User talk:RGTraynor/Archive6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of former discussions. Please do not edit it. If you wish to revitalize an old topic, bring it up on the active talk page.

Contents

[edit] Nomination

Hi, I first ran into about a month ago during a debate over the List of Writings of William Monahan. You've made 6300 edits here on Wikipedia, and was wondering if you would accept a nomination for an Administrator's post. I realize that last April you were nominated, but that failed. Would you want to be nominated again? Black Harry 03:46, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Black Harry and would be happy to co-nominate you. WaltonAssistance! 16:54, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I thank you both for your kind thoughts and confidence, there's a lot I'd do with admin tools, and heck, I was a senior admin on a major university system as far back as 25 years ago ... but truth be told, there's not a snowball's chance in hell I'd ever pass nomination. If you've seen me on AfD, I haven't gotten any less caustic this past year (in the wake of the civility hit squad on my previous nomination, I slipped harder than I feel comfy over now) or made fewer enemies. Beyond that, the new hobby horse of the antis is edit summaries, and I probably don't have more than 75%. About the only thing that's changed from my first go at it is that I wouldn't get caught canvassing again (which would, in my experience, neither stop Oppose voters from doing so themselves nor disqualify their votes in that eventuality), but no doubt there's some other rule it could be claimed I've violated or some turn of phrase I made in some AfD debate a year ago that would be seized upon as proof of my unfitness or "lack of admin knowledge." I wish I could say otherwise, but there's no need to start something doomed to failure. Please accept my thanks once more, nonetheless. Best regards,  RGTraynor  01:03, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay that's no problem. I was just curious. Keep up the good work though Black Harry 01:57, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, for what it's worth, I disagree with many of your RfA comments, but I don't think you've ever been uncivil enough to kill your chances of adminship - if you look at my second (successful) RfA, at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Walton_monarchist89 2, I got 10 opposes because I once called an MfD nomination "ludicrous and pedantic" and because I had controversial right-wing political userboxes, but that didn't cancel out the 68 supports. Waltonalternate account 08:54, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Just FYI: Page blanking on Archive3

Most likely the same person (88.108.*) has recently been blanking your User talk:RGTraynor/Archive3 page. If that's actually you, or if you simply don't care, please accept my apologies and I won't revert them in the future. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a line. Cheers =) --koder 21:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] It never hurts to be a little more civil, pt II.

