Jump to content

User talk:Supertigerman/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

WikiProject Golf

Wikiproject Golf
This is a "newsletter" of sorts. It's designed to let you know whats going on with the WikiProject. Contact me, Grovermj, if there is anything i could improve, or if you would like to write the newsletter yourself, because i'm certainly not skilled and experienced at this. Call it a test run.
  • Well, it's been a month since the project has started, and 4 new articles have been made by editors in the project. They can be found here.
  • The template {{Wikiproject Golf}} has been added to a total of 794 articles. We are most probably more than half way there.
  • Badbilltucker has proposed "Wikipedia Week" starting on the 15th of January. Details can be found here.
  • We have 14 participants at present.
  • If you are in need of things to do, the To-Do list could be a good start.
  • At present, there are no featured articles related to golf, and only one Good article. This is Tiger Woods.
  • Discuss golf course notability and a possible featured article collaboration on the talk page.

Thanks for your support with this project. Grover 08:42, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Please do not add protection tags to unprotected articles. The tags do not cause the articles to become protected; they just create confusion on whether the articles are protected or not. To request protection on pages, use WP:RFPP. --Nlu (talk) 06:54, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Tiger Woods

I answer your question there. Quadzilla99 11:09, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Deletion tag to Robert MacTaggart

I am not the one who first added a speedy deletion tag to the artile Robert MacTaggart - it's someone else added the speedy deletion tag first, then another person blanked the page because he think Robert MacTaggart is not notable, and I reverted the blanking. By the way, the article Robert MacTaggart does not meet the criteria of WP:Bio. Rockvee 01:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Golf Newsletter

The WikiProject Golf Newsletter
Issue II - February 2007
If you would like to improve our future newsletters, go to our newsletter page.
News
  • Well, this newsletter is new. I'm still mucking around with the layout, so if someone feels it could be better, go right ahead and change it. The newsletter page is right here.
  • An article has been selected for a drive to featured status, Jack Nicklaus. The article is currently rated a B, and is currently a Good Article candidate (thanks to The Giant Puffin). A to-do list has been set up in the talk page, see what you can do, or add a new thing to do which you think you could write well.
  • A shortcut WP:GOLF has been created. Thanks again The Giant Puffin!
  • Please add to the new list of core articles: Core article list.
New Members

We have had two new members join our project this month. They are:

Updates/New Articles

Expansions:

New Articles:

Click here for a full list.

Featured/Good Articles

No articles have been promoted to Good or Featured status this month.

The To-Do list
  • Over 1100 golf articles have been tagged with our template {{Wikiproject Golf}}. There is still many more though.
  • A userbox is requested for golf course articles including location, par etc. This may need to be discussed on the talk page.
  • Continue expanding and making new golf-related articles.

Click here for a full list.

Yeah you're right, i wasnt thinking at the time, so thanks very much for your time, efforts, and contributions to the article. Grover 03:33, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

My name

"Shanel" is just a variant of the French name "Chanel." According to this website it means "pipe." :)--§hanel 04:44, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Newark Academy

I have noticed you watch the Newark Academy page like a hawk. You seem to live under the incorrect assumption that Christina Capatides is famous. Winning a contest nobody cares about does not make a person famous. Many Newark Academy graduates have won contests, scholarships, and fellowships, but you do not list them. Sam Birnbaum was infact annointed as a pinball grandmaster earlier this year, yet you belittle his accomplishments by deleting him from the page. Wikipedia is about sharing information, not creating pages that function under the rule of a pompous dictator.

