, it sometimes emerges as WP:AGF as an extreme sport, tolerating actions that are almost unquestionably bad intent and faith. Yet it's part of the WP culture and policy that we AGF and I agree with it. I just don't think we need to be stupid about it. If an editor serially commits policy violations, my AGF decreases exponentially. Umph! Sorry about bending your ear. I've got to clear the house now. Cheers, Pigman☿ 01:45, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I see nothing wrong with your approach with levels of warning and when you bring it to ANI or elsewhere. As you say, the editors making these problems should be able to read and heed your elevating warning. Persistence in the face of warning deserves it's own reward. AGF but not to the level of stupidity and denial of reality. So as the saying goes: "Go, you!" Cheers, Pigman☿ 04:12, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reverts to Ron Santo

Have you actually read the paragraph that you keep reverting:

"In Chicago, Santo is well-loved for his unabashed broadcast enthusiasm, which he reveals with groans and cheers during the game. He also possesses a charming sense of humor. During one game, in which Angel Echevarria was batting, Santo casually asked play-by-play broadcaster Pat Hughes, "Pat, do you believe in angels?" As excitable as Santo is when a great play for the Cubs occurs, he is equally as vocal in his displeasure, as is evidenced by his meltdown in 1998 when Brant Brown, who was playing left field, dropped a fly ball against Milwaukee during the team's successful run for the Wild Card. You can hear the call here. Ron also has been known to engage in discussions about his variety of toupees."

Looks like: POV, and Uncited

There is a need here for quoting a reliable source, attributing those "well-loved" and "charming" comments, and properly referencing verifiable those kinds of comments, as-well-as those with the opposite opinion.

~ WikiDon (talk) 22:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I've noticed that you make several good comments at WP:ANI. However, I would like to ask that please keep the uncivil parts out. Things like lest it get promoted to Featured Article, Spam is spam, no matter how well written, My assumption is that they've got egg on their face and any moron can edit are really not needed and appear as gratuitous insults on other editors. This remark is beyond the pale and nothing more than a insult to another editor and unnecessary. I will also leave a note at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Baseball Bugs. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 21:15, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can assure you that I had no intention of taking any action beyond what I already did. And if I had known how far the AN posting would have escalated I would not have left a comment there either. And with that I will bow out of this particular mess. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 05:26, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea. I shall go therefore and do likewise. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 05:29, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Cubs

I was simply reverting what was already there. And I'd be interested to see some numbers vis-a-vis hockey. I am guessing the rising number of Hispanic U.S. immigrants will quickly and permanently place soccer as the 4th 'major' sport, ahead of hockey. As a thought that just dawned on me, the soccer mention may not warrant inclusion in the Cubs article, as the Cubs have been on a longer title-less streak than soccer has even had a presence in America. Without Googling anything, I'd guess the first soccer impact was in the 70's when Pele played on the East Coast. Not sure where I'm rambling to at this point. I guess I probably just convinced myself that mentioning soccer isn't really relevant to the Cubs article. Tool2Die4 (talk) 18:47, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point. I had no idea the NBA was that 'young', but I'm not an NBA guy. I think referencing the Cubs' drought against the 3 other 'major' leagues is a good point of reference, although there's a flurry of arguments that can arise from that. Must be tough being a Cubs fan :) Tool2Die4 (talk) 19:42, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

70.243.80.195

Does this [17] mean that the IP address in question is a sock of the banned User:Ekajati? And if there is any possibility that User:Rosencomet is a sock of both, I assume that fact (or non-fact) will make itself known? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 14:11, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, Ek's been using it that's for sure. But Rosencomet is in another part of the US. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:48, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CUBS

Please accept this invite to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago Cubs, a WikiProject dedicated to improving all articles related to the Chicago Cubs. We hope you can join and contribute greatly to the project.

