User talk:Eagles247/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Eagles247. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Mike Kafka

Nice work there, with some copyediting and reference adding I think it's bringing it to WP:GAN would make sense. If you'd be willing to collaborate on it, I'd be willing to help you with adding references and such.--Giants 27(c|s) 01:36, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

That sounds great. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:39, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I've added the WP:LEAD, a few more references for games and his early life, should be good. BTW I noticed you undid some vandalism on Johnny Unitas, you might want to look into WP:ROLLBACK, WP:TW or WP:HG for speedier reverting. Cheers,--Giants 27(c|s) 17:25, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Done, thanks. Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:37, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

27 refs now, and it should comply with MoS. Now IMO this is as close to a WP:GA as an article can be, but we can always bring it to peer review. Thoughts?--Giants 27(c|s) 15:51, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm not very knowledgeable in the Good Article nomination process, so whatever you feel is best. Eagles 24/7 (C) 15:57, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'm going to be busy for the next 3+ hours (SU game), in the mean time you can read WP:WIAGA for more info on GAs and WP:GAN for the process.--Giants 27(c|s) 16:05, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay, so I checked out WP:GAN and nominated Mike Kafka for Good Article status. How long do these things usually take to get reviewed? Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:21, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Varies massively. Sometimes it takes a few hours for someone to sign up to review it and sometimes it takes a month. So it varies a lot.--Giants 27(c|s) 17:27, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh, wow. I guess I won't be refreshing the page every five minutes then =) Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:29, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Haha, yeah I wouldn't keep refreshing it ;) (although you can always watchlist WP:GAN and/or Talk:Mike Kafka/GA1 to know when the review starts).--Giants 27(c|s) 17:33, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Have you tried www.flickr.com. http://www.flickr.com/photos/zrophotography/3943827214/ and http://www.flickr.com/photos/zrophotography/3943047767/ are decent photos. You might try requesting consent.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:55, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I have tried to ask the Northwestern Athletics Department to let me come to games to take pictures for Wikipedia to no avail.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:40, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I have left a comment at Talk:Mike Kafka.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:03, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Review done at Talk:Mike Kafka/GA1. Doesn't look bad, I'll take a look tomorrow unless you get to some before I get back.--Giants 27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 03:20, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I knew it would get reviewed as soon as I leave my post! Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:47, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Don't Even Say It!

Hey the Giants may have lost but so did the Phillies at this point so don't even say anything!--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{S†rawberry Fields (sign)} 12:56, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Wasn't going to, but now that you mention it... =) Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:17, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Award

		Ezekiel 7:19 Guestbook Barnstar
		This user has signed my guestbook and been presented with a barnstar, so sign my guestbook now if you have not yet, NOW!!!--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{Le†'s Go Buffalo! (sign)}

Sign. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:49, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Chaz Ramirez

Chaz Ramirez died 15 years ago, of course you didn't find anything about him in a news update search. Read anything about Social Distortion, the Casbah recording studio, or basically anything related to the 1980s LA punk scene and you'll see this was a legitimate article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MortyForty (talk • contribs) 00:06, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Kurt Cobain died 15 years ago too and I can find many news articles on him. This guy is not notable enough to have a Wikipedia article, and that's all. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:20, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

We Win!!!

Who won the World Series now! Ha! I'm so mean.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{S†rawberry Fields (sign)} 13:11, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Second that, go Yankees! Look on the bright side, there's always next year to lose to us again. :P--Giants 27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 19:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not a big baseball fan, but congrats anyways on buying the World Series this year. Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:42, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

We won didn't we? Steinbrenner's just willing to spend money, unlike everybody else. Plus, you'd be kidding yourself if you said you wished the Phillies didn't get Sabathia/Burnett/Teixeria.--Giants 27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 19:45, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Eh, I guess so but you guys are bragging to the wrong guy. I only saw the first three games of the World Series this year, due to my vacation, so I couldn't really see Philly's meltdown. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:16, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

I'd really hate to, but I can't root for the G-Men much more. They're gettting slaughtered. Oh well, I still have the Buffalo Sabres and the Syracuse Orange to fall back on!--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{S†rawberry Fields (sign)} 17:50, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Huh?