IP vandals

Hey there. Whenever I have added comments to the talk pages of the users who are making these changes and then looked at their home cities, Knoxville, Tennessee and the same Internet provider come up. This is why I believe it is the same person, using dynamically assigned IP addresses. Administrators can do a block based on IP address ranges, but I'm not sure that would be practical in this case because a huge number of people use that Internet provider and they would end up being blocked collaterally. We just need to be diligent about fighting the vandalism this user is determined to inflict, at least until consensus changes, which I don't think will happen. We also could file a report on WP:AIV or WP:ANI and request semi-protection of the articles through WP:RFP so that IP addresses cannot edit them. Thanks very much for helping to fight vandalism on tennis pages as this is a recurring problem. Tennis expert 17:46, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

FYI I have reported one IP for violation of the 3RR rule here--HJ 23:43, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
I thought you might be interested in this. An entry about Lman1987's recent editing history has been posted on the administrators' noticeboard.[1] Tennis expert 16:56, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Spencer Tracy

I researched and put the academy award nominations neatly into the infobox, but you deleted it. I was just wondering why, since it is seen in that format on other actors' pages. Supertigerman 01:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

infobox is for wins....can you imagine the 19 academy nominations of o'toole, and the emmys and the golden globes?....well, you get the point --emerson7 | Talk 01:27, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

tennis score format

Check out the Nadal Talk Page, as well as the Federer Talk page. There is a huge disscussion on those topics thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.6.32.12 (talk • contribs) 03:57, 28 February 2007

you seem to be alot less hard headed than TENNIS EXPERT. thanks I will stop the edit waring for now. I cannot guarante the others will stop though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.6.32.12 (talk • contribs) 04:18, 28 February 2007

Dear Supertigerman you should join us, we could use you. Think about it. but your pale tennis expert must know we will never back down. Me and my buddies are capable of haveing thousands of IP accounts. Any ways we are not vandalizers. we are doing this for the good. You could start changeing score formats to the correct ones on other tennis pages. (we expect to change EVERY pro tennis players score format soon. not just these few.) This edit war is pointless unless you want to have every Tennis players Article FULLY protected. (and I dont think the administrators could be depended upon to update tennis articles by themselves.) SEMI protecting is nothing. This war will never end, unless Tennis Expert and his pals agree with us.

Thank you. and have a nice day Supertigerman. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tennis Genius (talk • contribs) 05:13, 28 February 2007

WikiProject Golf Newsletter

The WikiProject Golf Newsletter
Issue III - March 2007
If you would like to improve our future newsletters, go to our newsletter page.
News
  • This newsletter is new. I'm still mucking around with the layout, so if someone feels it could be better, go right ahead and change it. The newsletter page is right here. Also, if you would like to change the way you recieve the newsletter i.e. a link, make a comment on the newsletter talk page.
  • An article has been selected for a drive to featured status, Jack Nicklaus. The article is currently rated a Good article. A to-do list has been set up in the talk page, see what you can do, or add a new task to do which you think you could write well.
  • Remember to check the talk page for more news on the project.
New Members

We have had three new members join our project this month. They are:

Featured/Good Articles

Jack Nicklaus has been promoted to a good article! Congratulations and well done to everyone that helped.

The To-Do list
  • Over 1200 golf articles have been tagged with our template {{Wikiproject Golf}}. There is still many more though.
  • A userbox is requested for golf course articles including location, par etc. This may need to be discussed on the talk page.
  • Continue expanding and making new golf-related articles.

Click here for a full list.

Elin Nordegren

Since you are very influential in the content of the Tiger Woods page, I thought I would ask you about this edit. Most celebrities include spousal information in their infoboxes. I feel it should be readded. However, I don't want to step on your toes. I also think, it will be appropriate to add an offspring entry as well in the near future. Respond at my talk page at your convenience. TonyTheTiger 04:03, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

You are the man for the Tiger Woods page so I wanted to run some things by you. Should his spouse's maiden name be in the infobox or her married name? Also, the page seems to wikify years even when not part of a full date. According to WP:DATE, I think the first occurence of a year might be linked [[2007 in golf|2007]] or [[2000 in sports|2000]], but not [[2007]] or [[2000]]. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 01:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Formatting of tennis players' pages

User:Lman1987, under various names and IP addresses, continues to try and change the formatting of the records sections of various tennis players' pages. The user is trying to make what they believe to be a constructive improvement (and to some extent I see their point on how it would be nice to see players' finals all listed in chronological order), but definately needs a lesson in constructive discussion and enagagement on Wikipedia.