Frankly, I would have expected someone comfortable with handing out civility lessons to himself avoid characterizing other editors as "idiots" and "pompous asses" for citing a (demonstrated) lack of maturity, recent vandalism, very few edits, no demonstrated breadth of editing and refusal to answer questions about one's admin candidacy as reasons to oppose that candidacy. Without going into pointless discussion of why you feel such characteristics are desirable in admins, such behavior in an admin is both unseemly and discredits any admonishments he might feel emboldened to deliver.  RGTraynor  02:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome to characterise my behavior anyway you so desire. First off, I 100% respect your right to oppose any candiacy and for that manner anybodys right to oppose, however wish that you do so civilly. My comments left were not meant to describe any particular editor as I feel as a singularity none of us are idiots. However, when a group of people get together to do a common task, it is inevitable that we will all be idiots at some time. To the outside, this may be hard to understand. I assure you that careful thought went into my statement and that In my every day work here i make every effort to be 100% civil. However, being civil does not mean ignoring the facts. My comments were generalisations and not particular attacks on any individuals personality, there is a major difference. There is at no point where I will call somebody or single them oput based on age or experience. We all have room to grow and learn, and offering to help as opposed to puttting them down is ALWAYS the proper course of action. There is NO situation where I ever consider "Not a bloody chance. Middle schooler with 87 edits total, been an editor for all of three months" an appropriate tone. Again, you are welcome to charaterise my behavior however you so choose, but i strongly stand by my statments. Best of luck to ya! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 02:53, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, there is likewise NO situation where I would characterize editors as "idiots" and "pompous asses" for applying sound measures of experience and deportment an appropriate tone either, nor would I figure failure to single out any of the nine editors in question by name much of a mitigating factor. The difference is (1) admins should be, and are, held to a higher standard, (2) I'm boggled by the notion that such represents your take on "100% civil;' and (3) I don't make a habit of unprompted civility lectures while using such turns of phrase. If you're as concerned about tone as all of that, I recommend either amending your own first or sending such sentiments through e-mail so that no one can catch you at it.  RGTraynor  03:27, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
First off, I have nothing to hide in my behavior, why would I want to "send such sentuiments through e-mail so no one can catch me at it"? Again, there is a difference between me characterising and participating int he RFA of a fairly new individual who does not understand RFA yet as "not a bloody chance" and or "a middle schooler with 87 edits". Again, i dont give a damn that you opposed and would have opposed myself. What bothers me is the whole, kick him while hes down ideal. Lets pile on degrading votes telling this person how bad an editor they are when a simple Oppose - not enough experience yet would have worked perfectly. Again, my statement does not single out any particular editor. My statements were in reference to the RFA process itself, not the paritucular RFA he participated in, and there are currently many editors often disgusted with the way RFA is currently going. If you monitor the talk page about twice a week there is a thread on "how to reform rfa" with a laundrey list of issues. In short, my statement was making a strong generalisation (and I myself am not expemt from this generalisation because we are all human). If you saw me make such a statement at an RFA, specially of a new editor, i would EXPECT a warnining from you and several other people. Thank you for addressing your concerns, however I stand by my statment that the RFA process is often full of pompous asses. I have nothing to hide here. Thanks and good luck. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 13:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
What makes you think that a simple "Oppose - not enough experience yet" would have served at all? That would be a pile-on vote with no particular purpose. In Jonjonbt's case, he could see that line, pile on a thousand edits in the next six months on his pet article, nominate himself once more with the expectation that he'd addressed the concern, and feel baited and switched when the Oppose votes came in saying that he's still too young, still was a one-subject editor, hadn't answered any questions about his candidacy or addressed his vandalism of a user page in an edit conflict. He'd be right, too.  RGTraynor  13:25, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Experience != edits. It was obvious that he a.) did not understand the RFA process due to his low edit count. We see a few of these a week that get snowballed after about 6 votes to prevent an editor breakdown. b.) Your statemnt "only has 87 edits" is more likley to cause the above situation than a simple "not enough experience". I also offered to help this editor get the required experience. XFD's, writing good articles and citing them, understanding WP:AIV. There are a large number of areas he lacked in but beiung a middle schooler and 87 edits should not have been the only objection. Again, the 87 edit statement is more likley to cause him to develop editcount-itis because he was opposed for too few edits, not lack of experience in AFD, or other areas. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 13:30, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Gosh, just as well I listed two other objections besides being a middle schooler and only having 87 edits. This is looking now like arguing for the sake of arguing; first you say that a terse, generic Oppose should have sufficed, now you're saying that two grounds to oppose aren't enough. I'd ask which is it, were I interested in prolonging this any further.  RGTraynor  13:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
It is obvious we have opposing views. I have been willing to engage in discourse over this difference however as you have stated above, it appears as though it is doing little good. If you desire to continue discussing appropriate demeanor in RFA, then I will kindly oblige otherwise, we can call it a day for this conversation. However, please understand that there is NO point where I will offer admonishment for simply opposing a RFA, that is everybodys right to do so and I have myself opposed candidates. What I will never stand for is biting newcomers and making personal attacks based on age. You are welcome to disagree with my statements that RFA is often full of pompous asses as well. All I kindly ask is that you do not bite the newcomers! Thanks again for discussing this with me. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 13:45, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
RGTraynor, you almost made me quit. I wuld like to get this all overwith, so I am OK, so no more fighting. OK??? JONJONBT talk•homemade userboxes 19:44, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
One more thing. For your information, I am in a gifted class and also know the longest word in the English dictionary. It is: pneumonoultramicroscoicsilicavolcanokiniosis n A lung disease caused by workng near silica mines.
Hmmm... a 11 year old lacks intelligence, huh? I am very disappointed. I am the smartest person in my grade as far as I know, and I hav an IQ of 140. That's one point over one over one of the kid mob members on 1 vs. 100 this season. Am I still lacking intelligence? I don't think so. So, here's amoral for you. You can't judge a book by its cover. JONJONBT talk•homemade userboxes 19:56, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Your argument would be more, well, intelligent, were I ever to have said that my objection had to do with your intelligence. It had to do with your experience and maturity level, and dredging up an old argument six weeks dead doesn't do much to help your position. Even more so than in other forums, Wikipedia is a place where dropping the subject, moving on and doing your best to make people see things your way by hard work and common sense impresses many more people than rehashing the same debate over and over. Frankly, given your continuing reaction, my uneasiness about your qualifications looks more and more justified.  RGTraynor  20:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hum..

check this edit. Now she could have asked him to do that - but how do we know that's not just him as well? Checkuser? --Fredrick day 21:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

We don't. I suppose we could ask an admin to take a peek. Posting that edit to the AfD would be the next step, I think.  RGTraynor  23:16, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] YechielMan's RFA

Thank you for participating in either of my unsuccessful requests for adminship. Although the experience was frustrating, it showed me some mistakes I was making, and I hope to learn from those mistakes.

Please take a few minutes to read User:YechielMan/Other stuff/RFA review and advise me how to proceed. Best regards. YechielMan 21:23, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Summers complained about our personal attacks on him over at AN/I

It's been resolved, but in case you missed it...

