Jump to content

User talk:Giants27/Archives/2010/January

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


College Football Stats

Do I include postseason stats in the 2009 stats for Mike Kafka? Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:56, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I think a separate section in the stats just for the postseason is the best route to go, but feel free to do it either way.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 02:19, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
I think I'll include it in the 2009 stats, because announcers for games group them together. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:24, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Broughton/Clark

Just letting you know why I removed the wording about these guys being signed off the Giants' practice squad. Since the Giants' season is over the practice squad contracts should be expired and those guy would just sign as free agents. I'm guessing the media looked them up after they signed with AZ and saw that there were on the Giants' roster online, not knowing the details of the situation.►Chris NelsonHolla! 22:13, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Figured that much but I just went with the media report even though it was unlikely they were signed off the Giants' PS.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 23:32, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 January 2010

Sorry

Hi! I'm sorry for not showing up to support your RfA despite offering to nominate you a couple of months back. I was inactive for 2 and a half months and didn't really follow Wikipedia during that time. For what it's worth, I still think you'd make a great admin and my offer still stands, if you ever feel like going through hell week again. Keep up the good work. Jafeluv (talk) 13:23, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, any potential support !vote probably wouldn't have made a difference. Thanks again for the consideration.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 19:25, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Curtis Gatewood

Updated DYK query On January 10, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Curtis Gatewood, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:00, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Captain Munnerlyn

At WP:GAN#SPORT you nominated Captain Munnerlyn for GA status. However, there is no {{GAN}} template on the article's talk page (Talk:Captain Munnerlyn). I signed up to review it but I first to ensure this is the correct article you intended to nominate. maclean (talk) 18:19, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Whoops, guess I forgot to add it. Thanks for the heads up.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 19:19, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
I made a couple notes at Talk:Captain Munnerlyn/GA1. Take care of these and it should be fine. maclean (talk) 21:26, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll get right on that. Cheers,--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 21:27, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Your userpage was blanked

Hi, just though I'd let you know that while I was looking at Recent IP edits, a certain 64.53.217.17 (who I understand you have had dealings with in the past!) decided to blank your userpage. I reverted it and issued a level 4, but also noticed this consituted block evasion. Should I notify administrators through the 'Administrator intervention against vandals' page or is there a seperate page?Acather96 (talk) 21:58, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Looks like somebody got to it already, but thanks for the reversion. Can't these people find a hobby?--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 22:01, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Category about "African-Americans" in football

I agree with what you said. It's silly. American football is primarily comprised of blacks, so the category is silly. Even if they were a minority, I think these racial categories are ridiculous. Enigmamsg 04:00, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Exactly. Having different categories for different races makes no sense. American football is predominantly blacks so a category that's comparable would be like white hockey players.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 19:29, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Greece men's national junior ice hockey team

Updated DYK query On January 11, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Greece men's national junior ice hockey team, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 06:00, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 11 January 2010

Eric Peterman

See there i tried more. Before it was full of crap. Now I kinda you know....made it readable. I understand the cleanup you did but before It was all BS. Dont get upset with me. Stealthninja545 (talk) 00:32, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, trust me the more work I have to do the less likely I want to do it all as well. Cheers and keep up the (necessary) hard work,--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 00:34, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Infobox NFL active

What do you think about the idea of making the "statseason" field optional for retired players? Personally I dont think it is necessary to say Career NFL statistics as of XX for retired players since it already says earlier in the infobox when the player last played.--Yankees10 19:50, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I kind of like it because it can be different. Say a player retired after the 2002 season but didn't play that season, meaning he last played in 2001 which is what the infobox should say. Plus, it'd be a pain to figure out how to do that.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 20:04, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Yeah thats a good point, never mind.--Yankees10 20:06, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

John David Booty

It never says on any website (including nfl.com) that John David Booty signed with the Houston Texans on January 11, 2010 or whatever it was. On nfl.com, it that he re-signed with the Tennessee Titans. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gibberish77 (talk • contribs) 00:56, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Check out the Texans website and [1] for the move. Both of those sources are more reliable for transactions than NFL.com.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 00:59, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

You are right about the Texans website, but he is also listed on the Tennessee Titans practice squad on their official website. So he probably is on the Houston Texans. I'm sorry for the trouble. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gibberish77 (talk • contribs) 12:36, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, odds are there are more people who are confused about this situation.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 19:37, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
@Gibberish77 - The Titans' roster is from 2009, hence the presence of a practice squad. There are no practice squads in the offseason and all practice squad contracts expire when the team's season does, so Booty's did and he decided to sign with the Texans for 2010.►Chris NelsonHolla! 21:37, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Mobile Wizards
Kenny Easley
Rio Grande Valley Dorados
Cliff Floyd
Hawaiian Islanders
Memphis Xplorers
Bakersfield Blitz
Macon Knights
San Diego Riptide
Everett Hawks
Louisville Fire
Manchester Wolves
Harvey Martin
South Georgia Wildcats
Arkansas Twisters
Todd Williams
Stockton Lightning
Quad City Steamwheelers
Riblets
Cleanup
Deion Sanders
Tulsa Talons
NFL on television
Merge
Two-point conversion
Personal trainer
Inter-Cooperative Council at the University of Michigan
Add Sources
Ray King
Baseball awards
Eli Marrero
Wikify
Don Beebe
Dat Nguyen
Super Bowl XVIII
Expand
Chris Weinke
Mike Mularkey
Curt Schilling

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:58, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh knoes!

