User talk:Baseball Bugs/Archive005

JUL 2008 - DEC 2008

Rollosmokes reverting "The CW" and "The WB" to CW and WB again

Hey, thought you might want to help me keep an eye on this again - seems Rollosmokes has started up his campaign of insisting that The WB and The CW shouldn't be listed under their actual names in infoboxes again. Since you were against him when he tried it on the WGN article, I figured you'd like to lend a hand... TheRealFennShysa (talk) 15:57, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Bowie, maybe?

IIRC, one of the lines in Bowie's Labyrinth soundtrack was something about a 'land serene'. Would that be it? EyeSerene^talk 12:05, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, good luck! Personally I hate it when I can't quite recall something, and it'll nag at me until I finally get it. The actual username is from a Wordsworth poem, btw, but I doubt that's been put to music. EyeSerene^talk 12:14, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Popeye a Scot?

Great comment. I don't recall seeing the one-eyed pipe smoking sailor man in kilts, being an overt tightwad or playing bagpipes. Steelbeard1 (talk) 14:58, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

failed candidate

Saw your edit summary and revert on Adlai. What you said is not really the case - this has only very recently been added to infoboxes around the encyclopedia by one single editor. I have no big problem with succession boxes showing this on bottom of page but in the infobox it is confusing and unclear - for example, it lists "election day" but he wasn't elected, doesn't say who he lost to, is out of chronological order which is against infobox style. Failed candidate is not an actual position held which is what we have always used infoboxes for in reverse chronological order. Again, up until a few months ago this was standard infobox practice - one editor took it upon himself to change infoboxes all over the place without discussion, and has added confusion, not clarity, so they are being reverted. Simply put, "nominee" is not a job, it's a job interview. The articles, of course, have detailed discussions of the failed candidacies as they should. But infobox is for actual positions held. I think it needs to be reverted back to the original. Tvoz/talk 07:23, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Ordinarily I would agree and would talk about it, but I'm just returning to where we were before he made these changes without discussion. He really should have discussed first, given the scope of his changes - and it's not even consistent: what about a president who runs for re-election and loses - that wasn't addressed. No Republican nominee in 1992? No Democratic in 1980? Some of the failed candidates' infoboxes used the "In office" field which is even more ridiculous - it's not an office, and what dates did he show? Although I think it probably was well-intentioned, it wasn't well-thought out, and it's really not the way to go about making a major change all over the encyclopedia - were wikiprojects consulted? Was anyone? So I think it is reasonable to revert to the way things were, consistently, and then have discussion. And also several had the field out of reverse chronological order which is one of the most consistent things we do in infoboxes - just stuck in the bottom of the infobox - why the exception? The bottom line is that infoboxes are for positions held, not for candidates. Tvoz/talk 08:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Not to worry - I didn't revert back on Adlai, did I? But I think it should be. Tvoz/talk 08:09, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

And by the way - I do not object to the succession box on the bottom of the pages - that is still there and I didn't suggest removing it. There's a difference between infoboxes and succession boxes - the succession box on Adlai is correct, the infobox entry is confusing. For example, what is the purpose of including the incumbent? How is that relevant to the 1952 election? Tvoz/talk 08:14, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

E-mail

Can you e-mail me when you get a chance? seicer | talk | contribs 13:18, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

AN/I User: Exanimous

Just an update [1]. The user has again linked the image without an consensus which in terms is censoring an image. I would be happy for them to get an consensus and if that consensus is to have the image censored I would also be happy to follow the consensus but at the moment there is no consensus. Bidgee (talk) 03:18, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I've just raised this issue with another Admin. I've also stated to the other Admin I will not be reverting since I don't want to be banned for 3RR/Edit warring. I would say more about this issue however some could see it as that I'm having ago at the Admin/Editor and not the context of the edits. Bidgee (talk) 11:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Food and drink

Okay, I probably could have said "very tangential to the subject of food and drink". I think that bot needs to be reined in -- at the rate it's been tagging articles, all of Wikipedia will soon be part of the WikiProject. Kevin Forsyth (talk) 15:12, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Cheap shots not welcome =

In an effort to keep things civil I have reported your uncivil cheap shot to WP:ANI. Just because you seem to think my English skills are not up to snuff does not give you the privilege to post them publicly. It is just plain wrong especially given the issues there. You should know better. Now, I cannot WP:AGF with you. Before, I thought you were were acting in food faith. Now? Well I have doubts based on your post.[[2]]72.0.36.36 (talk) 00:43, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

WP:CIVIL violation

Welcome, and thank you for your attempt to lighten up Wikipedia. However, this is an encyclopedia and the articles are intended to be serious, so please don't make joke edits, as you did to User:ChristianityMeansFreedom. Readers looking for serious articles will not find them amusing. If you'd like to experiment with editing, try the sandbox, where you can write (almost) whatever you want. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:48, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

That's not an article, it's the user page of a blocked user. And what took you so long? That was three days ago, and the block message rubbed out his quotations and mine both. FYI, I happen to like those quotations of Jesus. Just not the arrogant way that some people use them. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Killebrew scandal?!

Hmmm, I was wondering when scandal was going to pop up with Killebrew. Check page 81 of Allen's book. I guess his son Ken robbed a bank?! Here's a NY Times article too. Looks like he turned his life around though and now owns Killebrew Beverages? And Harmon went $700,000 into debt too? Hmmm. Do you know anything about any of that? —Wknight94 (talk) 11:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Here's more stuff too. Divorce, adultery, etc. Sheesh. —Wknight94 (talk) 11:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Google Books references don't work on my home PC. The one story sounds vaguely familiar, though, now that you bring it up. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 12:47, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Well apparently the post-retirement part of the current article is quite the whitewash. Even the part about he's married to Nita, their family is 9 children, etc., etc. - Nita is wife #2 so not all of those kids are hers, that's for sure, unless they're combining the kids from both first marriages. Wife #1, Elaine, apparently had most of the kids and then divorced Killer after 34 years because he was having an affair with a secretary. Maybe Nita is the secretary too? Let the careful tiptoeing around WP:BLP begin... —Wknight94 (talk) 12:54, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Aha! The hero with feet of clay. Well, it happens. So he may have more in common with Kirby Puckett than we realized. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 12:59, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Please don't bite the newbies

While I understand that User:Pug power's participation is a bit, shall we say, unique, some gentle guidance would probably be more effective in this user's case than poking fun. I understand you probably didn't mean any harm, but the 'net being what it is, I think something may have been lost in the translation. Thanks, --Clubjuggle ^T/C 14:06, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I want to know what's special about that dog that it deserves an article. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 14:29, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

So why not just ask directly? Though to be fair, I believe User:Pug power did offer an answer. If that answer is not satisfactory, gentle education on Wikipedia policy is probably the best way to go. --Clubjuggle ^T/C 14:42, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Caution

You gave me a caution that was misplaced. I am still learning to navigate around here so please bear with me there. However, none of my edits have been unconstructive. The changes I made were not experiments. Merely fixing mistakes. As I said, I am willing to discuss the issue. But in the meantime, it would be nice if that baseball page would display facts correctly. There is already a lot of slanted info there, but no direct errors apart from the division title thing. I am willing to compromise the wording if someone wants to discuss. But one thing that cannot change is saying the streak is 14 when it most surely was not. MAL01159 (talk) 17:59, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Braves

MLB does not recognize the streak as 14. The 1994 season did indeed count. Players stats counted. Players got credit for a season played. Post season awards were dished out. The only thing that did not happen was MLB did not recognize an official division winner. Since the Braves, or any other team, did not win the division in a year that was played and went down in the record books, the streak was broken. The only way the streak could not be broken would be if MLB determined that the 1994 season was never played and did not count. But it did. So the Braves streak ended and 3, and they started a new one that lasted 11. MAL01159 (talk) 18:59, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I have made this reference in the change I made. You should have seen it by now. http://atlanta.braves.mlb.com/atl/history/year_by_year_results.jsp This is the Braves own listing of their results each season. You can easily count how many years in a row the GB was "-" (meaning, they were in first) There are many others. I'd like to know how can a team keep a division title streak alive when they played a season that counted in every book but did not win that year very season. MAL01159 (talk) 19:20, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Why would I be blamed for the edit war? You are just as guilty it seems. If I got banned for correcting mistakes, you ought to be banned as well continuing to present false information. MAL01159 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:34, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

You answered your own question. There were not division titles officially recognized in a year that went down in the record books as being officially played. Since the Braves did not win the division in a year that was officially played, their streak ended. Or is it your assertion that the entire 1994 season did not count? If it didn't, then the streak stayed alive because there was no season played. MAL01159 (talk) 19:36, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

The Braves timeline thing is akin to someone SAYING that there are three trees on a piece of property but then when you go out and count them yourself, you only see 2. The Braves themselves show a gap in the division title streak in their year by year results listing. At best it shows a conflict. I propose that you actually count them out yourself to get the true answer. I count 11. MAL01159 (talk) 19:39, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Will you get blocked if YOU revert it again to the incorrect version? There has to be a higher authority than you in the blocking process here. MAL01159 (talk) 19:41, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Why would a consecutive division title streak count when the team did not win the division in a season that counted? Please show me proof the streak is 14. MAL01159 (talk) 19:43, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

What the standings were when the strike hit didn't matter since MLB did not recognize any division winner that season. The point is, since there was no division winner in an official season that was played, the streak was snapped. MAL01159 (talk) 19:46, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

There are many references to the streak being 11. Here is another... http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/ATL/ I'd say that the Braves own results itself is an authoritative reference. Here is a more appropriate baseball analogy for you. A game shortend by rain after 4 1/2 innings counts as a full and complete game. Just as the 1994 season was shortened. It counted as a full and complete season. You said yourself there were not championships in 1994. Since there were none, AND the season did indeed count, the streak ends. I think we need other parties involved here. Are you the final say in all things in Wikipedia? MAL01159 (talk) 19:57, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

You never answered my earlier question... Will YOU get blocked if you keep changing the data to the incorrect version? MAL01159 (talk) 19:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Your analogy is flawed because in order for the hitting streak to continue, a player needs an official at bat. Getting walked is a plate appearance, but not an official at bat. The 1994 season was deemed to be an official "at bat". The Braves did not get a "hit". It doesn't matter that circumstances made them getting that hit impossible. The streak still ends. MAL01159 (talk) 20:01, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Are you the judge and jury of what is correct? What I have changed it to IS demonstrably correct. It is yours that is the incorrect version. Do you act as judge, jury and executioner here? I think we need others involved here. Will you get blocked if you keep reverting to what is demonstrably not a correct version? Show me an authoritative source that agrees with your view on this subject. I did. I showed you two. You showed me one. I have more. You want to see them? MAL01159 (talk) 20:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

You have not shown me any source that claims the Braves streak was snapped. I have. All you have to do is click on the link, and count how many times the Braves won their division. You have yet to show me that the streak was not snapped. Please answer my earlier questions. MAL01159 (talk) 20:10, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Since when is asking for verification "trolling"? I'm trying to work with you here but you refuse to answer my questions. And have refused to move the matter along to others to chime in on. MAL01159 (talk) 20:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Not at all. My personal spin has nothing to do with it. As a matter of fact, my personal spin is that the Expos ought to be called 1994 division champs. But MLB does not recognize that. I am working with what MLB says. MLB says the 1994 season was played and no one was the division winner. That right there breaks the streak as the season was played. Every source (save that ONE your showed in words from the Braves site) says it is 11. I have showed you two sources. The Atlanta Braves own history. Baseball-Reference's assessment. And here is another from ESPN. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/alltime/franchise?team=atl You have showed me one. Please show me something to show the streak was not broken beyond you wishing it were so. Also, please answer my earlier questions. MAL01159 (talk) 20:29, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Since there was no division winner in 1994, how can you say that the Braves' streak of division winners was snapped? I already addressed that. Here it is again. Because the 1994 season was played and no one was recognized as a winner. Therefore, any division title streak in play at that time was snapped. I have shown you three sources so far showing explicitly the streak was snapped. All you have shown me was one web page that ended up being inconsistent with data that very same source provides. It is also inconsistent with the data from the other two sources I cited. The overwhelming evidence says the streak is 11 and 14 of 15. Unless you have something substantial to add to counteract this. MAL01159 (talk) 20:44, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Here is yet ANOTHER source for you. http://atlanta.braves.mlb.com/atl/history/timeline4.jsp In the 1994 time line, it reads "The strike eventually forced the cancellation of the playoffs and World Series for the first time since 1904. The Braves finished second in the National League East, 6.0 games behind Montreal." If the season did not count, why then would they reference where they finished that season? MAL01159 (talk) 20:48, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

If there was no division championship to be had, then what were the players playing for before the strike? The decision to not recognize a division winner was made AFTER the final 48 games and post season were canceled. The only way for the streak to remain intact would be if the Braves won the division in 1994. They did not. Streak ends. I have shown you 4 sources that confirm this. What do you have to show on your side?MAL01159 (talk) 21:04, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

"Arguing my own logic"? What does that mean? You are wrong. I have provided 4 different sources. I have no control over weather or not you perceive them to be credible. I, however, am still waiting for you to present something to show they won 14 in a row that was not contradicted on it's own web site. MAL01159 (talk) 21:20, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

There is no other source besides the final standings. 1994 was the only season that did not produce an official division winner. We are in agreement on that. Knowing that, you may use the final standings to count the consecutive division titles for yourself. BTW, where on mlb.com does it say the record is 14? I have yet to find it. I'm still waiting for you to provide a source that is not contradicted by itself. Do you have one? MAL01159 (talk) 21:42, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you have some kind of compromise that does not mislead the reader on the matter? I say we go with 14 of 15 and reference at one point that MLB officially doesn't recognize any division winners from the 1994 season. That would be 100% factual and not mislead the reader. If that were said nearby, we could even say they won 14 but that streak was interrupted in 1994. What do you say?MAL01159 (talk) 22:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Exactly! There were no winners! Therefore, the streak ended! The Braves would have had to win for the streak to continue.MAL01159 (talk) 22:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

No, all that needs to happen is for them to NOT win. They didn't win. The Baseball Almanac says the record for consecutive wins by a team is 21. Set by the Cubs two different times. The record for an unbeaten streak is the afore mentioned Giants run of 26-0-1. Why do you keep asking me for more sources? I have given you 4. You have given me one that was contradictory. You need to find an authoritative source that says their streak is 14.MAL01159 (talk) 16:19, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

You appear to be dead set against using wording that will satisfy us both. Why is that?MAL01159 (talk) 16:19, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

You have yet to find a source that explicitly states "1994 broke their title streak". Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 16:37, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

You keep saying that but it is not true. I have found many and have shown you 4. You have yet to show me a source that says it is 14 that doesn't contradict itself.MAL01159 (talk) 16:53, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

The Braves portion of MLB.com states that the record is 14. The Braves portion of MLB.com also shows the record to be 11. MAL01159 (talk) 16:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

You have shown me standings. You have not shown me someone who states those words. Meanwhile, the Braves verbiage on MLB.COM states explicitly that it's 14. Find words (not standings) to contradict that. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

So, because a property owner SAYS there are 5 trees on a property you blindly accept that? Even when you go to the property and look, and see only 4 trees? Don't you want to be more certain than just ONE source that contradicts itself? You have earlier stated that there are many places that prove the number to be 14. Yet you only show me the one that contradicts itself. Why are you avoiding this challenge to find an non-contradictory source? And why are you against using verbiage that satisfies all? And why are you avoiding any question I ask of you?MAL01159 (talk) 17:24, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Any future discussion on this should be on Talk:Atlanta Braves. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:49, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

With all due respect, since you continue to not follow the guidelines set in the dispute resolution pages, I feel you ought to not participate any further in the discussion.MAL01159 (talk) 18:07, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I have not violated any rules, and I plan to continue to participate if I choose to. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 18:09, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I do not know if they are guidelines or rules or what. But whatever you call them, you have not followed them. You have not focused on the content. You have not remained cool. You have not discussed this with the other party. (Repeating yourself over and over does not constitute a 'discussion' for most.) And you have not turned to others for help. You have steadfast refused to work out alternative wording. I wasn't telling you not to participate. Only that your disregard for the procedures should disqualify you from it.MAL01159 (talk) 18:17, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I have remained cool at all times, and will continue to participate if I choose to. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 18:23, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Threatening banishment and calling me a "troll" is not remaining cool.MAL01159 (talk) 21:29, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

(I hope you can find the strength to resist engaging him again; I've certainly enjoyed the peace and quiet -) JohnInDC (talk) 15:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

It's simply my hope, albeit likely a vain one, that after a while he will tire of talking into nothingness! JohnInDC (talk) 15:56, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Go Marlins

LMFAO. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 18:12, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Bah. Bah, I say. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 18:14, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

WEWS-TV

Hi Bugs,

I've reverted the edit you made here, which removed italics from the name of a TV series (going against WP:MOS) and which added back dubious content which cannot be sourced.

Whatever your beef with User:Rollosmokes, there was no reason for you to make that edit, which reverted the article to poorer quality material than what Rollosmokes had added. I do not condone Rollosmokes' incivility, but there's no reason to damage encyclopedia content because you're angry with someone. Firsfron of Ronchester 15:29, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Hence my advice to the non-blocked user to make any valid changes he deems necessary. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:08, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

About your edit to User talk:Allemandtando and his response time.

[[3]] took approximately 1 minute, 5 seconds. --Abd (talk) 16:53, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. Got to be close to a record for a non-bot. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:07, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, not necessarily. Perhaps you might be interested in this: [4]. Estimated time 2.2 seconds. No bot involved. Don't try this at home. Wear protective equipment.--Abd (talk) 17:12, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Wow. I'm humbled. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:16, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

:-D

"Although I try to make up for that effeteness by being a nattering nabob of negativism. 0:)"

LOL!! SlimVirgin ^talk|edits 00:18, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

A Poor Analogy

I was present for the "CW" dispute, and that dispute was retarded, where as the 55 Gallon Drum dispute, while retarded, isn't about grammar or a hyphen. In fact, I'd argue it has nothing to with anything the CW dispute was. But, that's just me. I was trying to be all sorts of nice about it too. Now, while still being nice of course, I'm going to have to break out the war drums on this one. (you're not the only one who can make HORRIBLE puns and word plays) Beam 04:51, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikidas

Answer: It can mean that. I can also suggest a few other meanings such as in dasa. Why ask me? What Baseball Bugs means? Wikidās ॐ 14:01, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

the bait

if you don't take the bait, the conversation is ended. Kingturtle (talk) 15:58, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Bugs never could resist a carrot though. JohnInDC (talk) 16:07, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Bugs, there is simply no reason to continue responding. Before discussion of appropriate and accurate wording on a specific issue should end, it should be exhausted and a consensus found. That has been done, MALs continuing commentary is like a passive aggressive decision to ignore just about everything. If he is BOLD and makes changes to the actual article, there will be about 10 editors who will revert. Continued discussion on the issue is clogging up the talk page at this point. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 18:21, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I've posted a warning at MAL's talk page. If nothing changes in the next few hours, I'm considering filing an RFC/U. Hopefully they will listen to community input, and if not, it's better to go by the book. Are you willing to certify it (i.e. provide diffs as evidence that you tried/failed to resolve problems with MAL's conduct)? SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 20:12, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I still hold out hope that if we simply stop engaging him on these never-ending Escher-esque arguments, he will simply run out of steam and quit. Maybe not, but maybe we could give it a few days. I acknowledge that that may be naive, however, or that such forbearance is beyond the reasonable ability of all of the other editors of the page, so I wouldn't complain about an RFC either. (Thanks for offering up your Talk page, BTW Bugs.) JohnInDC (talk) 20:50, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

WTF?

I've just read that the upcoming Looney Tunes Golden Collection: Volume 6 will be the final entry in the Golden Collection DVD series! What the hell?! No!!! Say it ain't so!!! :( Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 01:20, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I've just found this from Jerry Beck, who informs us that there are future plans to release more Looney Tunes DVDs, just under a different name. What I don't get is why they stopped this series in the first place... Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 01:26, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

In fact, there are to be fifteen more featured cartoons plus the standard sixty, in Volume 6. Could they be the "censored eleven" and some other banned cartoons? Let's all pray so! Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 01:29, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm... We shall see what we shall see. :\ Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:12, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Quite honestly, I was shocked when I heard this. I simply don't understand why WB is stopping the LTGC series with this sixth wave. The whole series itself could have lasted for ten-or-so years at the rate that they were churning these out! :/ Oh well... at least it's not the end... :-) Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 02:19, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Maybe they'll start a "Merrie Melodies" series? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:42, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Maybe so. After all, the "censored eleven" are Merrie Melodies releases, so that would be a perfectly fitting offshoot for them. --Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 15:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

re User:Rollosmokes

Per User talk:Rollosmokes#Unblocked, this account is unblocked. I would be really grateful if you could ensure that any future interaction is conducted in good faith. LessHeard vanU (talk) 08:09, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Of course, but a little good faith may be just enough to ensure it doesn't... LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:35, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Let's see if he does, but allow him to make his own priorities. LessHeard vanU (talk) 13:17, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

He doesn't get to decide if, but giving him time to get his act together shows what wonderful chaps (chappettes, if appropriate) we are. As it happens, I think I remember it was you who said that you weren't bothered by the insults... or perhaps it was someone else. If the stuff is still up in 24 hours time, give me a poke and I will remove it. LessHeard vanU (talk) 13:26, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

"Stay away from the "The CW" situation, and I'll stay away from you."

Nice job leaving a comment like that on my talk page. Here's the deal -- you leave me alone, and I'll do likewise. And don't dictate what I can and can't contribute to here, especially when I present proof. Do we have a deal? Rollosmokes (talk) 15:43, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Back to WP:ANI again. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 16:10, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Please stop baiting Rollosmokes. The two of you obviously are compelled to get the last word in. It would be healthier for you to just walk away. Leave it be. Let others deal with it. Just food for thought. Kingturtle (talk) 16:14, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

90%

yes, but if you'd just agre with me, imagine how nice 100% would feel! ThuranX (talk) 22:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm... first show me some diff's. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:11, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

LOVEABLE LOSERS

I AM 100% AGAINST THIS.... A. THERE IS NO SOURCE AND B. IT IS MENTIONED IN THE SECTION "FALL OF 69" SO WHY DO IT TWICE!!!! Wjmummert (talk) 23:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not married to it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:19, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I CERTAINLY THINK THAT ALL CAPS IS THE WAY TO COMMUNICATE IN A NON-AGGRESSIVE MANNER!!!! --Allemandtando (talk) 23:20, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I just took the good-faith approach that his caps lock was stuck. Or that he didn't know how to turn it off. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

OY VEY!!!! Can we get back on topic.... we are not in JR high.Wjmummert (talk) 23:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Speak for yourself. I'm only 13 1/2 years old. d:) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:32, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Thats a load of crap. A 13 year old who remembers Rick Monday. RIIIIIIIIITE!!!! Loveable Losers is already mentioned in teh fall of 69 section.

I made contradictory statements? Hmmm... There's only one possible explanation - One of me must be lying. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 11:11, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Ha! I have to remember that line. (Hopefully you haven't trademarked it.) —Wknight94 (talk) 11:51, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

It's as trademarked as anything else is on this site. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 11:59, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Possible imposter

Do you know anything about Baseball Bugs - What's up Dr.? (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)? So far, this user made one edit, to User talk:Ebyabe, announcing retirement. Is someone impostering you, or is this just a case of a duplicate username? Or is it actually you? --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 19:30, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Tis Ron liebman (talk · contribs). —Wknight94 (talk) 19:42, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Huzzah

This edit should be cast in bronze and properly memorialized. Good show. 172.169.182.126 (talk) 04:57, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

My incredibly shart wit is exceeded only by my humility about it. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 11:10, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Your eye is needed

"I gather that your complaint about the article is that it doesn't say enough about illegality and costs, and you've got a point. You should write up a prospective paragraph on the subject and post it on the talk page, if you have not already done so. I think it belongs in the "safety" section, because most of the folks doing this are probably kids who think they're immortal."

