User talk:Roehl Sybing

I'm Roehl. I like pizza.

USASA

Hi, can you put some more info on the USASA on the US soccer pyramid page and on the USASA page? like how exactly it fits into the pyramid? Thanks --AW 16:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Worked on the USASA page a bit today. Hope it's useful. --Roehl Sybing 20:28, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That's perfect --AW 22:23, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Editor's Review Thanks

Dear Roehl Sybing,
Thank you for your participation in providing me with a critique in my recent editor's review, archived here. I read and take each person's comments very seriously, whether or not the content is critical or praiseworthy. I look forward to working with you in future Wikipedia projects.
-- Real96

Noun particle

I noticed your change to the redirect I set the other day. However, noun particles aren't indigenous to Japanese, as far as I know. Suggesting as much doesn't make sense, and I felt that redirecting to general information about particles (which did, in fact, mention noun particles and explain what a particle is) would be best until someone did have insight on how best to explain noun particles across all languages that have them. Anyways, that was just to let you know of my thinking. Roehl Sybing 05:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, but it remains that the article redirects to an article that doesn't explain what a noun particle is, in what way it differs from just any old particle, et cetera. Stubs attract writers, redirects don't. But if you are knowledgable in this field, why don't you write something about it? Then the redirect won't harm and no stupid stub is needed. And thanks for your explanation. Cordially yours, Shinobu 19:42, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Target language/Translation

I tried to find a page on target language but was re-directed to the translation page. I was going to ask on the talk page of the translation article why that re-direct was there when I saw your same question from about 6 months ago. I added a brief comment. But then I went and removed the re-direct. I wrote a quick, 1-line intro of Target language but hope to work on it more soon. If you have time, よろしく。DDD DDD 08:14, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, to be honest I've forgotten about the redirect/article! I'll help work on it, for sure. I just have to find the time. Much appreciated! --Roehl Sybing 04:40, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'Underwhelm' indeed found in Merriam-Webster Online

While I appreciate your tendency to balk at people who discourage descriptivism in language (although I might balk at the idea, rather than the person), I encourage you to consider the following:

Dictionaries are are descriptive volumes by definition, nonetheless, not every word found in a dictionary is appropriate for an encyclopedia. Good dictionaries contain obscene language as well as non-standard but popular neologisms, but neither should be included in an encyclopedia. See WP:TONE.
While Merriam-Webster defines the word without any further notes, www.dictionary.com defines 'underwhelm' and points out that it's usage is informal, refer again to WP:TONE.

I am not interested in engaging in any sort of edit-war over such a trivial matter, so I am not going to undo your revert. But I would encourage you to look into the matter further, and perhaps seek the opinions of other editors. I believe you'll find that they'll confirm my original hypothesis: 'underwhelm' is creative, but non-standard English that has it's place in our language, but not our encyclopedia. Joshua Crowgey 09:02, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR

Please see here, where I've replied to the thread where we were discussing User:AGK/Sandbox/3 :) Cheers, Anthøny 19:12, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ernie

Yeah, I'm always hesitant to revert that much, but in this case I don't think there was any other choice. Thanks for adding the citation, though; I never would have caught it otherwise. Cmprince 12:45, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

W00t

All the material on this page is original research. I could go through and take out all the OR and be left with about four words. Instead of wasting my time doing that, I'll simply revert it to the dictionary entry since there is no verifiable information in the Wikipedia entry. If you would take some time to read WP:OR, WP:SYN and WP:CITE, it might provide some help on what to do with original research. In the meantime, please stop restoring original research to this page because it is unusable in this form. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 18:13, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of pigs over 1000 pounds

I've proposed a solution you might agree with. The Transhumanist (talk) 08:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Super Tuesday (2008)

Your edit to Super Tuesday (2008) has me puzzled [1]. Which two of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia are no longer states? --Kralizec! (talk) 13:40, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Box

I was dealing with someone undoing my edits on the teams table under the map. I got confused cause there were a bunch of edits all in a row, dealing with templates, etc. So anyway, long story short, nice job fixing what you fixed, and sorry I yelled at you, I was simply trying to fix something else, and you (for lack of a better word) got in the way. -- Grant .Alpaugh 05:53, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Minor Issue: Conference Info in the MLS Infobox

Hello! Hope for a reply. :) A Minor Issue: Conference Info in the Infobox. Thanks. --Blackbox77 (talk) 01:34, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MLS winners colors

Thanks for the message and your efforts. Please see the MLS talk page to see my comments. -- Grant .Alpaugh 02:45, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, wos up?