I previously said on User:Tennis expert's talk page that I didn't like this user's ideas on formatting becuase it made it very hard to pick out wins from losses in that format. But it has occured to me that if each entire line of wins had its text in bold and losses were not in bold, that problem might be solved and we'd in fact have what might be quite a good format.

Here's how that would look for Jim Courier's Grand Slam finals:

Wins (4) / Runner-ups (3)

Year Championship Opponent in Final Result Score in Final
1991 French Open (1) United States Andre Agassi Win 3-6, 6-4, 2-6, 6-1, 6-4
1991 U.S. Open Sweden Stefan Edberg Loss 2-6, 4-6, 0-6
1992 Australian Open (1) Sweden Stefan Edberg Win 6-3, 3-6, 6-4, 6-2
1992 French Open (2) Czechoslovakia Petr Korda Win 7-5, 6-2, 6-1
1993 Australian Open (2) Sweden Stefan Edberg Win 6-2, 6-1, 2-6, 7-5
1993 French Open Spain Sergi Bruguera Loss 4-6, 6-2, 2-6, 6-3, 3-6
1993 Wimbledon United States Pete Sampras Loss 6-7, 6-7, 6-3, 3-6

And here's how it would look for Stefan Edberg's:

Wins (6) / Runner-ups (5)

Year Championship Opponent in Final Result Score in Final
1985 Australian Open (1) Sweden Mats Wilander Win 6-4, 6-3, 6-3
1987 Australian Open (2) Australia Pat Cash Win 6-3, 6-4, 3-6, 5-7, 6-3
1988 Wimbledon (1) Germany Boris Becker Win 4-6, 7-6, 6-4, 6-2
1989 French Open United States Michael Chang Loss 1-6, 6-3, 6-4, 4-6, 2-6
1989 Wimbledon Germany Boris Becker Loss 0-6, 6-7, 4-6
1990 Australian Open Czechoslovakia Ivan Lendl Loss 6-4, 6-7, 2-5 (retired)
1990 Wimbledon (2) Germany Boris Becker Win 6-2, 6-2, 3-6, 3-6, 6-4
1991 U.S. Open (1) United States Jim Courier Win 6-2, 6-4, 6-0
1992 Australian Open United States Jim Courier Loss 3-6, 6-3, 4-6, 2-6
1992 U.S. Open (2) United States Pete Sampras Win 3-6, 6-4, 7-6, 6-2
1993 Australian Open United States Jim Courier Loss 2-6, 1-6, 6-2, 5-7

What do you think? Would this in fact be both an improvement and a reasonable accommodation that might stop the current edit war?

Just a thought.

Regards,

Zaxem 05:02, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

dont you understand anything. Snitching on me or my buddies, so you can get 1 of our IP address blocked is meaningless. We have virtually an unlimedted amounted of IP accounts. So doing that or having a revert war is basically meaningless. I really like the BOLD format. However do you think the entire line should be bolded? Or just the "Win" or "Score" (or both) category should be bolded. Instead of the whole line. Whatever works for you guys is fine by me. but the bottom line is the old format needs to go. and there is no way we will stop.

Thank You.

whatever works for you guys. So you guys want it exactly as that Zaxem guy put it. Thats cool. Frankly I like if every thing was to be bolded except for the opponents name. But good luck getting Tennis Expert the Tennis Nazi to change his mind. but you guys are gonna have to do it not me. And thus "World Revert War 3" will be ended.

Also about my reason for the deletion of the tiebreakers scores. I have 2 reasons.

reason A. because a score of 7-6(11), 6-7(5), 6-4, 7-6(6). This looks much more confusing than 7-6, 6-7, 6-4, 7-6.

reason B. The full score (including tiebreaker scores) is available on the "Titles" section of the page. So if someone is that interested in the tiebreaker score than all they have to do is just look at the "titles" section.

Final Solution

I believe we need to change the "Grandslam Finals", "Masters series finals", and "Tennis Masters Cup finals" to the way that Zaxem put it. but keep the Singles tiltles and runner ups parts exactly the same. This is definitaly the best way to edit the scores.