The only issue with this is, Papa has been equating urban exploration solely with its illicit nature and with the cost of providing security. Urban exploration is not solely about illicit activities, as I have been exploring abandonments legally for years through communications with various property owners, businesses and even the military. Security is a side effect, especially if the property has been vandalized -- but urban exploration is not vandalism, and both are wholly separate topics. Urban exploration is also not solely breaking and entering, although some do take the task to do so.

We came to a consensus to rewrite portions of the text and remove some of the dubious claims, and the page was unprotected after I made a request at RFPP. Papa has made little effort outside of trying to equate urban exploration with vandalism/breaking and entering and/orproviding rather dubious sources or original research. If you could, some outside eyes would be appreciated on the talk page.

As for the protection, I reverted on the basis that Papa has been conducting drive-by taggings, offering little rationale and stating that other editors have the burden to provide the proof of evidence that the article is not POV, instead of the tagger providing the burden of proof that the article is. I reverted to Papa's version and then I had to step out to a meeting. I was not informed of the thread on ANI (it's no longer watchlisted) nor was any communication given to me about it -- had it been done, I would have been happy to discuss the edits. seicer | talk | contribs 13:41, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

You may be interested in a duplicate thread, WP:AN#Need some admin opinions. seicer | talk | contribs 16:52, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Urban exploration

But I think the red-link user is off on some personal crusade

I think if you take a hard and honest view in the mirror, you'll see why I'm not all that thrilled to be contributing, having been thus vilified in advance. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 15:41, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to prove me wrong. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:42, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't see why I should have to. I'm just as much of a human being as you are. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 15:46, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

You don't have to. But feel free to. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:49, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I am surprised.

Not. LessHeard vanU (talk) 19:17, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

OhnoitsJamie does not muck about. He commented at the admin board that he would block if Rollosmokes did it again, and he did. Pretty direct guy. LessHeard vanU (talk) 19:41, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

The people I feel sorry for, in this instance, is FirsRon and KingTurtle (please note, usernames may not be 100% accurate - I'm going by memory) who stuck up for R's goods edits and tried to help him stay on WP. Good for Ohnoit'sJamie; it takes all sorts of admins to cover the different needs of WP. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:51, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I think it was FirsRon and KingTurtle, and maybe some others. They are to be commended for giving this guy every chance. He let them down. It happens sometimes. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:15, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Bugs, thank you for stepping aside when rollo came back. It made it easier to block him again when it obvious it was his own doing, and that there was no grey area of "was he being baited or led astray." Thanks again, Cheers. Kingturtle (talk) 23:36, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Rollosmokes looks to be back, this time as User:Black Waves. I've moved the issue back to WP:ANI and notified whichever admins issued the original indef-blocks. --66.102.80.212 (talk) 22:10, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Bugs Bunny is up for peer review

Let's have another go at this, shall we? I've submitted Bugs Bunny for peer review. If you wish to participate, click here. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 20:41, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. I'll see if there's anything I can do. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:59, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Heads up

Hey, just to give you a heads up. I posted a 3RR warning on PLW's talk page and figured this would be left at that. He has then reverted it a couple times and then turned it into some kind of vague threat from me. Here's the diff's: [5], [6], [7]. Personally I would not care less as long as he had taken the semi friendly warning on board and left it at that. Yet, he seems to be taking all this very personally, he 3RR warned me and Seicer, and then removed all traces of the warning from his talk page. I felt that due to his continual confrontational attitude, that the warning should be reposted with some friendly advice to take a break and cool down. Yet, he quickly changed the name of the section, deleted the warning, and is trying to make me look like the bad guy? I'm going to back away from his page for a bit, but do you recommend anything more then that? Brothejr (talk) 00:37, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

(A cope of my reply) I had been merely trying to stop the edit/revert war from progressing farther, but I agree that it would be best to let it simmer for a while. Thanks for the advice. Brothejr (talk) 01:04, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

LOL

Puffy.... ha. Why you talkin bout My waistline?Wjmummert (talk) 03:00, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

by the way, how do you get the "whats up doc" where "talk" should be? do you manually do that every time?Wjmummert (talk) 03:00, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Lakewood Mausoleum room.JPG

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Lakewood Mausoleum room.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. Sdrtirs (talk) 13:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

PD-self. Done. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 13:16, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Wiki can go to hell.

Right it's ok for them to do this and leave there comments up still[8]. I'm not going to put up with this BS. Bidgee (talk) 07:06, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Please remove there insults and block them if not I will be calling them an idiot since it seems to be ok for another editor to do so. One rule for one as it seems. Bidgee (talk) 07:12, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

E-mail request

This is not spam but I would like to speak with you off wiki. I can be reached at writetoomee@yahoo.com. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.245.148.120 (talk) 07:29, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't do e-mails with anons. If you want to say something, say it here. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:32, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

It was to avoid trolls and wikistalkers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.245.148.120 (talk) 07:38, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, give me a hint. What's the general subject matter? You've got like 3 edits, 2 of which are to my page, so I don't know who you are or what this could be about. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:42, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

You are "Baseball" Bugs.

Yeh, so? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:46, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

This user has not specified a valid e-mail address, or has chosen not to receive e-mail from other users.

How can I send a secret snark when you're playing coy? - brenneman 07:55, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, OK, I tell ya what... I'll consult my lawyer... and if he advises me to do it... I'll get a new lawyer. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:58, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Regarding Bharatveer's allegations against Fowler&fowler

These are the diffs I (will get an account soon) found "threatful" http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Moreschi&diff=prev&oldid=226880350 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kerala_school_of_astronomy_and_mathematics&diff=prev&oldid=226878753 Was just trying to solve the riddle... anyways keep it up! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.182.60.172 (talk) 12:07, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't see a threat anywhere in there. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 14:27, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Lou Gehrig

I'm considering this for GAR. See my message to User talk:Kingturtle#Lou Gehrig. Your thoughts? JGHowes ^talk - 16:06, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 16:15, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

fyi, I've listed this article at WP:Good article reassessment/Lou Gehrig/1 JGHowes ^talk - 00:05, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Tbb

if you don't reply...

if you don't reply to a troll, the troll has nothing to respond to, and no way to bait you. try the silent treatment for a full week. see what happens. Kingturtle (talk) 22:07, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

You took the bait. Let it alone. Don't get sucked in. Kingturtle (talk) 20:56, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

I would like to request your audience here. I look forward to any input you may have. Libro0 (talk) 23:00, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

NPOV

Hey, quick question, can we consider the NPOV issue over at Urban Exploration resolved? The edits you did have stood and seem to be supported by the consensus? Brothejr (talk) 00:19, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok then, I'll remove the tag and then we can move on. Thank you very much for your help! Brothejr (talk) 01:31, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Why am I not being included in the discussion of whether to remove the tag? Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 09:26, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I Guess It's Moot Now, But...

Greetings from California. It is not necessarily my business but I could not help but take not of your recent interactions with User:Rollosmokes over some television station article editing. I had a couple of similar set-tos with this editor in the month previous. I decided that I had better uses for my time than to war with this individual for whom reason and rationality had long left the building. I had no idea then that his fulminations were standard operating procedure; I thought that he for some reason had taken a particular dislike to my edits and even to my own personality. Congratulations to you for sticking to principle, working for the betterment of Wikipedia and contributing to the exit of this gaseous user. May he find some distant avenue for his bilious energy. Lantana11 (talk) 03:15, 24 July 2008 (UTC)Lantana11Lantana11 (talk) 03:15, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

History of Indiana

Bugs, so far as I know you and I have never had a problem with each other. I don't consider you an adversary, an enemy, hostile to me or someone I'm hostile to. I didn't mean my comments at ANI to imply anything to the contrary or be personal in any way. I hope they didn't read as if they were. I admire and appreciate the work of yours I've seen. I hope you'll understand that the policy at WP:SEASON isn't meant to confer ownership on the article's creator; it's meant to stop date warring. In fact the policy doesn't necessarily protect the original version, but any long-term stable consensus version. The policy is "leave it the way you found it" not "leave it the way it was originally created" unless there's a substantive reason supported by a clear consensus to change. I'm sure you'll agree that the consensus expressed in the discussion is to leave the article with the BCE/CE era style intact. I just reverted your last edit to restore that. I hope you'll appreciate that the main contributors to the article are trying to get it to FA status and came to ANI looking for relief from the disruption they were experiencing. I intend leaving the article alone now and hope you will do the same.

Best wishes and happy editing. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 05:57, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not one of the main editors of the article; I only got involved there because of the date warring. Also I'm not one of the editors seeking FA status. I jumped in to try to do something about disruption by the IPs. Therefore, I don't know why some dates are linked and some aren't. I'm pretty sure there's been a policy-change or clarification on date linking some time in the last months or so because I've seen bots going through articles delinking dates. Sorry, don't have a link to substantiate this. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 14:52, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I stand corrected. I should have said that The era style was encyclopedic, scholarly and apppropriate the way it was, not the article. I didn't necessarily intend to link round-number years. I just hit the undo button then made a change in the edit window so that all era styles were the same. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 15:19, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

American Indoor Football Association

I apolgize for using the words legal action in my comments. it was uncalled for and won't happen again.

How can i get the truth and the facts on this page. There is alot on there that does not belong there.

What can i do to help me resolve this.

Thanks,

Michaelmink

Take the advice of the user who posted on your page. He knows what he's talking about. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:35, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Copyright Dates

Do you think your newly created articles should have space for the copyright dates related to the cartoons? Agtax 22:10, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Looney_Tunes_and_Merrie_Melodies_filmography

I saw your comment on that talk page talking about copyright and release dates. Don't you think there should be a copyright section merged into the articles Fan90 created? That's what I meant. Agtax 23:52, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Ballpark films

I think that expanding it to all sports might be a good idea. Adding a chart to it might make it look nicer, perhaps with a references column (we could probably find most through a Google search). It would be nice to have a lead too. Maybe we could get a few more guys from WP:BASEBALL to help out? Blackngold29 17:46, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Left this comment on the talk page of the article as well: IMDB.com is a reliable source for filming locations. All you would have to do link to a stadium and it will show all films that used that location. For instance, all movies that used Yankee Stadium is listed here.Neonblak (talk) 17:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

So this has to potential to be a pretty large list, I don't have a problem with this of course. Then use the same format that is eventually established with this list to create one for Football Stadiums, Basketball Arena, etc. I suppose that it would need additional sources to pass muster with the wiki community that doesn't like articles/lists to be created from a single source.Neonblak (talk) 17:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Side benefit

If putting things on my radar keeps them off the radar of other, more respectable and productive editors, then my job is done. -Dewelar (talk) 23:36, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I cut my teeth on Usenet. I know how these things work. :-D -Dewelar (talk) 23:47, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Pudge Rodriguez

I moved this here, if this is left in my talk page its just a matter of time until they start coming

When I saw "native country", I said, "Whoa!" This is a misleading statement. Puerto Rico is arguably "semi-independent", but that's not the same thing as being "independent". To call it a "native country" is factually incorrect. How about "birthplace" instead? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:17, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

And if you're wondering what I was doing on that page, it was not to push politics, it was to read about his trade to the Yankees. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:18, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Believe me, you don't want go into the "country" or "no country" argument, you have no idea how far that has gone, now I can tell you by definition Puerto Rico isn't part of the United States either. Now to what we came, since the archipelago established "sports autonomy" (that reads weird as hell in English, its actually Autonomia deportiva) its not uncommon seeing it organizing competitions indepently, or for that matter beating the crap out of the U.S., Canada, China and so on from time to time. Pudge represented Puerto Rico period, no more is needed. - Caribbean~H.Q. 15:28, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I didn't have time to read that last comment, promoting the Yankees is actually more evil than pushing politics. - Caribbean~H.Q. 15:30, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

To characterize Puerto Rico as a separate country, without qualification, is POV-pushing. I'm well aware that it's a hot-button issue. But as long as the U.S. Congress has some say in Puerto Rican affairs, they are not fully independent. There has to be a way to say it differently, e.g. "birthplace" instead of "country". P.S. I do not promote the Yankees. Let me put it a different way: I wanted to see why the Tigers had bailed on the 2008 season and maybe given the Yankees what they need to go to the playoffs yet again. Curse them Yankees anyway. >:( Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:38, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not going to discuss that, this roll has been around since the US invaded the main island, if you ask me I'm glad that the political panorama has changed in the last year, this argument may be nearing its end, finally. The Tigers traded Pudge because they think he is going downhill, he may be one of the best in the game but he isn't going to last forever. - Caribbean~H.Q. 15:45, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not removing the posts from my talk page because they are biased politically, I was moving them because political threads are to POV-pushers what honey is to flies. Politics give me headaches, that is the reason that most of my edits are based on sports or historical events or figures, that is because nobody can't challenge the past. Well he is getting old and playing catcher is not easy, but as far as the WBC goes he will have at least a decent participation next year, then Molina will have to work on the defensive while Soto takes the offensive, they aren't as balanced as he was but that possition is covered for a while. The Yankees have that curse, they get an All-Star and then they start losing, just look at A-Rod, a huge investment and they still haven't won a World Series since they got him. - Caribbean~H.Q. 16:00, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I only revert if someone goes around claiming "Puerto Rican" is an ethnicity, that nationality is one of the few possitive things that Spain gave us, and we were lucky to have it so far, there used to be a curency but that fell flat on its ass when it was devaluated by 60% a hundred years ago. Frankly, I don't think that the US wants to control the future of PR anymore, times have changed and our location isn't strategic anymore, that is the main reason behing the perception that the government is gaining more autonomy, I don't think that the congress will oppose a complete "free association" the next time around, and with two parties jumping on the "sovereignty " bandwagon... - Caribbean~H.Q. 16:38, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

"That's plural" was a grammatical correction, fly → flies. Anyway, I do think that the Yankees' bomber was yanked from service a while ago, unless they consider bombing their own stadium an accomplishment. - Caribbean~H.Q. 16:45, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Fidel may be dead by now, unless he has only one set of clothes and has gone mute since 2007, I get a feeling that they are laying it down slowly to lessen the impact, but these videos might have been filmed a while ago. Back in 1898, naval warfare was by far vital for most strikes, being placed in the exact middle of the map had its advantages, now a F-22 can fly halfway trough the globe in a few hours and return home before dinner. - Caribbean~H.Q. 16:58, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

That reminds me, I need to go clean the backyard, we get them python here when it gets hot, they seem to be migrating north from the Everglades lately on summer vacation or something, and if you let the grass grow... - Caribbean~H.Q. 17:14, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Trivia time

My dad and I were talking about Jack Wilson, who has stated he plans on playing 10 seasons and then retiring. He's been on the Pirates since 2001, he made the all-star team once. And thanks to Pittsburgh's wonderul owners he has never been on a winning team. So we were wondering if he is close to having played the most seasons without a winning one? I figured if somebody would know, you would. I don't know if anyone was on the Phillies for that long when they had their drought (if not then he's definately in the running for consecutive losing seasons with one team) or someone who kept getting shuffled around and caught a lot of bad breaks. Any thoughts?Blackngold29 19:17, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

By "winning team", do you mean a winning record? Or a World Series winner? For the latter, I'd think Ty Cobb would have to be up there. —Wknight94 (talk) 19:27, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

For longest time in the bigs without being on a winner, Ernie Banks comes to mind. Longest time spent with a below-.500 team would require some research. I don't recall having seen any records on that. I was thinking Ted Lyons is a good candidate. He was a Chicago White Sox lifer, from mid-1923 through early 1946. 1927-1935 were losing seasons for the Sox, a 9 year stretch. The thing is, if a player isn't very good, he's not going to be around long, and if he is good, he's typically going to be traded in hopes of getting several-for-one. So I don't have a good answer on this one. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:38, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, Cobb went much longer. 24 seasons. He lost three World Series early on - including the Cubbies' last one - and never returned to the postseason. Reminded me of an early baseball version of Dan Marino. —Wknight94 (talk) 19:54, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking of Ernie Banks as perhaps the most prominent Hall-of-Famer who was never in a post-season series. Ted Lyons also played parts of 24 seasons without post-season action, although as with Banks, the team got above .500 a few times during his sentence, er, career. Just think if Cobb had stuck with the A's one more year, he finally could have had a World Series ring. C'est la vie. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:04, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

And in comparing with Cobb and Marino, what about Cal Ripken, whose biggest hurrah was soon after his streak started, although he also saw some post-season action in the late 1990s. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:17, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Anyway, I'm assuming Blackngold means .500 seasons, as the Bucs haven't been at or above .500 since their heartbreaking NLCS loss to the Bravos in 1992. We at least have a benchmark in Ted Lyons - we know the record is at least 9 seasons of being on a below-.500 team (I'm not sure what to do with exactly .500, if that becomes an issue, but I'm inclined not to count it, as it's not a losing season). So we would first have to make a list of every 10-years-or-more stretch of below-.500 seasons. Then scan the rosters and look for likely candidates. That in itself would take several long weekends. Unless someone else has done it already. I'm not sure how to look for something like that in Google. It's not a conventional baseball "record", it's more like "trivia". Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:17, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Big difference between Cobb/Marino and Ripken ---- Ripken won it all! The other two were loud and outspoken in their early chances but never actually won. For the correct answer, how about Chuck Klein? Lefty O'Doul? Someone else on the horrible Phillies teams around 1930? —Wknight94 (talk) 20:48, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Oooo, how about Cy Williams? 1918-1930! We have a new leader... And tack on his last three years with the Cubs too. That's 15 16 years in a row. —Wknight94 (talk) 20:53, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

And that complicates matters. I hadn't even thought about a poor schmo who would get traded from one team to another at the wrong time. 16 straight years with below .500 teams. That's either dedication or desparation. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:57, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, but if we're limiting this to entire careers, I'm wrong. Williams had a couple winning seasons early on. —Wknight94 (talk) 20:58, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Got to be someone from the Phillies between 1918-48. First guy I came up with was Hugh Mulcahy, who had a 9-year career (8 with the Phils, 1 tail-end with the Pirates), all below .500. Got to be someone better than that, though. -Dewelar (talk) 21:14, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, sorry I took so long. I meant longest career (seasons or games I guess would work) with no winning seasons. A "winning season" as .500 or better. I guess a player whose good enough to play in the majors, but not fortunate enough to get traded. Blackngold29 23:45, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

No winning seasons at all? Well that rules out everyone Wknight94 and I named. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:34, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

But not Jack Wilson. ;) btw, I found this picture of him, now I'm no expert, but I would think that's close to Featured picture material. Blackngold29 01:20, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

And not Hugh Mulcahy, as mentioned above. His nickname was the very appropriate "Losing Pitcher" :) . -Dewelar (talk) 02:05, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

A nickname like that is enough to make you go into some other line of work. It kind of reminds me of Bob "Suitcase" Seeds who playe for 5 different clubs in 11 seasons. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:18, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Warner Bros. Cartoons content dispute

User talk:70.119.13.45 insists on deleting a portion of the Warner Bros. Cartoons article when the studio was closed circa 1964 when animated titles for The Porky Pig Show was produced by Hal Seeger in New York. Steelbeard1 (talk) 19:32, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Ralph Kiner

"I think it was you that added a bunch of fact tags to Kiner's article back on July 19th. Several of those items are already covered in the external links. What's the point of linking the same information 2 or more times in the same article? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 15:47, 2 August 2008 (UTC)"

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Slater79"

Answer- Probably because I'm only human, and I make mistakes sometimes. What was the point of making such a mountain out of a molehill? What was the point of not giving me the benefit of the doubt that I just happened to not see the external links that you mentioned? (which I DIDN'T). I don't have all day to be editing Wikipedia. You could have been a little bit more polite in what you wrote to me. I've ALREADY had a rotten day. Give me a break! If I inadvertantly made a mistake, then I'm SORRY! Every other person has been polite who has written to me to call me on an error that I've made. What is the point of your being so rude in the tone of what you wrote to me? Is it really necessary? Please be more civil in what you write, and people will be more civil to you, as well. Slater79 (talk) 02:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:NWA Plane over Lake Harriet 020623.JPG

Hello! I came across the picture doing image sorting. I've identified it as a Boeing 757. Thanks for adding it to our collection. :D E_dog95' ^{Hi '} 03:45, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Fedora article

All my edits to the Fedora article comply with Wikipedia rules and guidelines, and some are based on other people's comments on the talk page. The article was in drastic need of cleaning up, and it still needs a lot of work( including references) to reach Wikipedia standards.Spylab (talk) 17:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Cocaine blues

Thanks! Much better. BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Image:KillebrewBanner020501.JPG

An image that you uploaded, Image:KillebrewBanner020501.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Aboutmovies (talk) 09:56, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

IP on U

BASEBALLS BUGS IS AN UGLY IGNORANT FOOL —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.49.166.166 (talk) 23:09, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

How dare you call me ugly? >:( Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:07, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I dare because its true --190.49.166.166 (talk) 00:26, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Ugh! I almost stepped in the poop! - BillCJ (talk) 03:20, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

When are you leaving Wikipedia? You have been talking about it for some time. Would this be another Michael Jordan, Roger Clemens, or Brett Favre situation. Enlighten us!! --Bob Purkey (talk) 17:47, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Never. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:58, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Rusty Stars

Old Glory

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		I hereby bestow the Barnstar of Dilligence to Wahkeenah for his persistence in keeping the Flag of the United States article free from vandals. — BQZip01 — talk 00:05, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Minny Ha-Ha-Happy Returns

		The Original Barnstar
		To Wahkeenah, on the occasion of Minneapolis, Minnesota reaching featured article. -Susanlesch 04:56, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

← Shucks, folks, I'm speechless.

Very Sorry...

I should have asked you for permission before deleting my own comment regarding a particular user ("I Guess It's Moot Now, But..."), and I hope that there was no violation of either the spirit or the letter of Wiki policies. I thought in retrospect that these words were rather harsh and perhpas regrettable--and now irrelevant anyway. But it is your talk page after all. Pardon any inconvenience. Lantana11 (talk) 21:18, 8 August 2008 (UTC)Lantana11Lantana11 (talk) 21:18, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Reason for this whole thing was this: it seems I came across some piece of policy that stated "don't mock" former Wikipedians or those who have been indef-blocked. So I thought I'd just creep in and creep out with removal of my disparagement. Again--sorry.

No problem. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:43, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

Thank you for your input in the GA review of Cy Young, which passed.LAAFan 22:28, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

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

ABN AMRO

Hello again. It looks as if the ABN AMRO is unlocked now. At the writing, the only new edits are positive ones in which the last remaining mentions of "ABN Amro" were corrected to ABN AMRO. So we should watch the article closely to avoid more edit and renaming wars. Steelbeard1 (talk) 17:47, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

2008 Olympics attack on American nationals (2nd nomination)

I have re-nominated this article for deletion. Please provide your input to the discussion. --Elliskev 17:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Why an editor of two years...

I'm not sure if I'm wasting my time here; I think it's likely that you view me with contempt and take my remarks about your position, which I genuinely have trouble understanding, personally. I saw that you were puzzled that "someone editing for two years" would persist in disagreeing with you about applying the MOS, and I wanted to come here and invite you to at least understand my perspective. The tone of that comment and some others suggest to me that you believe that I'm a troll or vandal or something like it, which puzzles me because I can see from your side that you're at least operating in good faith. (Or at least most of the time, anyway, implying that you'll "take me to ANI just like some guy who got blocked" is pushing it at the very least.) My issue is that every guideline we have that deals with naming, both in letter and spirit, calls for standard English. I've been involved with this issue for a while, and I've found that the people who are most adamant about ignoring the guidelines are the people who are fans/clients/employees of the given band, brand, or company. Most people, when approaching the issue from a broader context, tend to recognize the value behind the guideline, which I've articulated before and won't rehash again here.

