User:Zzyzx11/Archive10

Mighty Ducks CFD
Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_June_22 What should we do about this? Should we relist it? Bring it up at WP:HOCKEY? . I obviously like my way, but I don't care that much about it to go to war over it. I'd just like to get a consensus that we can act upon soon. ccwaters
 * Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey ccwaters 00:14, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Width parameter for 8TeamBracket
Could you add a "width" parameter to Template:8TeamBracket? It's being used for the final few rounds of Wimbledon, and the names are unnecessariliy wrapping, causing general ugliness. I think the ideal solution would be to have every round expand to include the longest name that appeared in any round. That way, every name would fit and the rounds would remain equally sized. But I don't think HTML can do that... --Dantheox 16:24, 6 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Many thanks -- team-width and score-width were exactly what I wanted. Sorry for any confusion! --Dantheox 01:43, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Arenafan links
I spent a considerable amount of time pruning some linkspam in the arena football team articles. Now User:Nolesrule has added the links to Arenafan.com back by indicating that they are references. Even though there are other mainstream sources for information, what makes this most troubling is that Nolesrule's user page states that he owns Arenafan.com. As a result, a Google search for "arena football" shows that he has vaulted to third on the list, no doubt because of all the links that he has inserted. I could obviously revert all the articles back again, but we know where that would lead us. Any thoughts as to how this should be rectified? Regards, Twigboy 13:20, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Seems you handled it ok for now. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 21:56, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

NHL team template
Great addition adding the optional syntax for if a team is Canadian or not and how it should affect spelling. Thanks for adding it in, and when I finally hit the Western Conference Canadian teams I'll remember to add that in to the coding on the team article end.--Resident Lune 01:16, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem. I was kind off thinking about it for some time now for the old one but did not get around to doing it. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Battle of Los Angeles bracket
Hi, Zzyzx! Could you possibly make me a bracket template to use for the 2006 PWG Battle of Los Angeles tournament, please? I made a diagram of what the bracket should look like. You can find it here.

It doesn't have seeds, but you can put the places for the seeds in if you want. If not, I still wanted to have the gray spaces there just because it looks better that way.

Again, this is only a request, and you don't have to, but I just thought I would ask since you made the 16-team one and I really like it.

Thanks in advance very much. -- F P A t l  ( holla ) 08:04, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Since there are currently no sources on that article, how exactly can there be a final match with three competing teams? Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Never will wilt lettuce

 * Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning. As you know that blocking will not be a solution. The normal cost is usually around $1.95 to $2.00, but varies on location. You cannot stop people who have dymanic IPs. Red is the color normally associated with fire engines. The beauty of the dynamic IP is that other people will get hurt and get pissed off. As they rescue a man trapped beneath a truck, another inside a sofa bed and another whose arm is caught in the garbage disposal. You should really stop pissing people off with your stupid lies. If found guilty of breaches, the Met could be fined an unlimited sum. I really hate people like you, damn know-it-alls. He said he got into his father's Corvette with a friend and drove north on Broadway.

—The preceding comment was added by 205.211.225.73 (talk • contribs).

Hydnjo's response to the blocking proposal
I thank one and all - Jarandal, Antandrus, Titoxd, Xaosflux, TenOfAllTrades, mboverload, PseudoSudo, Knowledge Seeker, Haukurth, Deathphoenix, Zzyzx11, Tyrenius, Zscout370, AnnH, Rick Block, Tyrenius (again), Zscout370 (again) and NoSeptember for your support.

To Jeffrey O. Gustafson who initiated this block request I ask why? We have had no interaction until now so how do you come to this requested action at WP:AN? Did you come across my account during your own research or are you acting as a proxy for another admin/user with whom I've caused to be angry with me? In reviewing your contributions I see no such "letter of the law" before now and so I feel singled out by you and I have no clue as to why - that to me is most disturbing. If you've come to this action on your own then should I be always wary of another admin challenging the legitimacy of my account?

For TenOfAllTrades who advised me not to worry and Rick who made me laugh I give special thanks, you've helped me to not take this so personally. And to Jeff, thanks for being courteous in informing me of your action and for letting me feel that your heart wasn't for blocking me. Except for my one explanation above, I haven't edited for a few days now so as to allow y'all to comment about this based on my history of contribution rather than my reaction to it.