Moving forward

Tennis expert has been heavily involved in this controversy, and I think we must hear his reaction to the proposed new format and discuss it with him first before doing anything. If we do decide to implement a new format it must be beacuse there is broad agreement among the regular tennis editors that it will be an improved format, and not becuase a disruptive user who does not respect the consensus-building and discussion processes of Wikipedia has bullied us into doing so. Reverting that user's edits is becoming tedious, but enough people are involved that none of his edits are staying up very long. His behaviour is not the reason I'm suggesting this (I've never come across a persistent vandal who hasn't got tired of it and given up eventually).

I personally feel that the entire line of a win on the chart needs to be bolded in order to make it sufficiently stand out from the losses.

Zaxem 03:29, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


I just tried the format without bolding the opponent's name as suggested, and I think that looks pretty good. Still allows the wins to stand out, without overly emphasizing the opponent. It looks like this (using the Jim Courier example):
Year Championship Opponent in Final Result Score in Final
1991 French Open (1) United States Andre Agassi Win 3-6, 6-4, 2-6, 6-1, 6-4
1991 U.S. Open Sweden Stefan Edberg Loss 2-6, 4-6, 0-6
1992 Australian Open (1) Sweden Stefan Edberg Win 6-3, 3-6, 6-4, 6-2
1992 French Open (2) Czechoslovakia Petr Korda Win 7-5, 6-2, 6-1
1993 Australian Open (2) Sweden Stefan Edberg Win 6-2, 6-1, 2-6, 7-5
1993 French Open Spain Sergi Bruguera Loss 4-6, 6-2, 2-6, 6-3, 3-6
1993 Wimbledon United States Pete Sampras Loss 6-7, 6-7, 6-3, 3-6

I think I'd recommend this. Zaxem 03:38, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much for seeking my opinion about this. I've added something to my own discussion page about this and don't want to clutter Supertigerman's page with a "copy and paste" of those comments. I wholeheartedly agree with your first paragraph, Zaxem. Supertigerman, there is no place for incivil comments, on a discussion page or anywhere else, and I would appreciate your honoring of this principle. Finally, my understanding of Wikipedia policy is that posts provided by the sockpuppet of a permanently blocked user must be deleted. Best wishes! edited by Tennis expert 03:57, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Actor infoboxes in general

Is the silver color used for dead people, and the yellow for living? Supertigerman 01:09, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

that is correct....cheers! --emerson7 | Talk 01:16, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


Golf Templates

Thanks for your comments about my golf templates it is much appreciated, i will try and fix the centre thing you mentioned. About the consecutive years, i think it's fine as it is because then the template will get to big and look messy,but i'm open to ideas. User talk:Bones999 13:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea (Bones999 12:34, 7 May 2007 (UTC))

Golfer Infopage

Thanks for the info about how to use the Golfer info page. I was actually wondering about that because the heading Majors Wins didn't make sense with just wins below. I appreciate the clarification. I believe User:Mudforce has also added a few of these for LPGA players as well so you might want to contact him/her. In the meantime, I'll get busy retrofitting the boxes. Crunch 01:06, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Update

I took the pages that Mudforce added and put them in a separate listing under her (I think it's a her) name. Crunch 01:18, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Urkel

User:Kingbk added some text to Tiger Woods. You seem to be the coordinator for this page. I tagged it with {{fact}}, but sort of doubt it. I see he has contributed to Woods' page often in the recent past and at times been at odds with you. Let me know what you think of the text about "Urkel". TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 01:12, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Your golfer infobox

Thanks for asking about the golfer infobox. I've changed some existing boxes to the new one and no one's complained so I say go ahead. Maybe start with Ernie Els. That should be a good test of acceptance. If someone complains we can always apologize. By the way, what's your recommendation on the font width for the box? I believe it started at 90%, but I believe you're using it at 80%? What are you recommending? Crunch 23:06, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Crunch. There are 3 GA class golf articles and they all use your infobox.Mudforce 08:07, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Your golfer infobox under attack