WikiZorrosign 21:33, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

test

List

Thank you for following up. There's a list of sockpuppets here. The page was deleted by none other than Jimbo himself, but I'm willing to resurrect it myself if this person continues to harass us. (I'm not willing to say publicly why Jimbo deleted it.) I'll e-mail its contents to you if you want. His most recent major logged-in user was this one. What's happened is that various admins have tried to deal with this user over the last two and a half years, but one after another they have either washed their hands of it or left the project. GRP edits almost every day under one or another IPs -- typically the Chicago Public Library (66.99.0.0/22 and 64.107.0.0/22, currently blocked), Triton College (64.107.220.0/24, currently blocked), and a bunch of other Chicago area public locations (Best Buy, Circuit City, and some locations I haven't identified). When they're blocked he uses open proxies. He likes to pretend he is many people; indeed he is obsessed with pretending he's different people. Since he's clearly mentally ill, and impossible to shut down, I'm fearing that only a real-life intervention -- such as by law enforcement -- might get him to stop. Antandrus (talk) 05:12, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It appears he may be back again, under the username Indwisdom. This raised my suspicion, but he just sent me an email a couple of hours ago, and it appears (looking at his talk page) that I'm not the only one he's sent emails to without solicitation. He's clearly not quite right in the head, and that's probably the only time I've ever been uncivil on here. Dreaded Walrus t c 21:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Peachy. Just peachy. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 21:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not really sure why he's singling me out (in response to your comment under the Antico thread), and if I knew the answer I think I'd be halfway along to understanding him. Several of the other administrators he has harassed repeatedly have either left the project, or just washed their hands of it, -- and I don't blame them. Dealing with him sucks. When I see this guy harassing other people -- such as making offensive accusations that someone's father was a Mafia member, to use one recent example -- I can't in good conscience just let it slide; it would feel cowardly -- so I have been intervening. This has gone on since December 2005, the first time I recall encountering the "George Reeves Person". One thing I have noticed is that he reserves his fiercest hate for people who try to help him. I think that once he doesn't get the results he wants, he sees them as part of the vast conspiracy against him. Unfortunately, dealing with him is taking a lot of my time, and I'd really rather be writing an encyclopedia. Funny... four years ago when I joined the project I had no idea it could be a hazardous enterprise. Adminship is overrated. I miss those early days when I just wrote articles and nobody noticed. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 02:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For the benefit of those new to this, I've been getting them too, since shopping the NewBlock (talk · contribs) incarnation as a sock. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 02:38, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like there ought to be some action that could be taken. This guy really abuses the "anyone can edit" philosophy that is reluctant to shut down ranges of IP addresses and so on. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:40, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Read this well, nobody abuses anything and those users ARE NOT me, but i am not going to explain you anything, read well here and i am warning you to let go of this case, got it?

You are not helping boy!Duh! http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:208.109.240.138&diff=215827290&oldid=215827127 -Boxingwear

I have friends in Croatia. They might just pay you a visit. >:) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 21:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC):[reply]

So you are that psycho wahabe, sure, let croats visit me, anytime! But you will get better visits soon all over the net...and your kind, enjoy mr lowlife! Im wasting time replying to total moron!

No disagreement here. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 23:19, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Wall

Hi. I've responded to your comments at FAC. I should say that I remain a little confused: are you saying that no article about this subject (or presumably, any similar one) should become FA? I might sympathize in some ways with that view, though of course I could do nothing about that fact in this case. On the other hand, if you do think there are ways in which this particlar article could be improved, I'd be pleased to have your comments. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 08:06, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For the update. Now I'm off to eat twinkies. JNW (talk) 15:15, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LTGC5

Well, Baseball Bugs, it's finally happened. Yesterday, I was finally able to buy, along with the Cloverfield DVD, the Looney Tunes Golden Collection: Volume 5! Now I can finally create those new Looney Tunes articles I've been yearning to for so long! -- Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 16:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 17:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And how did I know you were going straight for Bugs' Bonnets? :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 17:04, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's not all I'm headed for. : ) I've also just created this article for The Stupor Salesman, which is a cartoon I remember fondly watching during my childhood years. Mind helping out with it? Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 17:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I can't right now, because I'm on a road trip. Maybe in a week or so. :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 17:24, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks. Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 17:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
By the time I get back, you'll probably have all of them covered. :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 17:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indiana Jones

That'll be covered in the inevitable Indiana Jones/National Treasure cross-over movie. We're in scifi now, so it's easy to throw in some time travel. ColdFusion650 (talk) 00:20, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Funny, Max McCoy wanted to include time travel in his last IJ novel, The Secret of the Sphinx, but Lucasfilm found it unrealistic. Wouldn't see a point to it unless it served the story really, unless Lucas wanted Indy to bump into pharoahs and whatnot. Alientraveller (talk) 06:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AIV and you :)