The reason I care about this is that there was clearly NOT consensus to use "AMRO" when the page was returned there. My feeling is that, whatever you think of the first RM discussion, it was closed as move to "Amro," which is the style more in line with our MOS. I opened up a second RM discussion because the "straw poll" that Steelbeard1 opened was obviously going to have our three votes and then the votes of whomever else he canvassed to come support him. Using the RM procedure invites other editors, who are less likely to have a vested interest, to participate in the discussion. You may have considered the matter settled because there were more of you interested in arguing with me on the talk page, but if you count up all the opinions on the talk page at the time, it was basically divided evenly between the two styles. Had there been evidence of a consensus to use AMRO without the move, then there wouldn't have been much for me to say or do about it, and I'd have left the issue alone. I hope that you'd feel the same way if the consensus went against you, but I have to confess that I have serious concerns about whether or not you would really be willing to abide by such a consensus.

I don't want to discuss the merits of the issue here, since that discussion belongs somewhere that other editors would be more inclined to comment on it. I'd just ask you to consider whether Wikipedia should really be the most prominent source using these nonstandard styles within article text. Do we follow secondary sources, or do we just do what the advertising department of the band/company want us to do? Croctotheface (talk) 19:52, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Your complaint has been noted and logged. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:56, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

It's hardly a complaint. I came here because I saw your comment and thought that you genuinely might want to know what has been motivating me. We've both been editing here a while, and it's probably better for us to at least understand each other. If you don't feel that way, OK, and I'm sorry I wasted both of our time. Croctotheface (talk) 20:08, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't get why the so-called manual of style takes precedence over getting it right. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:34, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I mean, I don't know that I want to wade back into the whole discussion here. I'll respond to this comment if you like, but we've probably each made about 50 posts directed toward each other on that topic, and we're just not going to see eye to eye. I had meant for this to be something of an olive branch, something to say that while I will argue forcefully for my position, it's not something that either of us should take personally. I'm not a troll or vandal, as you saw if you looked at my edit history. There are probably times when, in the past, I argued just as forcefully for a position that you agree with. You can dislike me if you want, but I took that "editor of two years" comment to indicate that you're willing to try to understand my perspective. That's all I meant to do by posting here. Croctotheface (talk) 20:45, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I make no personal attack here. I question behavior. I don't know anyone here well enough to question their soul. Ya dig? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:47, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

What about my behavior, even, is questionable? Did I edit war? Did I implement my desired changes by brute force? All I've done is disagree with you. Croctotheface (talk) 20:58, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

The endless loop. The consant posing of hypotheticals which have no bearing on this specific case, while also not answering my questions about Sanyo, for example. The seemingly obsessive dependence on a manual of style vs. doing what's right to make wikipedia not look like we're ignorant. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 21:09, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I think that using "ABN AMRO" makes us look ignorant, actually. Your statement about what makes WP "look ignorant/stupid" is buy no means something that everyone would agree with. Saying that it's a bad idea to use one style or another begs the question. We're supposed to be discussing which style is better. You want me to accept as a given that I am wrong. Your "ignorance" formulation just precludes anyone from taking the other side. Croctotheface (talk) 21:19, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Spelling the company name using its legal business name makes us look ignorant? Tell me another one. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I came here because I thought that you might want to understand where I'm coming from. If you just want to take that I'm wrong as an article of faith and have no interest in understanding my side, that's fine. Just tell me so that I won't waste both of our time. Croctotheface (talk) 01:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

What I understand is that you're too hung up on pedantic rules. The first rule is, get it right. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

And I'm saying that this dispute is not over "should we obey 'pedantic rules' or do what's right." The people who disagree with you do not somehow concede that the style you like is "right" and the one we like is "wrong." The dispute is OVER which one is right. The style I favor is used much more frequently, and I think that it's the right style to use. If the MOS said "use all caps if the company does," I'd still think that "Amro" is right; this is not about some slavish adherence to guidelines. When you characterize my position this way, you just reject it out of hand, which you're certainly entitled to. But if you don't accept my position in good faith, if you don't want to understand what my position actually is, then OK, I won't continue to engage you because it's a waste of both our time. Croctotheface (talk) 02:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

The company's name is all caps, and there are plenty of sources that call them by all caps. It doesn't matter which style you favor or I favor. All that matters is what it is, which is all caps. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:36, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Could you just respond to my question: are you interested in understanding me here or not? I came here because I genuinely thought that you might be. Croctotheface (talk) 02:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

You keep coming at me like a lawyer or something. What I understand is that you think some arbitrary, generalistic rule should trump the actual name of a company, and that is not the right way to do things. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:51, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll just take that as a no. Croctotheface (talk) 02:59, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Throughout this tedious debate, you've constantly tried to put the answers in my mouth, so this is no exception. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I asked that question over and over. It's a simple question. I came here because I thought that we might at least be able to reach an understanding, but every time I've invited you to do that, or even invited you to say you were interested in doing that, you refused to answer. If you won't actually tell me what you think, what am I left to do but take my best guess? That said, I think it's clear that for whatever reason, you and I are not going to reach an understanding, so I don't think it's a useful exercise for either of us to persist in this discussion here. Croctotheface (talk) 03:07, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not real sure what the question was, buried somewhere in that initial essay. I have no connection whatsoever to that company, in fact I never heard of it until this debate came along. But I don't like wikipedians claiming that they have the right to define what the name of a company is. That is not our place. Our place is to report facts. And the plain fact is that that company's legal name is all caps. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:24, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

(removing indents) Here's my question, which I asked more than once in a way that I thought was pretty clear: are you interested in understanding me here or not? Do you refuse to accept that there is reasoned disagreement about which style is right to use? Croctotheface (talk) 02:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm interested in understanding why you think an arbitrary rule is more important than the demonstrable fact in this case. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:34, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Because "what the company does" is not persuasive to me, just like it's not persuasive to the dozens if not hundreds of publications that use the style I favor. Considering that, I'm really confused about why you seem to view my position with such dismissive contempt. All those publications, and you don't seem to think that reasonable people can disagree. Croctotheface (talk) 03:43, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

If you really think the company doesn't have the right to determine its own name, we're done. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

It can call itself what it wants. That doesn't mean that we need to use that style every time we write it. ABN Amro's legal name is actually "ABN AMRO Holdings N.V." We don't use that every time, for good reason. We can truncate it. Likewise, we need not use the precise style that they do, either. However, I take it from the "we're done" that you do not respect my position, which is your prerogative, and as such I will give up and apologize for wasting your time and mine trying to reach an understanding. Croctotheface (talk) 04:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Satchel Paige and Rookie status

When Paige joined the Indians in 1948, there were many comments about him being the oldest rookie in MLB history. The fact is that he was considered (by sportswriters) a rookie in 1948, a perception that persisted for many years after, but Paige himself found that designation insulting, and announced that if he DID win the RoY award that year, he would refuse it (didn't have to, as he received zero votes).

Such "records" as "oldest" and "youngest" player to do whatever have never been official MLB records, so calling it a "record for oldest rookie" is a bit of a misnomer to begin with. Whether Paige is considered to have been a rookie in 1948 depends upon the individual researcher/historian, and whether or not they consider the Negro Leagues to have had an average talent level that was equivalent or near-equivalent of MLB.

While it is freely accepted that the best players of Nippon Pro Baseball are of MLB (and possibly HoF) caliber, it is also accepted that the average talent level is still somewhere near Triple-A level. They can base such assumptions on direct comparisons of player performance when moving betwen the leagues, something they had little chance (nor inclination) to do in the 1940s. I know that Paige did better in the American League in 1948 than he did in the NAL earlier that same year.

Concluding, since there are no official MLB records that considers age and there is wide debate as to whether the Negro Leagues' talent level should be assessed as minor or major league equivalence, I would not call Satchel Paige a 42-year-old "rookie". - -Couillaud (talk) 21:59, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Re "oldest player at MLB debut": I have no problem with that kind of description, though saying he "holds the record" for his age would not be factual, simply because there really is no official "record" of that kind to hold.

FYI, before Paige took the mound on 9 July 1948, the oldest age at debut (42 years and two days) was Chuck Hostetler, who was 40 years, five months, and 27 days old when he debuted in April 1944, one of those infamous "graybeards" of WW2. Paige's status was challenged only once when pitcher Diomedes Olivio played his first game at the age of 41 years, 7 months, and 14 days. He missed Paige by 141 days. So yes, Paige is indeed the oldest player to debut in the majors. -- Couillaud (talk) 05:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

August 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2008 Olympics attack on American nationals (2nd nomination). Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Let's try to keep the discussion civil. Rwiggum (^Talk/_Contrib) 23:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

As much as I detest templated warnings, I have to (very reluctantly) agree with Rwiggum. You've way overposted at that particular AFD, bugs. If I recall correctly, this genre of afds (those of people that have met their untimely deaths) seems to grab your interest. Please stop posting at this one. Everyone there knows your views. Adding a "comment" under everyone elses' opinion does nothing to solve the AFD, it merely makes it more contentious. Pretty please? Stop posting there? Keeper ǀ 76 23:37, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Stadiums idea

I'm just kind of throwing this out there, I don't know if it'll catch on. I've been doing the Pirates' stadiums (PNC Park and Three Rivers Stadium are GAs) and I started thinking that it would be cool to get a Featured topic for the current stadiums of MLB. We'll need about 7 FAs and the rest GAs to get that, so it'll take a while. I figured if we need that many FAs we should make them the best stadiums (Wrigley, Fenway, Camden Yards). If I recall correctly you are a Cubs fan, so would you be interested in helping with Wrigley Field? I was able to do the Pitt ones fairly quickly (I wrote Heinz Field in one day), but I had a good deal of knowledge about them going in which won't be the case for most other ones. I thought I'd throw it out to you and then we could go to WP:BASE and see if anyone else would be interested. Thoughts? Blackngold29 02:45, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

If you could just get it started, I'm sure I could help some. I try to take FAs real slow. If you have any books that have info about the funding, building, or planning that's usually where I start. Just dump a bunch of random stuff into a sandbox and then worry about paragraph writing later. I was gonna do Forbes Field next, surprisingly I have way more info on that than 3 Rivers, but anything you need just let me know. Blackngold29 02:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, yeah it's better than I thought. I wrote all mine from scratch, because they were nowhere near Wrigley's quality. It doesn't have any in-line citations, I guess you could do those if you want. Just anything you find that needs work on it, really. Blackngold29 03:19, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Harmon Killebrew GA review

Since I was talking to you on blackngold's talk page, I figured I might leave this message directly for you as well. The review is complete. There are a few issues holding it back from GA status. I've put the article on hold for one week to give the editors time to address them. I will revisit the article in a week, or if you feel the issues are taken care of sooner than that, you're free to let me know at any time. Nosleep (talk) 08:00, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I know how that can be. The GA review is located at Talk:Harmon Killebrew, transcluded from a subpage. Like I said, I'll be back to revisit the article in one week, unless I'm asked to come back sooner. Nosleep (talk) 08:09, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

That's of course up to you. Nosleep (talk) 08:29, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Scopes trial

Policy requires a fair use rationale for each article the image is used in. I've added the template to the image for William Jennings Bryan. It needs to be filled out. Please do not remove the Fair Use Rationale tag again. It will be removed by a closing admin. -Nv8200p talk 15:17, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

• You have to justify why this image is fair use in the article. I'm not convinced that it is fair use. I can't tell you what wording to use. -Nv8200p talk 13:46, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I don't think that it does not qualify for fair use, but it has to have a fair use rationale for every article that the image is used in. -Nv8200p talk 03:29, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
    • When non-free media is used on Wikipedia, a justification for its usage, called a non-free use rationale (aka use rationale or fair use rationale), must be presented in the image description page, explaining how the image is used in a way consistent with Wikipedia's non-free content criteria for each article the image is used in. See Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline -Nv8200p talk 03:37, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
      • I have not uploaded fair use material in a long time. Too much hassle. I don't think I could justify using this image anyway. My suggestion is to look at other fair use images of the same nature and plagarize their rationale. -Nv8200p talk 03:44, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Bugs

I still haven't figured out what Bugs Bunny has to do with baseball. I suppose I would like to ask you for help. If the other side (they aren't evil, just misguided) can enlist their minions or support, then I feel I can ask you for your assistance at the 2008 Olympics incident page. How are you by the way? Overmoon (talk) 09:26, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

See Baseball Bugs. As to your question, the article name was long enough already, and you've made it longer. Either way, it's obscure and will require various redirects for anyone to be able to find it. And am I supposed to know you from somewhere? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 08:02, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Censorship on Wiki

Saw your comments on ANI re the German murderer "courtesy" flap, and you said it. Just goes to show that Wikipedia needs to decide soon whether it wants to focus on accuracy or being "nice." Can't be both, because reality isn't "nice." Aunt Entropy (talk) 23:02, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Good work

Bugs, I think in one of our first converstaions, I was trying to explain the necessity of using proper souces, or something along those lines. Since then, I've watched your work in various baseball related articles, the basball project, and on a few other type articles too. I just want to say you've done a great job learning the ropes around here, and have become a valuable editor. I especially appreciate you taking the forefront on the Braves division win-streak issue. Having been through that issue a few times before, it was nice not to be the one carrying all the water! So thanks for the good work, and I hope you can continue it. - BillCJ (talk) 03:20, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Zounds and egad

Re this, I swear to Zeus, Jimi Hendrix, or any other deity of your choice that I had no idea there were vulgar connotations to that name. I just thought it was a funny name from the Piranha Brothers skit. Raymond Arritt, editing for the nonce as Basil "Basil" Fawlty (talk) 01:57, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

[9] Hmm, I thought it was a clever and subtle reference to Vagina dentata (now there's an article I'd like to see one of our adolescent vandalismos try to put a "penis" in ... ) Antandrus (talk) 17:17, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello

I'm no Virgin!

you're welcome to have sex with me sometime.

call me: 07981041079

xxx

PushMyCrumpet PopMyCherry AndCallMeTina (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 17:35, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll get back to you on that. Probably sometime next millennium. Meanwhile, always use a contraceptive. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:40, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for removing that comment at ANI, especially because I know you disagreed with my perception of it. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 18:13, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Betacommand's recent unblock

You might want to look at this, where your comments about Betacomannd are being taken to be supportive of the recent unblock, which is not how I took them. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ^{(talk / cont)} 00:35, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Question from Fangusu

How is my wording poor in Elmer's Candid Camera? Fangusu (talk) 04:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

The changes add no new info, and "except for that" is slangy and inappropriate. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

what is your problem with michael jackson??

i just want to know what you have against the man, i cannot expet everyone to be keen on his music but you have to remember that he has not touched a kid and was found inersant - would you let your kid sleep in a bed with him?? i would put any of my kids in bed with michaels and sleep easily myself nowing that they were safe. even mcauley culkin was safe and although they may be close friends to say that he is abusing and using them to touch him intimately is and cannot be truth!!

leave him alone he is an innocent!! Danforthkeeton (talk) 15:38, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

You must have me confused with someone else, as I have no clue what you're talking about. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:41, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

you know!!

he HAS been accused of child abuse BUT

was found innocent-----> so!

not fair to call him a child molester or and kind of kidsex, RIGHT. Danforthkeeton (talk) 16:01, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

What edit are you even talking about? What page? —Wknight94 (talk) 16:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

MICHAEL JACKSON

The King of POP! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danforthkeeton (talk • contribs) 16:23, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

FPaS RFC

As a participant in the recent discussion at WP:ANI, I thought you should be informed of the new RFC that another user has started regarding FPaS's behavior.

• Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Future Perfect at Sunrise

Jerry talk ¤ count/logs 16:49, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for Image:I-35W new 080830 2.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:I-35W new 080830 2.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 17:31, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:56, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

BHS

Thanks, I wouldn't have even noticed it but you made an edit and the article popped up in my watchlist, so I thought I'd see what it looked like these days. IvoShandor (talk) 20:09, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Theft

Just FYI, I ripped off a userbox from your user page, and fiddled with it a bit. I put it up here. Hope you don't mind. Ed Fitzgerald "unreachable by rational discourse"^{(t / c)} 09:01, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Your sarcasm

Your thread is inappropriate based on sarcasm. You would not say that you enjoy any repeated harassment by the troll for a long time. I already had several bogus files on me at ANI. (just three days ago) I filed to request for blocking him in his IP range, so I strongly request you to retract the thread. Thanks.--Caspian blue (talk) 19:38, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I was trying to get the attention of the admins. You need to address the issue directly. You've got the admin confused also. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:40, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm very frustrating at the repeated harassment by the troll. Just look at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Documentingabuse and Wikipedia talk:Requests for checkuser/Case/Documentingabuse. --Caspian blue (talk) 19:44, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Don't tell me, tell the admin. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Quite silly answer. You keep nagging me to show 'diff' 'diff', because you want to know more. So I got you know the easiest way to perceive the case.--Caspian blue (talk) 22:20, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

You've told me nothing useful. We're done here. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:27, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Your involvements at the ANI are nothing useful, indeed. So long.--Caspian blue (talk) 22:32, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I tried to help. I reverted that IP character several times. It's plain you don't want help. You just want to complain. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:36, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Did you really expect me to dig all diffs to make you fill your curiosity? I was very busy to report the anon to AIV, and you showed to take more interested in listening to the indef.blocked user's excuses. That is not helpful. So long.--Caspian blue (talk) 22:39, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I only asked for 3 diffs, AT MOST. Even 1 would do. And since I know nothing of the issue, I wanted to hear both sides. I've got a hunch you're in the right, but I'm not taking your word for it, I want to see a specific example of the problem. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:41, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Whose judgement where?

Whose judgement where?

Now, bugs, I was very willing to play fair over this. Making an allegation of a race hate campaign, a persistent effort to game the Korean-Japanese pages, is not a superficial matter.

I have been watching, and documenting, this for months and many people's time is being wasted. I am not simply playing sock over this, I want to be very open and honest but I am asking for reason in return. --58.94.57.6 (talk) 20:22, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't need months worth of research, just 3 good examples of controversial content in articles so I have some idea what this is about. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:24, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

OK. I will do. But please leave the prior evidence in.

And, please, tell them to stop blocking IPs address. Its a waste of time. --125.204.110.203 (talk) 20:32, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

YOU tell them. I have no authority with admins. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:33, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Who is dealing with it then? Thanks. --125.204.110.203 (talk) 20:37, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Lucyintheskywithdada

I believe Caspian Blue is referring to this Message from Lucyintheskywithdada. Enjoy. --Amble (talk) 21:53, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Appreciate your work...

...on the "Request for range-blocking evading troll" AN/I thread, and elsewhere. It's so nice to see someone looking for all sides of a story, even from anonymous editors, instead of jerking their knee! Mr. IP 《Defender of Open Editing》 06:10, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I tried, anyway. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 09:30, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Baseball uniforms

Nice! --Dweller (talk) 11:36, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I know nothing at all about baseball, but am half way through doing a copyedit as a favour for RyRy. Does the first half read better now? --Dweller (talk) 12:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

lols

Thanks for having a good sense of humor. That Sarah Palin talk page is decidedly dreary and unfunny, and every bit of levity and normality helps. Coemgenus 14:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I've never seen such a feeding-frenzy here. Admittedly, I'm a small part of it now. But I'm just trying to get people to think about things, especially the absurd things. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 14:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Pink Panther

I removed the list of cartoon episodes, as they have nothing in common with the movie, excpet for the fact that the panther appeared in the start of the movie.

--Rsrikanth05 (talk) 08:58, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Whatever. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:58, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

And You Call Me A Troll (computing)

You think that I am a troll, then check out the user that asked if he thought he was Michael Jackson. Ericthebrainiac (talk) 14:53, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Soytenly. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 18:40, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

FYI

New user —Travis^talk 22:53, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Now that's someone who is on top of things! Blocked him before he could even make one of his stupid edits. Nice job! —Wknight94 (talk) 23:09, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Ha! I didn’t even realize it was a puppet - I just blocked due to the inappropriate username. Cheers —Travis^talk 23:29, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Awesome. Thank you! Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:23, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Handy list

Here. Kelly ^hi! 22:09, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

User talk:BehnamFarid

Stop trolling, I've already discussed this with FisherQueen on her talk page and she said that she didn't see his comment. Don't restore the comment again. Khoikhoi 04:00, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Why don't you actually read User talk:FisherQueen and you'll realize that you're not "enforcing the rules", you are indeed trolling. Khoikhoi 10:39, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

You're correct in your assessment. It is well-within our rights to sue, but we aren't allowed to say that on Wikipedia. But he's blocked, so I'm not sure what else you want to do. I can try to explain again to him if you want me to. He may not have realized that he cannot revoke the GFDL once he clicked the submit button, and he was trying to prevent a certain user from what he perceived as destroying an article he created, so he felt the only way to get him to "stop" was to say something like that. He didn't know about WP:NLT at the time and after I told him he backed off.

So I can talk to him if you want me to (FisherQueen and I are both admins). He wasn't community banned, only blocked for one sentence really. BTW I remember you from three years ago. Do you remember? Khoikhoi 11:13, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Haha, I thought you knew. :-) BehnamFarid has been an editor here since 2006, and a good one at that. The thing is, I think this is probably the first real editing dispute he ever got into on Wikipedia. So he didn't really know how to handle it correctly. That's what I think happened. And his English is quite good actually, but that's not the point. Anyways I'll see what I can do. What is your baseball team btw, I have to say I'm a Dodgers fan. Khoikhoi 18:56, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

That's my point -- he hasn't been in a real dispute for the past two years, just edits here and there on largely obscure topics to the average American. Cubs were in first place for awhile, are the Rays still ahead of them? Manny is indeed the Dodgers' savior. I gotta get a tattoo of him on my forehead one of these days. Khoikhoi 19:49, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I was kidding about the tattoo, we only have him for this season AFAIK. And you better hope that Steve Bartman doesn't show up at one of your playoff games this year. The Cubs are long overdue when it comes to winning a championship. There are only a couple people who probably remember the last time they won. [10] Khoikhoi 02:39, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Haha, you can see more about that guy here, where he declares Kurds and Persians to be "enemies of Azeris." Anyways, good luck to the Cubs. Ciao, Khoikhoi 04:22, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

72.75.107.249

15 minutes? Hmm... I didn't mean to. Oh well, I'll reblock him if he comes back. Exploding Boy (talk) 05:24, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I thought 15 minutes would be enough protection for the talk page. He seems to have become bored and gone away. Exploding Boy (talk) 05:54, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Cool Image

What's up Bugs. Just wanted to say, I like the image you've got for your User page (Bugs reading). Cheers. GoodDay (talk) 00:39, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

No worries, mate. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 08:33, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

User talk:BehnamFarid again

Several of us, in talking about this, think it's best to just totally leave that guy alone unless he specifically asks for something. He's essentially engaged in belligerence and trolling-like behavior at this point. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 21:53, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I pretty much agree. He's sent me some lengthy emails explaining how editing Wikipedia is a constitutional right, or something, and I've given him Cary's email. Nothing more for us to so now. Stifle (talk) 08:31, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

MOSNUM and ANI

• Please see my response here. Greg L (talk) 00:35, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Baseball

Dear Baseball Bugs, do you like baseball? Your name seems to suggest that. We can collaborate together to make baseball-related articles better. AdjustShift (talk) 04:25, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Dat's right. What do you have in mind? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 12:21, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

That's cool, bro! I've many things on my mind. I started a new article called Baseball Before We Knew It, and I will do a lot of work on baseball-related articles. I heard that Featured articles are the best articles on Wikipedia. Can our article on Baseball become a Featured article? AdjustShift (talk) 14:18, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

For what its worth

I like your sence of humor very witty, is thier a humor barnstar on WP?   «l| Ψrom3th3ăn ™|l»  (talk) 14:55, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I hope NOT. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 14:58, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

		The Prom3th3an Humour Barnstar
		I Prom3th3an, Almighty comedian of Wikipedia hereby award you (Baseball Bugs) this barnstar for doing or saying something that I found extremly humourous or otherwise witty beyond expectation. Take a bow. PS: Your name has now been crossed of my whichunt list ;)   «l| Ψrom3th3ăn ™|l»  (talk) 15:02, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

My humility is being severely tested, due to this unpresidented unprecedented(Captain hoek (talk) 02:41, 12 September 2008 (UTC)) honor. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:23, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Re.: Stan Freberg

Fine. I'll make a special trip downtown to the offices of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, get special permission to spend a week in their morgue (neglecting all other responsibilities in the meantime), and go through a year's worth of forty-year-old newspapers one at a time to find a copy of an article to prove what I know to be true from having heard it with my own ears, just for you, because you think I might be making it up.