I did miss it; thanks for the heads-up. Y'know, it's strange how so many people operate under delusions that not agreeing with them = attacking them ...  RGTraynor  20:12, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quincy MA

Thanks for clarifying on the "covenant" issue! I hadn't checked back 'til now.
-- Alain

Hey, since you seem to be a pretty insightful fellow, I was wondering if you could offer some advice on getting a new Quincy seal in the Quincy wikipedia page. I uploaded this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Quincy_seal.gif but I'm not sure if I have a valid excuse for its use. Would "logo" qualify? It's from the commonwealth's website so it sure isn't my own work. I'd welcome the advice. I'd say I have fairly noble intentions and a desire to learn more, but at this point am fairly inexperienced in all things wikipedia. Thank in advance!
-- Alain
It's always the case that an image representing or generated by a governmental entity is in the public domain, hence perfectly permissible.  RGTraynor  19:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll remember that for future reference.
--Alain

[edit] Userspace Vandalism by 80.44.64.21

Just to say that a few minutes ago 80.44.64.21 (talk • contribs • Info • WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • block user • block log) went through all of your archives one by one and blanked them (me following reverting) and then blanked your userpage. I've reported them to AIV. — Taggard (Complain) 06:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the assist!  RGTraynor  06:28, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WHA video site links

I have the only known video of the WHA on a non-commercial site ... That's not research? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwilland (talk • contribs)

reviewing my web log I see that you never bothered to even glance at the WHA video page (via your UMASS account) of the myhockeyTV.com web site -- where you'd find videos of all subjects we've posted to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwilland (talk • contribs)

  • They were rightfully removed per the guidelines and policies RG provided. I'll add this one as well: Wikipedia:Copyrights#Linking_to_copyrighted_works. ccwaters 17:17, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Beyond that, I'd suggest looking over your weblog again; I took a look at the front page video of the Aeros 1974 win. That being said, I encourage you to review the relevant policies.  RGTraynor  17:25, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I am disinterested in hate mail or rants; if you want to blow off steam, go join a gym instead.

disinterested or uninterested

"If you are disinterested in something you are impartial and do not take sides: A disinterested observer of the scene would have wondered what all the fuss was about. If you are uninterested you have no interest at all: The player was uninterested in the public reaction to his remark. Disinterested is often used instead of uninterested to mean lacking interest. This use is widely regarded as incorrect and should be avoided, especially in formal writing. "

I'm surprised at the concept that disinterest in receiving hate mail could be conflated into disinterest in everything. No doubt there's some discussion board or forum somewhere which would welcome your literary analysis; feel free to indulge over there instead of spamming my talk page.  RGTraynor  18:28, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

My point was that you used the term "disinterested" improperly -- you meant to say "uninterested." I'm just trying to help clean up your grammar. You are "uninterested" in receiving hate mail. That's not spam -- that's helpful feedback.

No, that's being pompous, an unsolicited misuse of my talk page and oh, wrong. The use of "disinterested" in that fashion has been in common use for decades. Now if you have direct project-related business, that is a pertinent and legal use of this talk page. Anything else was not asked for and is not wanted. Cease spamming this page at once.  RGTraynor  23:55, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clayton HS

Of course you're right that the article cant stay, but let up, the 2 of you are escalating. The other guy will learn; If he inserts the same non-article, we'll delete it and then he'll learn, no need to threaten in advance. DGG 06:31, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Which would be an acceptable way of handling things for a new editor, but Alansohn isn't one. There comes a point by which respect for the rules - and not just those rules which can be used to bludgeon the other guys, while ignoring those which inconveniently get in your way - had better be ingrained. As it happens, I didn't threaten him (I'm no admin; what with, exactly?), but it seems that someone with a soupcon of authority should.  RGTraynor  12:49, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Working Man's Barnstar

Thanks for the honour, I gladly accept the badge. PS- I hope pro-diacritics editors continue to respect the understanding at the NHL team pages. GoodDay 20:24, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your opinion

Hello, an article in which you took part in the AFD discussion has undergone more than 20 reverts. We are trying to get truely neutral opinion about removal of some information. [here Your esteemed opinion will be welcome. Thanks Taprobanus 14:05, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD for First World Problems

In addition to the SPAs that have all noted Keep comments, I did a little looking around and it appears these may all be sockpuppets, your thoughts? Wildthing61476 17:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Possibly, but I'm not an admin and lack access to the checkuser facilities. It may be worth mentioning.  RGTraynor  17:10, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RfC