See Morgan Pressel. The claim is that the box is non-standard. This same user is deleting the photos we've been using from LPGA.com on the grounds that they are not non-replacable. We've been using these for a couple of years and I think they are provided by the LPGA for promotional purposes, so I'm not sure if this is justified. Crunch 12:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Crunch, please see item #1 of Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria before making accusations. Fair use, in a biographical article, can only be used as a defense if it isn't possible to produce a free image (for example, if the person is deceased, reclusive, or fictional). The image should be accompanied by a fair use rationale to explain why it could not be replaced by a free image.
Supertigerman, I have no complaint about how the infobox looks. If you feel that your infobox format is better than the template, please edit the template, so that all of the other articles will use the better format.
— CharlotteWebb 19:22, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
CharlotteWebb, First, please do not use Supertigerman's page to carry on a discussion with me. With regard to the Pressel image, we will add the appropriate rationale, with is that it is promo image provided by the LPGA. Crunch 21:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I've brought up a discussion on the WP:GOLF talk page about this infobox. I really do like this template but there are a few issues
  1. As said before, it isn't an official template.
  2. The template needs to be smaller, as after all it is supposed to be a short summary of the golfer. I made some minor edits to the Jack Nicklaus infobox to try and make it smaller, it may not be perfect but its a work in progress. You obviously didn't agree with this edit, so maybe a few people should discuss it on the WP:GOLF talk page.

Grover 00:33, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


Raj- Whaduppp homeslice? You can delete this if you want. -D Block

67th Academy Awards nominees and winners

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article 67th Academy Awards nominees and winners, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Whpq 14:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Color backgrounds

I don't think a consensus yet exists about the color background for a second place year-end ranking. I prefer purple myself. Best regards! Tennis expert 16:14, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Form should follow Function

Form should follow Function or more to the point style should follow only after content. The old principle of web pages was that style should be an optional extra, not required to understand the meaning of a page but most people don't follow or even know about these first principles of web design and plain old clear "encyclopedic" writing requires one to be explicitly clear. The styling used on the Academy Award winners article was difficult to see, at a glance. If I recall correctly my change was to unambiguously write the word "Winner" beside the winners. It isn't much help to screen readers to do anything less (okay so maybe screenreaders will read it a bit louder but it makes skim reading a whole lot harder and obscures the meaning). Also it seems others complained the page was a boring list of data, using proper descriptive sentences would also help solve both issues. -- Horkana 22:29, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Golf Newsletter

The WikiProject Golf Newsletter
Issue IV - May 2007
If you would like to improve our future newsletters, go to our newsletter page.
Project News
  • I am experimenting with a new layout for easy readability, as well as to make the newsletter look more attractive and more like other ones. If someone feels it could be better, go right ahead and change it. The newsletter page is right here.
  • An assessment department has been set up. To find out how to assess an article, go to the assessment page.
  • I have asked Snowolf if his bot could help in tagging articles. The response is still pending, but hopefully we will soon have more of an idea of how many articles we have.
  • During the two months since the last newsletter, Annika Sorenstam has reached good article status. Congratulations to all who worked on this article.
  • There has been a recent peer review for Jack Nicklaus. Please help by following the suggestions that are shown here.
  • A new sidebar has been created. If you think it could be improved, go here.
  • Several new templates have been created. Go to the templates page for a full list.

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

Re: incorrect spelling of 'largley'

Apologies for that one. I've fixed my scripts and re-corrected the other articles I'd changed incorrectly. Thanks Rjwilmsi

Byron Nelson

Hi, thanks for the advice on the GA for Byron Nelson. I did intend to improve the article a bit anyway, but a bit more was needed than I thought. Nevertheless, the article was improved enough to grant a GA status anyway! Also on another note, your golfer infobox needs to become the standard one for all golfer articles, so for that to happen a discussion should take place, which has been happening at the WP Golf talk page, and eventually it has to be put into the {{Infobox golfer}} template. So if you feel you need to discuss some things about the infobox, raise your thoughts at the WP Golf talk page as mentioned above. Thanks! Grover 08:20, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons

Hi. Please help with translation pages commons:મુખપૃષ્ઠ and commons:मुख्य पृष्ठ. ~ kintup 19:16, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Golf Newsletter

The WikiProject Golf Newsletter
Issue V - June 2007
If you would like to improve our future newsletters, go to our newsletter page.
Project News
  • An assessment department has been set up. To find out how to assess an article, go to the assessment page.
  • I have asked Snowolf if his bot could help in tagging articles. This should be starting soon.
  • There has been a recent peer review for Golf. Please help by following the suggestions that are shown here.
  • Several new templates have been created. Go to the templates page for a full list.
  • The Outreach department has been founded. It now holds the newsletters, and soon a welcome message and an invitation message.
Member News

No new members have joined the project in the past month. Keep on recruiting!
Congratulations to all the editors who contributed to the newest Good articles:

From the Editors

Welcome to the 5th issue of the WikiProject Golf newsletter! There are a few new additions that I hope will be up and running soon. A welcome message and an invitation message for prospective members should be ready within two weeks. A collaboration of the fortnight, or collaboration of the month i'm hoping will be ready by the time of next month's newsletter.

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 6 – July 2007). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Contributors to this issue

Grover 08:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

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

Thank You!

You must have read the section I started on the talk page for the Avatar article, because I noticed that you reverted that edit someone made about season 3 starting on September 25th, 2007. Thanks! :) --Freespirit1981 03:31, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I spend much of my Wikipedia time investigating and correcting errors made to timelines because they already are very complicated and difficult to edit. Including links in the timelines as a standard feature would vastly increase the timeline workload (for all of us) and make an error prone process even more unwieldy. This is why I opposed the links when we (tennis editors) discussed the proposal recently. There is no consensus at the current time to include the links. (Nor is there consensus to change the font color, which also would increase the complications.) Best regards. Tennis expert 02:53, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Your Official World Golf Rankings revert

I see from your user page that you are an Inclusionist, as am I, which makes me somewhat puzzled why you reverted the edit that clarified what the "Order" column means in the Official World Golf Rankings article. The edit was factual and supported by verifiable sources. It was added because it was not clear what the sequence referred to, and it was difficult for some to understand; the edit clarified that. Perhaps it is unneeded to you ... others might think differently. I would have appreciated a message on my talk page asking why I added it before you deleted it. Truthanado 18:31, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons

Please help with translation of commons:મુખપૃષ્ઠ. ~ kintup 18:03, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Oops. I'm already ask you. =) But nothing happens from last time. ~ kintup 18:07, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Goof up

Thanks for fixing my goof up on the Tiger Woods article. I was checking for vandalism on the recent changes page (you gotta be really quick using that method) and I didn't give myself enough time to check whether or not it was really vandalism. Again, thanks for reverting my mistake. Savie Kumara 04:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

golfstats.com

WOW, amazing site, it has everything.

michfan2123 03:43, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Formating Question

I am trying to make my user page shorter. For example, for the list of states, how do I put a break in the middle so the list is shorter?

michfan2123 03:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, I figured it out

michfan2123 04:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Major Pages

I'm hoping to try and do one major page a day. Its gonna be hard to find information for anything past 2000 because I get alot of info off of the majors individual website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by hietanbs (talk • contribs)

Major pages

Agreed 100%, if you could make a templete for this I can update most of the pages. I think that winner and dates are a must. You can get rid of current champion, and record scores (because those would be a pain to update every year). I think that winners share could be added to the main page too. Any other ideas?

Hietanbs 23:59, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

While I value your opinon, the question arises "Are TV shows good topics for encyclopedia articles?" If every episode had an article on wikipedia, that would be more articles than we have now, doubling and maybe even tripling our article count. Websites like tv.com are better suited for this type of information than Wikipedia is. The Placebo Effect 22:34, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Templates

I agree, I think it is fine how it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michfan2123 (talk • contribs)

Old Majors

Yea I guess so, I just don't know where we can find that kind of information. If you find a good site let me know, I will go back to adding infoboxes to players pages for now.

michfan2123 01:09, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Yea we can add the prize for each player listed.

