User talk:Eagles247/Archive 48

Archive 45

Archive 46

Archive 47

Archive 48

Archive 49

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

A Bill Parcells Coaching Tree

Good evening. I know it's been awhile since we last talked, but do you still have any plans to design a Bill Parcells coaching tree for the Coaching tree page? Let me know if you'd be able to eventually do so. Thank you for your time. Hope to hear back from you soon. Mr. Brain (talk) 01:42, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Raymond W. Kirkbride

Hello, Eagles247. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Raymond W. Kirkbride".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:30, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

A goat for you!

you da goat frfr

Yuiv22 (talk) 14:33, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Bryan Scott

I see that you have repeatedly reverted edits on Bryan Scotts career achievements section of the article. those achievements should be displayed as they are relevant, and effect the publics view on Scotts career. Please refrain from reverting these, or provide an explanation for why you have been doing so. Bears247 (talk) 20:45, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

@Bears247: We don't typically include college conference records per WP:NFLINFOBOXNOT, nor have we been including The Spring League achievements there since it is/was an exhibition/showcase league that doesn't provide players with a salary. I stated this in my edit summary. You also reverted two other edits in the interim, including undoing link and category fixes. Additionally, the content you are adding is very similar to the undisclosed paid editing that has been rampant at that article (see the sock farm over at Talk:Bryan Scott (quarterback)). Your comment about the additions "effect[ing] the publics view on Scotts career" is a bit concerning. You're not also being paid to edit the page, are you? Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:47, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Sorry about the late response. No Scott nor any player is paying me to edit pages. I can understand how this would be a problem but that is not the case here. Bears247 (talk) 23:49, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alabama Pitts

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Alabama Pitts you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 18:01, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Listing players as "former"

Hye, I typically mainly edit baseball wiki pages the majority of the time but do edit football players as well. I seem to be having a disagreement with a certain editor named Bears247. The typical rule of thumb is no activity within two years as after that the odds of a player turning up are very slim. His argument is that one year is the use which is not at all enough time plenty of players after getting cut sit a year out and then turn up somewhere. I believe two years since the last known activity is the most effective way which is what we use on baseball articles as well please let me know your thoughts. Kingryan227 (Decrees • Acts) 22:42, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Kingryan227: I advised Bears247 here that one year without workouts or signings would be enough time for us to assume a player is "former". I've argued for this time frame for a while, but I'm open to other time frames if they make more sense. I'd suggest asking at WT:NFL for other NFL editors' thoughts on the matter, as this is a local consensus situation. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:47, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

I understand yeah I can see a one year argument, with baseball articles we typically do two years cause there is a lot of factors in play. A player could just choose to sit the year out and get stronger and come back, an injury like Johnathan Cyprien was waived with an injury designation he could have just taken this last season off to recover. I'm a firm believer that after two years the odds are very very slim but one year is far too common of a player not appearing in a season then turns up in the CFL or in the preseason or another league etc. I believe one year is just too soon because even after two years you see people turn back up somewhere as a rare occasion. I just believe that two years makes everyone's life easier as if a player turns back up after a year of not playing we don't have to go back delete all that info again and seems like wikipedia has some false info. The two year rule has worked out very well in the baseball articles as 95% of the ones I see that get marked as former after 2 years stay that way where as a lot of people come back in another league within a year of being out. Kingryan227 (Decrees • Acts) 22:54, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Kingryan227: It's not common for NFL players to take a year off to get stronger or healthier, unless maybe they've suffered an extremely serious injury. In Cyprien's case, it appears that he was healthy when the 49ers released him off of the injured reserve list, because otherwise they would have had to give him an injury settlement. If you look at his Twitter page, he has changed his bio to state that he has moved on to other business ventures. I'd assume he's no longer an active player at this point.