Hi RGT, BTW, I am sorry to read above that you don't feel you would pass an RfA. I understand that you are likely to attract some fervent opposition, but I suspect that many editors would gladly offer you support given your solid contributions and consistent common sense. If editors like you don't deserve the mop, the project is in trouble. Anyway, I really posted here to say that, after the most recent outburst at Wikipedia_talk:Schoolcruft & AN/I involving our old friend Alan, an RfC seems at this point the best remedy. Given your previous experience, I was wondering if you would contribute a thought or two when it materialises. (Seriously, reconsider admin!) Eusebeus 23:10, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I'm convinced I wouldn't pass an RfA. The Incivility Police has a year's worth more ammunition (or at least statements they can twist to their ends), this new faction that suddenly things 100% edit summaries is a prerequisite for adminship would zap me, the inclusionists would total up my Delete vs. Keep ratio on AfD, and while I can't canvass for myself, I saw last time out that it's okay to canvass against me. I've seen editors with better resumes than mine get shot down on single issues or incidents. Why put myself through that when the best possible outcome is, after all, a position that would require more work and time from me? That being said, I'd be quite willing to participate in a RfC over him. It's a shame, because he's a capable editor, but he's a chronic AGF violator and his sheer urge to !Win! makes any debate he's in near-automatically contentious and fraught.  RGTraynor  13:44, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recent comments on page concerning new "IHL".

I did go overboard with a recent comment, RG, and I apologize for it. There is a writer at the Peoria, IL newspaper who continues to print and report incorrect information in an effort to slander the efforts of the group that has just purchased the rights to the old "International Hockey League" name and is trying to put it back together.

I've had to edit the page several times today, as he keeps coming in here with incorrect statements, mis-truths, and utter lies about the league.

I will watch my temper in the future, I'm guessing this page will be edited often in the coming days. The most recent edit I made is factual, and doesn't simply "cheerlead" for the new league, rather it tells the truth about what is going on and what has gone on.

Thank you.

Peoria4440 06:40, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Waiver Edits

Hello RG, I need your advise. The Blues today, placed their captain Dallas Drake on waivers. Does this mean he's no longer a Blue (and thus appropiate edits should be made at the Blues, NHL captains and other related pages)? GoodDay 18:51, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead with the edits. If I'm in error, feel free to reverse them. GoodDay 19:00, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
No, it doesn't. He's no longer on the team when he's either released, traded or reassigned, but placing on waivers doesn't thereby remove him from the roster outright unless he's claimed.  RGTraynor  19:13, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
OK, I wasn't sure. GoodDay 19:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Hello RG, I'm having difficulties at the Blues page, concerning Dallas Drakes status as a Blue (and Blues captain). Editors, are declaring him a 'free agent'. I need your help, I'm in over my head. GoodDay 00:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Just noticed, Blues official website has removed Drake from their 'roster'. GoodDay 00:27, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


One cannot call the IHL "low level" minor leagues anymore than one can call the ECHL "mid-level". The players from both leagues, as well as the old ECHL and IHL, have played just about everywhere, even European Leagues, and the parts are interchangable. "Low Level" is just a clever way of saying "Class A", which we've been told is not a designation that hockey uses. Peoria4440 21:36, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

One can do exactly that. That some leagues are superior to others in talent level is evident, and isn't discredited simply because a sport doesn't use a particular classification system. The "parts" are by no means interchangeable; ECHL teams maintain affiliations with NHL teams (as the UHL/IHL clubs generally have not), and the measure of their respective talent bases is that in the entire UHL last year, I could only find two regulars (Jason Muzzatti, Daniel Goneau) with as much as 50 games NHL experience.  RGTraynor  05:50, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

RG, if you'll check the ECHL stats, you will find similar numbers of players have actually appeared in the NHL than to that of the UHL. I will readily admit that the UHL is more "veterans on the way down" laden, while the ECHL is "youngsters on the way up".

But in baseball, many teams use their AA and AAA franchises to hang on to vets for depth, and others use them for prospects. So, if you must INSIST that the IHL is a "low-level" minor league, then we must say the EXACT same thing for the ECHL.

I did last night, actually, team by team for the 2007 season, with both squads; I spent about an hour on it. The numbers are nowhere remotely comparable. Beyond that, anyone must concede that while the ECHL has a number of AHL and NHL prospects, the UHL/CHL teams are generally comprised of second- and third-line college and major junior players who never were prospects.  RGTraynor  18:54, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RfC

Hi, RGT Just to let you know, an RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Alansohn should you have a comment. Cheers, Eusebeus 00:24, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Bloomington has just signed, as player/assistant, Jarod Skalde, a vet with 115 NHL games in his career, and nearly 200 AHL goals over several AHL seasons. As a developmental league, I don't think there's anyone in the ECHL with that kind of experience. I could be wrong, I don't follow the ECHL as closely as I once did. Look, it's obvious we're going to go round and round on this issue, but I'm willing to put UHL negatives in their entry (which I have) and you've got to agree to quit sugar coating the ECHL entries.

