User talk:Pats1/Archives/2007/July

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Fair Use reply

No much I can do in regards to the images, because I have to wait until an administrator reviews the templates. But the article copyediting seem fine and RMANCIL shouldn't be reverting to a worse revision. — Moe ε 16:46, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

NFL Suspensions

I believe Pacman is suspended for the whole year. I know he can go to the facility like once a week but he can't practice. I believe with small game suspensions, everything is normal until the season begins.►Chris Nelson 22:19, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Injured Reserve is typically what it's called, even on team rosters. But from what I can tell, the Reserve/----- seems to be the way the most teams do it on their rosters when it's not an injury. Like a retirement or suspension. Really, I'd just say go with the way teams do it on their rosters.►Chris Nelson 01:34, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Just "football" is (generally) too ambiguous

Just 'football' is highly ambiguous, plus using it for American football is open to accusations of being too US-centric; they should be at "American football" or "American football player" to distinguish from the many other sports around the world known as football. Just "football" should only be used when the article applies to multiple varieties of football, such as with 12th Man (football) or Punter (football position). There are more examples at Wikipedia:WikiProject American football#Articles. Thank you. Sohelpme 22:39, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Injured Reserve

I really think you ought to revert your edits regarding I.R. on the roster templates. While Reserve/Injured is the official name, it is far more common to call it Injured Reserve, and will be less confusing to the common reader. As I'm sure you are aware, most if not all NFL teams list it as Injured Reserve on their roster. To get an idea of just how common each title is, note that a Google search for "Reserve/Injured" results in about 9,000 results, while a search for "Injured Reserve" comes up with over two million.

I really think it's best to keep the list as teams do on THEIR rosters, rather than the technical name.►Chris Nelson 22:51, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd also point out that the name of the article here is Injured Reserve.►Chris Nelson 22:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
I would still say the best policy is to use Injured Reserve, since this is how it is commonly referred by teams and in the media. The other lists are less frequent, and we can use the official names for those. But there's no doubt in my mind that at least in its case alone, Injured Reserve is the way to go.►Chris Nelson 23:04, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Maybe to you, but that's pretty subjective and by itself not good enough. I think the most common and widespread form of Injured Reserve makes it the best way in this case.

Why don't we just ditch the whole Reserve/ thing with other lists? Did-Not-Report, Physically Unable to Perform, Suspended, etc. And then keep it Injured Reserve as is commonly known?►Chris Nelson 00:10, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:NewEnglandPatriots 100.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:NewEnglandPatriots 100.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. fuzzy510 04:48, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Heath Evans

This is Heath Evans' brother in law Eventide11 (Jeff Lewis). The info i add is sourced and correct. Personal info is 100% correct and trivia is also correct. He is down to 245 in weight to prepare for more Tailback assignments as the team wants him to stay below 250. Thank you and please allow my edits to remain posted. Eventide11 15:43, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello again Pats1. Please e-mail me @ eventide0027@yahoo.com if you have any question regarding Heath or my edits. Thanks again. The citation needed for 'he was a 2 time all-state tailback' is right here: [1]

Get on AIM

Just wanted to discuss some things, get on AIM when you get this.►Chris Nelson 04:37, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

AWB Edits

Thanks for the heads up on Ref edits, Thought I caught / ignored most of them and tried to skip dupe links in ref's. Slysplace | talk 03:07, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

edit war.

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. RMANCIL 11:44, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Initials

That initials rule sucks. No other places presents them like that, including official sites and all media outlets.►Chris Nelson 22:23, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Proposal on WikiProject NFL talk page

Check out my stats proposal on the talk page and throw in your two cents. Thanks.►Chris Nelson 20:59, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah my bad.►Chris Nelson 21:10, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Travis Daniels

Yo look at some of the things I did on his article, I totally re-did it. Maybe you could do some of those things too, I plan on standardizing all the Dolphins pages. What do you think?►Chris Nelson 02:50, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Well the thing is, all that info comes from the two bios in the external links, only reworded and re-written. So I really don't know what the protocol is for that, I mean do the actually want 100 references to the same thing throughout the article, especially with an EL is already there?►Chris Nelson 14:56, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

NFL player stat links

I was browsing your contributions and looked at some of the Patriots player articles and I just wanted to let you know, in case you were unaware, that NFL.com has already created player pages for 2007 rookies. I'm letting you know in case you want to add them to the infoboxes for the 2007 Pats rookies. To find their numbers for the links, just go here or you can Google "NFL player's name" and that should work. Also, because CBS Sportsline shares the same numbers for players, you can add that stat link as well. Also, I'd have to check but I believe ESPN.com already has rookie pages up as well, so check that out. Plus, they share the numbers with SI.com from what I can tell. So all in all we should be able to add all four of those stat links for 2007 rookies already.►Chris Nelson 05:01, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Links

