User talk:Dirtlawyer1/Archives/2012/July

TB

A rather belated comment for you here. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 12:17, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

And I'd like to second the comments in the section immediately above me :) Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 12:17, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks and thanks, NL.

BTW, the "source" for the en masse transfer of the 1904 Florida State College football team to the new University of the State of Florida is apparently a one-sentence mention on a history page of FSU's website (no back-up, of course). Actual reliable sources like Kabat and McEwen don't support it. I think the fact that Pee Wee Fosythe was the old FSC's last coach in 1904 and the new UF's first coach in 1906 probably contributed to the myth. There was so much chaos and upheaval in the aftermath of the Buckman Act, consolidation, and the transfer of the new UF from Lake City in 1905 to the new Gainesville campus in 1906 meant there were very high attrition rates among very small student bodies. UF's total enrollment was around 120 in 1906. There were also very high drop-out and transfer rates in those days. The early history of both colleges is really quite twisted and confusing, but it's really interesting in the context of the larger history of the state. Modern partisans of FSU and UF who don't know or understand the details of that history often make "logical" assumptions that usually prove wrong . . . the actual history is so much stranger than anything you could invent. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 12:36, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Huh...that is quite interesting. My only (comprehensive through 1987, although undoubtedly partisan) source is Bill McGrotha's Seminoles: The First Forty Years, which says nothing about a full transfer from FSC to G'ville/Lake City. Combine that lack with the circumstances, which do lend themselves to various legends arising, and I understand how this would be dismissed almost out of hand. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 01:30, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Does McGrotha mention what happened to Pee Wee Forsythe after his three seasons in Gainesville ended? Did you know he played for John Heisman at Clemson from 1899 to 1902? Unfortunately, he just disappears from the public record after he left Florida . . . strangely, we're not even sure of his real first name. Ric Kabat in his Florida Historical Quarterly article about the FSC football team (1902–04), has his first name as "Jack," but the Florida athletic association says it was "James," the Clemson athletic department recorded his name as "Pee Wee," and the Clemson alumni association has his full name as "J. A. Forsythe." Little bit of a mystery. Forsythe was apparently quite the stud with a football, and is alleged to have suited up and played when he was coaching for both FSC and UF. If you haven't already read it, you should look at his Wikipedia article: Jack Forsythe. I suspect you'll get a kick out of it. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:49, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

He does not...there's only one clause about Forsythe, although he does use Jack as the first name and says that he played in the backfield during the 1904 season ("...and a backfield of Jack "Pee Wee" Forsythe -- who was also the coach -- plus Ed Watson, Lawrence Murray and Church Witmer."). I didn't know that about Heisman...and since the Noles opened the 1904 season against Heisman's Yellow Jackets, Forsythe's first loss (33-0) would have been at the hands of the man who coached him just two years prior...that's a great read on a fascinating guy. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 02:35, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for participating in my RFA! I appreciate your support. Zagalejo^^^ 06:28, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Walter J. Zable

 — Crisco 1492 (talk)) 08:03, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

3RR warning

You are hereby warned that any edit you make, just about anywhere, will be reported to ANI. Tony (talk) 02:59, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Tony1, thank you for taking the time to acknowledge the required WP:3RR warning that I left on your talk page here: [1]. I strongly urge you not to engage in further edit-warring on MOS pages in violation of WP:3RR, either individually or in conjunction with User:Noetica. As an experienced editor, you should be familiar with the mandatory sanctions for such actions. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:38, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Funny as Tony's warning is, your edit here does smack of a continued tangent of an edit war that you've taken on the wikilawyering of. Don't do that. Be nice, and WP:AGF. Dicklyon (talk) 04:00, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Dicklyon, thank you for your well-intended advice, but I am not engaged in "wikilawyering." I am simply pointing a procedural finger, pursuant to Wikipedia policy, at the actions of Noetica and Tony1, and the demonstrated long-term tendentious editing and ownership issues that both of them have presented on MOS pages, as well as the immediate problem of tag-team edit-warring by them. As I am sure you are well aware, in these situations 3RR warnings are mandatory, not optional; but as long-term editors, I am also quite certain that Noetica and Tony1 are painfully aware of these rules. I am just doing what policy requires. And while I will do my level best to maintain my own AGF composure pursuant to your sound advice, I have my doubts whether Tony's comment immediately above and his edit summary on his own talk page when deleting the 3RR warning were intended to be "funny." Any humor divined from such comments may be of the unintentional variety. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 04:18, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of any policy requiring you to issue 3RR warnings. In fact, that sounds like a pure hallucination. What are you talking about? Dicklyon (talk) 04:20, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