Peoria4440 18:31, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steven Douglas (footballer)

As for your contribution about notability of sportspeople, I would like to see your opinion about this article. I know that may be you will not support delete, I just want to know why this article must be kept. He has never played in senior's national team and plays in a weak amature league.--KRBN 10:46, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Whoa

Have you ever seen anything along these lines? User:Alansohn/Deletion tracking? Yes, it's all me :) Eusebeus 21:38, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh my freaking god. Well, I wonder what the "gee this RfC is so unnecessary" crowd will react to this?  RGTraynor  03:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Very creepy, init? -- But|seriously|folks  08:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
No kidding. "Collecting 'evidence' against my enemy" is the only possible interpretation. My notion that an ArbCom intervention shouldn't have blocking on the table just took a big hit.  RGTraynor  12:35, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

Well, I was looking for a prettier way to do this, but I'm not very artistic, so I'll just say thank you for your support in my RfA, which was closed as successful. I look forward to serving the community in a new way. Take care! -- But|seriously|folks  08:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Heh, it doesn't need to be pretty. Congratulations!  RGTraynor  12:35, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Corey Bryant

Just a lil note letting you know that our old friend User:Corey Bryant is back editing the season articles from the 60s-and-70's and even being a little sneaky about it as well, using IPs and the like. I've reverted him a few times in the last week, but just giving you a heads up... very few things entertain me more on Wikipedia then when you start ranting against IPs and sockpuppets :) CroCan "Short answer 'yes' with an 'if'...long answer 'no' with a 'but'" 19:14, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Charming. I'll keep a weather eye out. Thanks for the heads up.  RGTraynor  19:23, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Civility

Your edit to Al Arbour did not have a citation. It was not an "assumption", it was a fact. Had I said "untrue" rather than "unsourced", that would have been an incorrect assumption, but I did not say that. Now that you actually provided a citation, the content is fine. There was no need for anger directed at me in your edit summary. Croctotheface 06:41, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

If you believe that saying that the source was already in the article, or that (correctly) pointing out that adding a citation tag or making an inquiry on the talk page is the more civil way of handling things, constitutes "anger," I won't argue with you. I will say that unless you have reason to believe a fact is wrong (that's where the "assumption" comes) or controversial, or the article's getting a serious FA push, it's smarmy at best and incivil and disruptive at worst to blow off statements of fact with no warning. That being said, I'd want a cleaner history of edit summaries before I openly read insult into those of others.  RGTraynor  13:08, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

I was looking at the AfD for Country Tonite Theater... thanks for saying that. It really means a lot to me, and I'm sorry that I was going around saying that you were completely uncivil, and here's my apology.

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
I am so sorry, and I want you to have this as an apologetic gift. JONJONBT talk•homemade userboxes 18:01, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, thank you very much. That's a handsome gesture, and I'm quite appreciative. (Quite aside from that it's been a miserable day, and the lift is very welcome.)  RGTraynor  18:23, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
To be honest, I think you deserve to be an admin better than me. I think I was just being crankyish due to the fact I was keeping one of my deepest secrets from my friends and sometimes that kind of stuff makes me cranky, but I told them and they were OK with it. Anyway, no prob for the barnstar! I was working on creating one called the Civility Barnstar however my computer crashed the second I opened my image editor to create it...darn it! Well, that's all I have to say, so bye! jonjonbt talk•contribs 03:46, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia: WikiProject Ice Hockey, diacritics on NHL roster 'birthplaces'

Ya know RG, if I would've calmed down earlier and did some more research, I would have noticed that the 30 Official NHL team websites (the NHL team pages, main 'reliable sources') did not show diacritics (at player birthplaces). It would've saved a lot of debate, not to mention 'discussion page' space. I hope the 'Official NHL team websites', puts an end to the dispute. GoodDay 20:20, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I guess the Official NHL team websites aren't reliable sources afterall. It's Djsasso's way, no exceptions. GoodDay 21:04, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

My RFA
User:TenPoundHammer and his romp of Wikipedia-editing otters thank you for participating in Hammer's failed request for adminship, and for the helpful tips given to Hammer for his and his otters' next run at gaining the key. Also, Hammer has talked to the otters, and from now on they promise not to leave fish guts and clamshells on the Articles for Deletion pages anymore. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 16:58, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Goatse

I have changed the nomination on the AFD, and have made it so it looks more like a nomination for deletion. Have a read, and see if your opinion reflects it. The sunder king 17:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

My opinion hasn't changed; that the site is highly notable in Internet culture, that damn near everything is sourceable to Wayback Machine screenshots, if need be, and that the AFD was provoked much more out of the subject matter than its inherent notability. Thank you for asking, though.  RGTraynor  19:50, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hate rant (uh oh!)