Something that can fix all of this, and get rid of these types of subjective conversations, is figuring out a way to "future-proof" athlete player pages. Players who are free agents, retired players, and players who have not officially announced their retirements but have not played in years, should all show up the same, so that years later we don't have to go back and add that a player is done. Maybe remove "Free agent" from being displayed in infoboxes and "former" from leads of all pages would be a start? Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:08, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

I think that we should just have a set year whether we come to an agreement in the middle of like 1.5 years of nothing is fair but how you just mentioned Cypriens twitter that should be added in on his page saying like "As of March 2022, his official Twitter account states that he has moved on to different business ventures" something like that indicates that the player has indeed retired but if there is nothing on social media or any activity I just think one year is too short of a time to jump the gun on listing a player as retired. I think 1.5 to 2 years is definitely long enough to assume if they haven't turned up and haven't officially announced or hinted on social media that they are done. For example Adam Conley a baseball player his wife announced his retirement for him on a blog that wasn't picked up on by any rumor pages or news sources till the other day. I think if someone wants to list the person as former there should be a set time frame I believe 1.5 to 2 years is fair to just assume but any less than that needs to have some sort of source from an official statement or social media page from the actual player or a family member per say. Kingryan227 (Decrees • Acts) 23:18, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

I wouldn't add that to Cyprien's bio though, it's a bit of original research based on a primary source. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:24, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

My thing was pretty much saying that Berry has not played in almost 2 years The fact that this is the only time where I have had this problem with a user regarding “former” vs “free agent” listing, makes me believe that the 1 year mark is still a fine amount of time. Majority of the time in football, after 1 year of no reported interest, that player does not return to playing football. There are a fair amount of times when the opposite is true, but that is far less. The change from former to free agent is not that difficult, and I think that the way we currently have it works. Bears247 (talk) 23:44, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

It's not that it is a difficult edit by any means but like I said there are a lot of players that don't play for a season and then come back and turn up somewhere not going to list them all obviously but it's not an uncommon thing. When a player gets released or become a free agent you never know if they played in their last game a lot of players just wait for the right opportunity. But to mark a 25 year old as retired because he didn't play in a season doesn't make that much sense to me. I did make a post in WT:NFL if you guys would like to join in on the conversation have another editor who responded so it is a topic that is worth discussing. I do want to reiterate that I'm not discrediting anyones work at all I just believe that 1 year isn't a fair amount of time to write someone off you know? Kingryan227 (Decrees • Acts) 00:39, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

i understand what your saying 100% but all i’m saying is that most of the time in the nfl at least, after 1 year of inactivity that player does not play again. sure there are times where players take a year off. but there are also times that players have returned after 2 or 3 years away. should we wait 3 years to call a player former? I think 1 year is a fine time because it goes with what is typical for most players. I’m open for a discussion about this but what i’ve heard just is not enough for me to say that this needs to be changed Bears247 (talk) 17:21, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alabama Pitts

The article Alabama Pitts you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Alabama Pitts for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 18:20, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alabama Pitts

The article Alabama Pitts you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Alabama Pitts for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 20:21, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Eric Berry

I was having a discussion with another user who was repeatedly changing Eric Berry from “former” to “free agent”. Berry has not played in 3 years and should be referred to as a former player. Unfortunately I was banned earlier today for making these changes back, but I was just wondering if this is a change you would be willing to make as it has been more than enough time to call him a former player. Bears247 (talk) 02:24, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

You can also see on the discussion we had on his talk page that he has no intention of making much needed improvements to the page Bears247 (talk) 02:34, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

@Bears247: Still waiting for your response above at #Bryan Scott. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:51, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

hi eagles247. I just have a quick question still regarding everything that has happened with the Eric Berry page. I believe that I was given an unjust ban and was wondering if there is any way I can appeal this. I attempted to have a discussion with the steelers user about this on his talk page but he just was not cooperating. Obviously I can’t do anything about this since i’m banned from editing the Berry page, but i was just going to ask if you could review everything that has happened there because I believe that my original edits were in the right. Bears247 (talk) 17:39, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

@Bears247: As the block template on your user talk page says, you can appeal a partial block by posting {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} on your user talk page and an uninvolved administrator will review your case. Please read the Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks for details on how to write a successful block appeal. Eagles 24/7 (C) 18:47, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Recent spate of non-notable USFL player articles

I know you have been PRODing and taking a good number these non-notable USFL player articles. I have been draftifying the other ones in hopes that the editor will understand policy and try to work on them there. I've been trying to communicate and provide links to Karate LemonLime but he either is unable or does not want to communicate. Do you think it would help for you to leave a message given you're an admin? I'm starting to get at wits end and I feel like its now bordering on WP:CIR and WP:COMMUNICATE territory. Best, GPL93 (talk) 16:20, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