"Hallucination" is a little strong, don't you think? The 3RR reporting page states: "A warning is not required, but if the user appears unaware that edit warring is prohibited, they can be told about this policy by posting a Uw-3rr template message on their user talk page. Avoid posting a generic warning template if actively involved in the edit war; it can be seen as aggressive. Consider writing your own note to the user specifically appropriate for the situation, with a view to explicitly cooling things down." So, you are correct, sir: it is not mandatory. Just best practice. Clearly, Noetica was not aware he was about to breach or had already breached 3RR, and he has continued to revert edits on related pages even after warning. What can one say? As a real world lawyer, I am also aware of the rhetorical tactic of focusing on the one incorrect element among several larger points that are correct in their particulars. In the big picture, I think you would be hard-pressed to deny that we have very real long-term ownership issues on the MOS pages. When it comes to the MOS talk pages, I read a lot and comment very rarely. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 04:53, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

I didn't think "hallucination" was strong; it does appear that you hallucinated the idea that you were required to provide such warnings; and further to claim it as best practice, which seems a stretch for this case, where neither party had done 3 reverts and both are clearly aware of such rules. And you escalated matters by trying to apply the contested guideline to another page, and then complaining that you got reverted there, too. Don't do that. Dicklyon (talk) 05:09, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Also, you seem to have mis-read WP:3RR; look again. Dicklyon (talk) 05:16, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

{{outdent)) Dick, I am uncertain if you are here on my talk page to resolve something, defend Noetica and Tony, or simply express your substantive disagreement with me in a roundabout manner . . . . From the perspective of the majority, the "contested guideline" is the absolute prohibition against the use of the comma with i.e. and e.g.; there is not now, nor has there every been, a consensus to support such a prohibition. Several editors are engaged in a rhetorical exercise in support a non-existent consensus to maintain the status quo, when it should simply be reverted to its pre-prohibition 2011 form. If you think there is something inappropriate about my 3RR warnings, you are entitled to you opinion, but it does appear to be based on opinion, nothing more. The bigger issue here is the MOS ownership problem and the manipulation of "consensus" (really a stonewalling minority veto) in favor of the status quo when the status quo was attained through previous non-consensus changes in the recent past. Sorry, but that greatly offends my sense of fundamental fairness as well as any normal understanding of logical consistency. It's Alice-in-Wonderland to say that it can't be changed without a consensus when it's already been changed without a consensus. Furthermore, it's pretty darn clear that there is a present consensus against the prohibition of the comma. But, hey, if you want to continue to tell me that 3RR warnings "aren't nice," please feel free to continue. Oh, and for the record, Noetica and Tony collectively reverted three identical edits in a very brief time. It's a clear case of tag-team behavior.

Just a thought: good for the goose, good for the gander . . . Perhaps you should spend some time counseling Noetica with regard to AGF and CIVIL in light of his ongoing attempts at clever insults. Sleep well, sir. And now to bed. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 05:47, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

USA Swimming

Just wanted to drop by and say thanks for all your work on the USA Swimming-related articles. Especially going through all the bios and making sure they're consistent! It may be tedious, but your work is appreciated! You may or may not know I've been editing also, but under anonymous IPs.Philipmj24 (talk) 21:24, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

I suspected that was you. My personal goal was to have a consistently-formatted framework for all of the 2012 Olympic swimming bios to which we could then add substance. Another editor who I don't know added four or five stubs for the newbies, and I added one for Teri McKeever last night. We've still got a lot of work to clean up and flesh out the college and pre-Olympic careers for the swimmers, but it always seems a little more manageable when the articles are properly formatted to start. Between the online USA Swimming and college team profiles, we should be able to beat them into shape, and then layer in some online news article for the major events. I'll also try to layer in the NCAA records book for All-American honors and the NCAA championships. You're the expert on other swimming references, so we'll be relying on you for the substance and to properly source the swimmers' US national, FINA championship, Pan-Pac and Pan-Am history. All things considered, the articles are not in bad shape to start the real writing. I'm hoping my old Gator girl Dara still has one 50m sprint left in her! Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:43, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