I hate you RGTraynor, and I'm just too damn lazy to go to a gym. That is all. Croat Canuck talk 02:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

(smirks) Gosh darn. We'll just have to cut off your Doritos supply, is all.  RGTraynor  02:42, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Hahaha, wow a Wikipedian AND a dietician, a regular jack of all trades you are. Croat Canuck talk 17:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Hrm. I had donuts for lunch. Dietician would be stretching the limit ...  RGTraynor  18:08, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Taro Tsujimoto

Thanks for cleaning up some of the random thoughts at Taro Tsujimoto. I am in Buffalo reasearching the Sabres of the 70s this week. I managed to get Good article The French Connection (hockey) up to WP:GA status this week and am working on Gilbert Perreault as well. I am hoping to find some more on Taro this week. I hope you don't mind the part I added back. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 04:21, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Do you care to meet me on the talk page?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:00, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 2

Thank you for your support in my Request for Adminship. Unfortunately the nomination did not succeed, but please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project, and I'll try again in a few months! If you ever have any questions or suggestions for me, please don't hesitate to contact me. Best wishes, --Elonka 04:19, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Queens the Musical deletion

Hi! I live in Belfast where Queens the Musical was performed. It wasnt just a school play, it became a production put on several times, and included in the cities' Gay Pride events in July 2007. With full backing from the Belfast Pride Committee it is expected to tour and was the talk of many in the city during the last few weeks. I would like the article to remain as it is important that plays important to Belfast are included in Wikipedia as we lack articles on many aspects of Northern irish life, aspects that if they were that of a smaller US or Canadian community would probably have large articles on this site. Thanks for taking the time to hear me out Damo

Not a problem. Here's the rub. Wikipedia isn't a community bulletin board like Myspace. It's an encyclopedia with certain policies and guidelines governing what merits inclusion. I recommend you take a look at WP:NOT, WP:V, WP:NN and WP:RS for openers. Under those policies, it isn't enough for you to assert that a certain play is important to Belfast. You must demonstrate that the play has been the subject of multiple, independent, reliable, third-party, published sources ... such as major newspaper articles, a piece on the BBC or the like. The odds that a student play performed for the first time five months ago has received that level of notoriety (or, to be honest, achieved any widely acknowledged importance to Belfast) are remote. If you do have such sources, please feel free to add them to the article and let us know.  RGTraynor  20:54, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello WikiProject Ice Hockey/Participant

I am an advisor to the National Hockey League. With your help over the next few months I plan to review and correct any information on wikipedia relating to the National Hockey League, its franchises, players, executives and partership organisations. I am here to provide you with information. Your work is appreciated. --NHLsource 18:16, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gilbert Perreault GA

Thanks for your help with the early stages of this article. You may want to add

This user helped promote the article Gilbert Perreault to good article status.

to your user page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 20:08, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Please see my response on my talk page--NHLsource 04:45, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Featured topic Drive

Hi, as you may or may not know, some of us at WP:HOCKEY have banded together and are trying to get the various NHL Trophy pages to FT status. It is a big job and if you would be willing to offer any assistance, it would be most appreciated. You can find out more here. Thanks for the time, Scorpion0422 21:33, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR violation

You've violated the 3RR on Chris Tancill. Levelhlp 03:19, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Go back and read WP:3RR; the key text is "An editor must not perform more than three reverts, in whole or in part, on a single page within a 24-hour period." My reversions have taken place over a week. Beyond that, when you and User:Mainmre are SPAs whose sole activity on Wikipedia has been to change instances of UW to UW-Madison, without bothering to discuss the matter, and that your first edits took place only after Mainmre's ... well, even an actual 3RR violation (which this is not) is justifiable when reverting vandalism.  RGTraynor  05:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gilbert Perreault

I appreciate your interest in Gilbert Perreault. I spent a lot of time last month returning to Buffalo to research his article as well as The French Connection (hockey) to get them both cited well enough to be WP:GAs. I am glad someone else cares about these articles. However, removing sources that support facts that are not commonly known to wikipedia readers is not appropriate in my mind. I have reverted many of your changes and this ist the net result of our joint efforts.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 14:03, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