Chris gave me permission to. And, besides, THIS IS SO SUBTLE HOW DOES IT REQUIRE CONSENSUS? LARGE-SCALE DIFFERENCES CAN REQUIRE CONSENSUS. NOT FREAKING LINKS! Soxrock 14:46, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

What sockpuppet. The one with Projects attached? I didn't log out to revert your changes. Everyone knows it's the same person. Soxrock 14:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
First, that ended tied. And second of all, THEY ARE SUBTLE (again). Why does that require consensus? Soxrock 14:56, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't get it. It's subtle. Why is consensus needed for links? If consensus is needed for that, then consensus is needed to practially make a change. I don't think we need consenus to make subtle changes like that. And what happened to BOLD? Or are you going to remove this link as well? Soxrock 15:02, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Yankees10 requested I get consensus. It wasn't my decision. And he's gone now. And your still treating like I can't be bold. Thanks a whole lot Soxrock 15:06, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm saying I didn't want to go to consensus. Yankees10 wanted to. And it's still subtle. Quit treating this subtle thing like a large-scale change. And don't tell me your not treating it like that. Soxrock 15:09, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm not saying I never did. But no true consensus was ever reached. AND YOUR TREATING ME LIKE I'M A CRIMINAL FOR A SUBTLE CHANGE! BACK OFF! Soxrock 15:11, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
What case? That I can't do subtle changes to infoboxes when Chris one time did large-scale changes and was only recommended change it? But me making links requires deleting them? Give me a break. I haven't done anything wrong. Soxrock 15:16, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
An obvious disagreement? How? Because a very subtle change is a violation of policy? I fail to see how something so small could provoke this controversy. And to tell you the truth, it never needed consensus, it was requested. I wanted to prevent a controversy with Yankees10. And, now that a consensus was never reached, it's fair to make these changes... again. Stop treating it like I'm ruining this place. Soxrock 15:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Obvious? It wasn't obvious, those were the same people who later voiced disgust. You're just trying to get it to be the way you want it. When someone can't make a SUBTLE change without being messaged, there is a serious problem. This shouldn't even be happening, but a subtle change from something that was requested to consensus, ended a tie, and can't be changed later? I'm not sneaking shit. I'm only doing something subtle, not large-scale. Back off Soxrock 15:31, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm still not sneaking. I just chose to try it again. I could've done this 8 weeks ago. I chose not to. You need to back off of me. Soxrock 15:40, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Fenway Park

In looking at the stuff you questioned from that red-link editor, I became convinced that it was a combination of overlinking, random tinkering, and material that read like it was lifted from someplace. So I zapped it all. Feel free to fine tune as needed. :) Baseball Bugs 00:52, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Template:FalconsQuarterback

Any particular reason? The extra space screws up formatting in articles with multiple infoboxes. --B 13:40, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Brandon Meriweather

he hasn't officially signed with the pats and he is still on the list.--TheNation 22:20, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Ref section question

Please explain how I should list references satisfactorily so I won't be guilty of making that mistake. Thanks RMANCIL 14:03, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Let me know if you don't like something with the Chargers article. That user might be more receptive to a nuetral party commenting than you. I appreciate your response and I can certainly understand your frustration. Be well. Jmfangio| ►Chat  18:15, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Template:Infobox NFLactive.
For the Mediation Committee, Daniel 08:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Stephen Gostkowski stats

Why did you delete the statistics from the page? That summary doesn't constitute "original research" (all the stats are verifiable), nor does it constitute a copyright violation (sports statistics have been declared public domain). Samer 23:59, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Ricardo Dickerson

Up until a few days ago, Dickerson was listed on Oakland's active roster and always had been. He was never on an NFLE/IR list because to my knowledge, no team site has such a list on their roster. From what I've seen, basically every team keeps NFLE/IR guys on their active roster lists. So I think this might mean something different for Dickerson. I'm fine with seeking confirmation before taking him off the roster again, I was just letting you know my interpretation of what I've seen.►Chris Nelson 19:18, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree, but someone edited that web page with the specific purpose of taking him off the roster entirely. I've yet to see that happen to any other NFLE/IR player on any of the other 31 team websites.►Chris Nelson 19:56, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Yo dude get on AIM, I'm a little confused.►Chris Nelson 21:52, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Yo Pats, got a question for you, get on AIM.►Chris Nelson 23:34, 29 July 2007 (UTC)