What's going on?--Giants 27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 01:04, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I was going to do what you told that guy who was changing the Cowboys template, and create a 2004 Philly Eagles Super Bowl roster and I edited the wrong page. Sorry Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:07, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, I figured it was a mistake just wanted to bring it to your attention if you hadn't noticed.--Giants 27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 01:12, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Yea, thanks. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:13, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Damn, for Giants and Eagles fans, you guys get along fairly well. Suprise Suprise.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{S†rawberry Fields (sign)} 17:51, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Seongha Jeong

Check out the talk page...I'm chatting with the creator now about notability and reliable sources...they seem to want to create a good article. Frmatt (talk) 05:40, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Okay. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:17, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Jared Odrick

I agree he's notable, but see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.--Giants 27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 22:10, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Also see WP:NOTBROKEN for you edit on Billy Cundiff. ;)--Giants 27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 20:24, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Grr I really hate that policy. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:17, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

68.228.183.91

There can't be 9 players on the practice squad, he (Keith Grennan) is on the IR list unless you can prove otherwise. You cannot base it simply on "team websites are normally wrong".—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.228.183.91 (talk • contribs) 16:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Team websites are usually wrong with this kind of stuff, and the current placement of Keith Grennan on the roster is correct. Please stop changing it. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:29, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

He is exempt due to him being on the practice squad injured reserve. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:41, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I'll stop as soon as I see a link with proof. Stick to editing your Eagles.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.228.183.91 (talk • contribs) 15 November 2009

First of all, watch the comments like that; they can be WP:UNCIVIL and you will be blocked for telling editors that they can't edit. Pats1 ^T/C 22:43, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

This is the way we do things here on NFL roster templates. If you don't like it, you can go somewhere else. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:57, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

The way you do things here is based on no proof? This does not make sense. I sent you a link showing you that I am correct, if you cannot show me any sort of proof that your argument is correct and mine is false I stand by mine being correct. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.228.183.91 (talk • contribs) 17:33, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Keith Grennan was placed on the Practice Squad/Injured list. The designation (Injured) after his name can be found in the key of List of current NFL team rosters as meaning Practice Squad/Injured. It is important to note that the Practice Squad/Injured list is not the same thing as reserve/injured ("IR"). Therefore, ClevelandBrowns.com's placement of him under there is inaccurate, and your repeated reverting to list Grennan as IR is also inaccurate. Grennan is under a practice squad contract and therefore inherently is not treated the same way as a player under a normal contract (in which case he would go on reserve/injured). Proof for Grennan's placement on PS/I can be found here, which is the only official transaction wire on the internet. Pats1 ^T/C 22:43, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

As for there being 9 players on the practice squad (your only comment on Eagles247's talk page), Grennan does not count against the 8-man limit. Sure, we could change the designation on the template to say "8 PS, 1 inactive PS," but that would be confusing. Again, the designation (Injured) does not simply mean Grennan is injured, it means he is on the Practice Squad/Injured list. Pats1 ^T/C 22:45, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Great, that's all I wanted was proof. Not sure why it took so long for you to simply show the links.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.228.183.91 (talk • contribs) 17:45, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

Hello Eagles247. You've just speedy deleted 2 pages I set up (and it was speedy - within 10 mins!) The pages were Maternity Worldwide and timmo999/Maternity Worldwide. Maternity Worldwide is a charity that I work for and I was going to start building up a page of info on them. In the Maternity Worldwide page I put a link to the timmo999 page where I'm going to build the page and then transfer it to the main page (so if someone else had the same idea they would know that someone was working on this). In fact, you so speedily deleted my timmo page that I didn't have a chance to put more than the heading titles that I was going to add text to. Am I going about this wrong then? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timmo999 (talk • contribs) 00:42, 18 November 2009 (UTC) Now I'm getting confused - my log now says it was PMDrive1061 who deleted the pages - but if I try to leave a comment on his talk page it says that I can't because it's semi protected and I need to be a registered user! Please help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timmo999 (talk • contribs) 01:00, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

You actually started the article on the wrong page if you wanted to put it on your userspace to work on it without the risk of it being deleted. Try creating the article at User:Timmo999/Maternity Worldwide. Previously, you forgot to include "User:" at the beginning of the page header.

I did not actually delete your article, I just nominated it for speedy deletion (which you can read about here). User:PMDrive1061 is an administrator and therefore has the right to delete articles on Wikipedia. He saw my speedy deletion nomination and agreed that your article was eligible for speedy deletion and deleted it. User:PMDrive1061's talk page has been vandalized so much that another administrator had to protect it. I'll send him a message for you directing him to this thread. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:05, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that's the problem with being an admin..someone is always out to clobber your talk page and mine is the frequent target of attacks coordinated offsite. Anyway, Eagles247 pretty much summed up what I was going to say. Sorry about the talk page inconvenience, by the way. PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:12, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah, ok - I see. Thanks. Timmo999 (talk) 01:15, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Stuart Schweigert