I wanted to say all of this before it all goes to archive heaven. I still have a lingering concern that this may arise again and don't want to go through WP life looking over my shoulder or worrying that I might piss-off some admin and cause another inquiry about the legitimacy of my account. If any of you who have been so gracious as to take the time to support me here have any suggestions to prevent such an action, please drop your thoughts on my talk or by email.

Finally, on a personal note to all, I never ever expected so much supportive response from all of you. I know that I've been moody at times and have spoken in ways that I have regretted the next day. I hoped otherwise but it seemed that those unfortunate responses might end up being my legacy as they were the foremost in my mind. And so far as this being a "role account", I think that I'll let the descriptions of AnnH and NoSeptember (both above) stand as the most intuitive descriptions of this account. My (and our) warmest regards to all of you for your understanding and outward support for the continuation of hydnjo's user account and future contributions. Again, my delighted and humble thanks :-) --hydnjo talk 02:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

addendum: Jeff, I was confused at the outset in that I wasn't aware of the "role account" policy and then after becoming aware I was frustrated that I had made so many edits which could mislead someone to the conclusion that my account was a role account. I'm sorry that in my zeal to understand your actions that I posed the possibility that you were acting at someone else's behest. I have no evidence of that and it was improper of me to even mention that such a bizarre conspiracy was possible. I find myself guilty of "blaming the messenger" and posting an inappropriate comment about your motivation.

As for my account, I want to state that it is not a role account and I apologize for leaving the impression that it is one. "hydnjo" is the signature that I commonly use for much of my correspondence and thought it to be appropriate when I first started my WP account. The portmanteau is an acknowledgment of our shared existence and not an indication that Heidi and I share in editing at WP.

I thank you for your courtesy in informing me at the outset of the discussion at WP:AN and for your compliments about my contributions. The comments in my response were made in the shadow of my own frustration with my having left a trail of edits that could easily be construed as having come from either Heidi or myself. I sincerely apologize to you for making any suggestion as to your motivation in bringing up a legitimate policy question. You have a genuine concern for the orderly behavior of our editors and I thank you for initiating this discussion and providing me the opportunity to explain the nature of my account. --hydnjo talk 19:04, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Template:Main Page
Hello, Zzyzx11. Thank you for creating this useful template. I quite like it, but I don't like the name. How about "Template:Main Page toolbox" instead ? -- PFHLai 14:06, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:28, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

MLB_HoF
Zzyzx11: Thanks. I'd had you pigeonholed as a "style nazi", and since this was wrong, I apologize. I think we would both agree then, that this particular case is not one which the current policies address very effectively. If nothing else, perhaps my noise will cause some movement there. Ender78 06:00, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Unfornuately, in my experience, the Wikimedia Foundation has been very strict on this policy that they so far have not been willing to negotiate. What they really want is to have the use of unfree images be kept to a minimum. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:35, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Late Thanks
Hello, Zzyzx11. It's been more than a year that you wrote me a warm welcome, and I've omitted to thank you for it ever since. Thank you! (better late than never). I should have heeded your kind advice then (instead I chose to go the hard way, bumping my head along the road) and should have resorted to asking you for further guidance. At present I have a question: does Wikipedia have a hit counter for articles, that you know of? That is, does the supporting software provide a tool for monitoring the number of queries to an article over time? Is it available to contributors?

Thanks again, AVM 18:40, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Anaheimat on template:Orange County, California
Hello, User:Anaheimat keeps reverting the communities that were on the template for Orange County, California. I ask you kindly to put the communities back, for they have been there for many months, and are necessary for some of the larger communities that were included on the template previously. Thanks. --Mr.Executive 18:58, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