Or maybe not, because I actually have a life and more important things to do than neglect my children jump because a wiki-bureaucrat says "frog". -- Davidkevin (talk) 20:44, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

It's the rules. No original research. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:25, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Classic.(Captain hoek (talk) 02:41, 12 September 2008 (UTC))

Classic bureaucratic bullshit. It was stated to a radio audience of literally thousands of people. "But we weren't alive to hear it back then, so it doesn't exist." Solipsistic bureaucratic bullshit. -- Davidkevin (talk) 14:16, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

HELP!

Hi Bugs. I see you do great work on Sarah Palin. Would you please be able to take a look at the Joseph Smith Jr page. As a very well established user, you'll have a better idea than I about whether its NPOV. Personally, as you'll see on the discussion page, I don't think it's at all well written. In particular the line 'Some measure of common sense had begun to return to Missouri leaders once the Latter Day Saints no longer posed a political threat.' irks me and i don't want to initiate an editing war by killing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Captain hoek (talk • contribs) 22:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I changed the one line. We'll see what happens. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Superman movie vid cap2 larger.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Superman movie vid cap2 larger.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) 06:04, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeh, yeh, yeh. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:48, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey BB..

Andy Mabbet/Pigsonthewing has placed a statement on his user talk page for your attention (not sure if you're still following the issue: [11]. Accordingly, please do not refer to him by that phrase again, (I think everyone either types out Pigsonthewing, refers to him by POTW, or by his name, as he does, with Andy Mabbet. Thanks :) SirFozzie (talk) 11:23, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Bugs

Your having a feast!

Bugs, for all your hard work on the wiki since you joined us last year and for having one of my favourite usernames on the wiki, i just have to give you this for you to munch on, i know they are healthy so please enjoy :) Also for the slack you have taken on the wiki like the above comment, i hereby give you this:

		All Around Amazing Barnstar
		Baseball Bugs Bunny for your hard work and making me smile when i see your name around the place, i give you this in the hope it will put a smile on your face and continue your adventure here on the wiki. I know that because of your name, you have been impersonated many times by vandals, socks and by your fans so enjoy your popularity and may it make you stronger and make you the bravest bunny on Earth! Monster Under Your Bed (talk) 03:40, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

My Kind of Town

Do you have a citation for the Robbo context of "My Kind of Town"?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:07, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the contents of the film. The film is the source. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:15, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Can you add a footnote citing the claim properly so that the reader can know how to verify the statement you make. Actually, the film is a primary source. We truly need a secondary source saying what you said for a proper citation. I let an occaissional primary source slide in unusual situations. This is one. Also can you properly format your other citation about The lyric, "Each time I roam etc. Please use the citation format that the rest of the article uses if possible.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:22, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Snoopen

Yah, I should have posted on the board after I saw your note ... got distracted by a football game that was pissing me off. Bad to be adminning and yelling at the television set simultaneously.  :/ Antandrus (talk) 21:41, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Us guys are not so good at multi-tasking. :\ Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 21:50, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikzilla was here

Okay, happy. Now it's not just an anonymous IP address.151.204.140.88 (talk) PS Love your username. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.204.140.88 (talk) 02:24, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Coolest user page I've ever seen

Your user page is by far the best I've seen. When I first came upon it, for a second I genuinely believed that sock-puppet warning was real! It's hilarious and creative. If Wikipedia had an official user page designer, it would have to be you. Crackthewhip775 (talk) 20:53, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Now, if I can just apply that creativity to the actual articles, I'll be on to something. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:47, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Regarding my proposed retirement - I am still wrestling with the agonicing decision pertaining to my possible retirement. I recently had a session with my priest about it. I will let you when my decision is final. Sincerely, Baseball Bugs - What's up, Doc? September 16, 2008 (UTC)

More likely my rabbi. The above is a fake by User:Ron liebman. The way you can tell is that I can actually spell English words properly. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:14, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Category "Negro League baseball" to "Negro league baseball"

I proposed a rename from Category:Negro League baseball to Category:Negro league baseball on Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy at 01:52 UTC on 15 September 2008. The rename has not taken place yet, and since there seems to be some controversy, I am planning to initiate a non-speed CfD in the near future. Four of this category's subcategories have already been renamed through the speedy rename process. In each case, I was the proposer, and User:Vegaswikian was responsible for putting them in the work queue. Stepheng3 (talk) 18:29, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Correct. The ones I had moved were without any opposition and were nominated as a speedy for capitalization. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

The anti-barnstar, you say?

I believe you asked for one of these.. ;)

		The pooheadIU@13726*!@^(&!# Barnstar
		omg yr mom is GAY lol hahaha hi ashley!*&@#^I@112bshsbhud

Prince of Canada ^{t | c} 15:00, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Kudos. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:09, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

(Also, upon reading through your userpage.. you are a hoot. If you're ever in my neck of the woods, I have a beer with your name on it. That is.. real beer. Not the fizzy yellow water stuff y'all have down there. ) Prince of Canada ^{t | c} 15:10, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer. I'm more of a soda guy, like Canada Dry for example. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:09, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

ANI

Hi Baseball Bugs. Most of the time you're quite helpful on ANI, but on occasions, you could cut down on the snark - please? Your contributions to threads like this and this aren't really helping anyone, and they make you look kind of like a jerk. fish&karate 15:19, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Your complaint has been noted and logged. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:21, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, all I ask. fish&karate 15:24, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

seriously

I've seen your comments (commentary) on several Minnesota pages recently. Pray tell, are you Minnesotan, either in spirit or physical location? I wouldn't have guessed as much (Minnesotans are generaly nice zing!!!!. I mean well, but seriously, I'm curious....Keeper ǀ 76 01:59, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Nah, his sense of humor is too good. Must be from South Dakota. (Billboard seen on I-90 eastbound: "you think this is boring? wait until you get to Minnesota!") Antandrus (talk) 02:03, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

There are long stretches of... well, long stretches... throughout the midwest. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:06, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

And I recall South Dakota - the part of the Dakotas with scenery. And something resembling cities. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:11, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I drove across SD once. God's country for sure. Assuming of course that God likes incredibly boring non-arrable land, endless stretches of monotonous freeway, and mountains so boring that man had to carve pictures of dead US presidents on it to get anyone to visit...Keeper ǀ 76 15:05, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Me? On AN/I?

They don't like old farts like me on ANI, and frankly the place runs my blood pressure through the roof. I'm scared I'll lose it and either rip into the guy with the 10-pound legal threat who innocently claims it's not, or the guy who can't seem to find something with a gajillion sources and thinks if he throws COI he'll win his wikifight. I might check it tomorrow...or, I might catch a baseball game or go fishing. Have a nice night. (or day). -- Logical Premise ^Ergo? 05:52, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Ah, god, I just read your user page. Thank you for the laugh, I haven't really smiled all day. :D -- Logical Premise ^Ergo? 05:56, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Did you see their last game? I'd say I'm less of a Ranger "fan" and more of a masochist by this point. As far as the whole mess on the Walnut Street place, well, I'll let some admin do the wikimagic and by this time tomorrow next week everything will be fine. You gotta be laid back sometimes, you know? Especially if you're pulling for the Rangers, I got enough problems. :D -- Logical Premise ^Ergo? 06:08, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Lead on Apollo hoax

Er, where does the lead say these have been debunked? I don't see that at all. Also note that there's no "baiting" going on in keeping an article compliant with NPOV. JoshuaZ (talk) 16:06, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I know what we went through then, I kept a close watch of that discussion but frankly whether or not we need to deal with trolls or serious POV pushers isn't relevant if NPOV requires a stronger lead. Moreover, a gallup poll of the general populace is not at all the same. The general public's opinion has little relevance to the matter at hand(compare all the tired stats about the general publics basic knowledge of history, any area of science, etc.) . What actual experts think matters far more. JoshuaZ (talk) 16:13, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

And I'm saying it adds nothing to the lead. But the best defender of that article is User:Bubba73. Maybe you could pose this question to him and see what he thinks? I tend to defer to his judgment. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 16:16, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

You are both good editors, in my opinion. I think that the opinion poll should be in there, to give an indication of how widespread the belief is. However, the lead probably does need to state that experts don't believe the hoax. I don't think the Armstrong biography is a good one to use for that, since all it seems to have is that one sentence, and it isn't an outside third party. I think it would be good to cite Philip Plait and maybe The Mythbusters as experts that discount the hoax theory, since they have written on it (or done a TV show about it). Bubba73 (talk), 18:51, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Excellent point. A general quote from anyone from NASA would be an inherently biased (even if true) viewpoint. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:23, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I've been asked again to comment, and I don't think that one line from Armstrong's biography is a good enough reference to say that the claims have been generally discounted. A better source for that would be Philip Plait's book Bad Astronomy, where he has a whole chapter about it. Bubba73 (talk), 01:07, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your input on the "bridge controversies" topic in Sarah Palin. I hope it is not a problem that I grew up a White Sox fan. Dave Collect (talk) 23:30, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I welcome all faiths here. And all the different sects of the Church of Baseball. I don't mind that you're a Sox fan. I only weep for you, I deeply sympathize. :) On the other hand, wouldn't a Cubs-Sox World Series be about the most awesome thing that's happened since... well, since about 1906? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Bugs is a great editor. Sure, Bugs has unfortunate prejudices, like unfortunate baseball fandom, but has admirably managed to overcome them to achieve neutrality. And the best thing about Bugs is that he doesn't take s&^t off nobody. Max props, Bugs! Kelly ^hi! 23:32, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you back. My humility is being severely tested right about now. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

My late cousin who lived in Chicago would love to have seen it (are my tenses all goofed up?) I mainly liked the White Sox because they were the only hitless team with a winning record, it seemed (am I dating myself?) My main connection with baseball seems to be that I have too many cards left from my old store (by about 250,000 or so). Thanks again. Dave Collect (talk) 03:13, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

That's very sad. Maybe your cousin is watching from baseball heaven - along with seasons tickets to watch the angels now. :) And along with my late grandparents who were lifelong Cubs fans. Unless you're a Yanks fan, championships are rare and must be cherished. If you could go back in a time machine to 1908 and tell the fans, "This is all you'll get for at least 99 years," I wonder what they would think? Basically better off not knowing. Meanwhile, hang onto those baseball cards, as they can only appreciate in value. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:19, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

My grandfather was the most faithful Twins fan you could ever imagine - all throughout my childhood, I remember him glued to his radio, entranced by every pitch. He passed away in April of 1987...in that year, the Twins went from the cellar to winning the Series. I'm positive he witnessed this all from heaven. Baseball can be a sacrament. Kelly ^hi! 22:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

There's something about baseball that brings out this kind of feeling, I think more than any other sport in America. The closing of Yankee Stadium tonight (which is a crime perpetrated by George S. but that's another story) is dripping with sentiment, and it's all good. Even for thus of us who don't much care for the Yankees. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:35, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

ANI is not the authority

Anyone can write anything on ANI. If you write on ANI "The cover of Time Magazine for January 30, 2007 was mistakenly not copyrighted by Time", it doesn't make it true. I am seeking the true status of the cover. I have written to Time. If I receive information from them, I will update WP. 903M (talk) 00:15, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Henry Ford

Thank you for your interest in the article.

My concern is that it is a copyright violation and a non-free use image. I've written to Time to seek proof of renewal of copyright. If they respond, I will report the findings. I am not bothered by the image if it is a permitted image. I am bothered if it is a non-free use image and we steal it. I want Wikipedia to be scholarly and ethically use images. 903M (talk) 00:28, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

It has already been demonstrated that the copyright was not renewed. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:50, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Where? If it is that recent ANI, it was just one anonymous editor that said he heard it was. I seek the truth. If it turns out that it is not copyrighted, then I have no objections to free use images, when appropriate. 903M (talk) 01:09, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Seems to me there was a citation. Maybe I got that wrong. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Maybe it's Groundhog Day

Since Ron keeps doing the same thing over and over about you retiring. [12] --Ebyabe (talk) 22:35, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

Hiya, hope everything is good for you! Wasn't it a good game last night? Anyways, I noticed that you reverted this post. I just wanted to give you a friendly reminder that rollback is only for vandalism and not for reverting good faith edits. I'm not bothered personally but you should be aware that people have had it revoked for even a single reversion like that one. I' not an admin but know of some who just go around looking for incorrect use of rollback. Take care! :-) fr33kman ^{t - c} 22:42, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Baseball Bugs. You have new messages at Fr33kman's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cubs Win flag

Can you provide a citation for the claim you are adding.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:36, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Proper citations would be great.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:38, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

There is no deadline for getting it right.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:46, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Can you find a good source for the 1982 retirement of Ernie Banks' number?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:52, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I too am done for the night. I have a half dozen Dodger books to return to the library tomorrow. Off to Walter O'Malley for the rest of the night.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:10, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

How much of the story in the Wrigley field article is in the Media guide.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:29, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I was talking about the flags. Is it in this]. I am asking because you probably would know where to find it most quickly.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:33, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Can we talk?

Unless your over 40 you're not gonna get it. Anyway, is there a method we can talk privately? I have some questions for you about my recent AN/I. (They are, hopefully, self-improvment questions if that helps.) Padillah (talk) 18:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I am, but I don't do e-mails with anyone here except a very short list of admins. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:14, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Impersonator?

Is User talk:Baseball Boogies you? Just posted to Wknight's page, signed manually as "baseball bugs". I'll unblock expediently if you declare your devotion to the MN Twins oops, I mean, clear this up for me. Keeper ǀ 76 21:06, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

FYI

I'm still on break and just took a quick look in, but thought you should be aware of this, since you've been looking after the situation. Thanks, Bugs. Kelly ^hi! 21:15, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I read over the source, the only thing it says is that the McCain campaign declined to comment on the fact that a nosy reporter was asking questions about her oldest child's birthdate. The source says - The Palins eloped on Aug. 29, 1988, and their first son, Track, was born eight months later, a fact that Maria Comella of the McCain campaign, declined to elaborate on. “They were high school sweethearts who got married and ended up having five beautiful children together,” Ms. Comella said. When it comes to Palin, I think people should go to town on the political stuff, so long as it's neutral, but the personal and family stuff is vile. Kelly ^hi! 22:49, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed it, but I greatly appreciate you keeping an eye on things. I'm really trying to disengage from those articles because I'm obviously partisan here. I think I have an idea of your political leanings on the subject, and it only increases the already-great respect I have for you that you work so hard to keep the articles professional. Thanks, Bugs. Kelly ^hi! 22:58, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I absolutely agree with the family thing. Hell, even if you were a total Obama partisan, you would want to avoid this stuff because it generally only generates net sympathy for Palin. I'm old enough to remember a more dignified treatment of this stuff...for example, Reagan's family life was a train wreck but the press limited their hyperbolic attacks to his political views. Amy Carter was treated with deference, and Betty Ford's alcoholism was also treated in a dignified way...hell, even Billy Carter was a figure that gave his brother a little realism and humanity, and there was not much scorn except on the extreme fringes of the right. I'm starting to think that era of journalism is forever dead. Anyway, thanks again, my good friend, and all my respect to you. Kelly ^hi! 23:07, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

The Apollo astronauts were my heroes, too - I was one of the millions glued to the television, waiting for Cronkite to announce that the Apollo 13 astronauts were dead or alive. I've only delved into the controversial stuff three times - Eliot Spitzer, John Edwards, and Sarah Palin. Each time, like you, I looked at an article to learn more and saw shenanigans going on. With Palin, the vile stuff going on actually generated enough sympathy with me to switch me from Libertarian to Republican. As a Catholic, the anti-religious POV was actually enough to enrage me, a first here on Wikipedia. I'm tolerant enough that I can happily be friends with an atheist, Jew, Muslim, Wiccan, or whatever (and count such among my friends), and leave the question of abortion to God rather than secular authorities - but the suggestion that being a Christian or saying a prayer makes you some kind of mindless zealot is infuriating. I'm a veteran of the Cold War, Bosnia, Kosovo, and both Gulf Wars. I prayed many times for affirmations that I was doing God's will, but my ultimate goal was to fulfill my oath and carry out the will of the people of the United States, that doesn't make me a Crusader. I also have a wonderful daughter who accidentally got marriage/pregnancy in the wrong order, but everything worked out and I am very proud of both her family and her career. Anyway, sorry for the screed, just trying to illustrate why these types of attacks just boomerang on the attacker...I'm sure you already know all this. With respect - Kelly ^hi! 23:30, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I loved the insight in your last note. I agree with the Watergate thing...that's where it started, and the disputed 2000 election has really fueled the insanity. I'm really intrigued by the fact that you were a possible McCain supporter on this journey - I started out with Hillary, thinking that she might bring the ability her husband had to find common ground in the country, despite his personal problems. But I don't think Bill Clinton could be elected nowadays. The attention span has grown so short that only cardboard cutouts can be nominated now..."War Hero" and "Woman" versus "Optimistic Black Guy" and "Elder Statesman". The mouth-breathers can't be bothered to turn away from E! and Cops to learn anything more. Oh, and I agree the "bailout" is a travesty against the American taxpayer. Kelly ^hi! 23:42, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'm a military vet, and your thanks means a lot to me...the gratitude of a citizen is worth more than any medal ever designed. On the other hand, if you're a Cubs fan, my Twinkies hat is off to you, because a lifetime as a Cubs fan is a far more brutal and masochistic existence than even the Navy SEALs have been able to dream up. :) No matter how things turn out this election, we need to watch Petraeus in 2012. In the military now, Petraeus-worship is at fever pitch - he saved our honor when even the Joint Chiefs were ready to throw Iraq under the bus. After all this time, there is still a lot of muttering in the ranks about the "General Betray Us" and "suspension of disbelief" things. It goes far beyond the respect for Norman Schwarzkopf and Colin Powell, and everyone since them has been non-entitites...Obama's military supporters, Wesley Clark and Merrill McPeak, are discussed with open contempt. Will be interesting to see how this plays out in a few years. Kelly ^hi! 00:04, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Heh - on 9/11/01, I was crossed between "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" (how sad, considering that was originally published by The Atlantic, who is now publishing Andrew Sullivan's Trig Truther screeds) and "I Won't Back Down". But "American Tune" is equally motivating, and appropriate. I will admit, however, that I am working out to "Barracuda" these days. God bless you, Bugs - we'll all come out OK in the end. Kelly ^hi! 00:30, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I had forgotten about the Beach Boys thing! I just remember Reagan, John Cougar (!), and "Pink Houses" - was that 1984? Oh, I missed your earlier note - in a certain youthful indiscretion, I voted for a certain entertaining looney in 1992. So I share the blame for the degeneration of the Republic. :) (I think I was actually voting for the Dana Carvey impersonation of Ross Perot, instead of Perot himself.) Of course, I voted for Michael Badnarik in 2004, so I think my overall influence on our history has been minimal. :) On a serious note, I was born after JFK's death, and am slightly too young to have clear memories of the RFK or MLK assassinations and the Apollo 11 landing...though the historic impact of those events was solidly drilled into me by my FDR-Democrat grandparents and my JFK-Democrat parents. Kelly ^hi! 00:56, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I totally agree with your last post...it sounds like you are maybe 1/2 to 1 generation ahead of me (I was born not long after the JFK assassination, and I watched Cronkite assiduously as a little kid because my Dad was in Vietnam). Watt was a joke, totally agreed. I do remember that Reagan was a FDR Democrat due to his "the party left me" quote...but FDR was revered in my family as well, my grandfather worked for the WPA and walked 22 miles to vote for him in 1932. Speaking of FDR, did you know he was on television in 1929? I suppose if you had an experimental television receiver in 1929, you could have seen FDR and thought "Who is this guy, and where is President Hoover?" :) Actually, that reminds me that the most fun I've ever had on Wikipedia is searching the Library of Congress for early-20th-century public domain photos and uploading them to appropriate articles, I think I'll go back to that. All my best - Kelly ^hi! 01:27, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Talk page stalker at work

Yeah, I know, I'm terrible -- I was reading your extremely interesting conversation with Kelly (I have lots to say too about Apollo 11, JFK, etc. -- as you probably have figured out, I'm not a kid). This might interest you, since I noticed you said "... Palin has been hyped like there's no tomorrow. It's also a convenient distraction from the 700 billion dollar invoice that the mortgage companies are trying to send to the American public with the help of Mr. Bush." Do a little curve-fitting to those stats. It's illuminating stuff: Wikipedia page counts have an astonishing correlation to the interest level in a topic among the population; it can be quite enlightening to check different pages on that site, if you haven't done it yet. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 01:51, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Stalking, eh? Be careful, or I'll turn you into an admin. Oops, I forgot, you are an admin. Well, is my face red-white-and-blue, or what? No surprise at all there about the stats. Contrast that with this, which I'm just pleased has a few measly hits: [13] Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:06, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Come on Bugs..

let's not start the fire up again, if Jossi and Kelly continue to snipe at each other, then we have an issue. Let's just redact that section and wait and see? SirFozzie (talk) 05:17, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Everyone is determined to have the last word, it seems. Well, I don't know what else to say. Kelly's practically begging for a reblock, but some others are trying to see if they can push Kelly over that edge. Everyone needs to stop it and hit the hay. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:20, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Cubs Win flag

I have added a lot of images. I just need one from the infield seats of the scoreboard. If you can find anything let me know.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 08:18, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

If worse comes to worse, I could use http://www.flickr.com/photos/falsecognate/2439409291/ , but it does not have all the rest of the national league teams.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 08:21, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I mean pictures like the following:

1. http://www.flickr.com/photos/trainboy03/2744578019/
2. http://www.flickr.com/photos/trainboy03/2380124137/

Why are the other teams flags visible in these photos and not the one I mentioned earlier?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:40, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey

If Kelly wants to make outrageous statements, I can make relatively mild ones commenting on her behaviour. Sure, Kelly might not like it, but really I don't particularly feel terribly upset if she takes it to heart - if anything, she should! - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 14:01, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I do understand and I also expect a high standard from admins. I think characterising the admin as hot-headed is unwise, perhaps a little inexperienced but they most definitely did the right thing in taking the block to WP:AN/I, which is really what AN was designed for.

In regards to Kelly though - I don't retract my statement and I feel that Kelly was out of line. So I said so directly to her. Was it baiting? Well, I didn't do it to bait her, but really if she makes such controversial statements, then really she should expect people to comment on that directly to her. If Kelly can't handle that (and I think she can), then she should probably refrain from the statements she makes. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 14:38, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Sure, it might be closed. I'll still make that comment, and I stand by it. I've watched Kelly's behaviour for a long time, and this is really par for course. Like I say, I don't feel any regret in the statement I made. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 14:39, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Like I say, I wasn't baiting her. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 14:59, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, you can believe that if you want I guess, but like I have said, I stand by my comments. Kelly should not have made the statement she made, and I feel well within my rights to say something. Such uncivil behaviour deserves a fairly mild talk page comment. And now, if you please, I'm going to bed. Good night! - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 15:09, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I have insomnia... anyway, I just want to note that if you haven't followed Kelly's exploits, when I left for an extended wikibreak, Kelly was doing exactly the same things. You might think the problems are over, but I haven't seen where Kelly has apologised or admitted that she did the wrong thing. Perhaps you could provide me with the diff? - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 16:09, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Have you considered that I made one comment, which I was going to let her respond to directly until you decided that you would monitor her talk page? Seriously, she's an experienced editor, she knows and has been warned again and again and again about civility, yet she flaunts this regularly. As I have stated, I am not baiting her. Though again I ask - where is the diff where she admitted that she was uncivil and that her behaviour needs to change? - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 16:18, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of assume good faith, I don't really appreciate you saying I was picking a fight with Kelly. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 17:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Now that there's an ANI thread on this, let's confine our comments to that page. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:31, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Thankfully it's been archived. I stand by my comments on the thread and on her talk page. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 18:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Obviously. And be glad you didn't get blocked over this nonsense. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 18:12, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure that I would have been unblocked far faster than Kelly was. But, my goodness the irony would have been amazing to behold had that happened! - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 18:18, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the irony of it all. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 18:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Irony

Irony is an edit summary that says "Don't delete others' posts" ... when your revert deleted [14] a post by GoodDamon! (If I had a faster internet connection, I would fix it myself.) --Kralizec! (talk) 01:36, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Much to my surprise, I did not get an edit conflict when I tried to fix it ... so the deleted message has been restored [15]. --Kralizec! (talk) 01:41, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

No worries, as it was not my post you deleted. Regardless, it was easy enough to re-insert. As you said, with the high traffic at WP:AN/I, such things are bound to happen. --Kralizec! (talk) 02:50, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually as drama-filled as AN/I has been ... I thought it was pretty funny. In fact, I think it provided the only laugh-out-loud wiki moment I have had all day. Kudos to you, sir! --Kralizec! (talk) 03:25, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks much...