Hey there! Thanks for helping us out at WP:AIV by reporting vandals, like you did here. I just thought I'd give a pointer; when you're up against IP vandals, remember that they may be dynamic or shared, meaning that many people can use the same IP in one day. The IP you reported only edited once recently; even if they vandalized previously and were blocked, if a large amount of time passes (as little as a day), it's preferable to run through a full set of warnings again instead of immediately blocking, as it could be a new user unfamiliar with Wikipedia's workings who is just testing it out. This IP seemed to be dynamic, meaning it shifted from computer to computer; the contributions log seems to indicate that, given the two-year gap in editing and randomness of subjects. Anyway, sorry for rambling on, and I hope that helps! Have a great day (and thanks for helping :)), Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 02:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, those are from half a month ago; blocking now would be unfair if the IP has shifted. But don't worry, you're not turning in too many at all! Vigilant folks like you are what help us catch so many of these guys in the first place, so rock on! :) Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 03:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, the ultimate decision in blocking is made by the administrator handling the report. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 03:31, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Something about drama....

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hopefully archiving this will put a stop to Martinp23's drama-filled call to stop drama. —Wknight94 (talk) 13:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I closed the thread on ANI for a reason. That reason was to avoid the escalating drama. It therefore dismayed me to see you carrying on being an idiot over there, calling for "heads to roll". If a user cannot realise when to put down the stick and back away from the horse, then they really shouldn't be participating in community discussions at all. I am sorely tempted to block you for one second to leave a note about your obsession with drama in your block log for all to see should an RfA come up in the future. Is that a bit harsh? Please convince me otherwise if you think so... Martinp23 10:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I rarely see an admin threaten to do something so explicitly listed in policy as something not to do. How about you not? —Wknight94 (talk) 11:15, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I really don't care. It's not an empty threat. I'm sure I can justify a block on the basis of disruption if I need to. :) Martinp23 11:49, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The rules are what matter the most. Sockpuppetry of that type is against the rules. I expect users to make excuses for their behavior. I don't expect admins to do likewise. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 11:57, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The community is what matters the most. Without the community there would be no rules, nor would there be any progress writing articles. I'd expect users and admins alike to recognise this. I ask you straight out: when I closed that thread, why did you ignore what I'd said and continue the dramafest? Martinp23 12:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I deny fomenting any drama. Nor did I start that section. I raised what I felt were legitimate questions. The user in question, i.e. the sockpuppeteer, is the author of the drama. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 12:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For the purposes of this, I don't care what you said before 0024UTC. It's that you carried on after that point after a direct plea to stop that dismays me. Such a propensity for lasting drama isn't really needed. Martinp23 12:15, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I deny fomenting any drama. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 12:19, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you take a long hard look at your actions then, and reconsider what you determine drama to be. Basically, the question I'm asking is: why did you ignore the closing of the topic? Martinp23 12:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You might ask the same question of the two editors who responded before I did. If they had not responded, I would have left it alone, as I'm doing now on that page, since you appear not to understand the gravity of the sockpuppetry issue. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 12:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to comment here. I occasionally comment on Baseball Bug's interactions and often admit that I think he could handle things in a bit better manner. However, let's get a few things straight here. The power to archive a section is what it is, but it DOES NOT mean that there is some blockable offense if someone wants to continue discussing it there. Furthermore, Martinp23 was heavily involved in the situation, (as was I), so his archiving of the section, while I think was useful, simply does not mean that people have to stop discussing the issue, it's rather just a request/suggestion. I supported an indef block of Prima, but at the same time, considering the facts, I was still probably against a checkuser being done. Finally, Martin, considering your deep involvement in this issue, I would consider it highly improper for you to be blocking anyone for anything unless there was some obvious blockable offense. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 12:30, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to discuss my behaviour on my talk page, if you are indeed keen to avoid drama :). The issue at hand here is that Baseball Bugs effectively acted as a "troll". While tohers had agreed there to stop discussing it for the time being, he continued to fish for a reaction. This is how the facts made themselves apparent to me. I would rather not have another contributor going down that path and so I'm willing to spend a bit of my time here attempting to educate. You are perfectly welcome to close the tab, just as Baseball Bugs is perfectly welcome to tell me to go away. I'm not here to defend the sockpuppeteer at all, now, - I'm trying for something different.. Martinp23 13:35, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My specific concern about the admin, other than his personal interest in the sockpuppeteer, was this comment [18] which in itself is laced with drama, as well as belittling the importance of the sockpuppetry rules. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 12:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hah, that comment was somewhat tongue-in-cheek towards Mr Keeper there. Martinp23 13:35, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I might just comment here - this is all just making drama out of drama. This remark is mostly towards you, Martin - I sort of get the sentiment, but if Bugs wanted to keep talking - fine. If you felt it was overly dramatic - also fine. Bringing it to his talkpage and hammering the point to try to force him to agree seems unproductive. I am amazed that edits are still being wasted over this incident, but that includes that which might be interpreted as haranguing editors over procedural points. Let's all just wander off and leave this be - let those who want to talk about it talk about it, and those who don't, let's stop. Sorry about the intrusion, Bugs Fritzpoll (talk) 12:38, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