template:Orange County, California
Hello, but I was wondering why you did not like the setup made last night where the larger cities and communities were in bold. Although I didnt create it I thought it looked better because it was more condensed, and flowed better. Would you please explain to me why you did not like the setup. Greatly appreciated. --Mr.Executive 23:16, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * That setup and organization has been there for many months... much, much longer than the "other neighborhoods and communities" section. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:22, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I'll put in a checuser request later, but Mr.Executive may be a friend or alias of EricSaindon2. -Will Beback 23:58, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Davey O'Brien National Quarterback Award
Hi- I'm calling on you because you're the first name on the American football wikiproject- I moved the article Davey O'Brien Award->Davey O'Brien National Quarterback Award, and I'm beginning to think that that was a mistake. Do you think it should be moved back? ThanksBorisblue 01:05, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Gah, I knew I shouldn't have been so hasty. Thanks for the time. Borisblue 01:12, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Please calm down
Please calm down over small little things on the pages.

Have a good day! :)

I will not be back to bother you on the site! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.189.199.24 (talk • contribs).


 * I apologize, I got a little carried away. The biggest problem I have with the big three's network news shows is that they have different titles for each edition. Why can it be simply, "ABC World News", "CBS Evening News", and "NBC Nightly News"... what is with all this "with [Anchor X]" stuff? Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:25, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I mean, look at the news at my local station. All of the editions say "ABC 7 Eyewitness News", not "ABC 7 Eyewitness News with [Anchor A] and [Anchor B]" on weekdays and ""ABC 7 Eyewitness News with [Anchor C] and [Anchor D]". Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:27, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about the duplicate template
My apologies for duplicating the Template:Talkheader template; I had found the non-templated text on another page and didn't check to see if a template existed. I have placed the Talkheader template on those pages so that no redirect will be necessary. Regards, --Ryanjo 01:05, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:07, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

2005 Seattle Seahawk game notes
This artical is being done in the style of the 2005 Texas Longhorn football team page. That page uses the team logos on the game notes. I am attempting to do the same for this page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rick lay95 (talk • contribs).


 * That page does not comply either, so I am removing them. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 05:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

CBS Evening News
Can you change the CBS Evening News page back to the way it was. Some person keeps chnaging it to Katie Couric and she doesnt even take over until September thanks! It says I'm to new to chnage it back.

THANK YOU!!!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Drewgu111 (talk • contribs).

POTD captions
Hi, I noticed you changing some of the POTD captions recently and I'm thinking that the way you're writing them is a little too ... obvious, for lack of a better word. For example, this edit -- you can tell that it's an aerial photo, so it sounds a little condescending to me. I would prefer that we not state the obvious. I'll admit I don't always put the most thought into writing these blurbs (mostly it's just copy-n-paste from the articles), but thanks to your influence I have tried to comment more on the image itself as of late rather than just the subject that's depicted when it makes sense to do so (see the ones so far for Picture of the day/August 2006). Regards,  howch e  ng   {chat} 06:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
 * My tweaking of the captions is a direct response to the discussion now archived at Talk:Main Page/Archive 74, where people wanted the caption to be more like an actual caption in describing the picture instead of merely just copying a lead from an article. Of course, on the subject of stating the obvious, there is always a fine line between what WP:1SP says ("State facts which may be obvious to you, but are not necessarily obvious to the reader") and what you said ("it sounds a little condescending to me"). I would rather err on the former, especially when many of the photography books that I have seen or own do indicate in their captions when a photo is an aerial view. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 06:56, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I see... I don't monitor Talk:Main Page so I missed that. As for the captions, I did note that Captions says a good caption "clearly identifies the subject of the picture, without detailing the obvious." Thanks.  howch e  ng   {chat} 16:17, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

That is it!
I have had it. First I get acccused of being a sockpuppet, then your crap. I am not going to waste my time. Wrath of Roth 15:33, 25 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I am sorry you feel that way about the templates. Don't shoot the messenger (me), but this underlying policy regarding this issue comes straight from the Wikimedia Foundation, the owners of Wikipedia. It may be found at Fair_use item #9. It states there that "fair use images should only be used in the article namespace", and goes further into the underlying reasons for the policy.


 * This issue is important because copyright complaints are a very direct way in which Wikipedia could be financially harmed. Wikipedia operates on donations only. To have to respond to copyright complaints, Wikipedia ultimately needs to pay for legal counsel to help respond to these issues. Violating most policies on Wikipedia does not constitute a financial threat to Wikipedia. In the case of copyright infringement, violation of policy most definitely does constitute a very large potential threat if for no other reason than the cost of Wikipedia representing itself against plaintiffs in court cases.