...for looking after my talk page. I zeroed out the drama left there to Ta bu shi blah blah or whoever, what a crock. Anyway, I am going to spend the time between now and Election Day doing things that are incontrovertibly noncontroversial...for example, I've been spending some time today locating and uploading free photos of baseball players, in your honor. ;) Best wishes - Kelly ^hi! 17:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. I did what I could. And others joined in. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 18:38, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

FYI, this was one page I forgot to unwatchlist when I disengaged from the Palin mess. I can't believe there is still stuff going on there, given the fact that whatever edits that user made have long since been refactored/subsumed. I'd recommend full protection, as the user seems to have disappeared. Kelly ^hi! 20:01, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Palin Pic

Hi, After taking into consideration the feedback from other editors regarding the Carson City image at Sarah Palin, I have created a new version with the intent of pleasing those who have contributed to the discussions. The quality of the image has been significantly improved. I would appreciate your opinion here: [[16]]. Thanks, IP75 75.25.28.167 (talk) 20:40, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Jim Hickman (1960s outfielder)

One of my all-time favorite Cubs. He was a major impact player on the Cubs of 1969 and 1970, kind of forgotten now when they talk about the Banks-Santo-Williams era. A very quiet country boy who just happened to have a knack for knocking the big bang in clutch situations from time to time. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:00, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I have been a life-long Mets fan, and I can only share my sympathies with anyone who has rooted for the Cubs. After some mediocre years with the Mets, he had a few fantastic years with the Cubs and has a place in the history of both teams. Thanks again for the note. Alansohn (talk) 02:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Darren Bragg

You think that this photo can be cropped or manipulated to use in his article? It's the only free photo of him that I can find, but I hate the way he's cut off at the edge of the picture. Kelly ^hi! 02:48, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Oops, never mind. I found another photo after all, will crop and upload later. Kelly ^hi! 12:14, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Definitely a better photo. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 13:43, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Since you're a Cubs fan, thought you might appreciate that I found some good pics of Mike Remlinger. Still digging through the .mil archives for other pics of ballplayers on USO tours. Kelly ^hi! 13:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Yeh, he covered a fair amount of ground in his career. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 13:51, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

ANI?

I will wait for the response about the fee. That way, I can present the whole story and not bits of it at a time. 903M (talk) 05:29, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Rogereeny. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:32, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Well the irony is amazing

It's annoying when you post a reasonable comment and then someone tells you to stop "baiting" the user. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 06:25, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

And I did stop. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:41, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Disgusting comment

You are clearly baiting that user. I'm seeing comments to a committed anti-abortion Christian like "There has been more evil, more mass murder conducted in the name of Christianity than is possible to tabulate." I can't believe you had such a massive go at me for one comment on Kelly's page and yet you are engaging in far worse behaviour! - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 06:33, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I am convinced that that user is a troll or someone funnin' us. So I'm just funnin' him back. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:40, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I am a Christian, and I don't find your comment very funny at all. May I refer you to our very well defined rules on assuming good faith? And may I state for the record that you might have found that a very funny comment, but I see that as baiting and extremely offensive to other editors like myself. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 07:14, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

That user went after an admin candidate for having a lyric from "Imagine" in a userbox. That struck me as an attempt at humor, but I wanted to learn more about what that guy was about. Meanwhile, if you don't know about the mass murder committed in the name of religions of all kinds (including Christianity), maybe you should go study your history instead of worrying about trivia sections in baseball articles. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:21, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

So, you thought that it was OK to go after the editor and try to cause them a bit of trouble? I find this interesting in light of the comments you made to me on Kelly's talk page.

I should note that I studied church history for six months, and I am well aware of many terrible things that occured in history in general. You were baiting the user, I advise you to stop doing this, and also advise you to stop making inflammatory comments like the one that I mentioned above. Just remember, the editor may well believe that abortion is murder, your joking might have seemed very offensive and as you decided that you don't like "baiting" comments (even when they might be justified) then I'd suggest you look into your own comments.

As for your comments advising me I'm wasting my time on articles on Baseball, for your information I am currently trying to merge so called trivia from all tagged articles as I am part of the the trivia cleanup Wikiproject. Hardly think your last comment was helpful, or even called for. I'll continue to try to improve articles on Wikipedia as best I can, this is the way I've chosen to contribute so I'm not going to stop just because you don't like me. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 07:29, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I already stopped talking to that user. I'm very glad to obey an order to stop talking to someone that comes after I've already stopped talking to them. P.S. I happen to believe that abortion is murder. As is warfare and capital punishment. That's what my Christian parents and my church taught me. So there. As far as liking you, I don't know you, so liking or disliking does not figure into it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:41, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

It was not an order, it was a suggestion, and quite a reasonable one at that. Does your response mean that you will bait another user like this in future, if you feel they are a troll? - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 07:49, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Being a lifelong Cubs fan, I try to avoid predicting the future. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:55, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

lol! I'll leave it at that. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 08:13, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

If I might interject, yes, it is true that many mass murders have been committed in the name of religion, including Christianity. However, let's not forget that many millions were killed in the last century under the atheistic regimes of Lenin, Stalin, and Mao. There's enough bad to go around to just for about any kind of belief. Just saying. - BillCJ (talk) 08:06, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Marxism is its own kind of religion. The bottom line is that when people want to commit mass murder, or murder on any scale, they will find ways to justify it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 08:09, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Common sense

I think common sense would indicate that the editor accidently typed in his signature twice. Entirely innocent, nobody is going to get annoyed. Sheesh! - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 09:10, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

anon user 76.24.142.154

I just noticed this user, and don't really have time to look into it properly, but since you've had some experience with his edits, I thought I'd bring it to your attention. It looks to me like a fair percentage of his recent edits are introducing errors into statistics, Ed Delahanty and Hit by pitch for example. I'd normally dig deeper and either AIV him or contact the admin who previously blocked him, if necessary, but I'm got to soon vanish for the day. If you have time, you might want to look into it more. Majorclanger (talk) 12:41, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Letters from fans

BASEBALLS BUGS IS AN UGLY IGNORANT FOOL —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.49.166.166 (talk) 23:09, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

That may be, but on the plus side they know how to use the caps lock key. I'm not sure where that leaves you... - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 14:16, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

ANI Thread needs attention

Could you please look at this thread? Thanks, ~ Troy (talk) 21:13, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

main page DYK edits

On 28 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cubs Win flag, 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.

Thanks for your assistance in getting this page up and running. Be advised I have reversed the following main page edits: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cubs_Win_flag&diff=241671989&oldid=241668451 --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:22, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

thanks

Thanks for your opinions re: Sarah Palin. You might possibly want to check out Talk:Sarah Palin as one of the issues I hoped was gone has re-arisen. And don't write off a White Sox - Cubs series yet! Dave Collect (talk) 20:59, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Today's Liebman sock

In view of your plans to possibly retire, a Cubs-White Sox World Series (or any Series involving the Cubs) would be agood way to go out --Davey Collect (talk) 21:15, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Note that someone is apparently seeking to either stalk me, or just annoy me. The above "user" is someone's sockpuppet, and ought to be slapped down. Thanks! Dave Collect (talk) 11:40, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

It's either User:Ron liebman, a banned user who keeps turning up using that schtick, or it's (ironically) someone imitating Liebman. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 12:39, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

User:ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ

Bugs, I take a complaint to you now with this accusation by the above-mentioned user accusing me of being a sockpuppet of another user based solely on what he sees on my userpage → "This page intentionally left blank.", which is according to him similar to another user going by the name of Dave whom he suspects is giving him a hard time now.

Against the same user, it is noted at ANI that he is suspected of operating several sock accounts which I have now tagged as sock in response to his tagging of me being a sock.

Also, the accuser is noted for being disruptive and uncivil on several of his edits with comments to others. I wash my hands off this guy and shall leave the accuser now in your judgement. --Dave1185 (talk) 21:13, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

apparently not. i request an admin run an ip trace on all of the sockpuppets i accused dave of being.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 21:40, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Dave1185 AKA David873 AKA 122.105.149.69

all 3 are the same disruptive editor. User:David873 has been blocked already, and had exactl y the same "This page intentionally left blank." on his page.

plus if you look at the edit history of the page of User:Nefbmn, he posted the EXACT SAME sockpuppetry accusation as David873.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 21:20, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Please note

I am not an admin. Y'all need to take your concerns to WP:ANI. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:50, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

My reaction? So far my opinions of "administrators" who take pains to point their status out is underwhelming. Give me honest folks any day who desire no titles nor pomp! And the White Sox lost today. Collect (talk) 02:19, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Ironically, Tampa Bay kept them honest. I suspect that the Rays are this year's team of destiny. But I've been wrong about that before. :) Regarding admins, they come in all stripes. Find a few good ones that are trustworthy and whose philosophy is similar to yours. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:27, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Alas, I am such a dang straight arrow that no one seems to be willing to stand up for what is right at times. Meanwhile, take a gander at the "comments" left on my talk page if you want a laugh! At least the Cubs are alive for you! Collect (talk) 17:54, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

October 2008

Please do not use talk pages such as Talk:Steve Fossett for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article. They are not to be used as a forum or chat room. See here for more information. Thank you. Danorton (talk) 00:13, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Caution: Above user lacks a sense of humor. Tread on eggs. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:17, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Please do not attack other editors. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Danorton (talk) 00:24, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Making fun of your edits is not a personal attack. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:24, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Welcome!

Welcome! AdjustShift (talk) 13:19, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Hahahaha! That was funny! AdjustShift (talk) 13:50, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I welcomed you because you thanked me. You've contributed for a long time! Would you like to become an admin? AdjustShift (talk) 14:07, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

That was a long reply, but I read everything you wrote! :-) You are still quite young, so you can wait. I've read you post on WP:ANB/I and they are quite good. I believe you have the right temperament to become an admin. Someday you will become an admin. Have a nice day! :-) AdjustShift (talk) 14:31, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

According to your userpage, you are only 13 years old. So you are young! :-) AdjustShift (talk) 14:47, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

You are thirteen and a half years old! That means you are still quite young. Even young Wikipedia admins are 17 or 18. So you've time. You should be proud of achieving so much on Wikipedia so soon! :-) So you got your Wikipedia name from the cartoon Baseball Bugs! It's a cool name. My Wikipedia name "AdjustShift" comes from my Casio watch! Have a nice day! :-) AdjustShift (talk) 15:04, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, so you are older! :-) AdjustShift (talk) 15:18, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

:-) AdjustShift (talk) 15:25, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello, madman!

Saw your username and just HAD to look at your userpage. Looked. HAD to comment. :)

I'm a Bugs Bunny fan and a Wikipedia editor (well, copyeditor mainly), and I love stuff like this. But wait. Am I addressing you, or your sockpuppet? Or maybe your sockpuppet's sockpuppet's sockpuppet... Would it save time if I just gave up and went mad now?

Rosuav (talk) 03:12, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

All the above. And don't let me stand in your way. 0:) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Diskettes? Yep. Remember them, have a pile of them, and occasionally use them. 3.5" and 5.25" but not 8". I'm young though; the oldest computer I have - which is older than me - does have a hard drive. I never used the dual-floppy models. But I learned to program in BASIC, then assembly language, in 640KB minus however much DOS was using at the time, and I think it was good education. Today I write programs on 32-bit systems with upwards of a gig of RAM, but I still think in terms of coding efficiently.

Haha. The Merrie Melodies theme just came up in my MIDI playlist. How appropriate! Rosuav (talk) 03:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

There's a number of computers still around that, though they'll happily use USB devices once booted, won't boot anything other than hard disk, floppy disk, or CD (and on some, not even the latter). Doing a BIOS update on those computers requires the use of a floppy. It's a VERY narrow sectional use... for the rest, I think floppies are ever so slightly useless :) Rosuav (talk) 03:36, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

If you ever run for adminship, I'll nominate you a trillion times over. You are more mature than most users around here (and some of them are like, decades older than you), for I have yet to find a talk page where you lose your temper in moments of being challenged. It's very hard to believe you're only 13 considering your maturity and intelligence, because let's be honest, the knowledge most kids your age have is about the current status of Heidi Montag and Spencer Pratt's relationship. And I bet you they couldn't even locate their homeland on a map, either. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 03:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Crackthewhip775 (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Here's a cookie for not being an American idiot (which is quite rare in people under 30 nowadays). Green Day would be proud. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 04:04, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you both for your support and your willingness to go along with my 13 1/2 years old joke. I'm not interested in being an admin. That's not an adventure, it's a job. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:30, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

You mean you're not 13? --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 02:11, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Thirteen and a half. My user page says that, so it must be true, right? Righty-right-right? :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:13, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

As long as you're not some 30 year-old pretending to be a teenager.:) --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 02:41, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I am definitely not 30 years old. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:47, 8 October 2008 (UTC) I am also strongly considering imminent retirement. - Baseball Bugs, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Recent comment on ANI

You mentioned something about letting a user go far enough so that we can really block him good. You may want to read this: WP:GIANTDICK. Its mildly entertaining and totally applicable here... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:38, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, Trudat! :It's one of the more enjoyable aspects of being a Wikipedia admin is watching people "hoist themselves on their own petard". I can't count the number of times that someone's posting at WP:ANI has led to their OWN block... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:00, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Liebman

I have one unusual observation. Ron Liebman is considered one of the most reliable and most respected researchers in the baseball community (surprisingly, perhaps) and is one of the few whose name is somewhat recognized bythe general public, along with people like Bill James, Bob McConnell, Pete Palmer, David Vincent, and Steve Hirdt - along with the deceased SABR founder Bob Davids. Yet the main thing I learned from him in his time on Wikipedia is the meaning of the term "bezzler." Unusual indeed. - Sincerely, Baseball Bugs (10/9/2008) UTC --Mr. Baseball Bugs (talk) 21:56, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I'm told by reliable sources that SABR considers Liebman to be a jerk... and a "bezzler". Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:06, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm assuming you're a fan...

The line at the end of the cartoon: "That's what the man said, you heard what he said, he said that!" is just identified in Baseball Bugs as a popular line from a radio show. Would you happen to know which one? The line is also used in The Big Sleep (1946). Cheers, Postdlf (talk) 03:13, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Verrry interesting. I'll have to look into that. Thanks for the tip! Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:18, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial

Since you've been around a while, I won't template you. But in this edit, did the statement you made come from a source, or is "It was also noted" referring to you noting it (which would be unsourced original research)? I looked in the sources immediately preceding and after your edit and found nothing about what you added. Thank you. Ward3001 (talk) 16:15, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Some critic pointed it out. I would have to find out which one. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 16:22, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Without citing the critic, it should not have been added per WP:V and WP:NOR. I have reverted it. Thanks. Ward3001 (talk) 18:04, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Maybe I should have simply said that Elliott's name begins with E and ends with T. That's verifiable.

Verifiable, yes. But to make it notable for a Themes section (i.e., more than just plot summary, and in that case it would be trivial), it requires a source. Look at any film article that has been identified as a good article or a featured article (E.T. is one of those; another one is Pulp Fiction (film)), and you will see any discussion of themes, criticism, etc. is well-sourced, not just an observation by the Wikipedia editor. My basic point here is this: it is inappropriate for you to put it in the article anywhere except plot summary (and then it's trivial) without a source. Ward3001 (talk) 19:54, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Here's another blog, from sometime last spring, where this is referenced a little more than halfway down. [17] So it's not "original research" and it's not particularly POV-pushing. You could still argue for "trivial", though. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:32, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I never said it is POV-pushing, just that it's POV if it doesn't have a citation from a reliable source. Blogs are not acceptable sources on Wikipedia. With a little help from someone with computer skills (or maybe not), a third-grader could create a blog. Ward3001 (talk) 20:40, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Your edit summary said it was POV. It is not POV to state that E and T are Elliott's first and last initials. Nor is it original research, obviously. Your best argument is that it's trivial. Even if Roger Ebert had said it, it could still be argued to be trivial. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:45, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia policies are very clear on these matters and speak for themselves:

• "Citing sources and avoiding original research are inextricably linked: to demonstrate that you are not presenting original research, you must cite reliable sources."
• "Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, blogs, knols, forum postings, and similar sources are largely not acceptable".
• "We only publish the opinions of reliable authors, and not the opinions of Wikipedians who have read and interpreted primary source material for themselves".
• "All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), representing fairly, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources".

The information in your edit was not published from a reliable source and was your point of view (or a synthesis of the point of view of an unreliable source, making it POV), thereby making it original research.

You didn't just say that Elliot's initials are E.T. You placed it in a Themes (thus interpretation) section and implied that it is more than your opinion by stating, "It was also noted".

I don't want to belabor this point and debate endlessly about it, so I'll end my side of this discussion by simply stating that if you re-add the statement to the article, it needs a citation to a reliable source that is not a blog. Thanks. Happy editing. Ward3001 (talk) 21:02, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

If Roger Ebert pointed it out, how would that be any more noteworthy than someone in a blog?: Because Roger Ebert is a reliable source and a blog isn't. That's my last word on the matter. Ward3001 (talk) 21:21, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Your original complaint was "unsourced POV". So if I cited Ebert or whoever, that would be "sourced POV". Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:53, 12 October 2008 (UTC): And sourced POV is perfectly acceptable in a Themes or Criticisms or Reception section of a film article. Let me repeat myself (unfortuntatey): Look at film articles that are or have been Good articles or Featured articles. You will see generous amounts of sourced opinions from legitimate critics (i.e., reliable sources). What you will not see (unless it has been added inappropriately, as you did) is unsourced POV or POV from a blog.
Now, I don't care to argue any further just for the sake of argument, which is what this discussion has degenerated into. I have repeatedly pointed out Wikipedia policies (which apparently you understand less than I thought you did), and you insist on coming back with inadequate retorts over and over again, requiring me to again provide you more and more detail about very clear Wikipedia policies. So if you wish to continue tendentious debates about the finer points of Wikipedia's policies, please take them up on the talk pages for WP:RS, WP:V, WP:NPOV, WP:MOSFILM, or the talk page to E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial‎, not on my talk page. If you add another pointless statement on my talk page, or if you re-add the statement about Elliot's initials either unsourced or sourced to a blog, I will simply copy this entire discussion to Talk: E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial‎ and let you try to argue endlessly with the rest of the Wikipedia community and see where that gets you. Goodbye. Ward3001 (talk) 23:18, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

E.T. in Star Wars

There is an E.T. in one of the Star Wars prequels. That IP address said it was Star Wars I, but I'm not totally sure that's correct. I'm thinking it was II. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:28, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

No, it was I. [18] It wasn't E.T. himself, as such, it was a group of E.T.-like creatures. A typical inside-reference for Lucas, such as putting R2-D2 and C-3PO on the wall of the Well of Souls in Raiders of the Lost Ark, or putting variations on TXH 1138 in practically every film with his stamp on it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:32, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I've known that for a long time. If you'll notice, the reason I reverted is that it was not sourced. This information has been added to the E.T. article dozens of times, but no one ever sources it. And I'm not going to do the sourcing for someone else too lazy to do it. (By the way, the Nitpicker source is not a reliable source because anyone can add information and it has no editorial control. But let's not get into another endless debate again. If you wish to take this up further, please do it on the E.T. talk page.). Ward3001 (talk) 01:25, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

The film itself is the source. If an on-screen fact is unambiguous, no other source is required. So, the only question is, is it clear that there are E.T.-like creatures in the Imperial Senate chamber? Or is there some ambiguity about it? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:54, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

That's in contrast to the Star Wars characters on the walls in Raiders, for example. It's not visible on-screen, it's only known because it was discussed in the "making of" book. So the film can't be a source for that. But if the E.T.-clones are clear and unambiguous in Star Wars I, then no external citation is required. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:56, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

As I told you, I'm not playing your game of endless debates any more. This discussion has been copied to the E.T. talk page. Take it up there instead of my talk page. Ward3001 (talk) 03:08, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Moving the discussion to the E.T. page is fine, provided you actually address the question instead of moving it there just so you can ignore it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:13, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

It's already moved. I've tried to be polite about this. But let me explain one damn thing to you. No editor, myself or anyone else, is obligated to jump to your demands. And you do have an obligation to cooperate with the Wikipedia community on the E.T. talk page before adding any unsourced information. Now, kindly add any additional comments to the E.T. talk page. If you add more to my talk page, bear in mind there is something known as "wikistalking", and I will not hesitate to make a WP:ANI report. Ward3001 (talk) 03:20, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Yankees

I noticed the melee (?) concerning "official names" of the Yankees. The New York Times in 1909 ran articles apparently using both names in the same article. I am curious, however, as to whether the "New York Highlanders" owed their name to the Civil War regiment with the same name? Thanks. Collect (talk) 01:49, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Second warning

Cease and desist from adding comments about E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial‎ to my talk page. Take up your concerns on Talk:E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial‎. If you continue making such comments on my talk page, I will make a report at WP:ANI. Ward3001 (talk) 03:33, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Saw your message on Alientraveller's talk page. FYI, I am pretty sure that the presence of E.T. in that Star Wars film has been noted by secondary sources. If you could find one of them, neither of you would have to worry about interpretation. It may be a matter of how important the detail is. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 04:05, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

• Bloom, David (1999-06-13). "Calling the shots". Los Angeles Daily News.

“ As the film neared its completion, Lucas showed a rough cut to buddy Steven Spielberg, whose own directorial credits include the beloved alien-in-Chatsworth tale, E.T. The Extraterrestrial.

Spielberg and Lucas decided it might be fun to have E.T. in the Galactic Senate, so in March, just two months before the film was supposed to hit theaters, the effects guys got a call.

'So we put E.T . in one shot and Steven said, "I couldn't see it," so we added him bigger in another shot,' said visual-effects supervisor Scott Squires, winner of an Oscar for technical achievement and twice nominated for other Oscars on Dragonheart and The Mask.

Want to spot the former Valley alien now that he's made it to the big time? Look lower left in the wide shots. But it may take a magnifying glass and the jog-shuttle control on your DVD months from now to get a good look.

”

Hope that helps. :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 04:30, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

It's a newspaper article that I retrieved from my university's subscription-only database... actually, I found an online copy. Should cover your bases. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 04:38, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

No problem. :) I wouldn't mind working on the Star Wars film articles, but I hesitate to get involved with something that has been processed so many times before (seeing how they were FAs and not anymore and FAs again...) Let me know if you need help researching anything. I'm working on my pet project Fight Club, and I have a ridiculous amount of resources to use in my sandbox. I may conceive of a Resources page for WP:FILM so all editors can at least know where to start researching... :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 04:44, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

How about this, man...

• Wuntch, Philip (1985-07-19). "Return of E.T.". The Dallas Morning News.