It may not be appropriate in your mind, but it's appropriate per policy. "All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation." (emphasis in the original, from WP:V). Items of readily provable fact, such as that Perreault is a Hall of Famer or the years during which he was named an All-Star, are already cited in the general references and the external link and do not require a cloud of jarring inline citations. Furthermore, the extensive references to the Fog Game are inappropriate, given that the game is not itself about Perreault and he had no particularly overwhelming impact in it. Finally, I worry that you might be crossing the WP:OWN line. I likewise appreciate the interest of other editors in this article, am glad other editors care about it and have spent time researching the edits I myself have made in it. I hope other editors are similarly invested in the articles about which they themselves care. Nonetheless, no single one of us has any more authority or influence over an article than another ... which is just as well, since my first edits to this article happened a year and a half before yours.  RGTraynor  03:51, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
I find your style of I am so sure I am right I am going to revert in whole instead of going item by item and analyzing deeply each thing that I replaced. Your haphazard total revert even delete an incredibly useful template. Taking the I'm right and I am going to threaten you with an WP:OWN challenge is the completely wrong approach to take. Please reconsider each single item you removed especially valuable templates you carelessly removed. I took a lot of time with a thoughtful compromise edit and your approach is not thought of very highly. Since this was a newly minted WP:GA you should seriously reconsider your reversion. It is common to cite a source for unlikely to be challenged statistics because it is helpful to the reader. You should keep in mind that at one point the article said he was a six time All-star. Some sources have it wrong. Even though you should not challenge that he is a 9-time All-star you should not remove such a citation. Please respond at my talk page. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 01:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I was unable to complete my thoughts because the library closed at 9PM central (2AM UTC) last night. It also appears that I was in a huffy mood at the end of the day yesterday. Citations are not reserved for things likely to be challenged by experts. Basically, they are used to provide references for most interesting facts in an article. If I told you someone scored over 500 goals you might find that to be an incredible claim if you are not a sports fan. An article should be written with main page exposure in mind. Suppose this becomes a FA some day. If you look at most sports FACs they are chock full of citations for things that we all know are true. An article will have a citation for the fact that a team won the Stanley cup in a given year and one for the fact that it moved to another arena in a given year. This is the way proper citation works. The challenge rule you are cited does not mean that you only cite something if you think it might belong in Ripley's Believe it or Not. Please respond since I know you are online. I will begin reverting this after noon if there is no response.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I stand by my statements. Your argument relies on vague speculation such as whether someone might challenge that Perreault scored 500 goals or that he was a nine-time All-Star. Quite aside from the obvious fact that no one here has ever done either, such speculation doesn't override the policy governing the use of inline citations. Beyond that, of course I believe that I'm right -- it would be quite incorrect for me to make changes I felt were wrong -- and that believing you're crossing the line into WP:OWN is a very long way from "threatening" a "challenge" on those grounds, for which I'd be interested in you pointing out where I said anything of the sort.  RGTraynor  18:16, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I gotta agree with RG on this: his career stats are included in the article. They're backed up by a link to hockeydb and others stats websites could easily be added as well (I've always preferred hockeydb because it includes minor, junior and college stats). Data like that is mundane, qualitative and easily accessible. I'd be more worried about citing statements such as he also plays on occasion with the Buffalo Sabres Alumni Hockey Team for charity events. I certainly wouldn't be surprised if it is true, yet I don't see anything that would prove it. ccwaters 18:45, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. Unlike his stats, that's a fact that is not to be found in a hundred hockey books or fifty websites, each and every time invariably.  RGTraynor  19:01, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I am going to revert item by item with comment. Give me about a half hour. The point is that facts at WP are highly suspect by the general populous and thus notable fact citations are being reverted. I will attempt to do so minimally. Hopefully places that had redundant citations will have fewer, but facts that are worth boasting about must be cited, for the sake of the reader who should not just trust us.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:33, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
P.S. in case you think I lie about the 6 time AS source, see http://www.sabresalumni.com/2001/perreault.php3 .--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:39, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I am going to need more than a half hour.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 20:04, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Take your time; any inline citations of non-controversial statistical fact will just be reverted right back. Uncontroversial items of readily-provable statistical fact don't uniquely become needful of inline citations just because they're "boast" worthy. I'll be happy to raise this to the Wikiproject for a consensus.  RGTraynor  20:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I have moved the fog game to The French Connection (hockey) and explained each additional reference readded. Which WP do you want to go to? Ice Hockey or Biography?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:25, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
The hockey project. Err ... that fog game reference isn't any more appropriate in the French Connection article. A large chunk like that must be in an article to which it directly pertains. The only possible articles would be the main Sabres article, an article on the arena, or the applicable NHL season article.  RGTraynor  01:07, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
I find it hard to believe that you honestly feel that the line that was responsible for the game-tying and overtime game-winning goals is not a proper place for a short paragraph on the game of that level of importance.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 01:16, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
If we continue to get no response, we can go to Biography.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 14:12, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Whalerpedia?