Grant.Alpaugh - he's so bored. He has cancealled your edits US - Jimmy Slade (talk) 17:26, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MLS Infobox

I think we finally found something we can agree on. :) -- Grant .Alpaugh 01:20, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've never actively collaborated on a WikiProject before, so I don't know all the formalities and procedures to get that done, but I think my recent work on the 2008 MLS season, Major League Soccer, US Open Cup, and USMNT articles would indicate my full support. If you lead the way I would be more than willing to get involved, and would love to work with you on such a project. Let me know any additional information about this. I've only been editing regularly on WP for six months, but I've tought myself quite a bit about markup and template coding recently and would love to extend my repetoire into this area as well. I look forward to working with you on this. -- Grant .Alpaugh 02:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for thinking of me in connection with this but truth be told, lately I can barely manage to find the time to compose testy critical comments! Good luck with it though and if it does get underway I'll be happy to keep an eye on it and contribute the stray observation. JohnInDC (talk) 10:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the Supporters' Shield is in the infobox, I don't see why it can't be in the article the way it is. Explain to me on my talk page, why exactly you don't think it should be in the article. -- Grant .Alpaugh 22:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You obviously missed something because the result of the discussion on talk:2008 Major League Soccer season was to transition all American and Canadian soccer articles to Away-Home and W-L-T format. MLS uses that format, and that's fine, I can accept that reasoning. By the same logic MLS has made the Supporters' Shield a major trophy that is determined solely by MLS play. As that is the case I see no reason why it can't be in the article, infobox, or anywhere else because MLS endorses it. You seem to think that everyone who disagrees with you "caries their bias against MLS into the article," and I, for one, couldn't be more insulted by that characterisation. I am one of the only people who edit the 2008 season articles and the US Open Cup articles and I also edit the USMNT, SuperLiga, CONCACAF Champions League, and all other MLS and US Soccer related articles. I care passionately about US soccer, and for you to insinuate that I don't, or that I have some bias against it, is insulting. All I want is for the articles to be as well written as they can be. MLS values the Supporters' Shield as a major trophy, as do the clubs who win it. I know that the award was created as an unofficial award by the fans, but since that time it has become a major trophy in US soccer. The A-League article has both the Premiers (like their Supporters' Shield winners) and the Champions (like the MLS Cup winner). There is no reason the same can't be done in the MLS article. It should be in the infobox and the article, and I want you to explain to me why you don't agree with that. -- Grant .Alpaugh 14:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You still haven't given me a reason why it shouldn't be in the infobox or the article. -- Grant .Alpaugh 15:01, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again, your reason for that belief is? -- Grant .Alpaugh 15:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Football club infoboxes

I've created a draft new infobox for football clubs incorporating the features present in the MLS box at {{Infobox Football club2}} (see User:Number 57/Toronto FC for how it displays). Please give your thoughts on WT:FOOTY. Cheers, пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 08:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal

I like what I see. So are you proposing basically a beefing up of the US/Canada task force into a full blown WikiProject? -- Grant .Alpaugh 13:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your mediation case.

Hello, I am Atyndall and I have taken on a mediation cabal case you filed regarding Major League Soccer in hope to help all editors involved to solve your dispute. This discussion will be taking place here and I implore you to please add your opinions on the matter there, I will be researching the issue also but your help in the matter is greatly appreciated. Thankyou. Atyndall93 | talk 10:21, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Roehl Sybing! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 167 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Allen Hopkins (soccer commentator) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 00:41, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:44, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]