None of this is an intrusion. I welcome any reasonable comments about anything, and I had thought this matter was already over and done with. The sockpuppeteer, though expectedly unrepentent, claims to be done with wikipedia. I didn't re-open the closed box, I added to comments that were put there after the admin said he had closed it. I made my points, and the users I made them to can heed them, or not, as they see fit. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 12:45, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, and I'm glad you don't mind me butting in! Just to clarify, I think it's perfectly justifiable to discuss legitimate issues, which is where your comments seem to lie. Fritzpoll (talk) 12:49, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My primary concern was about the sockpuppetry, which is what caught my attention in this case. It seemed like the importance of that issue was not being sufficiently addressed by all concerned. That was it. As to the length or breadth of the block, that's for the admins to decide upon. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 12:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As I have said about, it's not the sockpuppetry I'm bothered about. It was just your refusal to, well, stop, when everyone else had done so. Sometime you do just need to take 5 mins (or, 9 hours) and let things carry on around you - the wiki isn't about to collapse if you're absent for a bit. Martinp23 13:35, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Indiana Jones

The information about Marshall College at Yale belongs in a production section of some sort. If we only have information relating it to the fourth movie, it probably belongs in that article's production section. As far as the separate article for Saucer Men, that article is word for word identical copy and paste from the box in the main Indy 4 article. I don't think it needs its own article either. It's not like we can find any more information on it to expand that article. ColdFusion650 (talk) 14:19, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine with me. ColdFusion650 (talk) 14:33, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Commons

Thank you for uploading images/media to Wikipedia! There is, however, another Wikimedia Foundation project called Wikimedia Commons, a central media repository for all free media. In the future, please consider creating an account and uploading your media there instead. That way, all of the other language Wikipedias can use them too, as well as our many sister projects. This will also allow our visitors to search for, view and use our media in one central location. If you wish to move previous uploads to Commons, see Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons (you may view images you have previously uploaded by going to your user contributions on the left and choosing the 'image' namespace from the drop down box). Please note that non-free content, such as images claimed as fair use, cannot be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons. Help us spread the word about Commons by informing other users, and please continue uploading!

--OsamaK 06:52, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

FWIW, I upload all my pictures to Commons (I still have a bunch from my latest trip to upload...) They're a little more strict about freeness but it's never affected me adversely. E.g., a picture like this one might be attacked there because it's a picture of a picture that is probably still copyrighted. Then again, it might not if it's on the side of a building and falls under their freedom-of-panorama statutes. But, like I said, I've never had anything deleted from Commons. Your latest uploads would definitely be fine. —Wknight94 (talk) 12:57, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

