User talk:Crash Underride/Archive/February 2008

				Contributions by Month
Home	Talk	About me	Awards	Edit count	Sandbox 1	Sandbox 2	Sandbox 3	Sandbox 4	Sandbox 5	Wikiwords	Glossary

---THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN PAID FOR BY THE new WORLD order---

Leave a new message.

All I ask is the following:

No Irish jokes please.
No redneck/southern jokes.

Every few months I will archive my talk page and you can go here to see what has bee talked about, etc.

Request for Review

Could you take a look at 2007 ACC Championship Game and let me know if there's anything I need to change? It's up for FAC review right now, and any comments or support would be appreciated. Thanks! JKBrooks85 (talk) 21:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalise?

how the hell did I vandalise Bret Hart? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Altenhofen (talk • contribs) 06:00, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sorry for not signing it, when I am upset I don't sign my posts because I forget ok?!?!!?!!!??!!?????!!?!!!!!!!!!!?!!--lord kass (talk) 06:06, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photos

Whether or not you think it's ugly, those serve a purpose here on Wikipedia and therefore should not be removed without good reason. "They're ugly" is not a good reason. I'm not going to blank your user page simply if I feel it's ugly.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 08:11, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Madden 08

clearly you are delusional because that was no vandalism, the whole section is pointless and not needed--Yankees10 21:15, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I dont mean to be an jerk (for for calling you delusional), but i'm sorry that isnt vandalism--Yankees10 21:18, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

again, it is not vandalism and I reverted the edit after your second message--Yankees10 21:22, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

it is pointless there to and should be removed there to, but im not going to remove it because I dont want to really discuss this anymore, I dont really usually edit the Madden articles anyway--Yankees10 21:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

HOF

yeah so did Darrell Green, Andre Tippett, Fred Dean, Gary Zimmerman, and a couple of other guys I forgot--Yankees10 21:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yeah it was about time, he should have gotten in a while ago--Yankees10 21:46, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Madden

Im sorry to, your right I should have gone to the talk page before I got rid of it--Yankees10 23:12, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ok, same here--Yankees10 23:16, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

69.182.45.39

You're being trolled. Move on and stop rising to the bait. Kuru ^talk 00:02, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Reversion
		For reverting so many unhelpful edits and vandalism on Wikipedia I User Swirlex award you this Barnstar.

Kurt Angle

Edits are not vandalism. I am editing to get obtain NPOV on article. Animesouth (talk) 01:59, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Animesouth (talk) 02:06, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3RR?

I reverted a WP:ENGVAR vio = 1. Where are the other 2? Are you perhaps looking at the wrong page? 156.34.213.34 (talk) 02:52, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted the Black Sabbath article more than once? Are you sure you're lookin gat the right edit history? 156.34.213.34 (talk) 03:01, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

so 1 valid edit to rm a WP:ENGVAR violation = 3 reverts??? 1 doesn't equal 3 + it was a 100% valid edit??? I am still not sure which article you mean? 1=1 . 156.34.213.34 (talk) 03:08, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am still not seeing it. I didn't put the "and present" text in that article. It's been there for months. And I rv'd it simply because that article gets hit with a lot of vandals who are trying to rm any reference to Black Sabbath still being active (the anti-Ozzy crew). The common practice from most regular editors on that article is to restore all "active" references into the page to keep it consistent throughout. And, in the end... that's 1 valid edit on my part... and you gave me a 3RR warning for it? Do you understand what 3RR is? One doesn't break the policy (which is actually 4 reverts back to the same earlier version not 3) by making 1 valid edit? I don't want to sound picky. I had over 20000 edits with my old user account before I decided to reject it for the purity of anonymous editing. And I have rolled over 30000 edits as an IP. I've been editing Wikipedia almost as long as there's been a Wikipedia to edit. And that's the first time I ever received a 3RR warning for doing 1 valid edit. If you need help understanding 3RR or any other policies don't hesitate to ask. 156.34.213.34 (talk) 03:21, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter

WikiProject College football February 2008 Newsletter

The College football WikiProject Newsletter
Issue III - February 2008

Project news

After a discussion to establish consensus, the "importance" criteria in the College football project banner has been removed. Editors cited the fact that writers rarely use the criteria when improving articles, and that many articles lacked the criteria, causing unnecessary work.
Editors are encouraged to watch the project talk page and Featured Article Candidates for potential College Football featured articles. Several featured articles have failed to make it past the nomination stage due to a lack of comments -- both positive and negative. Due to the fact that college football is a niche subject on Wikipedia, fewer editors are likely to comment on college football nominations, making it even more important for Wikiproject members to contribute.
User:BetacommandBot adds College football project banners to over 10,000 articles, bringing the total number of articles in the project to nearly 15,000. Editors are now needed to assess uncategorized college football articles, and help has been requested on an as-available basis.
Template:Infobox CollegeFB Bowl was deleted following a deletion discussion, and was replaced by {{NCAAFootballSingleGameHeader}}.
The article Chris Jessee has been kept following a deletion discussion.
The article 1906 Auburn Tigers football team was nominated for deletion and kept. This deletion discussion, in addition to the discussion for the 1902 LSU Tigers football team, provide a precedence for keeping stub-length single-season articles, even if those articles only consist of the team's schedule and results for that season.
A hotly-debated discussion about the wording of team conference affiliations ended in agreement that teams "compete" in a conference if they fielded a team in that conference, regardless of the final standings.
Partially owing to the addition of most NFL player articles to the project, more Good Article-class articles were added to Wikiproject College Football in January than in any other month in the project's history. Keep up the good work!
With 45 Good Articles, this project now accounts for approximately 1.3% of all the good articles on Wikipedia!

From JKBrooks85

Welcome to the latest issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter! I hope that you're enjoying regular updates about the goings on of college football on Wikipedia, but if not, feel free to add your name to the "no delivery" section on the newsletter signup page.

I encourage everyone to make regular visits to the College Football Portal and perhaps make it your Wikipedia entry page instead of using the Main Page as your gateway. Nominations for selected articles and pictures are always welcome, and can serve as a great way to show off that new article you just shepherded to Good Article status or the great picture you took the last time you were at a game.

Comments and suggestions on improving the newsletter are always welcome, and help me improve it on a monthly basis. Keep contributing and editing, and don't hesitate to contact me or post on the College Football Wikiproject talk page if you need help or just want someone to look over your article.

New high-rank articles

2007 Hawaii Bowl — Promoted to Good Article status on January 10.
Mercury Hayes — Promoted to Good Article status on January 13.
Gordon Bell (American football) — Promoted to Good Article status on January 16.
Dan Dworsky — Promoted to Good Article status on January 16.
Jon Vaughn — Promoted to Good Article status on January 17.
2008 Orange Bowl — Promoted to Good Article status on January 18.
Don Dufek — Promoted to Good Article status on January 18.
2007 ACC Championship Game — Promoted to Good Article status on January 19.
Whitey Wistert — Promoted to Good Article status on January 19.
Ted Petoskey — Promoted to Good Article status on January 24.
Garland Rivers — Promoted to Good Article status on January 26.
Iowa Hawkeyes football seasons — Promoted to Featured List status on January 30.

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:40, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're wrong about Warrior.

Sorry, pal, but Warrior was right. Ledger's daughter is better off without a drug addicted father in her life. Drug addicts deserve no respect. Warrior a homophobe? No. He's just against gay propaganda. Warrior won't kill himself either, so you lose. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.242.152 (talk) 20:54, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jahleel Addae

Well, he said that Bill Stewart and the coaching staff wasn't pursuing as hard anymore. And with Butch Jones, who was with Rich Rod at WVU for awhile (incase you don't remember him lol), at CMU, Jahleel went ahead and went there. They run the spread as well.