 * This includes the use of fair use images on templates. At first glance, this might seem improper. Afterall, these templates are often intended to be used only on articles that portray the thing in question. The problem comes in the "intended use" area; it is entirely possible (and does happen) that templates intended for use only in main article namespace are used in other namespaces. This potentially creates a copyright issue if there is a fair use image on the template. Thus, the policy has been written to forbid uses of fair use images outside of the main article namespace, which does not include templates of any kind.


 * Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

user:Coolcaesar
Will you add a suspected sockpuppet master tag to the user:coolcaesar page. He is currently a listed ArbCom Case, and has a suspected sockpuppet, user:Anaheimat but keeps deleting the tag. Until a checkuser is made, I think it needs to remain there. I would appreciate it. --69.227.160.83 07:34, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Note to Zzyzx11: I have already been contacted by this user for the same request - see my talk page. Viridae Talk 07:35, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Sizes of the main page images
I noticed that you recently changed the sizes of the images on the main page. However, as per WP:SA and In the news section on the Main Page, these images should be no more than 100px in width. This is because of how the main page currently appears on 800x600 display resolution, which many users have set on their computer monitors &mdash; anything greater than that value screws of the formatting of the main page. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 17:21, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I just created a test page and displayed it at 800x600, and I didn't see any formatting problems. Could you please point me to documentation of this issue?


 * Regardless, it makes no sense to display vertically-oriented images at much larger sizes than horizontally-oriented images. For the sake of uniformity, we need to apply an arbitrary number to either the smaller dimension (as I've been doing) or the larger dimension (meaning that vertically-oriented images would have a maximum height of 100px), except for images with unusual aspect ratios.  &mdash;David Levy 17:56, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Let me clarify as it was told to me because I cannot find the exact discussion: the issue has to do with how the text is presentable on the main page. For instance, on an 800x600 monitor with the larger image size of the flag, the word wrapping causes the text to appear like this:
 * "DRC (Congo) (flag pictured), whose fragile peace is being kept by the UN's largest peacekeeping force, undergoes its first multi-party elections in more than four decades."


 * which is harder to read when compared to the smaller image size and more horizontal space for the text:
 * "DRC (Congo) (flag pictured), whose fragile peace is being kept by the UN's largest peacekeeping force, undergoes its first multi-party elections in more than four decades."


 * Although, I do agree that some of the images with different aspect ratios should be resized a little bit, but not to the degree that it affects the readability of the text. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 18:17, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, that's a valid style concern. Most of our images have fairly similar aspect ratios, so the most common significant variable is the orientation.  The obvious solution is to set a 100px limit to whichever dimension (width or height) is larger, with exceptions made for images with unusual aspect ratios.  In other words, a 600x800px image should be displayed at 75x100px, while an 800x600px image should be displayed at 100x75px.  &mdash;David Levy 18:35, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

coordinates
Thank you for explaining things to me.--Dr who1975 03:21, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Southern California ZIP Codes AfD
Sorry to bother you directly, but I noticed that you made an edit right after I proposed Southern California ZIP Codes for deletion. I just got admonished on the AfD for making the AfD in the first place, when perhaps it should have been a Proposed Merger. If you believe that to be true, can you close the AfD and I'll relist the article in Proposed Mergers? -- Gogo Dodo 16:38, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I closed the AFD, so you can now follow the procedures at WP:MM. There is actually no formal voting like AFD. You have two options when merging the pages: if you are sure that something should be merged, you can be bold and do so. If the merge is controversial however, and could be reverted immediately, then you can tag the proposal with merge tags, and the discussion would take place at the article's talk page. Please read Merging and moving pages for full information. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 22:19, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have to admit that I'm a bit leery about following the merge procedures.  I seem to mangle the procedures of various things when I go outside what I'm comfortable with on Wikipedia.  This being a potential hot button issue doesn't exactly encourage me either. -- Gogo Dodo 22:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)