State Farm Insurance

I made an entry to State Farm Insurance that you have removed. State Farm hired Patni Computer Services to provide H1B employees in which Patni underpaid the employees who worked on State Farm's home location. In fact Patni, had to make a settlement with the Federal Govt to make it go away. The citations clearly support that. How do you propose that we include that in the Wikipedia page? I could agree to include it in the "Criticisms" section. Thanks - Bob Heath User:Bobheath 19:36, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is Patni's issue, not State Farm's. Patni's page is where this belongs, and in fact it's already there, posted by the original reverting user. [19] There is no indication that State Farm is culpable in any way. If it's to be mentioned on the Star Farm page at all, it should be just a link in a "See also" section. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 19:44, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As cited by the citations, State Farm alleges that they paid $100,000 per employee for the H1Bs, when Patni claims that the prevailing wage in that location is less than $44,000. I can go for the "See also" citation. Should I put it under "Criticisms"? User:Bobheath 19:36, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If State Farm got duped by Patni, then how is State Farm culpable? Put it under "see also" and see if that flies. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 19:56, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Who says State Farm was duped? State Farm? State Farm has the same data that we have. The people worked at State Farm's location. State Farm did not know who was working in their own building? Actually, the citations speak for themselves. Thanks - Bob HeathUser:Bobheath 20:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As recommended I created a See Also section. Does that meet with your approval? Thanks - Bob HeathUser:Bobheath 20:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The cited article says State Farm hired Patni. It is Patni that is alleged to have underpaid the Patni employees. There is no issue on State Farm's part. This link does not belong in the article. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 20:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please continue the discussion on that article's talk page rather than here, in case other editors want to join in. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 20:51, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Will do. Thanks - Bob HeathBob HeathUser:Bobheath 20:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AN/I question

Er, examples of what - the synthesis or the unpleasant circling of the wagons in the article discussion? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 22:31, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, okay. I'll add them to the report is due course. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 23:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Negro Leagues in general

McGraw and Rube Foster were said to admire each other, and many of the same management myths are attributed to each. Each one has the story attributed to him that he fined a player for disobeying orders after hitting a home run when ordered to bunt, even though the original story was told no later than 1890. It's uncertain whether McGraw lacked prejudice or whether he was a "do anything to win" guy. Considering his near-disastrous relationship with Hal Chase, the latter is obvious, though it doesn't rule out the former. No matter what the motivation, McGraw, had he had the power to do so, would have integrated the majors about 1902.

Ruth was indeed popular with black ballplayers and fans. Newt Allen told and retold the story of Ruth sharing a cut of tobacco chaw with him, a remarkable act in the age of segregation. Ruth signed autographs and shook hands with black fans as well. The rumor throughout Ruth's career was that he had Negro blood (his most hated nickname was "N-----Lips"), and his lack of racial prejudice helped fuel that, though it did nothing to his popularity with fans.

As for Landis, his place in Baseball Apartheid is still not entirely clear. It's obvious that he made a convenient (and even willing) scapegoat for the times, it's obvious that he harbored racist beliefs himself. What is not obvious is whether he was personally responsible for keeping baseball segregated or whether he simply had a role to play in the grand shell game: many managers said they had no problem with blacks, but it was the owners; owners said it would not a problem except that too many players would object; most players would not object, but baseball had its rules; the Commissioner says there is no rule barring blacks, go talk to the managers.

As for Landis' "purging" of the gambling problem, I'd suggest you find and read the book, Burying the Black Sox, by Gene Carney; it is an excellent study of how Baseball (with Landis' participation) swept gambling scandals under the rug as much as dealing with them. It's also an excellent lesson of why MLB keeps finding itself armpit-deep in scandals every few years, as it usually turns a blind eye, hoping it'll go away, and then turns into Captain Renault and declares itself "shocked, shocked" to find the latest problem.

On your last point, about the eventual death of the Negro Leagues: If there had always been integration, there would have never been a need for the Negro Leagues. When Jackie Robinson broke the color line, the walls did not come tumbling down; it was over 10 years before all Major League teams integrated (the Red Sox did not until 1958), and some minor leagues remained segregated for as long. The Negro Leagues saw their purpose as a showcase for black talent that Organized Ball still had not made room for, and they did that for a few years, but it left older players (good enough to play in the Majors, but not "star" enough to qualify for one of the limited spots in OB's quota system) out in the cold, and they ended up playing out the string in Mexico or somewhere like the Manitoba-Dakota League. It would have been nice if Baseball could have financially supported the Negro Leagues as a development league during that transition period; I think that integration might have progressed faster, if only because the NAL would not have been so easily ignored as it was after 1947.

End of my editorial as well. Good chatting with you again. -- Couillaud (talk) 14:19, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rolling back the page moves

I don't know the best way to do it, actually.. I'm not an admin, and I'm not sure even if the admins have good tools for this. VandalProof (which I run) has a rollback-all button, but I do not think it works for page moves :(

If an admin doesn't get to it soon, I can help you go through 'em manually if you want. Man, that was crazy! heh... --Jaysweet (talk) 19:50, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, But..