I don't think I want to do a day by day standings, that would take a really really long time. I might get around to it though.

michfan2123 01:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok cool.

michfan2123 01:17, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Dude, I just added the first round at the 1934 Masters, that was time-consuming, I am pretty sure it is all right.

michfan2123 02:48, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, ok, thanks, that will make it faster, I am going to go see the midnight showing of the Bourne Ultimatum so I am done for now.

michfan2123 03:04, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Cool, you have AIM/AOL? Communication is much easier that way.

michfan2123 03:09, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I added you, my sn is the same as it is here.

michfan2123 06:42, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

OWGR/WGC

How is it known that the WGC events are getting 76 points? Do you have a reference? For example, T. Woods got only 70 points for winning last year's AmEx. That's why I reverted it; although the WGCs always get a high score, there is (to my understanding) some range for the winner's point total. 76.10.24.245 21:46, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

A year or two ago, Osomec (who you may have noticed editing golf) said something substantially similar, but he ended up being wrong. I know of no policy that has assigned the WGCs 76 points. 76.10.24.245 00:59, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Fail to see how tone has been argumentative. Have never been one to use smilies or exclamation points. Would be happy to concede point if 76-points-for-WGC-events is a policy reform I missed (a possibility, since all 3 were for 76 this year). Highly skeptical of inductive reasoning generally (see article on topic for extensive referencing for this proposition). Query, while I have your attention: why does Woods article (which you heavily edit) style him as the "PGA Tour Money Winner" for several years? Nobody would question he was a money-winner those years, but many other people were too. Perhaps other wordings are awkward, which is why I would say a reference to the Arnold Palmer Award (or is it Trophy?) works best. A similar distinction may be valuable for the PGA of America Player of the Year and Jack Nicklaus Trophy (or is it Award?), which are not the same. Would also draw attention to these awards, which are underappreciated honors for game's past legends. 76.10.24.245 02:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Templete

I finally finished the Template:Infobox Individual Golf Tournament. I was wondering if you could give me advice on if its good or needs some tweaking (its my first template). Thanks Hietanbs 08:20, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Templete

I was worried where to put the score too. I think it works where it is actually. Do you think we should put aggregate score, under (over) par score, or both? Winners share is much nicer then winners purse or whatever I had before. I was wondering if runner(s) up should be up there also. I'm leaning towards too much information but it would be nice also. What do you think?

Edit: I looked at the score on other majors, it looks perfect and doesn't need any changes. The only thing I'm wondering about is runner up.

Hietanbs 22:02, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I like it below, it looks neat and uncluttered.

Hietanbs 22:49, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Tiger Woods achievements

I moved the information back. There are not a lot of articles that link to the article ([2]) and per WP:L, the previous name was not appropriate. It keeps the content consistent within the category Category:Career achievements of sportspeople, and clearly identifies that this is a list article. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  20:46, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Making Templates collapsed