But we can blame it on RR. lol John (talk) 22:02, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shark Boy

If you will check the "Stone Cold" Steve Austin Wikipedia Page, then go to the "Austin 3:16" portion of the page, and you will clearly see it says whipped not whooped. Also, I've never heard him on television say "whooped", it's always been "whipped". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Superwhitekid (talk • contribs) 01:54, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stargate Universe

Fair enough but why did you delete the reference to Stargate Universe altogether.There was no need to delete everything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Riddeller (talk • contribs) 21:17, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles

Yeah man, good job with those. It really helps alot when you fix my mistakes, since they're usually everywhere. lol I've been gone all weekend, and that's why I never got the chance to check them out. John (talk) 01:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, Mingo. lol John (talk) 02:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's all West BY GOD Virginia in my book. lol John (talk) 02:29, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter

Delivered: 18:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

Zereoue

I'm not exactly sure. He's actually from Africa? I thought he was from NY. John (talk) 23:26, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Umm, all I can say is to try and find some stuff on websites like people.com or something. Sorry.John (talk) 00:35, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your RfA

Hi Crash Underride. I'd advise you to withdraw your current request for adminship since a strong consensus is emerging against you being promoted. Your willingness to help Wikipedia is appreciated, but it appears that you are not yet ready to be given the tools. Withdraw2ing now would save further discussion and may be looked on favorably if you decide on another RfA in the future. Good luck and I hope that you continue to make good contributions to Wikipedia. Gwernol 13:13, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your request for adminship was unsuccessful

Good Morning Crash, unfortunately, I closed your recent request for adminship per the generally accepted snowball clause for RFAs that are not likely to succeed. I personally believe you do have the potential to become a user who could be promoted to administratorship in the near future, especially in consideration of the clear dedication you put in. Try to ensure that you take all the criticism in the oppose section constructively, and most importantly, communicate with those that voiced their opinion in your RFA and by discussion you will eventually find a better ideal of what is needed in an administrative candidate and even try to look for improvements in yourself. I would also like to suggest that you seek an administrator coach who will eventually assist you in your development and give you general tips on the community on Wikipedia. Regards, Rudget . 16:30, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No I don't think he contributed to the discussion. I'm sure you'll do fine though. Rudget . 18:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox 2008

I don't really see how this is more beneficial than the current infobox TBH. Having both their name and birthname is redundant (since only a handful of wrestlers have legally changed their name, so 99% of them would have the same name for both) and their birth name is posted in the first sentence. TJ Spyke 00:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(x-posted) I'm inclined to agree with TJ. Also, if we had decided on adding the birthname, we could have just added it to the other template instead of making a new one. Nikki311 00:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(x-posted) I Agree with Tj and Nikki Less Than Clippers 00:43, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What's up wtih your shouting response? You wanted opinions and I gave my opinion (in a very respectful manner). I don't see what this new infobox adds that would make it better than the current one. TJ Spyke 00:54, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, haha. I didn't see that. TJ Spyke 00:57, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmad Carroll

It's Ahmad Carroll by the way not Carrol and calm down all I did was fix a typo of penaltys to penalties. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.31.229.63 (talk) 01:02, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: AAFL

No Prob, Bob! (Reference to Waldo Heraldo Faldo of Family Matters) User:Alakazam —Preceding comment was added at 01:37, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Picture deletion

I have deleted the image. In the future, if there was another image that you uploaded and wanted deleted, you could just put {{db-author}} or {{db-user}} (for user pages) on the page or image. MECU≈talk 13:48, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WWE/TNA Plug

Are you sure it's an honest plug for TNA? I mean, it seems very fishy that WWE would practically ignore TNA for all this time, with wrestlers making the odd subliminal jab at them in promos from time to time , and then turn around and promote them so openly. I don't think it's an honest plug, myself, but hell - it could be. It's just very weird. I mean, all the other news on the "Industry News" portion of WWE.com is WWE-related.. Th 2005 (talk) 18:05, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seems I spoke too soon. The sister site of PWTorch.com, ProWrestling.net, is reporting that it's not a mistake. Huh. Still weird. Th 2005 (talk) 18:11, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]