Gasp! Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:43, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

I doubt he's impersonating me but amusing none the less.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 02:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Haha, I know I just thought it was funny. Eagles 24/7 (C) 05:17, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

WP:NODRAMA/2

Just a quick reminder that the Second Great Wikipedia Dramaout has begun. Please log any work you do at Wikipedia:The Great Wikipedia Dramaout/2nd/Log. Good luck! --Jayron32 01:51, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Van Halen

Someone just decided to mess with my favorite bands page. Like I said your better at cleaning up. Can you do it? I know its not football related but. Please?? Stealthninja545 (talk) 05:11, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

 Done Eagles 24/7 (C) 05:24, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Community de-Adminship - finalization poll for the CDA proposal

You are recieving this notice as you have participated in the Admin Recall discussion pages.

A poll was held on fourteen proposals, and closed on 16th November 2009. Only one proposal gained majority support - community de-adminship - and this proposal is now being finessed into a draft RFC Wikipedia talk:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC, which, if adopted, will create a new process.

After tolling up the votes within the revision proposals for CDA, it emerged that proposal 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.

A finalisation poll (intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to;

  • gather opinion on the 'consensus margin' (what percentages, if any, have the most support) and

The Wikipedia Signpost: 18 January 2010

Questions.

Howdy! Sorry I haven't been bugging you in awhile- I've mostly been playing in the MMA and doing just random edits and checking.

I have some questions for you.

I have been using my site as legit press for several local MMA organizations. My websites have also carried various press releases and press conferences. I have also been running interviews and first hand show reports.


1. Since this is verifiable- I can fax someone a hard copy of the press release and the shows are on tape (but not all are on Youtube) can I still use it as a source on articles- this is not original and does not violate neutrality.

2. Can I source my website? Since ESPN is a source, and CNNSI is a source- I have the same press credentials as they do (actually, I got better seats than the ESPN guy did at one show)

3. If the owner of an organization writes something for me to post- But I am the one posting it on my site- do I have to state his title or can I just have his name

I.E

Blah Blah Blah - Jerry Jones or Blah Blah Blah - Jerry Jones, owner, Dallas Cowboys

-- Thanks. I'll try to bother you more in the future.

David.snipes (talk) 02:06, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

You're not bothering me at all, in fact I enjoy answering questions. To answer your question, you're site may be reliable but you can't link to it yourself since (although it's clearly not intended this way) it might look like link spam since it's your site. Making your site more well known and allowing other Wikipedia editors to find on their own will be the best route. Plus reliable sources are expected to be Third-party sources so while you're a third party to another editor, you're obviously not a third-party to yourself. Hope this helps. Cheers,--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 02:21, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Ok, follow up.

Policy: If your product is truly relevant to an article, others will agree—try the talk page

- So, should I make the base article, then post links on the talk page and ask some other editor to build the article? Seems kind of asking others to do my work for me there. I did the USA-MMA organization - but its getting hit for lack of sources, something I can use easily- but it would all be original (but verifiable) I hate to stub it out or ask others to do my work for me. I mean I could get another writer to just do it for me, but then it would be a sock puppet. Grrr David.snipes (talk) 15:45, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

I guess you can always ask the people at WT:MMA (is that link correct?) if they find your site to be reliable and that you yourself can use it.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 19:30, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Mike Kafka

I have asked at WT:CFB whether we anticipate a 2010 East-West Shrine Game article. I see in Mike Kafka you have linked his MVP to the general article. What do you know about the prospects of a game article.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:09, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't know much, but what I do know is that the game isn't a bowl game so shouldn't be linked in the bowl games section. However, an article for each season might be out of the question since it's just a tool for scouts.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 14:02, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
I disagree with you, Giants. The Shrine Game has been around much longer than the Senior Bowl, even before the NFL Draft was first established. It supports a pretty good cause (Shriners Hospital for Children) and it is considered a bowl just as much as the Senior Bowl according to this template. I have started the article in my userspace for the time being. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:05, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
I still do disagree but you are free to start the article and move it into article space. The East-West Shrine Game may support a great cause and may be older but it doesn't make it notable enough for a year by year article IMO. I don't believe the Senior Bowl is a bowl because unless the media and other people treat it as such it will always be a scouting game to me.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 02:59, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
I agree that basically it is just a scouting game, but the Pro Bowl is equally useless except that the players get paid to participate. I would not put it back in the infobox under bowl games, however, because it is not considered a real bowl game. I think I can make a case for it being notable, since it receives a bunch of coverage in the media. I'm going to go ahead and create it anyway, but if it gets deleted, I won't be too sad. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:11, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Like I said, go right ahead and I'd personally be surprised if it was deleted. Since I feel as though an article is unwarranted (at this time) I'm not going to bring it to PROD or AFD since there isn't a standard for this and I'm not exactly neutral here. If another third-party editor nominates it then I'll have to evaluate the notability you can demonstrate for it.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 03:15, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 25 January 2010

WikiCup 2010 January newsletter

We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. We've had some shakeups regarding late entries, flag changes and early dropouts, but the competition is now established- there will be no more flag changes or new competitors. Congratulations to Hungary Sasata (submissions), our current leader, who, at the time of writing, has more listed points than Pennsylvania Hunter Kahn (submissions) and New Orleans TonyTheTiger (submissions) (second and third place respectively) combined. A special well done also goes to Isle of Man Fetchcomms (submissions)- his artcle Jewel Box (St. Louis, Missouri) was the first content to score points in the competition.

Around half of competitors are yet to score. Please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. 64 of the 149 current competitors will advance to round 2- if you currently have no points, do not worry, as over half of the current top 64 have under 50 points. Everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places in round 2! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, by email or on IRC. Good luck! J Milburn, Garden, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot (talk) at 00:14, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Giants27/Archives/2010/January&oldid=1139316220"