If you're in Atlanta, maybe you have access to the Journal-Constitution? This will really improve the Amanda Weir article. Drmies (talk) 23:35, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Drmies, I read the online Atlanta Journal-Constitution daily, but the bandits charge for everything that's older than 10-14 days after they dump it in their archives. I was going to subscribe to the online New York Times during the month leading up to the Olympics (the NYT archives are the bomb), but if you get me a list of AJC articles you want, I'll get a limited-time subscription for the AJC archives, too. It looks like several of the Olympic swim team members have significant Georgia ties. By the way, is that "Dr. Mies?" Otherwise, I have no clue how to pronounce your handle. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 23:43, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

I may have access through my university, but the problem is that it's a bit of a hassle (on my netbook) and I don't really love swimming enough (unless it's in our own pool, haha). So no, don't get that subscription; I'll check and get back to you, and if I can I will find articles if you want them (I have access to the NYT also, even the years you have to pay for). Georgia and Auburn are swimland, as far as I know--and aren't there a lot from Oregon and USC? BTW, my neighbor here was a lawyer and moved to ATL--if your name is George, hey, they did a lot of work on your house. Yes, it is Dr. Mies, indeed. We watched some of the trials today and my 6-yr old was impressed; both my girls are water rats. I saw that kid swim the 700 today: I couldn't swim that far if my life depended on it. Drmies (talk) 00:10, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Oops. No George here. LOL

Arizona, Auburn, Cal, Florida, Georgia, Southern Cal, Stanford and Texas have been the consistent top-10 college swimming programs over the last 25 years. Other programs have come and gone, but these have been the gold standard. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 02:40, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I'm currently a little occupied doing summer school, but I can work on it when I have some free time. Philipmj24 (talk) 12:07, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Alleged misrepresentations and incivilities

Dirtlawyer, I expect your retractions and apologies. See this new subsection. Also please note: you are required to advise affected editors formally when you have taken action at an admin forum. You failed to do that.
Noetica^Tea? 00:34, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Noetica, I just saw your comment above for the first time this morning; apparently the orange talk page notice bar got lost in the fray. I was certainly wrong not to place the 3RR notifications on your talk page, and I do apologize for that as it was inconsistent with required procedure. As for the substance of the history of "stonewalling," well, as I said on the MOS talk page, the truth is a sound defense in my world, and in most circumstances, on Wikipedia as well. Regards. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:34, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

When you alter the heading of a section made by someone else (for example adding "alleged" in the present case), note the change in the section itself, please. Now to the content:

You deprive me of a timely opportunity to counter serious and sometimes gratuitous accusations at an admin forum, and you apologise. That is hollow, because while you could remove a straight and deliberate lie about me (concerning my preferences among style guides) at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Abbreviations, you do not do so. So much for truth.

Turning to "stonewalling", that is the worst and most partisan slant that could be put on my long-standing and consistent appeals for orderly development of the Manual of Style, and of titling provisions. And on the slow, patient consultative work that I have engaged in, and sometimes led, to that end. You can continue with cheap slurs on talkpages if you like (despite last year's ArbCom warnings and heightened readiness to deal with such abuses, at MOS talkpages and at WT:TITLE); but you do so at some peril.

I am not a litigious editor; but I reserve all available options in the present circumstances – including through ArbCom enforcement. I am still waiting for amendments at the MOS:ABBR talkpage.

☺

Noetica^Tea? 00:46, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Noetica, per WP:TPO, I could have simply deleted your comments. I thought they served a better purpose by leaving them for all to read. As I'm sure you know, an editor on his own talk page has a fair amount of latitude, including editing any section headers. To leave the header as you typed it is tacitly to accept your allegations; I do not. Please feel free to file whatever ANI or ArbCom enforcement action you feel is necessary; I will gladly meet you in any forum of your choosing. As a resident of the Land Down Under, I am sure you are aware of the BOOMERANG concept. There will be no amendments forthcoming at the MOS:ABBR talk page. My comments on the talk page stand as written; if you are unable to accept the good-natured teasing about Strunk and White, instead of trying characterize it as a "lie," may I suggest you not engage in comments of your own such as these?

This conversation is concluded; I respectfully request that you find another forum. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:21, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 16

Hi. When you recently edited Max Jaben, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Israeli (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:46, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Rugby

Hey. Can you explain why the rugby section was taken down? I know it is not a NCAA sanctioned sport, it is sanctioned by the International Rugby League, which is why I made a sectioned titled "notable non varsity sports". Just thought we should have a section, just like every other team in the SEC has it on their page. Specially since the team did win the inaugural championship and are ranked in the top 10 every year. I don't see the harm. There is mention of the cheerleading squad and the dance team, but not a championship team that gets more air time than some of the less known sports? Just want a legitimate reason. Not just a "because they are not NCAA" statement. And like I previously stated, most other schools have a "non varsity" section on their pages.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.64.101.31 (talk) 04:43, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I have undone the "corrections" made by "dirtlawyer1". Adding to what's above, the page talks about the marching band and about fan traditions. I don't comprehend why a section labeled "non varsity sports" or even "club sports" should not be on this page. The name of the page is "Florida Gators". You shouldn't be biased to just varsity sports.

