User talk:808

Note

This page should be a "user write" page, because you can't talk here. I mean, you can talk at the page, or you can record your voice and then link to the file, or you can write and pretend it's talking. You know, because writing is like a poor man's talking. I think a great Professor of Eastern Religion named TeeKay told me that once before he stole my wallet.

Don't get upset

I just finished my Michael Jordan project (made it into an FA) and have now begun my project to improve the Giants articles. I started by expanding their history and creating three new history articles. One of which is now a good article. Here's the template I created and the three articles I started are the three subpages of the Giants history. Template:Giants history, have a look at my edit history:[1] Quadzilla99 14:05, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Quad, I'm not upset, you just have to appreciate I have put hours of research into the section, and it was shocking to see it dismissively removed. I know you have the best intentions, and I'm all for the good of the wiki, so I moved the pertinent information to a new page. 808 14:09, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, basically I'm using the two articles I mentioned as examples in improving the article. The logo section could probably still be expanded a bit in the Giants article. It should probably be about the size of the logo sections in the other two articles. Quadzilla99 14:38, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Agreed! Go ahead and flex your writer's muscles and improve it if you wish. 808 14:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

You're clearly taking this personally. You'll notice I didn't change any of the wording that you added. I've been around a little longer than you have and I can tell you that editors clearly disapprove of short paragraphs when reviewing articles for GA of FA candidacy (except in rare circumstances). Also this version contained a small amount of grammatical errors, which I was planning on ironing out later. Characterizing someone's work in the terms you did is clearly meant to offend. The reason I am concerned with the section is because I'm going to bring the article up to Good Article staus and it clearly needed work. Please stop assuming bad faith. Also use the article's talk page, as you are new around here you should know that generally concerns about a particular article go to the article's talk page. When you bring it to someone's talk page youi immediately make it personal. Quadzilla99 16:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Basically to summarize I condensed the paragraphs, due to my experiences during GA and FA candidacy discussions, and reverted the pic size. There's no reason to get upset about either decision that I can see. Quadzilla99 17:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

As gently as I can say, I'm not upset. I am concerned, however, that you care more about how things look than what is actually in them. My concern is content: your concern is chiefly appearance/format. And, if we're going to be working on the same turf, I want to make sure you understand why I chage what I change. I think I understand why you change what you do: you're going by a community style/appearance guide. Fine. I don't do style guides. So let's agree if I see grammar, spelling or logical agreement that can be improved, I will try to do so. And, for my side questions that you won't answer:

1.) How long have you been a Giants fan? Are you from Jersey? NY? Cleveland?

2.) And why, as I asked before, are you editing the uniform section at all if you don't think they're important?

Just think how much fun this will be if another contributor gets involved! ^_^ 808 18:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

My god you really need to learn how things work here, your behavior is unacceptable. A person's personal preferences are irrelevant to their editing. Please see WP:NPA and especially WP:OWN, but as I made it clear in my first post I've done a huge amount of work on the Giants' history articles. The Giants' article was terrible before—just compare it to the Bears or Pats articles. You really need to learn how things work here see WP:WIAGA, WP:WIAFA, and probably this is the best page WP:FAC. On that page you can see discussions on articles that are featured article candidates and the discussion about what things need work. Also and maybe most importantly you also need to learn how to create inline citations see WP:CITE. Basically you have a lot to learn and seem to get very angry when someone corrects you, which is not a good sign. Also your arguments make little sense as any English teacher will tell you that 1-2 sentence paragraphs should be avoided at all costs. Quadzilla99 22:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

QuadZ: Okay, since you're not responding to any of my queries: Let me state this clearly as possible: I am not angry at you, I do not want editing conflicts, I only wish to improve the New York Giants page and its sub-pages, and you lecturing me as to "how things work here" is akin to me lecturing you as to the weakness of your editing style: it's all subjective. So here, for the record, on my talk page, I am imploring you: 1.) no more needless conflict, 2.) let's just agree to disagree, 3.)we should both work for the improvement of the Giants page/sub-pages 4.) no further name-calling or any other digital unpleasantness. I'm trying to be reasonable - I have a vested interest in the subject matter, and I have yet to receive word one from you about your feelings for the Giants, their uniforms, or playing nicely with others. Peace, 808 10:32, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I moved your comments on my talk page to the article's talk page as I have it on my watch list and there's no need to put it on my talk page. Quadzilla99 18:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

For the reasons previously stated. Quadzilla99 18:22, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Why the images are being deleted...

Hi 808,

If you want to help to keep the affected images at Logos and Uniforms of the New York Giants and get others restored, the path is simple:

• Identify the copyright holder. It is not sportslogos.net as identified on this image page.

New York Giants primary logo 1950-1955, claiming fair use Copyright: Sportslogos.net

• Add a detailed Fair Use Rationale Statement per the requirments:

User:Soxrock asserts that the limited use of this copyrighted image in Wikipedia articles directly pertaining to it is a fair use of the image, for the following reasons:

• It is of the logo, helmet or uniform of an NFL team which retains the copyright.
• It was obtained from the Sportslogos.net website which serves only to collect and archive these images.
• No free-license alternatives are available that convey the same information.
• The image is no larger, and of no higher quality, than required for its use in articles.
• It is used in Wikipedia only for educational purposes and is not used for profit.
• Its use on Wikipedia does not compete with the copyright holder.
• Its use on Wikipedia is not expected to decrease the value of the copyright to its holder.

That is really all that is necessary! Let me know if you have questions, please.

Take care,

Lmcelhiney 15:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Gosh, thanks for clearing things up in a helpful manner. I'll get around to doing the necessary footwork (sources and rationale) before all the logos are sucked into the Void! And no one wants that - the Void is a very uninformative place. ^_^ 808 16:15, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Someone helped me with the Fair Use Rationale issue several months ago and I wanted to help pass it on to others.--Lmcelhiney 18:03, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey 808, you should just be able to add the same fair use rationale and copyright tag as the ones used here and here I believe. Just click edit and you can even cut and paste it to the logo-uniform page. Shouldn't be a problem. Quadzilla99 20:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I added fair use rationals to all the images, in one case I shrunk one as the person who tagged the image requested that it be made smaller. All they need now is source info in a couple. Quadzilla99 21:01, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Wow, thanks, Quad. I'll see if there's anything additional I can do! 808 12:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

(undent) I uploaded a spliced together version of the Giant quarterbacks into the article, I thought just showing the new logos and uniforms might come off as a little bit of recentism. Looks alright I think. Feel free to comment, revert. Quadzilla99 08:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Recentism? I love Wikipedia: it's always good to learn new and baffling things. But, the splice looks great and improves the article further. Thanks! 808 14:29, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Giants 3.gif

Hello, 808. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Giants 3.gif) was found at the following location: User:808. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 05:33, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hey, I am trying to breathe new life into this wikiproject. Any with this task would be appreciated. RC-0722 ^communicator/_kills 00:19, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:10, 23 November 2015 (UTC)