I would like to know if there is any interest out there to create a separate web page using the Wiki technology based solely on the Hartford Whalers. This page can have in depth articles on related subjects just as the Carolina Hurricanes, Whaler players and Whaler draft picks, Whaler trades, the NHL, the WHA, the Binghamton Whalers, Springfield Indians, Howard Baldwin, and so on. Let me know if anyone else is interested in starting this web page. Thanks. Whalerguy1 17:27, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The now-traditional RFA thank-spam

Click there to open your card! → → →

[edit] New York Rangers

Hello RG, the user 'Payne2thamax' (remember him?) was banned months ago for threatning to murder someone on Wikipedia (he was obnoxious about full inclusion of Hall of famers). Just curious, now that's he's gone and having seen your comments at List of family relations in the National Hockey League, would you be interested in re-opening that discussion. Afterall, didn't Bobby Orr suit up as a North Star in an old-timers game? GoodDay 20:38, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Orr? I doubt it, actually; he played in very few oldtimers games, and I attended the first and maybe the only one he did. Then again, I don't know for certain. As far as reopening the Hull fiasco, let's see how this one goes. I have no objection to Rheaume being on that list as long as the Keith Gretzkys and Marguerite Norrises of the world are included, but also have no objection to the list being strictly for those playing in a regular season or playoff NHL game.  RGTraynor  20:42, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Judging Djasso's reaction at New York Rangers, removing Bobby Hull may be a futile attempt. Gee-wheez, I gotta say it again - I should've listen to you back then. GoodDay 15:37, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
PS- have you noticed the inconsistancies? At Bobby Hull, the Rangers aren't listed in the Infobox (as one of his teams). GoodDay 17:09, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gilbert Perreault at GA/R

I should have mentioned I put Gilbert Perreault at WP:GA/R.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 23:31, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

It seems there is support for citation restoration at GA/R. If you do not reply at my talk page or at GA/R within the next 48 hours I will restore some citations.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Editor review

Could you please review me? Thanks! Jonathan talk \ contribs — er 02:42, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:JC_Tremblay_-_WHA.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:JC_Tremblay_-_WHA.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:23, 31 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 15:23, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Archiving

Hello RG, months ago you awarded me with a badge, for my cleaning up of diacritics. In my failed attempts to archive my pages, I resorted to deleting my pages (with a directory noted in the Edit summaries), in the process I accidently 'deleted' my badge. Thought I'd let you know, it was accidental. GoodDay 22:42, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quincy, Massachusetts

Thanks, again, for the numerous lesson in... life, haha. I just saw a bunch of edits were made. Good call. Aepoutre 18:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your opinion please?

Am I guilty of over-kill? That is what Noroton seems to be implying.

Can I ask if your follow-up comment was meant to tell Noroton that they should take their own advice? Your comment is open to that interpretation. Or it could be interpreted as support for them in their assessment that I am a "sore winner".

I don't accept the excuse, "he/she started it first." That is not why my last comment was so detailed. FWIW, however, Noroton's continued insistence that the only possible reason anyone would be interested in the the article was "prurience" already opened the door to speculating about reader's motives.

I went into detail for two reasons:

  1. Noroton's insistence that other respondents weren't offering substantive objections
  2. Noroton is not the only regular patroller who has adopted this very strange interpretation of {{blp}}. IMO, this kind of interrpetation of {{blp}} is irredeemably vulnerable to POV. I really do believe this interpretation of {{blp}} puts the wikipedia at risk of irrelevancy.

It wasn't my intention to be offensive. Noroton seems to be implying I was. I was hoping you could clarify whether you agreed with them. Don't worry, you can agree with them without worrying I will trouble you with a long defense.

Cheers! Geo Swan 13:18, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I absolutely think that Noroton should take his own advice, and would have said so more pointedly if I'd wanted to escalate the hostility level further, which I didn't. Let's leave completely aside the merits of the arguments, which we've already discussed to death. No matter how right I think I am on an issue, a large, unanimous consensus against me always brings me up short. Even if I can't bring myself to concede defeat openly, it's a long-held aphorism of mine that in an effort like Wikipedia, it's inevitable that there will be a consensus against you at times, and when that happens, it's incumbent on you to shut up and get out of the way. Noroton passed that point days ago, and if I hadn't been involved myself, this would be a great candidate for a non-admin closure under WP:SNOW.  RGTraynor  13:33, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. Cheers! Geo Swan 20:56, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Click there to open your card! → → →

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bolt Risk

Following [1] saying that there was a race condition on my closing the debate while someone was preparing some valid new information, I've reversed my closure and relisted on today's AfD list. Thought I'd let you know in case you had already un-watchlisted the page. Splash - tk 21:44, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Seattle Totems (NPHL)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Seattle Totems (NPHL), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Seattle Totems. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:50, 23 November 2007 (UTC)