I don't see how having one wikipedia article linking to He May Be Old, But He's Got Young Ideas means it isn't orphaned. Generally, Articles are considered orphaned until at least 3 proper articles link to them. Therefore, I am re-adding it to the list of orphaned articles. Retro Agnostic (talk) 02:41, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the Criteria section of the WikiProject Orphanage page, you will see the full criteria for what qualifies as an orphaned article. And to answer the question you left on Retro's talk page, no, an article won't get deleted just for being an orphan. What the orphan tag does is tell me and others who are trying to build the web that we need to come try to add more incoming links. We'd like to have every article linked to by at least three other proper articles, which we feel is the minimum necessary to really have strong depth to our encyclopedia. Happy editing!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 13:08, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caution

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. [Test] Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 19:01, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AIV

Thank you for your anti-vandalism work, but please ensure that before you report a user to AIV, ensure they have received sufficient warnings, and that they have vandalized after the 4th level final warning. Any questions on this, let me know. xenocidic (talk) 20:19, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Might I also suggest you use the standard warning templates rather than creating your own. This is to ensure other vandal-fighting automation programs will recognize which level of warnings they have received. Twinkle can assist with this. xenocidic (talk) 20:21, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They're templated for a reason. Some users are using programs such as huggle, and there are also bots that depend on the templated warnings to determine when to automatically report a user to AIV. xenocidic (talk) 20:31, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personal note

It is unfortunate that we first encountered one another on a matter on which we have strongly held philosophical differences of opinion. I suspect that overall, and as regards Wikipedia in particular, we agree on a lot more than we disagree on. I just looked at your User page (and the not-so-hidden page to which it links). What I saw there confirms, at least in my own mind, that suspicion.

  • We both actually have some philosophy about what Wikipedia is and should be, and we both care. I agree with practically all of your stated philosophy. I am one of those who is inclined to work on the writing quality (I would never cite journalism overall as exemplary of good writing), and favor full bibliographically correct citations. Many years ago, I was a senior editor of a scholarly journal.
  • If I understand correctly what you mean by Liberal American Patriot, we are on the same side of the political spectrum. I still describe myself as McGovern Democrat. I was a "card carrying member" of the ACLU for more than a decade before Bush I coined that communist-tinged term.
  • We are also both concerned about censorship. I joined and became an activist in People for the American Way when the organization first formed in the early 1980s, because I was concerned about how Jerry Falwell and his ilk were campaigning to censor school books, and for awhile were succeeding.

This is not an "I'm sorry I said what I said" message. Nor is it a "You should be sorry for what you said" message (except for bogus: you really should look up that word's etymology). Rather, it is an attempt at making a human-to-human contact, something that can be elusive in strictly online communication. Finell (Talk) 21:16, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS: The tool for generating vandalism warnings that you have on your Talk page is very impressive. Did you program it yourself? Your User page is also is a great piece of work, and shows a lot of wit.

Bubba Gump shrimp company

We went down to the launch of STS-124 a week ago and came back through St. Augustine, Florida, and passed a Bubba Gump Shrimp Company resturant. But it wasn't near mealtime, so we didn't stop. We are planning to go back to St. Augustine next fall or winter, so maybe we will check it out then. Bubba73 (talk), 15:36, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You thought about it, though. :) How close were you to the launch pad? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 15:55, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Your contributions on The Day the Music Died

Please refrain from using blatant ad hominem in terms of my spelling/grammar error in your discussion. The first time you tried to be high and mighty was plenty. Here's some light bedtime reading for you, Bugs. Cheers. Tamajared (talk) 04:15, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You also misspelled "led" as "lead", in a section I deleted anyway, because the 2001 crash report said nothing, that I could see, about the 1959 crash. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 22:38, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You are mistaken, once again. I wasn't logged in when I started this section on your talk page, but that there was me. I did not add that article you deleted on "the day the music died" page, nor did I misspell "led." Tamajared (talk) 04:15, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Great. So there have been two bad spellers messing with the article. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:18, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd take two bad spellers over the one sarcastic jerk any day. Tamajared (talk) 18:43, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My opinion is the opposite. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 21:09, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Sarcastic jerk"? Were you trying to give a better example of a personal attack? If so, you succeeded. Now ease up a bit please. —Wknight94 (talk) 22:30, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I consider Bugs' "bad speller" comments, which he regurgitated several times unnecessarily, to be the real personal attacks. Tamajared (talk) 02:01, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The evidence is there, unrefuted. C'mon, relax. Take your shoes off. Set a spell. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:28, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but pointing out bad spelling is not a personal attack. Calling someone a sarcastic jerk most certainly is. That's an easy one. —Wknight94 (talk) 02:48, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

could you please do me a favor?