Also, this page is one of the few that don't include club sports, like mentioned above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.54.85.190 (talk) 05:05, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Sure. I'm happy to explain my removal of the rugby team material if my edit summary wasn't clear enough. The Florida Gators article was purged of all random, non-NCAA, non-varsity sports three years ago in the interest of focus and fairness. The Florida Gators varsity sports teams are sponsored by the University of Florida, funded and managed by the University Athletic Association, and are the officially sanctioned representatives of the University of Florida in intercollegiate sports. All nineteen (twenty-one, if you count the indoor and outdoor track teams separately) of the Florida Gators varsity teams are clearly notable per WP:N. The lead section of the article makes it perfectly clear that its subject matter only includes the varsity sports teams of the university. Legally, the club teams are not official representatives of the university and may not use the University of Florida sports logos. Furthermore, the caliber of the average scholarship athlete who participates in intercollegiate varsity sports is significantly greater than the average club team athlete. In short, the Florida rugby team is no more deserving of mention in the Florida Gators varsity sports program article than the competition cheerleading club team, cricket club team, flag football club team, frisbee golf club team, rowing club team, sailing club team, water-skiing club team, or any of the other 30+ non-varsity club teams that proliferate in Gainesville with student government funding. And, yes, I am aware of the fact that a single-purpose WP editor added rugby club team sections to most of the Division I sports program articles several months ago. That material should be deleted as well. The fact that other editors have not been as diligent in purging such material as the Florida Gators regulars have been is not a justification for adding the some misplaced material to the Florida Gators article. If you really want to test the notability of the Florida rugby team, I suggest that you try adding a stand-alone Florida rugby article to Wikipedia. In all likelihood, it will not survive an AfD review because it cannot satisfy the general notability standards of WP:GNG. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 05:27, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the time taken to respond. I understand now. You say that it cannot satisfy the general notability standards of WP:GNG, I don't think I quite understand this. Also, you said that the rugby team is no more deserving of mention in the Florida Gators varsity sports program article than any of the other 30+ non-varsity club teams. I did not mean for my editing to come across as to think that the rugby team deserves more than the other teams, I just thought that just like the rugby team, other teams could post as well. But I now perfectly understand this page is strictly sanctioned varsity sports.

Also, apart from this discussion, there are certain Florida rugby players that are near the skill level to able to compete for the USA and other countries in the 2016 Olympics in rugby 7s. Some already play in their individual countries. If they do achieve the honor of going to the Olympics, will they be included in the "Gator athletes in the Olympic Games" section? I know this is still 4 years away, but I am just curious as I am intrigued by how this whole online "editing" on Wikipedia actually works. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.64.101.31 (talk) 06:45, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

The list of University of Florida Olympians includes all current and former students who have participated in the Olympics, not just former Florida Gators varsity athletes, but I'm pretty sure we can count one hand the number of UF Olympians who were not also current or former varsity athletes. Frank Shorter comes to mind; he was a Yale undergrad and a Florida law grad. There are a handful of others, mostly in sports like bobsledding, cycling, handball and martial arts, for which Division I teams are non-existent. If any Florida rugby players qualify for the U.S. Olympic team, or that of any other country, they would be included. If you're comparing Florida Gators sports articles on Wikipedia to those of other universities, many of ours are in much better shape (see, e.g., Florida Gators women's lacrosse); several of ours still need a lot of work (see, e.g., Florida Gators volleyball). If you're interested, we can find productive work for you to do! Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:50, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright investigations

Thanks for the offer to help with a copyvio issue (Ryan Nece), and sorry no one responded earlier. Our resident expert, Moonriddengirl, who would normally have jumped on this, has decided to take a break from the understaffed Copyright Problems, to ....drumroll... work on the even more understaffed Copyright investigations.

She is the primary author of Wikipedia:Text Copyright Violations 101, which was written exactly for your request. Feedback on whether it needs work would be appreciated. If it isn't clear, I'll take a stab at it, although I'm still far from an expert.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 21:50, 28 July 2012 (UTC)