Thanks for your help with that link, looks much better now. --134.126.203.208 (talk) 01:58, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: Kalapos

I have declined your speedy deletion tag of Kalapos. Remember, A7 has a narrow scope: individuals, animals, groups/organizations/bands, and web content. It does not apply to articles about names. If you still believe it meets Wikipedia's deletion policies, consider PROD or AfD (I would probably pick AfD since we routinely keep articles about common names - see WP:Anthroponymy). Singularity42 (talk) 05:18, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I have a feeling this guy is making the info on that page up since it's his last name, ~~but I'll go with AfD on this one.~~ but I won't go any further with it. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:17, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, Google Translate comes back with "Hatter" for Kalapos, so there may be something to it... I wouldn't go so far as to say it's made up, but the article definitely needs some reliable sources. Singularity42 (talk) 21:33, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:35, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

No problem, looks like I forgot to remove a word when the article was promoted.--Giants 27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 21:44, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Alphabetical order on Chicago Bears roster template

Oops! Sorry. I didn't notice the order. I'll keep that in mind for the future. Rnb (talk) 20:28, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, you aren't the first to think it is supposed to be a depth chart. =) Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:39, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Subpages

You know that you can remove the PROD tag if notable, right?--Giants 27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 20:40, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I know, but I don't think any of those players are notable enough yet. I just want to have a copy in case they get deleted and become notable later. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:43, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: Manningham Vandalism

Sorry about the manningham edit, good luck to your eagles tonight.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.7.126.253 (talk • contribs) 19:54, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Prods

Why did you remove the Prod tags off of Michael Moore (wide receiver) and Ladi Ajiboye‎. They are not notable enough to have articles and arent top prospects for the draft. Moore is the 59th ranked receiver according to NFLDraftscout.com and is expected to go undrafted[1] and Ladi Ajiboye‎ is only projected to be a late round pick.[2] Not all draft prospects deserve articles yet, just projected first, second, or third rounders. If they improve their stock later on than yeah they deserve articles but not now. I saw you copied them to User:Eagles247/Michael Moore and User:Eagles247/Ladi Ajiboye‎, you can always just remake them.--Yankees10 21:40, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Let's take it to AfD then. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:42, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Why waste time and the chance of them being kept if they dont get drafted, they do not meet WP:Athlete.--Yankees10 21:44, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Their not notable now and waiting to see if they're drafted appears to violate WP:CRYSTAL. AfD won't be a bad option.--Giants 27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 21:49, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I still think AfD is the best option right now in order to gauge the opinion of mulitple editors. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:53, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Do you mind starting them?--Yankees10 21:54, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Sure, but why couldn't you do it yourself since I don't have a problem with these articles? Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:46, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Im currently on vacation and dont have enough time to start them.--Yankees10 02:57, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, okay. Have a good time wherever you are. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:59, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks--Yankees10 15:56, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Asterisk

Is there a reason you're reverting my adding the *, which is appropriate given the key below, or are you all just blinding reverting me because you're all pissed off? Grsz¹¹ 01:56, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

The reason is that typically we don't add the asterisk until they are no longer on that team in case they get added to the active roster at some point during their tenure. And don't be so quick to assume I am "pissed off" at you, because I am not. Thanks, Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:58, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

WP:CRYSTAL. Currently, he isn't on an active roster. If he is added in the next five or six weeks then it certainly can be removed, but right now it is blatantly inaccurate and misleading. Grsz¹¹ 02:01, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Are you trying to piss me off? Because it's not going to work. This is the standard NFL procedure, and all of the main NFL contributors (Chris, Giants, Pats, Osi, Yankees and Myself) follow this. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

If stating legitimate issues pisses you off, than that's your problem. I understand if it's "standard procedure" even if I think it's wrong. I'm not pushing the issue. Grsz¹¹ 02:52, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Haha, and kudos for catching that. It wasn't as subtle as yours, which is a neat trick. Grsz¹¹ 03:00, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Yea, it is typically used in Wikipedia articles instead of a big, bulky key for confusing acronyms and abbreviations, like I did here for the article on Mike Kafka. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:09, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Cullen Harper

You know, he does pass WP:N. The fact he had no pro career is irrelevant, because he was a well-documented and (at times) successful ACC college quarterback who was once projected as a potential NFL first-round pick. All that makes him notable regardless of how his pro career turned out.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 20:32, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

As soon as I see some sources from Giants, I'm going to withdraw it. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:38, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Posted.--Giants 27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 20:44, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Alright, it's closed. And I could care less if others wanted to discuss it. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:50, 28 November 2009 (UTC)