“ The spontaneity of E.T .'s and Elliott Taylor's first flight through the Halloween night is as thrilling as remembered, and it makes us hungry for what Spielberg might accomplish in the flying scenes of his long-proposed version of Peter Pan. (Incidentally, Elliott's last name is mumbled only briefly in the film, but the symbolism of the initials is obvious.) ”

Not quite what you wanted, but probably a better connection! :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 04:55, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Passed Ball

I noticed that you updated why a passed ball is not considered an error here: [19]. A couple of buddies and I have been wondering about this for a while, and would like to know if your reasoning was pulled from a source. If so, can you let us know? This will help us out a TON! Acedriven - 2008-10-14 18:29 UTC

I was applying pure, geometric logic. If the explanation is doubtful, remove it and just leave the fact that PB's and WP's are not considered to be errors. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 18:50, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Award winning IP

Hey there. It was an interesting debate, actually, and not one that I was aware of, so I'll thank the IP for that, but as soon as anyone starts linking to talk pages and not project pages, I'm usually pretty sure it's a POV pusher, especially when it's an IP. --Ged UK (talk) 09:55, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Aye. I'll have a look over his edits at some point if a get a chance. --Ged UK (talk) 10:02, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Any Python references are always good! --Ged UK (talk) 10:10, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Certainly, hiding behind a single bush never works.  :) --Ged UK (talk) 10:20, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I've seen the traceroute result on this before, sometime in the last two days. I too am quite suspicious about this. I couldn't tell if someone who was in that archived discussion had been subsequently banned for something, but in any case, I plan on reverting this until a consensus is formed on each article. No problem. Wildhartlivie (talk) 10:25, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

That's a terrible pun! Well done! --Ged UK (talk) 10:25, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) I don't mind doing it, I hate to have someone unilaterally (gee, I couldn't believe you chose that word too) deciding a policy exists in the obvious absence of one, then cite it. It borders on vandalism, because he or she knows there was no determination. 3RR is very easy to violate if one decides to fight the same battle across the entire site. Wildhartlivie (talk) 10:32, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Go for it. I'd agree it's vandalism. That said, so far the IP hasn't reverted my revision to James Cagney so 3RR probably won't come into it. And if it does, you've got a good argument it's vandalism. --Ged UK (talk) 10:37, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Boiling it down from that discussion, I see these users and some dates:

User:FuriousFreddy 16:06, 7 April 2007 (UTC) - Has never been blocked.

User:Ronz 16:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC) - One short block in December 2007.

User:Extraordinary Machine 15:09, 9 April 2007 (UTC) - Has never been blocked.

User:Dreftymac 18:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC) - Has never been blocked.

User:WikiLeon 18:37, 15 June 2007 (UTC) - Has never been blocked.

User:SigPig 22:10, 15 June 2007 (UTC) - Has never been blocked.

User:Spellcast 13:15, 4 July 2007 (UTC) - Has never been blocked.

User:TimVickers 14:23, 4 July 2007 (UTC) - Has never been blocked.

User:17Drew 19:40, 28 July 2007 (UTC) - Has never been blocked. Has multi-accounts within rules.

User:Abecedare 20:32, 28 July 2007 (UTC) - Has never been blocked.

User:Oskarg956 05:06, 13 September 2007 (UTC) - Has never been blocked.

It's also funny that the article is from a year ago, yet this new IP address found it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 10:38, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

No, unilateral wasn't all that, but we have a consensus that it was unilateral. I'd only checked FuriousFreddy and Extraordinary Machine - I was looking at those who seemed to be arguing against awards being important (well, you know...). What annoys me is that he or she said it was wrong to heap accolades on Gregory Peck!!! GREGORY PECK!!!! One can't pile enough accolades in his lead. Or... is that POV? :) Wildhartlivie (talk) 10:50, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Rollosmokes

Can anyone be as stupid as User:Rollosmokes pretends to be? Lantana11 (talk) 04:05, 18 October 2008 (UTC)Lantana11Lantana11 (talk) 04:05, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: User: Rollosmokes

Hey, Baseball Bugs--thanks for your message. I really can't believe that one user could get me so motivated to rant, but from the first time I crossed paths with the guy I knew there was something different going on here, and that it wouldn't be pleasant. I have no idea why he had chosen to go this route, but there may be no turning back. And it is sad, because intelligence is always good to have on hand. I have not the slightest idea why the "CW" business resulted in such a meltdown; it probably would have happened sooner or later on any subject. I think many of us have some ego involved with our editing, and that's why I indeed left him some less-than-complimentary messages (and removed some of them after seeing them in the brighter light of reason). He took me completely out of my normal character. Anyway, Wiki will go on quite well...all the best and happy editing. Lantana11 (talk) 18:38, 18 October 2008 (UTC)Lantana11Lantana11 (talk) 18:38, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:James Cagney in Yankee Doodle Dandy trailer.JPG

Image Copyright problem

Hi Baseball Bugs!
We thank you for uploading Image:James Cagney in Yankee Doodle Dandy trailer.JPG, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a copyright tag, it may be deleted by an Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a copyright tag to the image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation.
This message is from a robot.

--John Bot III (talk) 02:56, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

That was a test. Delete it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:26, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

You can remove this now, it has no meaning since it was a test :) CWii_{(Talk|Contribs)} 04:07, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I'll keep it. I never throw anything away. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:35, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Orlando Cepeda

Could you please take a look at this article's history and give a uninvolved opinion? The thing is that there is this kid removing a chunk of the lead, I restored it twice but he has already thrown the "hey don't be an asshole" line at me, so I'm fairly sure that he's ready for an edit war if necessary. The kid is a Yankees fan, so you can see why his attitude doesn't surprise me at all ;-) - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:46, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Dont waste your time responding to this guy hes an idiot--Yankees10 13:55, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I'll decide what to do. I take orders from no one. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 13:59, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I'm not giving any orders, were cool, im just confused on why this guy is being a jerk for no reason--Yankees10 22:18, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I have not looked into the dispute yet, so I can't comment either way. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:25, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

=={Retirement?}== Good luck if you go ahead with your planned retirement. --Couilaud (talk) 23:42, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

The above is another Liebman hoax. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:44, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

RE:Another Ron Liebman sock

Thanks for the heads up. By the way, he guessed wrong - my name is not Mike ! -- No Guru (talk) 16:48, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Boston Red Sox

The Red Sox are currently in negotiations with the city of Fort Myers for a new spring facility. It is the latest, most current news on the team, and I can't understand why you would remove that.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 10:03, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

The Boston Red Sox entry was over 100,000 bytes before I began editing it. Check the article's history if you don't believe me. I shortened it to the 93,000 byte range by removing redundancy and by making the facts more concise. I think the article is better for my work, and I'm a METS FAN.

There is no question that 2 years from now "The Sarasota Curse" should not be part of the Red Sox's Wikipedia entry. For right now, it is the current news on the team.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 10:36, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism warning

Stop vandalizing or you will be blocked. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 12:10, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

The above was a test. Seems that I have to prefix "User talk:" on the warnings now. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 12:11, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Query on 99.207.98.92

Hello. I am trying to get a handle on what happened with 99.207.98.92 (talk · contribs · block log). Since the IP's last edit was at 13:21, it appears that they listened to their 13:24 warning and stopped vandalizing Wikipedia. However I am not sure why you then issued another warning at 13:25, then reported the now inactive IP to AIV at 13:26. Thank you for your time, Kralizec! (talk) 18:58, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Two suspicious usernames

Please have a look at WP:UAA#User-reported when you have a moment. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 19:57, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Regarding The Election

I am not a reactionary Republican or a bigot! I am voting or Barack Obama. (originally posted on October 27, 2008) In fact, I am a moderate progressive Democrat. With the World Series now over, I will revisit my proposed retirement plans after the Presidential Election. Sincerely, Baseball Bugs. --The Baseball Bugs (talk) 20:07, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Another Liebman sock. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:24, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protection

I've semi-protected your talk page since Ron Liebman keeps coming here with various sockpuppets claiming that you're going to retire. The guy just doesn't quit, does he?

By the way, you should think about becoming an admin some day. I think you're already involved enough at WP:AN/I and other admin-ish areas that you could do it well. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 20:33, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

AfD on 2008 attack at Beijing Drum Tower during Olympics

You have previously contributed to the debate on the article, and may like to express your views on the deletion of this article here. Ohconfucius (talk) 02:00, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Two suspicious usernames

I thought you might have been online at the time, but I guess I should have posted a permanent link so you could see what I was talking about. This is what I wanted you to see so we could get your opinion, but it's been taken care of since. Cheers! Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 13:17, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

It is to laugh

[20] Of course it's not a sock, b/c he says it isn't. *lol*

Sox New Deal

The Red sox signed a new deal with Fort Myers today, I added that to their Wikipedia entry and removed the Sarasota Curse as I planned to do all along.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 22:56, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Mel Blanc/Hiawatha edit

Noted your clarifying restoration of the name "Hiawatha" to the list of characters voiced by Mel Blanc. Thanks. IIRC, that was the one that ended with the Native American saying he was the last Mohican and Bugs pointing out a stork carrying a baby that looks like Hi, who faints, then sees a huge flock of the birds, each carrying an infant version of Bugs, and he faints. That "Indian" was Mel? Wow! --Ted Watson (talk) 20:51, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

The big day

Today is the day that defines history. Who you're for, by the way? (I promise I'm not trying to start a debate). --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 19:44, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm for the Cubs. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:46, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Are you cleverly dodging the question or did you think I meant something else? If you're doing the former, then I don't blame you for it, though like I said I'm not trying to bait anyone into a debate. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 20:08, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I am cleverly dodging the question. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:24, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I respect your choice. :) --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 21:18, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism Warning Scripts

I have been having problems with my Vandalism Warning scripts. Acroterion‎ said you and him had a very similar conversation about that a couple days ago. He said you found a work-around to the problem, would you mind adding that work-around to my vandalism warning scripts? I would greatly appericate it. - NeutralHomer • Talk • November 6, 2008 @ 03:11

My page isn't (I am using the same setup as you) and it isn't working either. Must be a goof in whatever MediaWiki has done. Darn! - NeutralHomer • Talk • November 6, 2008 @ 03:47

More appropriate title for 2008 attack at Beijing Drum Tower during Olympics

• I have set up a poll to vote on the new name of the article. Please go to the talk page. Ohconfucius (talk) 06:52, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Barack Obama

[21] - Um... I'm speechless. Richard Cavell (talk) 13:15, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

You seem to have a new talk page...

...courtesy of a newly established editor that is unable to edit your semi-protected page. User talk:Baseball Bugs/hello. Just thought I'd give you the heads-up. Cheers! ←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez ^{Get to know me!} / _{Talk to me!}←at≈:→ 22:02, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

I saw. And he's beating a dead horse. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:03, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Reliable

on the List of United States Presidential names you put in amazon as a source.. amazon is not a reliable source.. it's not even really a source.. and also, don't forget to put references in between <ref></ref> tags. - -' The Spook (TALK) _{(Share the Love with Barnstars)} 23:49, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

I Think it should be kept out unless it's sourced.- -' The Spook (TALK) _{(Share the Love with Barnstars)} 00:01, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, thank you

... for your willingness to engage in thoughtful dialogue! :) Wiki-Smile on you, EagleScout18 (talk) 01:20, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry

I apologize if I made you uncomfortable with the question regarding your political views. It was never my intention to make you feel that way, I was just purely curious as to who you were supporting, I wasn't trying to start something or put you in a bad position. I hope you can accept my sincerest apologies. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 04:08, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

I always support the winner. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:51, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

President-elect & Vice President elect

Hiya Bugs. Though I agree with the presumptive Presiden-elect & presumptive vice president-elect crowds; It ain't a dispute worth continuing. Afterall, one could argue that the articles United States presidential election, 1804 to United States presidential election, 2008, should be renamed United States presidential and vice presidential elections, as there's elections for both offices occuring simultaneously. GoodDay (talk) 19:59, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Eitherway, the topic will be moot after December 15th. GoodDay (talk) 20:04, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Vice President Cheney will get the honour of announcing the elections of the first African American as President of the USA & the first Catholic as Vice President. GoodDay (talk) 20:08, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Yep; out goes one old guy with foreign policy experience, in comes another. GoodDay (talk) 20:12, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

I was rooting for Bill Richardson & Tim Pawlenty to be the major party veep nominees. Hmm, maybe Biden (who'll be going on 70) won't run for re-election in 2012. GoodDay (talk) 20:53, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

IMHO, Palin's chances for the US presidency, ended on August 29th, 2008. It was a case of too fast, too soon. Similiar to the Quayle experience, one never gets a second chance to make a first impression. The AP slaughtered her (later with help from McCain campaign aides). GoodDay (talk) 21:06, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Ron Liebman

Why is he obsessed with you? If he doesn't like you, he can just do the simple task of avoiding you, which is quite easy since Wikipedia is a pretty big place. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 22:23, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Well that dude even pretended to be you, left a note on my talk page ( as Trent McCotter), claiming that you made political comments and that you would be retiring. Has this ever gone to ArbCom? --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 22:38, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Sad, very sad. Must be a teenager. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 22:48, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

SAY WHAT?!?! --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 23:52, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Infobox format

According to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (infoboxes) "The top text line should be bold and contain the full (official) name of the item. This does not need to match the article's Wikipedia title.".

Given that all former U.S. Presidents have their full name presented (i.e Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan etc). How is the removal of this standard here acceptable? Glen Twenty (talk) 22:55, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:12, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Then change it for every person ever. Get to work! Tim010987 (talk) 01:12, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Who's trolling?

You have a pretty quick trigger, go there and restore the topic. Universalsuffrage (talk) 01:38, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Another revert with no decent explanation and I'll report you. Universalsuffrage (talk) 02:28, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Knock yourself out. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:30, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, there will be no need if you can catch a breath and slow down a bit. Thanks. Universalsuffrage (talk) 02:45, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

It's junk. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:46, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps it is, then again, perhaps you should give it some more thought and examine who said what far more closely and carefully. Hope we'll have more pleasant encounters in future, best wishes and keep up the good work. Universalsuffrage (talk) 03:04, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

It's taken from a McCain attack ad on Obama. It's junk. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:10, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

You should forget the ad and the way 'Biden's clairvoyance' was used in campaign and examine it independently. Same goes for Powell's premonition too. Either way, I'm not firebrand about it; I just wanted to have a decent discussion, that’s all. Well, perhaps when things cool down a bit, if ever. Go now, deal with those trolls and vandals, but watch for friendly too. Universalsuffrage (talk) 03:22, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

It's junk from the Limbaugh school of lies and word-twisting. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:24, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Heh, we call it doublespeak back here, it's reoccurring though and I don't like it one bit because it's happening once too often. Either way, I probably wouldn’t react if not for that last take from BBC, with such emphasized ending. Perhaps you're more skillful in discerning the facts from junk than I am. Universalsuffrage (talk) 03:42, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Don't be a sap. It's just junk from a McCain attack ad. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:44, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

And Powell, do you have an opinion on that one? Universalsuffrage (talk) 03:53, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Every new President gets challenges. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:54, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, but you must admit, usually, we don't have dates attached to it in clairvoyant manner. Universalsuffrage (talk) 03:58, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

You must be a Brit, and didn't see that ad running on American TV. It's not clairvoyance, it's word-twisting junk. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:01, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I haven’t seen the ad indeed, but I'm refereeing to the interview in which Powell endorsed Obama.

‘There’s gonna be a crisis come along on the 21st or 22nd of January that we don’t even know about right now’. Some call it cryptic. Universalsuffrage (talk) 04:06, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I'd call it "Colin Powell trying to get a job in the new administration." Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:07, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, you seem to be into it, all right then, I'll take your word on it. It might be nothing but fodder. Thanks for patience, it was somewhat enlightening exchange. Universalsuffrage (talk) 04:11, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Keep in mind that Powell said there were WMD's in Iraq, so his predictive capabilities are subject to question. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:14, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Templates at Barack Obama & Joe Biden

Ah come on, Bugs. I could understand having those Templates there, if they were called Presidents of the United States & the President-elect, Vice Presidents of the United States & the Vice President-elect. But that not what the Templates are called. GoodDay (talk) 02:05, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

No? Oh well, at least I've mentioned it on the respective articles. GoodDay (talk) 02:11, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

List of Vice Presidents of the United States

Hiya Bugs. I'm glad you pointed out numbering terms at List of Presidents of the United States article. It made me check the VP counterpart page & wow, the date corrections I had to make there. GoodDay (talk) 00:06, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

2013

I'm in a dispute at that article, concerning the date of the US Presidential Inauguration. GoodDay (talk) 19:40, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Be careful what you ask for. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:36, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Interesting prospective

Ok, this one make me laugh a little :-D Digital^Ninja 04:19, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

The talk page has already turned into a circus, so some added clowning seemed to fit. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:22, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm too tired!

I am way too tired to debate with Everyme right now and I am getting extremely tired of that user's high handed debating style. (I.E. I know the rules way better then you so shut up and stay in your corner!) So I am going to be quiet before I say something stupid in that debate. I've said my piece and even tried a compromise version which Everyme shot down as a "Strawman" argument and that I should stop distracting the discussion. (On a side note I am getting really exhausted of that user bandying around all the policies like we don't know them!) You know where I stand and what I am worried around. Thanks for letting me vent on your talk page! Brothejr (talk) 15:32, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

It's way too much time being spent on a couple of sentences in an article. It's obvious trolling. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:59, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

your comments on the obama talk page

I understand that you have a humorously short (and mildly gruff) way of commenting on talk pages. I often find it funny. However, sometimes your comments can be counterproductive and foster an environment where disagreements are more likely to lead to flame wars and less likely to come to compromise. I understand this because I, too, am sometimes guilty of making sarcastic or humorous comments on these boards. I would just ask that you please try and tone it down a little and not follow one or two editors arounds making jokes at their expense and calling them "trolls" or other insulting remarks.

I am making this comment here so that it is private, and just between us. Feel free to delete it after acknowledging it in a response on my talk page.LedRush (talk) 19:52, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I have had quite enough of that page, and it is now off my watch list. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 21:01, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

November 2008

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Landon1980 (talk) 04:45, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Cool your jets, son, I'm not watching that page anymore. I've jumped off your endless loop. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:46, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Calling good faith editors trolls is a personal attack. Look over NPA if you do not agree. You have been told to stop calling me a troll, now you are referring to anyone that agrees with me as a troll. This has to stop, I don't expect you to agree with me, but you could at least respect my position. Also, do not patronize me by calling me "son." Landon1980 (talk) 05:01, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

I stopped watching that page 8 hours ago. Where have you been? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:06, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Is there a time limit on personal attacks? There is no need in continuing this, just please stop calling me a troll. Landon1980 (talk) 05:12, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

I told you, I stopped anything to do with that page at least 8 hours ago. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:16, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

What does that have to do with you calling me a troll? I don't care if it was 100 hours ago, it's still a personal attack and they are prohibited. With your record of personal attacks you really should consider stopping. Landon1980 (talk) 05:19, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

I stopped 8 hours ago. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:22, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

8 1/2 hours now. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:34, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Landon, what the fuck's your problem with letting things go. He hasn't said anything. But with this behavior does look an awful lot like trolling. Grsz^{11 →Review!} 05:22, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

You sure have tons of room to accuse someone of not letting something go. The same goes for you, you need to be civil. Calling me a troll is a personal attack, he even implied that anyone agreeing with me is a troll. You act as if I'm the only one replying. I reply when I get a reply. Landon1980 (talk) 05:29, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

By the way, why do you follow my contribs so often? You sure do have an interest in me for whatever reason. Would you like my number, or we can chat if you'd like, I have a myspace. Landon1980 (talk) 05:32, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

HEY! This is a user talk page, not a dating service. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:35, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

"Get your pies for the great pie fight!" Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:34, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

HAHA at least you have a sense of humor. Landon1980 (talk) 05:38, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Obama

Sorry you've been driven away from Obama Bugs. Hopefully you'll get a few days break and then consider stopping back in. I'm this close my self, lest we let it get taken over by random kooks. Grsz^{11 →Review!} 05:37, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, ya know, it's already well on the way, which is why I stopped watching it (along with another editor asking me nicely to sist and decease). The last endless loop I got into was with a guy who kept asking the same question over and over about why the Atlanta Braves are generally regarded as having won 14 straight division titles, claiming a POV violation despite overwhelming sources supporting the conventional story (sound familiar?). In that case, ignoring him turned out to be the best approach. But at least he never went after my talk page and started asking people to call him on the phone. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:44, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Like I really want one of you calling me, have you not ever heard of sarcasm? I really couldn't care less what any of you think of me. He was obsessing over me so I thought that may make him stop. If you truly want me off your talk page just leave me alone. If you hadn't called me a troll I would have never came here in the first place. I won't leave any more messages on here though. Landon1980 (talk) 05:56, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

You're a fine one to be lecturing others about obsessing. Now, go, and never darken my towels again. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:58, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Cookie

Brothejr (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

I know it seems like they are coming out of the woodwork sometimes and with my last post I seemed like I was really close to being burned out. But with some sleep, a good plate of food, some good music, and watching recent events unfold on Wikipedia while I was sleeping have made me a lot happier. Hopefully after a while you'll feel/be better and less burned out!  :) Brothejr (talk) 05:56, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Sleep makes all the difference. Sleep - the most beautiful experience in life. Except baseball. And cookies. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:59, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

RE: Spoonerism

Because the point of Wikipedia is to say to readers "here is the information, here is the source," not "go find the source yourself." Furthermore, the Adlai Stevenson article is very long and it could be a pain to find the reference there (searching the page for "Apostle Paul" gets it, searching the page for "Spoonerism" does not). It's really not that difficult to copy and paste a reference. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 15:46, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Not that Adlai Stevenson is non-notable, but that the example is merely a single use of a spoonerism, whereas most of the section is on habitual uses of spoonerisms. I don't think the article should inventory every spoonerism ever used. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 16:36, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Quick question

I must have misunderstood you on the talk page. I thought you meant screwing over the voters, not the votes themselves. Bush liked around 500 thousand votes of winning the popular vote, but he still won the election. I don't know a whole lot about how it works, but when they meet on the 15 can't they vote for whoever they want? I think some states are required by law to go with the popular vote, but not very many of them. I agree that it is extremely unlikely, but it could happen, "could" being the operative word. I saw someone on the news the other night talking about the chances of this happening, and the experts say that Mccain would be likely to win popular vote yet still lose via electoral votes, not Obama. Most of them agreed there was a 10-15% chance of Mccain having an electoral victory. The very thought of it makes me nervous, surely this won't happen. Can you imagine the chaos, protests, etc. that would take place if it did happen? Landon1980 (talk) 20:18, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

That's somebody's fantasy. It won't happen. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:58, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

I hope you are right. Landon1980 (talk) 02:30, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't see how McCain would come out ahead in popular vote, since Obama was leading by several million after election night. But I haven't seen any figures lately. Regardless, Bush winning by minority popular vote in 2000 reflects the idea that the founding fathers had, about tilting in favor of a coalition of smaller states, to keep the largest states from dominating the Presidential election. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:34, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I did a poor job of explaining myself. What I meant was that even if Mccain won popular vote on the 4th that Obama would have a better chance of winning via an electoral victory than if the situation was the other way around. The way I understand it, the vast majority of states have no laws that prohibit them voting against their in-state poular vote. So pretty much the electoral college can take whichever party to victory they want. This almost never happens, but it has happened more than once. Landon1980 (talk) 03:18, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Except that the electors are party members, so they would be extremely unlikely to vote against Obama, and even less likely to vote for McCain. However, even if a few rogue electors vote for Hillary, or Dennis Kucinich, or whoever, as long as 270 of them stay in Obama's camp, he's in. And if not, the House will select another Democrat to the post. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:22, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Am vs Brit mispronunciations