@GPL93: Thank you for your message. I have blocked the user from editing in the mainspace until they acknowledge the messages on their talk page and prevent them from creating new articles. I do not think a message from me would have helped the situation, as the user does not seem to have read any of the messages on their talk page so far. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:52, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Looks like it worked like a charm. Best, GPL93 (talk) 18:38, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up on WP:NGRIDIRON, completely missed that discussion. Dan arndt (talk) 15:29, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

• So I'm not sure if ANI is necessary or not, but there is a similar situation with an editor who is finally communicating after a threat of ANI but is essentially creating stubs with poor sourcing. Despite attempts to give them advice, they are still creating mainspace articles and then now just asking other editors to fix all of the mistakes. GPL93 (talk) 17:11, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• @GPL93: I've blocked NateDawg652 from editing in mainspace for now. Repeated warnings to start articles in draftspace have not been heeded, and the user is creating messes for other users to clean up. They can be unblocked once they demonstrate an understanding for WP:N and WP:GNG. Eagles 24/7 (C) 11:42, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

A belated thank you. Sadly, it looks like NateDawg652 decided to resort to sockpuppetry before heading your advice. I'm sure there will be another editor who ignores policy and refuses to communicate soon enough because they all seem to be interested in American football for some reason. Best, GPL93 (talk) 20:18, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Alabama Pitts

On 9 April 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Alabama Pitts, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Alabama Pitts was noted by the Los Angeles Times in 1934 as "the most prominent jail-bird athlete in America"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Alabama Pitts. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Alabama Pitts), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:02, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 5,664 views (472.0 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of April 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 02:45, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

pass rusher positions

I had a question regarding the listing of players between Defensive end and Outside linebacker. Those two are very interchangeable and are entirely based on the defensive scheme of the team. In cases where coaching and personnel changes, and they announce what type of defense they will be running (3-4 vs 4-3), wouldn’t it be safe to change pass rush positions accordingly? I changed many of those prior to my original edit ban, which may have been part of the reason. But the Bears have announced they are switching from a 3-4 to a 4-3, so players like robert quinn and others would change from outside linebacker to defensive end. This also goes for other teams so I was just wondering if it would be acceptable to make this change at this time. Bears247 (talk) 00:28, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

@Bears247: Why should I continue wasting my time explaining Wikipedia's policies to you when you just ignore everything I say anyway? [1] [2] [3] [4] Eagles 24/7 (C) 15:20, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

I see that you linked a few of my previous edits, and I assume that is to prove some sort of point for lack of citing. In those instances their is nothing to cite (RG3 and Leggett). It was a community consensus based edit on differing between former and free agent, and I looked on the community page and saw the discussion about waiting 2 years rather than 1. Nothing their to cite, just be going back and correcting things to match the new consensus on wiki. sorry for trying to help. Bears247 (talk) 16:51, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

@Bears247: No, that is not what I was referencing, and this is exactly the problem. Please read through my response in the second link again, and if you still don't understand, keep reading it until you do. Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:53, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

{{re}} I see. You mentioned that you wouldn’t bother doing it, but it wouldn’t be an issue if I did so would it? Just something that isn’t necessarily needed? Bears247 (talk) 17:01, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

@Eagles247: sorry i’m trying to learn how this works Bears247 (talk) 17:02, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

@Bears247: No, it's not explicitly an issue, but you directly asked me if I'd "prefer" that you make these changes. I said I would not bother with them, and you proceeded to make them anyway. Why did you ask for my opinion if you were going to ignore it anyway? Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:06, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

@Eagles247: I asked because if you would have told me you did not want me to do it I would not have. Your response made it sound as if it did not make a difference either way, and I preferred that I just get it done so all pages follow the same time frame. Bears247 (talk) 17:17, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

@Bears247: Okay, that's fine, but you did not respond at the time so I was surprised to see you go against my advice. As a heads up, Template:Infobox NFL player now has some changes to it. When you write "Free agent" in the |current_team= parameter, it is the same as if you leave the field empty. Therefore, there is now no need to write "Free agent" at all; just leave the field blank. You can add a player's number to the |number= parameter whether that player is explicitly retired, a free agent, or whatever. This future-proofs the infoboxes, so there is no longer a need to go back and switch over players' infoboxes after set amounts of time. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:27, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

so what would your response in answer be to the original question about listing pass rusher positions. I would just like to know for future edits and when it would be acceptable to change this. Bears247 (talk) 01:19, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