Note: I have refractored this hear to make sure you saw it. I'll mark your page for watching, but we can do this at my page if you'd prefer. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  00:16, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey, you seem like quite an able editor, so I have a question for you. How does one make a template always appear collapsed? I tried writing class="collapsible collapsed" but that didn't work for me on Template:U.S. Open champions. Can you teach me how to do it? Thanks for your help. Supertigerman 23:57, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Hey - you can use {| class="toccolours collapsible collapsed" width=75% align="center" |- ! style="background:#ccccff"| What you want to call the collapsed content |- | CONTENT GOES HERE |} Does that help? If not, lmk and we'll work on it together. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  00:00, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Also, I can do the edit for you if you think that will help. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  00:18, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
And one more thing - while you're at it, there should probably be some sort of WP:D for the "US Open" as there is a US Open in golf and in tennis. Just a thought. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  00:20, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey, I think it would be easier if you did the edit, since I can't figure it out. My goal is to make the following templates always appear collapsed: Template:The Masters champions, Template:U.S. Open champions, Template:The Open champions, and Template:PGA Champions. I look forward to learning how it is done. Thanks! Supertigerman 04:36, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Okay, cool..give me just a few. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  04:46, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Looks good, except can the navbar not be white? it's hard to see. Also, i think the nowrap function helped its layout. thanks again, u da man! Supertigerman 05:45, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • The new format *should* not require the nowrap, but just in case i'm missing something - is it causing you problems. If you go to edit the template - you'll see the color (which is for the background color of the bar) and the fontcolor fields (for the color of the text that isn't wikilinked). You can use whatever web colors you want there, but just keep in mind that there are some usability standards (i can dig them up) and some people might react to the color being changed (it's a HUGE debate on other sports templates for example). Alright, I'm definitely out, but i'll be back to help later. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  05:51, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Now there ya go! Good job on the no wrap. Have you thought about creating one of these templates in your user space as a sandbox! Really nice job. Let me know if you want some more help or if you want to talk about any of this stuff! Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  22:07, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Hug me brotha! Tiger Woods' templates look rather godly now, if i may say so myself. Oh, and why is it good to create the template in a sandbox again? I never really understood the point of a sandbox. :)Supertigerman 22:18, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Haha, hang in there. People love to template out pages, I personally thing it's ba-aaaad. But whatever. The purpose of sanboxing anything is that you can work on it until your hearts desire and you won't really be affecting anyone else. You can "workout" all the issues you have and then open up the content to interested users. I have done this many times and it's a great way to start things. The only thing you need to be careful is with the category tags. In a sandbox you should use (for example: [[:Category:Super cool people]]). Once it's live you should use [[Category:Super cool people]] This way, the category isn't inundated with pages that don't really belong. Does that make sense? Have you looked at Help:Template yet? I'm not super great, but i'm doing pretty good with my template development. There are a couple of guys who are super helpful and freakin awesome, I'll be glad to get them to help if there is something i can't answer for you. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  22:24, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

How many userboxes?

How many userboxes do you have? There is a userbox that will tell the amount of userboxes on your page. Just put {{User:UBX/ubx num|put number here}} on your page, replacing "put number here" with the amount of userboxes. I have one on my page, and I have 88 userboxes. Hope I'll see it on your page! Savie Kumara 00:03, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

ps. on your main page, you have a box at the top that says "Please yell at me on my talk page". I THOUGHT THAT WAS FUNNY!!! HAHAHAHAHA!!


What's a facebook? Savie Kumara 19:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Smile

Michfan2123 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Tiger won 2 in a row, it is happy time. michfan2123 20:34, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

2 things

1. I like the Tiger Woods template but it is kind of fat from top to bottom, what do you think about making it wider?

2. What else should we add to the tourney performance page?

michfan2123 20:29, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Marquetry28 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Congrats on the very clearly worded description of match play golf. Have wondered for ages what all those mysterious match play scores meant!

Columbia vs. Brown

Columbia and Brown play at 12:30 while Michigan and Ohio State play at 12 so I can not go to the Columbia game. We will figure something out though, I can meet you in the city. michfan2123 01:27, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Golf

Hi Supertigerman/Archive 2
I thought that a way to further improve the golf articles on Wikipedia is for the whole project to work together towards a goal. An example of this could be a certain number of good articles in so many months, or to create the project's first ever featured article. If you are interested, come to the talk page and discuss it. And hopefully through this the project can continue to work towards several goals in the near future. Grover 10:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Invite to discuss goals for WP:Golf

You are invited. Go to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Golf#Goals. michfan2123 14:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Tiger FAC

If you are ever going to go for a WP:FAC the offseason is the best time of year to do so. What do you think?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 20:24, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

=======================================================

Hello, i like the input and effort you put into the articles on wikipedia. It's great. People like you is al we ever need ;) Keep on the good work! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.119.143.109 (talk • contribs)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Supertigerman/Archive_2&oldid=1220846008"