Well now -- this certainly doesn't belong on the Obama page, but I couldn't resist a rejoinder: We Americans are often quite amused at the way the Brits mangle the Spanish language, e.g. Nicaragua (I suppose you know the actual pronunciation, to which the American "Nick-uh-rah-gwuh" is fairly close, then we have the Brits: "Nick-uh-rag-gyew-uh"(rag as in rag-doll, with southern Brit. accent). "Don Juan" in Americanese is "dahn-wahn" or "dahn-hwahn", but the British: "don-djew-uhn". or "herb", when we (English speakers) borrowed it from French, of course it had no "h" pronounced, and we continue the tradition here in the US, but the Brits have decided that old "h" MUST be pronounced. By the way, this "eye-rack" stuff": that's only a portion, probably a minority, from more "rural" backgrounds, but the strange British pronunciations I mention above are, as far as I know, recognised as standard in the UK. oh, I forgot "junta", Am: "hoon-tuh", Brit: "djunn-tuh" (dj is just my overly-clear way of describing the normal English j, as in Jack, i.e. not like French or German. Cheers.Jakob37 (talk) 04:20, 16 November 2008 (UTC) p.s. (I can't resist it!) "towards" has been traditionally (for centuries) been pronounced as "tords", and still is in the US, but the Brits's "too-wards" sounds like a little baby just starting to figure out the language syllable by syllable. Sorry to be so mean---as a consolation, let me say that the way I have heard English pronounced by educated speakers in the Outer Hebrides is the most beautiful accent of all.Jakob37 (talk) 04:20, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

It's nice to know that Brits mangle foreign words as well as Americans do. That Nicaragua pronuncation accounts for why the Brits who advertise the Jaguar car say "Jag-you-ahr" instead of "Jag-wahr". I usually hear it as "nicker-ahg-wuh", which could sound kind of funny to Brits who think of "knicker" as underwear. I think actual Nicaraguans pronounce it "nee-carr-AH-wah". I would say "tords" is more hickish in America. In the midwest I often hear it (and say it myself) as "t'wards". It's funny the Brits take such great care to enunciate "too-wards", while slurring words like "forecastle" into "foke-suhl" or "Worcester" into "Wooster". Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:52, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

You might find this website amusing. It gets into the pronunciation issue and other subjects: [22] Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:44, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

"Don Juan" has a specific pronunciation due to the way Byron pronounced it. Same for Shakespeare and "Jacques." And "Camino Real" for Williams. And "Worcester" in Massachusetts rhymes with "Wister." "Calais" in Maine has the olde English pronunciation of "callous." Collect (talk) 14:02, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I've heard the British pronunciation of "Don Juan" before. The proper way in Spanish is like "dohn hhuan" with the guttural "h", whereas in America (as you say) it's like a rhyme: "dahn wahn", or "Don 1". I've often said that English is the most democratic language, freely taking words from any language on earth - and then freely butchering the pronunciation. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 14:28, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

In some cases, the American pronunciation is older than the British pronunciation. Vide "Thames" which is still pronounced correctly in Connecticut, but has been reduced to "tems" in England. "Don Juan" does not have only one Spanish pronunciation <g> as Spanish has many dialects. Collect (talk) 14:42, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

National Post

Just out of curiosity, do you think the National Post is so biased and downmarket that no article form them is RS? Mattnad (talk) 15:06, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

The National Enquirer publishes many factual articles. The issue is whether the source is RS enough to be cited in an encyclopedia. As such, he NP fails. Collect (talk) 15:32, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

My motto regarding tabloids publishing factual stories is, "Even a blind hog finds an acorn now and then." Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 16:00, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'd let your eyes to the talking. Take a look at their web page - do you really think this is a supermarket tabloid? Anyway, the RS Noticeboard has so far agreed it's a reliable source (much to Collect's dismay I'm sure), but maybe not as reliable as the NYT if we had to pick ONE source (which we don't of course). Mattnad (talk) 17:40, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

You, of course, might want to read what has actually been said there <g>. Collect (talk) 17:58, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Obama and Joe the Plumber

Why does it seem like you love to inject your liberal trash into these 2 articles then revert anything that is remotley RW? Seems like your pushing a non NPOV to me. 71.57.146.112 (talk) 05:46, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

As opposed to your conservative trash. No idea what you're talking about otherwise, who/whatever you are. And I have done virtually no updating on the articles themselves, but have mostly just brought up issues on the talk page. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:24, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Funny, Bugs, I never would have pegged you as a liberal. I though you a Fox News guy!!!! Wjmummert (KA-BOOOOM!!!!) 06:02, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm somewhat liberal. But to a true liberal, I'm not much of a liberal. And I do think Lis Wiehl is hot. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:24, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

RFCU

Shouldn't this be at RFCU, not AIV? I don't know the user, is it blatant from their edits? — neuro^(talk) 20:25, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Whitey Ford

• I know it's a Ron Liebman sockpuppet. That's why I was saying "here we go again" because that's the edit he likes to make. However, I've actually looked online for his birthyear in the past, and it's listed like that on Retrosheet, on Baseball Library, Allmovie.com, and it shows up on a lot of other minor sites. The Baseball Library entry is based on the Ballplayers, a 1990 book. I actually have a hard time imagining that Ron Liebman was sockpuppeting back then. My guess is that he was thought to have been born in 1926 at one point, but it was corrected to 1928. This is the date that shows up on his online page for the National Baseball Hall of Fame and on the historical stats at MLB.com. That's verifiable proof for us. Now, I just hope that, if he dies, the media doesn't change his birthdate like it did for Tom Tresh.

• BTW, should I just delete the mention of Retrosheet claiming a 1926 birthdate? The last thing I want to do is entice a Ron Liebman sockpuppet again. -- Transaspie (talk) 21:49, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

• • It's fair to list alternate sources, just so it's clear that they are alternate sources. Note the Chief Bender article, for example. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:10, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Templated warning

Your recent edits to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that this is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. . Please indicate that Charles H. Hungadunga, of the firm Hungadunga, Hungadunga, Hungadunga, Hungadunga, and McCormick has been notified that you will not proceed.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 18:18, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll have my secretary Jamison take care of it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:09, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah, excellent.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 22:28, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

A Heads-Up, For What It's Worth or Not Worth

For your amusement, Bugs, I point out to you that some editors feel as if the Rasputin of Wikipedia, User: Rollosmokes, has in recent days days tried a new tack in attempting to make his presence known and tweak article WPIX, among others. (I figured all concerned had pissed on his set fires long ago.) He quite possibly has resorted to some more less-than masterly sockuppetry. I only casually looked at a portion of the correspondence, so I don't know what's up, but if you've no more important claims on your time you might want to take a look. Damn me for a fool, but I really am tempted to send R's talk page (it is still active) a message conveying my unvarnished opinion of him...but better not. Lantana11 (talk) 04:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)Lantana11Lantana11 (talk) 04:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

NWA.Rep

Hi, Baseball Bugs. I see you rephrased your post on NWA.Rep's election questions page to be formally a question to him, though in practice a set of angrily-phrased accusations. (For instance: all editors are supposed to be welcome to "stick their noses into" any Wikipedia page, so that's a meaninglessly mean way of putting it.) I think it's pretty immoral to post a "question" like that to a candidate who you know isn't allowed to reply to it. I'm not going to do anything about it; I want to see first how my proposal for unblocking him for the purpose of posting on election pages only pans out. (Right at the bottom of the ANI thread, in case you want to comment.) But I think you should have a chat with your conscience. Bishonen | talk 19:15, 22 November 2008 (UTC).

I'm obviously too annoyed to comment constructively. I think I'll go watch James Bond kill a bunch of people and blow some things up. That should be therapeutic. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:04, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

And it was. :) Nothing like kiss-kiss, bang-bang to brighten an otherwise dull afternoon. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:56, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Question on rollback privilege

You mentioned at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball#Reggie Sanders that NWA.Rep had lost his rollback privileges, so I thought I'd ask you--exactly how does someone go about getting them? I just found myself undoing five vandalism edits at Major League Baseball Most Valuable Player Award and I figure there has to be a better way. Rklear (talk) 00:44, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. And Quantum of Solace was a good way to kill a boring Saturday afternoon. Rklear (talk) 01:34, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

FuriousFreddy screwing up Popeye the Sailor (Warner DVD series)

If you look at the Popeye the Sailor (Warner DVD series) article and the individual volumes, Furious Freddy has nominated the Warner DVD series for deletion and deleted the background sections of the individual volumes. Can you check it out? Steelbeard1 (talk) 02:14, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, there are separate straight listings of Popeye cartoons such as List of Popeye the Sailor theatrical cartoons (Fleischer Studios), List of Popeye the Sailor theatrical cartoons (Famous Studios) and Popeye the Sailor (1960s TV series). Steelbeard1 (talk) 03:01, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

You may want to add your input in the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Popeye the Sailor (Warner DVD series) page. Steelbeard1 (talk) 14:35, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Link

Go here. Viriditas (talk) 00:50, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Image:IsThisHeavenIowa.JPG

The best-sized version would be one that is as small as possible but where the critical elements, including the fine print, are legible. Try one maybe 10-20% bigger, if that's no legible, increase it another 10-20%. You might also try less jpeg compression to see if that helps, or use GIF or PNG format. If by some miracle you can get one smaller that is completely legible, that would be even better. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 06:12, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Notification of mediation

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Barack Obama, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, Downzero (talk) 11:22, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Obama

It is unfortunate and disappointing that rather than have a discussion on the topic, it resorts to this instead of a finding of facts. Hopefully our next edits can be productive rather than back and forth.

Oh and by the way, that other guy you quoted has a history of editing political articles on the other side of this debate. I'm pretty sure my contributions have been limited to areas of philosophy and of biographies of non-politicians. Downzero (talk) 11:49, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Can you show me a diff of an example? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 11:50, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Right. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 11:48, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand your question. My contributions thus far look like motorcycles and freemasonry--not all that political now is it? Downzero (talk) 11:57, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

You said you were editing from an IP. I was curious to see one of those edits to see if, indeed, your approach to things is different from that of Zsero, as you claim. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 12:08, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Barack Obama. For the Mediation Committee, WJBscribe (talk) 17:00, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Hallelujah. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:06, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

8vrtcl (talk · contribs)

I only signed into my (ancient) account, to try to help see to it that the problem of HIS extremely distasteful edits was resolved (replacing 'Barack Obama' with 'N*gger Faggot' throughout Obama's article). Young children have most likely seen what he did - it made me feel a little aggrieved. Themusician31 (talk · contribs) 00:56, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Understood. Now, go, and wiki-sin no more. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:08, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

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

Thanks for uploading Image:IsThisHeavenIowa.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) 05:27, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Damn, the cutoff for requiring a copyright notice was March 1, 1989. Unless the state produced them before the movie came out, it's not public domain. (Unless it's ineligible, which actually might be true. I'd ask at Media copyright questions.) --NE2 06:49, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

This it?

Was Commons:Image:Siena with Torre del Mangia.jpg the one you were thinking of? I've got some closer views to upload soon. —Wknight94 (talk) 12:56, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Awesome. I think that's the one. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 13:01, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Glenda

Hello. I think I'm a transient, though I may become a squatter and in time, perhaps even a homesteader (on Wikipedia not your talk page). I'm a bit of a newbie, just registered today. I (like just about everyone else in the free world) have been utilizing the great internet encyclopedia for years, but now I feel the need to contribute. Any helpful suggestions? Unhelpful suggestions shall be considered as well, though they may require the use of mental floss. Glenda 69 (talk) 01:42, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't be your best example of a mentor. I recommend you review the various links on the left side of the screen and see what this is all about. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:22, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Ty Cobb

Hello. The issue here is long division, not what is or is not considered official. If you take 11.434 at-bats and divide it by 4189, it comes to .36636, which rounds to .366 (not .367). Just for the record (though not relevant here), Pete Palmer's ESPN Baseball Encyclopedia is considered by most historians as the more "official source." But the issue in this edit is long division, Sir. (Get out your calculator!) --Jose cartagena (talk) 18:01, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

MLB recognizes 4191 hits, not 4189. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 18:11, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

IP Editor

Don't get too worked up with that IP editor. They are just pushing the same exact conspiracy theory as before. They will get bored when they don't get their way and move on. Brothejr (talk) 09:15, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving!

Hey, Bugsy! I know it's been a long time since we last communicated and that my activity around here has been pathetically low for the last several months, but I still thought I'd drop by and wish you a Happy Thanksgiving Day!!! The only reason I can give for my absence on the wiki is that of an extremely busy schedule involving school, extracurricular activities, and my mother's health, as well as mine.

I just realised that it's been a little over a year since I first officially became a Wikipedian. Wow! How time flies!!! :) Y'know, you yourself were the first one to welcome me onto the site, and for that, I am truly grateful; your frequent collaboration is also very much appreciated.

Once again, I hope you enjoy yourself this holiday season! Sincerely, — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 15:52, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Back at ya. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:55, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

FuriousFreddy is a sore loser

Despite the verdict that the Popeye the Sailor (Warner DVD series) article should be kept, FuriousFreddy went ahead and created the redirect. I've reverted that change and informed the administrator who closed the poll in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Popeye the Sailor (Warner DVD series). Steelbeard1 (talk) 11:56, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, and I've got big ears too. I followed the suggestion of the people who run the Films WikiProject, who made it clear that they planned a slash of such articles anyway. I'm no one's "sore loser;" I just don't like having unnecessary articles of dubious quality hanging around for no reason, no matter who rights them. You're taking this personally; it's Wikipedia. You don't own any articles here. If you write an article that has subpar prose, improper referencing, and is an unnecessary duplication of other content, it should be deleted. Period. --FuriousFreddy (talk) 14:29, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Problem Editors

Please send me a listing of any vandals, sockpuppeteers, or other new problem editors you may have spotted lately, so that I can incorporate them into my next report for Georgewilliamherbert. Also, check in with Ebyabe regarding this matter. Hope you enjoyed your Thanksgiving. --Wknite94 (talk) 19:27, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Another Liebman sock. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 21:08, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Limbaugh is scum

Hi BBugs, I know you aren't a fan of Limbaugh, but do you need to bring him into discussions about others? The logic that Limbaugh hasn't done something, so there isn't anything to it is sort of weird. Anyways, carry on :) --Tom 21:32, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Barack Obama

The following are the contents of a .DOC file that I have copied and pasted and then uploaded to your specific talk page. The reason for this is not to cause ‘disruption,’ or to perpetuate an ‘urban myth’ or ‘urban legend,’ but rather to set the record straight.

The Constitution of the United States of America Article I, Section II states:

“No person except a natural born Citizen, or Citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.”

Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articleii.html

We know he has gone by the names of Barack Hussein Obama, Barry Soetoro, Barry Obama, Barack Dunham, and Barry Dunham.

Source: http://www.wnd.com/images/ObamaIndonesia.jpg

The image referenced lists Barry Soetoro as an Indonesian Citizen who was born in Honolulu Hawaii on 4-AUG-1961. His religion is listed as Muslim. The AP has confirmed that is a genuine photo.

But there is a problem with that:

Source: http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/UPDATE/misc2008/ChicagoTribune-ObamaLtr-Nov-2008.pdf

“You have posted on the Internet an unsigned, forged and thoroughly discredited, computer-generated birth form created in 2007, a form that lacks vital information found on any original, hand signed Certificate of Live Birth, such as hospital address, signature of attending physician and age of mother.”

“ • Hawaii Dept of Health will not confirm your assertion that you were born in Hawaii. • Legal affidavits state you were born in Kenya. • Your grandmother is recorded on tape saying she attended your birth in Kenya. • U.S. Law in effect in 1961 denied U.S. citizenship to any child born in Kenya if the father was Kenyan and the mother was not yet 19 years of age. • In 1965, your mother legally relinquished whatever Kenyan or U.S. citizenship she and you had by marrying an Indonesian and becoming a naturalized Indonesian citizen.

The most important two points are the last two. According to United States law in 1961, US Citizenship was denied to any child born in Kenya if the father was Kenyan and the mother was not yet 19.

And, in 1965 his mother legally relinquished whatever Kenyan or US Citizenship she (and he) had by marrying an Indonesian and becoming a naturalized Indonesian Citizen.

These are distruptions? These are ‘urban myths?’ These are facts.

However, so as not to be “disruptive,” I have posted these to your talk pages.

Happy Trails! --Dr. Entropy (talk) 03:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

This belongs with the alligators in the sewers. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:24, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the warning about my rhetorical usage. It may have helped had I read guidelines. Gotta read those guidelines. And for the record that post of mine you replied to was sarcasm. --DemocraplypseNow (talk) 19:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate your comments, Baseball Bugs, but I'm very interested in the 'why' right now. Instead of sarcastic replies or calling names or something else, I'm very interested in 'why.' I've submitted the facts of the case and you replied that it belongs in the sewer.

Whether you or I or anybody else agrees with them, those are the facts. From a legal standpoint, I'll agree it has a very slim chance of succeeding, which raises its own hornet's nest of issues. But those are the facts of the case.

In my IRL profession I have to deal with facts. Not innuendo, not suspicions, not opinions, not half-baked ideas that have substance only in a delusional mind, but with facts. If I were to go to my CO with an opinion I'd get (and have before) "My opinion doesn't matter. And neither does yours. Now since your opinion differs, I suggest you put it where nobody'll ever find it."

That applies here, I believe. Wikipedia is intended to be an encyclopedia, not a collection of documents written with a specific person's (or group of people's) opinions being expressed.

Above we must remain neutral. Period. Any slant to either side seriously jeopardises our stated goal, our mission, and above all our credibility.

Answering with facts and having a discussion on the facts in a calm, reasonable method is acceptable and is to be encouraged.

Belittling others is not.

Going forward, I do find myself in agreement with Eaglescout18. Address the issues, not the people. Thank you. :)

Happy Trails! --Dr. Entropy (talk) 23:25, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Do you generally have to put up with so much crap on your talkpage? it would drive nuts. --Cameron Scott (talk) 23:33, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Blanchardb

Hello Baseball Bugs. Please see my comments in the general comments section of that RFA, as it pertains to your neutral vote. Thank you. --Deskana (talk) 08:05, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Political cranks

Hi Bugs,

Political cranks are political cranks but maybe take it easy with the more animated namecalling against the far right. While there's nothing too unWikipedian about expressing what I'd call fairly left-wing (or certainly anti-right) views to shoot down efforts at swaying from NPOV to CPOV, it makes it harder for the people you're addressing to see that the version of the article that you're advocating doesn't contain the "Rush Slimeball"-type remarks you use as counter-argument. Particularly with Rush, it's slipping from sounding like counter-argumentative humour to irrational trivialising of the right wing community.

Your work on these political articles is really valued, but I thought I ought to point out this outsider's view of the way things are going so you might become a little less troll-o-magnetic. Cheers! Bigbluefish (talk) 17:47, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't really care about Limbaugh, but I do use him as a barometer for how the right wing is "thinking". He brought up (though did not originate) the slander that Obama was going to Hawaii to fix something about his birth certificate, and that his grandmother's illness was just a ruse. When his grandmother actually died, he wisely clammed up about it, but some of the right wing hacks didn't get that implied memo, and when they continue with it here, I have to bring him up. Keep in mind that most everything I say and do here is purposeful, and not always for the obvious. Sometimes it's to flush out what a user's true viewpoint is, especially an IP or a redlink with an over-the-top attitude. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:00, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I agree on your stance on Limbaugh, but I should think that most of the kind of people (and I think their persistence is consistent with this) that you're talking about are simply further anagonised by the kind of language that uses him and other conservative figures as a point of mockery. This instils a determination to fight back at your POV with even more POV. Put simply, I think it's harder to argue with someone whose arguments are neutral as well as their content contributions. But don't stop helping if this is your only style! Bigbluefish (talk) 00:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I choose my styles purposefully. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:45, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Request

I'd actually prefer you address the issues, rather than me personally, going forward. Thanks in advance. EagleScout18 (talk) 21:54, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Note: The above user has since been indef-blocked. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:54, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Your Proposed Retirement

Hi. This your friend Mike (No Guru). You recently asked me for advice regarding your contemplated retirement. I recommend that you first participate in a relaxation technique, such as meditation or yoga. I would then advise you to discuss the matter with your wife (or your mistress), your kids, your best friend, and your pastor. By then, you should have a good idea where you stand. Do not discuss the matter with your adversaries, and do not waste your money on paid therapists, such as psychiatrists or psychologists. I hope this helps. Cordially yours, Mike (No Guru) --Mike (No Guru) (talk) 18:10, 25 October 2008 (UTC) Note: was originally posted on October 25, and was deleted by some wiseguy. This was restored on December 4, 2008. --No Guru (UTC) (talk) 23:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

The above is today's sock of the banned User:Ron liebman. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:54, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Bugs Bunny coin

The IP address pretty much had it right. Go to Google and enter "bugs bunny" coin 1987, and you'll see one for sale on eBay, for example. However, I would say it's just a souvenir of some kind, so I don't see where it warrants special mention in the article, as there have been countless Bugs icons through the years (and I should know, Doc). Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Yup, I had the same feeling you did, I was hoping any sources on the subject that came back would include some information on significance or lack thereof. I was also a bit curious which constitution it referred to. For most national constitutions I'd say it would be a bit of an insult to commemorate them with a bugs bunny coin, love the wabbit though I may. Oh well... --fvw* 04:56, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

thank you for your persistance

I am amazed at your incredible stalking ability. You should win a medal for that. There is no need to hold permanent, unnecessary grudge to a one-time content dispute. Please stay off my userspace in the future. Just some friendly advice.--NWA.Rep (talk) 07:10, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Don't presume to be giving me orders, son. And that is just some friendly advice. 0:) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

P.S. Thanks for letting us know what your IP address is. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:13, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Go ahead. Investigate me. I couldn't care less. I know you really have an interesting life. I'm outta here anyway.--NWA.Rep (talk) 07:17, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

No you're not. You're lurking. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:18, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Wow! That is just plain strange! He asked for people to watch his pages for him, and that's his thanks?? And isn't this the same thug who's been using socks to move articles to HAGER-type names? And he thinks he's qualified to be on ARBCOM? Talk about inmates (in his case, probably literally) trying to run the asylum! Very strange indeed! Have fun, Bugs, and don't let the bed rabbits bite! - BillCJ (talk) 07:27, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

We will sorely miss you NWA, wonder if you will break the record no. of "Opposes" if you really ran for abcom? LOL Dengero (talk) 08:45, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Naw son. Gwen Gale got the record taken care of if he/she hadnt withdraw.--NWA.Rep (talk) 11:11, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

So, how are things at Northwest Airlines? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 14:21, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, how the frightly have maulen! - BillCJ (talk) 10:48, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Oy! Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 11:08, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

User talk:EagleScout18

I was aware of his attempts to hide the comments of others. I have been watching his talk page for a little while and know to review the history before every thinking about responding. I didn't bring it up because I don't want him to take that red herring and run with it ("oh, I was just trying to do this", "those editors are out to get me", etc.). I'm going out on a limb and hoping that he is actually remotely serious about helping out, not just a bull-headed POV warrior. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Memorial Stadium (Baltimore) page, "Tenants"

The NASL Comets played its 1975 home matches on the campus of Towson State University (now Towson University) because Memorial Stadium was too big for the crowds the team was drawing. The source of this information was the article titled "Outdoor Soccer Lost Three Teams In Baltimore," written by The Baltimore Sun's Mike Klingaman for the December/January, 1986 issue of Soccer Digest. The Ink Daddy! (talk) 07:46, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Rogereeny. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:59, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Regarding User talk:2legit2quit2

I have no dispute. He has decided to make the issue about me, rather than about the articles in question. Frankly, I want nothing to do with the fellow, and only wish for him to stick to the matter at hand. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 19:40, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

OK, but if things get out of hand, WP:ANI is where to go. Either that, or the nearest convenient friendly admin. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:48, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Honestly, I hope it does not come to that. If you look at the talk page for Honky, you will see that Rockpocket attempted to deal with the guy, but to no avail. Thanks for your interest. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 19:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

He'll be under surveillance. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:57, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I see that the matter has now been dealt with by other means. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 21:39, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Very interesting. Thanks for the note. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 22:11, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

2legit2quit2

He's off harassing people again... [23]... I'm going to block him. --Esanchez_{(Talk 2 me or Sign here)} 21:27, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, I set up the block already. If submitting it to Incidents work, even during blocks? --Esanchez_{(Talk 2 me or Sign here)} 21:30, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

He's not gonna stop now. [24] --Esanchez_{(Talk 2 me or Sign here)} 21:46, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Bugs, just wanted to say that I *loved* the section header.[25]  ;) --Elonka 22:52, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Under the circumstances, maybe he should have called himself '2dumb2stop'? HalfShadow 21:53, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Good one. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Busy

Greetings Bugs,

I see you're quite the busy bee at ANI, and the ruthless Bugsy tactics look, well, pretty close to officious when it comes to the perceived errors and sins of other editors (not least the hapless ES18, against whom you campaigned vigorously and, it must be said, effectively, from a Bugsy point of view at any rate). If you don't mind my asking, what gives? You're obviously aching to join the sysops, so why don't you? I just don't get it. Pray enlighten! But no problem if you don't want to, or you just can't. And while I'm being a shameless nosy parker, why the semi-protection of your talk? Thank you. — Writegeist (talk) 05:03, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I'd rather dabble in it than make it a full-time job at this point. I consider all of this activity to be useful experience, if and when I ever decide to take that plunge. I also wanted to get my last block well behind me, which is more than a year as of today, but it's not enough distance yet. And I still need to work on my chippy attitude. The semi-protection has to do with the banned User:Ron liebman who keeps coming back in other guises. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:21, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Olbermann article

I'm not sure how changing the category from Category:American tax evaders to Category:American Tax Evaders resolves the BLP issue that you're identifying in this edit: [26] --Bobblehead ^(rants) 18:14, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't. Now it's fixed. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 18:25, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

arcteogry:tax edavers. You game for it? --Rodhullandemu 01:50, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Soytenly. The Smith Jones solution. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

2legit2quit2 (again)

He's back! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 03:45, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

If you have a thread there, I certainly am not finding it... ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 04:18, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I see this is now a moot point. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 06:01, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I wonder how many more there are? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:14, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I imagine we'll find out soon enough. He doesn't seem the sort to quit. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 15:33, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

2illegit2quit. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:39, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Note

Hi BB, wanted to drop a line that [27] is probably not the best way to address another contributor. Do consider this in the future. MBisanz ^talk 15:52, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

He already deleted it. And he cops an attitude that indicates it's his show and that we are to bend to his will. Go talk to him next time. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 16:13, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Barack Obama

Took a peek at that article. Wowsers, there's actually editors out there, who are taking the birth certificate thing serious. GoodDay (talk) 21:50, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

It takes all kinds. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:14, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Obama Note

I saw that you reverted my edit regarding the president elect note. As an original party to the compromise, you'll remember how long we fought over this and how difficult it was to make all parties happy. At the end of the day we agree that it would be a footnote in the lead that would direct people to an explanation. The way it is now you'd never know that there is an explanatory footnote (and not a normal one). I understand why the footnote is no longer in the lead, but the idea is to inform people (as you yourself argued in the discussions). People can read the footnote and then look into the issue more if they want, or just see the sentence and understand all they need to about the issue. The purpose of the note is frustrated if the article is left as it is (as is the compromise we reached after many hours). I don't want to get in an edit war, and I certainly don't want another 10 pages of flaming and fighting, especially as we came to a compromise that has almost no effect on the article.