@Bears247: If a source does not exist for the player changing positions, you can't add it. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:21, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Potential Mdelnegro12 Sock

The this edit history is very similar (mostly focused on USFL and Fan Controlled Football League). At the least, the editor is editing disruptively and adding photos that are clear copyvios. Best, GPL93 (talk) 16:15, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

@GPL93: They've already been indeffed. Not 100% sure about the connection to Mdelnegro12, but this one appears more likely to be their sock. Eagles 24/7 (C) 14:03, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. It does look like NflFanInEditing has begun socking as well and I have started an SPI. Best, GPL93 (talk) 16:37, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

@GPL93: Good catch, I was reverting their edits earlier today and didn't make the connection. Reviewing their edits again, they're clearly a sock. I've blocked the account and left a note on the SPI page. Thanks! Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:48, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

New administrator activity requirement

The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.

Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:

1. Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
2. Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period

Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.

22:52, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

TSL

Are teams in The Spring League no longer added to player infoboxes? Thanks. BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:17, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

@BeanieFan11: I usually don't add them since the league was non-paid. This was the only discussion at WT:NFL about it, with one editor agreeing. Could be worth another discussion if you wanted to post about it. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:47, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Vincelord

I don't feel I should lose my new page patroller user rights just because I created 2 pages people didn't like. I've never vandalized any pages. I'm a good page reviewer.Vincelord (talk) 14:53, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

FYI, Eagles247 since Vincelord didn't notify you and this is definitely related to you, they've requested rights back at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Vincelord._appeal_to_get_back_new_page_patroller_rights. PRAXIDICAE💕 14:31, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

@Praxidicae: Thanks! Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:03, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For your significant contributions over the years.... Keep it up! Volten001 ☎ 02:22, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Block evasion

Looks like our friend is back 199.33.32.245 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) Yankees10 22:06, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

@Yankees10: Yep, thanks! Also at 2600:1700:2B30:22C0:0:0:0:0/64 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Eagles 24/7 (C) 12:04, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Is this the same friend who has left you love notes the last two mornings? – Muboshgu (talk) 14:49, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

@Muboshgu: Could be, but I find it unlikely. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:01, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

This person legit doesn't stop. 24.201.8.149 (talk · contribs · WHOIS).-- Yankees10 03:55, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

@Yankees10: Thanks, blocked. Keep 'em coming. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:50, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

2607:F380:828:FA00:0:0:0:588C (talk · contribs · WHOIS)-- Yankees10 00:24, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@Yankees10: Blocked. Eagles 24/7 (C) 12:59, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

130.65.254.15 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)-- Yankees10 22:32, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

@Yankees10: Blocked, thanks! Eagles 24/7 (C) 13:40, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Kupp

Hello. On that revert to Cooper Kupp, you had wiped out my recent changes as well. Was that intentional? If not, can you restore mine? Thanks. Red Director (talk) 16:22, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

@Red Director: I've restored your intermediate edits to the page. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:53, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Just didn't know if I messed up somewhere. Keep up the good fight on here! I see you are in a fight with a rogue IP. Red Director (talk) 17:54, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

@Red Director: Nope, you're good! Sorry about that. That IP likes to edit seemingly every line of text in a page, and all in the same edit, so it is difficult to undo just their edits if they aren't the most recent editor. If you come across edits like theirs in the future, feel free to drop me a line here so I can whack them. Thanks! Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:59, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Jamal Pettigrew

Hi. I just noticed you're deletion of Jamal Pettigrew under G5. I don't think that would apply in this case, as I thought I saw someone other than the sock make "substantial edits" to the article. Let me know if I'm wrong. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:53, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

@BeanieFan11: Saw those edits, and thought it was a close call. I can restore the page if you'd like, but do you think it'd survive an AfD? The only references in the article at the time of deletion were from his college team bios, an article about the Southland Conference postponing the 2020 season, and his Rams bio. Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:03, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Team 9 roster

Template:Team 9 roster has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:22, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:XFL (2020) staff templates

A tag has been placed on Category:XFL (2020) staff templates indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:08, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for being a super editor!

Your edits are simplifying me the job to translate articles from english wikipedia to French Wikipedia.

In the French one, there isn't a lot of people who are working on the NFL project.

Cordially,

AQuebecBoy (talk) 21:07, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Archive 45

Archive 46

Archive 47

Archive 48

Archive 49