Hello,

I am a master student at the Institute of Technology Management, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan. Currently I am wrapping up my master thesis titled “Can Wikipedia be used for knowledge service?” In order to validate the knowledge evolution maps of identified users in Wikipedia, I need your help. I have generated a knowledge evolution map to denote your knowledge activities in Wikipedia according to your inputs including the creation and modification of contents in Wikipedia, and I need you to validate whether the generated knowledge evolution map matches the knowledge that you perceive you own it. Could you please do me a favor?

  1. I will send you a URL link to a webpage on which your knowledge evolution map displays. Please assign the topic (concept) in the map to a certain cluster on the map according to the relationship between the topic and clusters in your cognition, or you can assign it to ‘none of above’ if there is no suitable cluster.
  2. I will also send a questionnaire to you. The questions are related to my research topic, and I need your viewpoints about these questions.

The deadline of my thesis defense is set by the end of June, 2008. There is no much time left for me to wrap up the thesis. If you can help me, please reply this message. I will send you the URL link of the first part once I receive your response. The completion of my thesis heavily relies much on your generous help.

Sincerely

JnWtalk 05:10, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One question...

As you've made clear many times before, you are an obvious fan of satire and topical humour. I saw your brilliant response to the recent Warren G. Harding "Secret Negro President" 'controversy', and I've just gotta ask: Are you, by any chance, a loyal viewer of The Colbert Report? I strongly suspect you are. Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 00:30, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Colbert — and by Colbert, I really should say the Colbert character — has always poked fun at Wikipedia, and his light-hearted "vandalism" of several articles — most famously the elephant page — quickly got him banned. A very funny show, though, and its political humor is sharper than that of the similar The Daily Show, another programme I often find myself watching. The real Colbert, in contrast to the blustering, bullying, overwhelmingly right-wing conservative pundit he often portrays, is actually a Democrat with a—shall we say—restrained ego. Which, by the way, was evident in his playful willingness to help out two friends during the recent writers' strike, generating what I think was a very funny mock rivalry with Conan O'Brien and Jon Stewart, an article for which, by the way, I have recently created. (Forgive the plug! :)) Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 00:56, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not censorship

I understand the distinction between censorship and countering defamation, thank you. Impugning the integrity of a state's judiciary without any basis is a very serious offence in all countries. It is called contempt of court, and there is nothing I can find in Wikipedia policies that states that no censorship = let all allegations fly. Of course, you are right to say that there is an issue of reliability of sources, but I have already stated so in my complaint that RS was an issue. Chensiyuan (talk) 11:48, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let's confine this discussion to the WP:ANI page to keep things in one place.

RE:The Diamond

You do whats best, im not an expert. I just saw the diff where the user stated 'best stadium in the league' and something like that needs a ref from somewhere, anywhere. In fact i have no idea but im sure you can decide whats best, as i said i have no idea about that particular subject Monster Under Your Bed (talk 2 me) 14:37, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're funny, man.

I like your userpage. RocketMaster (talk) 14:12, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It's all full of words and music, and signifying nothing. :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 15:57, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Popeye the Sailor: 1938-1940, Volume 2

Yes, the Fleischer documentary was poignant. As for the disc one problem, there is a discussion about the defective disc at [20] with related discussions about other problems with the disc one cartoons in the official thread about the new Popeye set. Steelbeard1 (talk) 10:45, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your notability

Congratulations. :) Welcome to the "been spoofed" club. Acalamari 22:12, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It's nice to be considered important enough to be impersonated. You know, I've worked myself up from nothing, to a state of extreme poverty. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 23:29, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome for the notice. :) Acalamari 23:31, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your post on Keeper's talk page