To me, this is also a problem of the integrity of process. We meet and discuss and fight and compromise for days, and finally agree to do something. Whether or not we agreed to have the NB note or not, that's what happened right after the compromise and that's what stayed there. Why do we even spend all our time making these compromises if we're not going to keep them until a new discussion reaches the consensus that we shouldn't? I just took a 17 day Wiki-break, but the lack of integrity and willingness to work together is so frustrating that I am still depressed by it (this is not a reference to you, but to the fighting in general). Perhaps I need more time away...

The footnote itself is fine. NB is patronizing and unneeded. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:35, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't suppose I could convince you to respond to my points?LedRush (talk) 15:43, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Block?

Resolved

 – Poster has been indef-blocked as being part of a Fox in Socks farm

Please tell me what I will be blocked for? All I did was supply a link to a list of reliable sources and ask were in the article a criticism section should go. You can not argue that the sources are unreliable, this has already been decided elsewhere.Fru23 (talk) 02:18, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

You won't be blocked for anything, if you stop warring and start discussing. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:27, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Im not do it now. Fru23 (talk) 03:14, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Right, Kemo Sabe. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:15, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

See, normal editors agree. Fru23 (talk) 03:30, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

What has normal got to do with anything? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:36, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure they would agree with me to.Fru23 (talk) 03:44, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Maybe, but keep in mind they're in an ill state. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:53, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

I have been very delinquent, but please accept this:

This user helped promote Cubs Win Flag to good article status.

--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:18, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Hey-Hey!!! Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:44, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Fru23, KingsOfHearts, etc.

I had noticed the silence, and was, to paraphrase Depeche Mode, enjoying it. But, yes, I assume it will not last. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 20:11, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Ha ha ha!! Lusitania! That's a good one. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 20:22, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I just read the full ANI, and appendices, and it was quite entertaining. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 21:30, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Wow that was an unexpected result. To think all I wanted was a 30 day topic ban or so. It is interesting how he imploded so quickly. Ramsquire ^{(throw me a line)} 17:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Another possible SP

Hello Baseball Bugs. Although we have not communicated before I have been following this drama over the last few days. I thought that I would make you aware of this post to Wknight94's talk page [28] since it looks like it may be connected. I am sure that Wknight will let you know about it but I did not know how long that might take. Of course it might not be connected - in which case - I hope that you aren't retiring since many of you post at AN and ANI make me smile :-) Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 22:59, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the alert. It's just today's entry in the endless sock parade of User:Ron liebman, no connection to the KingsOfHearts / Fru23 "brothers". Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:07, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Gangster

Speaking of potentially being "over the top," can you take a look at this article, and my comments on the talk page, and tell me if you thing I went too far? I would appreciate it. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 21:44, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look, and offering your thoughts. A month or so ago, I cut the article down to a stub so that it could be rebuilt with decent references. Now, it is right back in the same sort of shape it was before. sigh... As the man said, sometimes I despair of the species. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 22:05, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

American League establishing dates

I think you're right, I will take it to the project, thanks. SixFourThree (talk) 17:31, 16 December 2008 (UTC)SixFourThree

Conservapedia Confession

You might be amused to know that I was once a Conservapedia editor. In my one edit, I responded to a question about whether Andy was really a lawyer, saying, "Why, yes. And Obama was his boss at the Harvard Law Review." The edit vanished immediately, and I was blocked for five years. PhGustaf (talk) 05:57, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Good ol' KKKonservapedia. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:44, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

The Anthonys

Those people gotta be major headaches for the Defence team. GoodDay (talk) 00:38, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Maybe Casey's attorneys will claim her pathological lying is genetic, thus absolving her of all blame in the matter. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:47, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Worst of all, one gets the feeling that the family will look to make books or movie deals. GoodDay (talk) 00:54, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I assume the court will put a stop to that. They've probably got enough evidence to send Mom to the needle, especially if her parents' dim lightbulbs finally come on and they provide some useful timeline info or other evidence. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:10, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

WP:PLAXICO --Smashville^talk 00:34, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I just can't wait to use it..."Well...per WP:PLAXICO..." --Smashville^talk 07:04, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

User:Rims007

Sure, I can take a look, he just happened to get an article that I was watching. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 18:05, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Reviewed, and everything seems to have been caught at the point of exit. This seems to be a second offense, he was here a lot around this time last year. Probably a holiday drunk or some such. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 18:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Insert vandals here.

That's the best way to handle them... by toasting. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 18:14, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Much appreciated. I'll try to find something interesting to give you for other random days of the year too. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 18:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Barack Obama

please see my revision on the talkpage. I apologize if the antecentednt for "they" was. I was refernig to other editors. Now if you have been in church more often than I, I will apologize forthwith. I refer to your edit on Orange Mike's page.Die4Dixie (talk) 23:32, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

ANI

You have been named in an incident at ANIDie4Dixie (talk) 01:07, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Noted and logged. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:08, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Hello from your fellow user in California. I wish you all the best, and since I see baseball is an important subject for you I shall share with you that I am a near life-long Los Angeles Dodger fan...I still remember the first time, many years ago, when I walked through the concourse at Chavez Ravine and saw my heroes on the green diamond backdropped by mountains and pastel-blue walls. Best wishes and by all means continued principled editing. Lantana11 (talk) 04:43, 20 December 2008 (UTC)Lantana11Lantana11 (talk) 04:43, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Never been to Fenway, but it's on my short list of must-do's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lantana11 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeh--this has got me ruminating. Wrigley must be something; the colors! Green, Cubs blue and red. And to a baseball lover maybe even the Metrodome would be a great sight, especially for today's kid who could feel the ghosts of Puckett, Morris, etc. Lantana11 (talk) 04:16, 21 December 2008 (UTC)Lantana11Lantana11 (talk) 04:16, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Been to Fenway many times; never Wrigley. But when the Cubs vs. Sox World Series happens, I will get out of my rest home or wheelchair or crypt and be there. PhGustaf (talk) 09:12, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Bill Veeck--now there was a guy who knew what it was about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lantana11 (talk • contribs) 05:07, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Of course--and what do people remember about the Chisox of the late 70s? Not that they were a so-so team, but they were fun and people started enjoying coming out to Comiskey. Wish I had visited that grand old park, and Tiger Stadium and Memorial Stadium in Baltimore too, among others. Geez, come to think of it I haven't been to very many places! The Anaheim Stadium of the 80s, enclosed for football--that wasn't exactly one of those "diamonds are forever" experiences. Lantana11 (talk) 20:26, 21 December 2008 (UTC)Lantana11Lantana11 (talk) 20:26, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

It is happily true that the game itself is what endures and is most important. When I was going to college in the Bay Area I can remember my buddies and I sitting among 8,000 or so on a cool September night at the Oakland Coliseum ("The Mausoleum") watching, say, an obscure Athletics-Mariners game. Those of us who were there loved every minute of it. It is strange to think that decades ago, when the NFL's popularity lagged far behind that of MLB, pro football games were awkwardly squeezed into baseball parks (Forbes Field, Shibe Park, Milwaukee County Stadium, even Wrigley); this even predated the much-maligned symmetrical "cookie-cutter" facilities of the 70s (Riverfront, Three Rivers, Veterans). Hope I haven't droned on and bent your metaphorical ear too much here today! Lantana11 (talk) 05:10, 22 December 2008 (UTC)Lantana11Lantana11 (talk) 05:10, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

So you were there to see Sayers and Butkus?...One of the enduring images we fans have of the Bears at Wrigley is that of George Halas waving his arms lecturing the officials with a backdrop of the outfield-wall ivy waning in the December freeze. I saw the Rams at the Los Angeles Coliseum quite often, and I am old enough to remember a trip to see the 49ers at S.F.'s Kezar Stadium, the concrete bowl jaggedly shaped to fit along the edge of Golden Gate Park. Lantana11 (talk) 00:33, 23 December 2008 (UTC)Lantana11Lantana11 (talk) 00:33, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I truly believe that our affection for those old settings we've mentioned is more than merely personal, that real character and uniqueness existed there that today's "state of the art" edifices cannot duplicate--at least not for sixty or seventy more years. Most people shrug it off by saying that "those were simpler times..." "ah, the days of our youth..." etc.

Lantana11 (talk) 06:09, 23 December 2008 (UTC)Lantana11Lantana11 (talk) 06:09, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree entirely. Closeness between the fans and the game is still there, if you love the game, but elusive today. In my opinion, many of today's stadiums are really theme parks where you can see a game. When minor-league ball seems more removed from us, things really have changed. By the way,I've had the opportunity to see California League games in such locales as San Jose and Palm Springs (at the park where Gene Autry's LA/CA Angels once trained)--great experiences; it's a ball game and you're there to see it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lantana11 (talk • contribs) 00:14, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I've seen "Bull Durham" more than once, and the attention accorded the DAP thereafter did seem to make the park too famous for its own good. I wonder if attention and fame for a stadium, like a person, can beget self-importance and self-consciousness. And then once it's realized that this is a cool place, everybody jumps on the bandwagon and it loses a certain quality of coolness. It's no longer for the connoisseur. But then this really hasn't happened to the likes of Wrigley and Fenway, has it? Just mulling it over...though I really don't know that much about Veeck I like the fact that he offered fun witihin the confines of a baseball game and didn't beat fans over the head with "We're making Comiskey 'fan-friendly' for you."Lantana11 (talk) 08:58, 24 December 2008 (UTC)Lantana11Lantana11 (talk) 08:58, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Each in his own way, Veeck and Wrigley were owners the like of which we do not have today. They were big men. I seem to remember that Wrigley, like the Giants' Horace Stoneham and others, oversaw his team in a kind of benevolent, low-profile way; he loved his team and its fans and was disappointed but never furious with his employees during losing times. Veeck, a showman but a baseball man foremost, simply reveled in happy fans and happy times at the ballpark. I think with owners as with players, there were giants in those days. Of course some owners could be famously tight-fisted too... even Walter O'Malley, who had the wherewithal to do pretty much as he pleased, could and did draw a hard line (regarding finances and principles alike--the 1966 Maury Wills trade for example, but that's another tale for another day). Yes,I indeed remember when the term "The Friendly Confines of Wrigley Field" was almost an insider's thing--as if Wrigley and its unique charm (suspending games for darkness! 14-12 scores!) was for the purist fan (which I claimed I was, no doubt erroneously) who demanded more than the average place-setting for baseball. Dodger Stadium at least never had to deal with something like this; it's neither a beloved relic nor a post-modern state-of-the-art park. so its overall perception and image has never changed much. Even for such recent renovations as altering the lower level and eliminating the "dugout seating" (where the ever-present, Panama-hatted Mike Brito stood with his radar gun), advertising stuck on every dammned flat surface, and absurd ivy grown on the bullpen walls :( it remains a representation of the era of its design-- a kind of "mid-century modern" stadium. Lantana11 (talk) 22:48, 26 December 2008 (UTC)Lantana11Lantana11 (talk) 22:48, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Football naming conventions

Hello, thank you for taking part in the ANI regarding me. I know I may seem like a vandal, but my moves were honestly made in good faith. For a summary of my beliefs on the matter, please read WP:FBNC and tell me what you think of it. Tavix (talk) 21:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

		Merry Christmas!
		Baseball Bugs, here's hoping you're having a wonderful Christmas, and here's also hoping that all your family and friends are well. Lets all hope that the year coming will be a good one! If we've had disputes in the past, I hold no grudges, especially at such a time as this. If you don't know I am, I apologise, feel free to remove this from your page. Come and say hi, I won't bite, I swear! It could even be good for me, you know - I'm feeling a little down at the moment with all of these snowmen giving me the cold shoulder :( — neur ho ho ho(talk) 00:00, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Wishing you the very best for the season. Guettarda (talk) 00:24, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

WP:NCSP

Your recent meaningful participation in an ANI on sports-figure article disambiguation suggests that you may be interested in participating one way or another in the development and/or discussion of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (sportspeople), a draft proposal to clarify Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people) as applied to sports. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 04:15, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Hello Baseball Bugs! I just wanted to wish you and your family a merry Christmas! May this Christmas be full of great cheer and holiday spirit. Have a great day and a wonderful New Year, from The Bald One ^{White cat} 11:57, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

	<font=2> HHoyC (Happy Holiday of Your Choice)! Ebyabe (talk) 16:58, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Obama

It seems that a couple of editors have changed the religion part on the Obama page without any attempt at discussion. Please look at it and perhaps encourage them to revert and come to the talk page.Die4Dixie (talk) 19:48, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Slightly belated Merry Christmas

Hey, Bugs! Haven't been around much lately, and I forgot to stop by here yesterday - but the very best wishes for the holiday season to you and yours. I've always admired your neutrality and political insight, and I have to say you're my very favorite Barack Obama supporter in the whole wide world...from one of the 48 to one of the 52, I'm looking forward to sparring with you (and agreeing with you whenever it's justified) over the next four years. Anyway, God bless you and keep you, my friend. Kelly ^hi! 20:58, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Non-disruptive

Again, just because your delicate sensibilities were disrupted by a general statement directed at no one in particular does not mean that it is disruptive to the project. The needless drama-mongering and strong-arming is what proved to be disruptive to the project. Read up on policies, guides and other related pages before further involving yourself into situations; also ensure that arguments are sound before latching onto them, else you do no one any favors. لennavecia 21:14, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

You're wrong. It was directed at SheffieldSteel. Its author is just not willing to admit it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 21:15, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

It was not, in text, directed at SS. It was a general statement. You can assume or conclude that it was directed at anyone, but it doesn't matter. I can go to my talk page or anyone else's and say whatever I want about you or anyone else, but as long as I don't name names, there's not jack you or anyone else can do about it. There was nothing in the statement to suggest it was about any specific person. If you want to come to the conclusion that it's about SS because he's an admin with no manners, then that's you, but it doesn't violate any policy. You have yet to point out specifically which part of which policy was violated. So far it's just been a lot of crying and wikilawyering over a vague sentence. لennavecia 04:37, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

The user who posted it is / has been the one doing the wikilawyering. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:03, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

And since SheffieldSteel is happy with their compromise, I'm fine with it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:10, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Joe the Plumber occupation-mania

Bugs, you're my friend - I've been watching Joe the Plumber for a while without getting involved. Can you explain the occupation-mania at that article? Why is there such hysteria about whether he is really a plumber based on differing interpretations of licensing requirements? Does it really matter? Barring his recent book-writing gig, if he's not a plumber, what is he? A laborer? I admit I find this whole thing sociologically fascinating. The whole "not a plumber because his papers are not in order" seems unAmerican and I don't think I've seen it's like before outside of the legal and medical professions. I can understand the root sentiment (I'm military, and we refuse to call any old gun-toter a "soldier") but this instance is the first case I've seen the standard applied to blue-collar occupations. Kelly ^hi! 22:03, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

The current push to label his "occupation" as "unemployed" males me think that Truman's profession is now "dead" by the same rationale. Collect (talk) 22:05, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Beats me. My occupation is whatever I say it is. If I'm a plumber and I get laid off, I'm unemployed, but my self-image is still a plumber, and I'm just "between jobs". Seems like excessive pedantry. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:29, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what I thought too. Kelly ^hi! 22:34, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

There is a catch, though. I can say I'm a medical doctor, but if I don't have the proper license, then I'm not. And that's probably the core of the argument - that he was only a plumber when he was working for a truly licensed plumber, and now he's not plumbing anymore. However, he could hire on with somebody else tomorrow, and he'd become a plumber again. Or, arguably, he never stopped "being" a plumber, he just stopped "doing" plumbing work for awhile. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:39, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

That's part of the catch - Collect made a big deal that he was a plumber while employed as such. Now he isn't. But there's a much more basic reason to stop calling him a plumber: Joe spends his time these days doing other things and we have ample support of that. I would argue Collect's fenzy to maintain this "plumber" status is not based on what we know, but what he wants.Mattnad (talk) 17:22, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Third person comments are such fun, eh? I want the articles on WP to accurately reflect facts, not election games. Last I checked, John Glenn is still an "astronaut." I think perhaps you should go to BLP and suggest the change in how infoboxes are filled out rather than leaving tracks across userspace. Collect (talk) 18:56, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Request for assistance

Hey Bugs, could you take a look here and give an input on the discussion for this FLC? I think we need some neutral parties. We're trying to decide whether it's important to show managers elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame as players as Hall of Famers in managers lists. I know, confusing, but let me know if you can help out. Thanks! KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 22:40, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Mark Teixeria

I noticed in your edit summary at Mark Teixeria that you said to stop reverting verifiable information, well I know I can speak for myself, I was reverting vandalism from an IP, that kept saying he had signed with the Orioles, so that's why that info probably got removed, cause I know I didn't intentionally remove it. Thanks.--Iamawesome800 16:49, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I was talking to the guy who keeps removing the Yankees tentative signing. I've had enough of that nonsense for now, so you won't see my name on that page for awhile. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:30, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

I have to say, I agree with you, I mean what's the big deal with saying he agreed to a deal.--Iamawesome800 17:55, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Obsessive pedantry. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:57, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Yup. I agree with you 100%. Its unfortunate that there are two editors that think they WP:OWN all the free agent bios and won't allow the siging into the lede based on misapplied WP policies. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 21:10, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Hey Bugs, might you be interested in re-joining the Teixiera question at WT:BASEBALL? I'd like your opinion on the proposed compromise. I know things were getting a little heated, but I'm trying to see if we can generate something that's acceptable for a consensus. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 23:56, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Are they trying to get a compromise before he officially signs? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:41, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Sceptre (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Guess I was wrong.Die4Dixie (talk) 07:50, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your comments at ANI

If you want to take up a matter with me, please do so either here, or at my talk page. The current ANI is about a different situation than the football one. That is past us and I already said that I wasn't going to do it again. Also, I would like to know how I lie? I wasn't aware of lying. Tavix (talk) 22:43, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Keep it at ANI, please. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:46, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Will do, but I would like to say that this is a different matter. You still didn't answer the question about how I lie. Tavix (talk) 22:51, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Keep it at ANI. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:53, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

The ANI has now been resolved and so there is no further reason for me to post there. This is geared specifically at you and is off topic from the ANI anyway. Frankly, here is what my question boils down to: Do you hate me? Tavix (talk) 23:03, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I hate no one on wikipedia. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:11, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I was just checking because you did seem pretty hostile to me at one point. Tavix (talk) 23:39, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Hostile only to some editing behavior. Don't take it personally. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:40, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Tavix (talk) 05:05, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Help with adoption and wikistalking

What would you do if an editor went to a userspace page for someone else' adoption and then warned the editor about comments made there? Isn't think some type of wikistalking? Padillah (talk) 23:22, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Baseball Bugs. You have new messages at Padillah's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Loved the Will Rogers quote

That was an awesome quote at Talk:John McCain presidential campaign, 2008 - made me laugh out loud. As a matter of fact, it was so awesome it was like awesome on a stick, with awesome sauce on it. :) Kelly ^hi! 01:34, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I've always loved his stuff - it's just that I never heard that particular quote. Thanks again for making my day. Kelly ^hi! 02:12, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I've always really liked Coolidge as well as Rogers - I think Coolidge was one of our best Presidents. However, I think I'd have to give the Best American Humorist title to Twain. Kelly ^hi! 03:46, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

FDR

We never had fiat money before FDR either :).Die4Dixie (talk) 06:22, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

The way I look at it, FDR offered hope while the GOP offered despair, and the people voted for hope. Then we got WWII and became a world power. Would that have happened under the GOP? Or would we have been better off not to be? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:26, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I would argue we were a world power under the the Monroe doctrine and when the good Roosevelt carried a big stick. Even Benito Mussolini praised FDR as a good facist before the US's first salvo in WW II.Die4Dixie (talk) 06:37, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

At quick look turned up this [[29]]. ( and I woke up thirsty, see below!)Die4Dixie (talk) 18:36, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Indulge me a little , I'm a good way into a half gallon of Evan Williams. but I love these kinds of discusions away from the article talk pages :).Die4Dixie (talk) 06:42, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Talkin' 'bout Talkin' Baseball

Trust me, I'm not sure even Don McLean knows the meaning of everything in "American Pie" -- and if he does, he's not telling. The experts are still debating it *grin*.

As for this song, the lyrics have been up since the creation of the article five months ago. It's nice to have them there so that we can plot out the links, so hopefully Mr. Cashman won't mind. -Dewelar (talk) 06:29, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

No text is ever "safe" in wikipedia. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:30, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

AIV

No, no, no. I did not mean that. i meant that the creation of the spurious username for the purpose of making a fake RfA nom was vandalism, not your perfectly correct report of it. Please accept my heartfelt apologies for not making that clearer. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 20:27, 31 December 2008 (UTC)