I saw that and I wanted to say that since anything divided by zero is effectively infinity, working yourself up from "nothing" to "a state of extreme poverty" is an infinite improvement. Good work! ;) J.delanoygabsadds 00:25, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was not aware of the Groucho Marx reference, but I really enjoyed the mathematical thingy, which is why I made this post in the first place. J.delanoygabsadds 00:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question

What's a "Romanian Umpirer"? :O Neıl 龱 10:35, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Impostors posters)

I don't know if this is good news or bad news, but I have decided to call it quits on Wikipedia, this time for good! n pril, 2007, I pulled out for a few days then changed my account name. I hope that I have made a constructive contribution to Wikipedia - even I have embarrassed myself (even being suspended) several times, and I have bullied some decent editors - even driving them off the site. "Tecmobowl" probably was the most unique editor I encountered, but there were others. I hope that I haven't done enough people wrong to jeopardize my chance to go to heaven. Thanks to all of you for what you have done for me over the years. I will stick around until the end of June. Bon voyage. --Baseball Bugs - What's Up Doctor? (talk) 14:28, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck in your endeavors. I will miss you on Wikipedia. It was nice working with you - even though we sometimes participated in controversial activity. Let's exchange e-mails after your "retirement." --Ebyabes (talk) 15:01, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Rogers Hornsby.jpg

I would guess most baseball cards never had their copyright renewed (since they weren't reprinted, the original cardmakers probably couldn't give two shits). This may be of interest to you. WilyD 15:14, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs...

I was rumbling around in WP:RC this morning and I happened across that IP accusing you of being a sockpuppet. Four hours later, when I stopped laughing (i.e., now), I just had to swing on over and let you know that I was glad you stood up for yourself. It was totally unnecessary and unjustified. As always, enjoy seeing your sig around the baseball pages. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 16:56, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sure, sure... that kind of thing happens all the time! If you need to go use HIS computer, you can always borrow my matter transporter. Gotta keep these things ready for an emergency. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 13:08, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Be careful, Wile E. Coyote... *meep meep* KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 01:36, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thread on AN/I

Bugs -- Saying "fuck" is bad, but irresponsibly throwing around accusations of sockpuppetry and calls for blocks is worse. If you're not careful you may find yourself being more disruptive than the other fellow. Please don't keep contributing to the thread. If you decide at some point to start a new thread about this user, please begin with a list of actual diff links (not simply a suggestion that I figure it out myself), followed by an explanation, based in policy, as to why these diffs merit a block. Alternatively, don't go to the noticeboards at all: just tell me about it. I know the policies pretty well, and I'm perfectly willing to hand out blocks where warranted. Regards — Dan | talk 01:07, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:45thParallelMinneapolis.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:45thParallelMinneapolis.JPG. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 06:07, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MKR

The sourcing discussion about MKR on the article page is getting truly amazing. Currently the discussion is about using a private e-mail from a notable figure - but because the notable figure values his privacy, his name needs to be kept secret. Yes that's right - a private email with a person who's name would be kept secret... --Allemandtando (talk) 20:30, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, that is my concern as well - the current push seem to an attempt to extend the use of self-published sources by logic of saying that if you have enough of them, they provide notability. It's an extraordinary position to take and one that would open the floodgates for all and sundry to get articles pass AFD by virtue of their own works. --Allemandtando (talk) 20:51, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


some editors think if you talk everyone else to death, that's as good as reliable sources - I don't. --Allemandtando (talk) 02:19, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yes indeed, bizarre how people are complaining bout abuse of process and then !voting "keep" for an article with NO sources - the most perverse abuse of process I can think of. --Allemandtando (talk) 02:28, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wow - Fram closed it as a delete and concentrated on the sourcing issues. A lot of admins would have bottled it. --Allemandtando (talk) 20:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Surely DR is going to follow - because how else are we going to get our hourly thousand word diatribes about how wrong we all are? --Allemandtando (talk) 20:56, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

American Association (19th century)

What do you mean 'too detailed'? This is an encyclopedia. The article doesn't make an attempt to show how the league was formed. If you cared to edit it then fine. But a wholesale deletion of a sourced edit isn't really 'editing' it is just deleting.Mfields1 (talk) 01:02, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

nice addition

Hey, nice addition there. Great work. Cheers, Kingturtle (talk) 11:36, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Baseball_Bugs/Archive004&oldid=1193793391"