User talk:Basement12/Archive 3

Three reverts rule
I see now that this is the rule, but why did you revert my edits simply on the basis of "apparent" no concensus. Why didn't you leave my edits and let the other two user to "spend" their three reverts rule. Does that rule apply to admins as well? I do not know.

Why do I need to have a concensus when no concesus have been asked. Must every user seek concensus even if the facts are on his/her own side. Shouldn't the concensus be seeked at the talk page by the opposition and not by the orriginator of some editing.

I ask of you to revert back to my editing in order to allow other users to rebut my edits and "spend" their own three reverts per 24 hours rule.

Imbris (talk) 00:01, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Firstly yes, the 3RR does also apply to admins. Secondly i'm not sure how i could let the other users ""spend" their three reverts rule" as it would not be possible for them both to do so (that would be 6 reverts of your 3 edits?). Finally, and most importantly, the fact that 3 seperate users (myself, Jonel and Andrwsc) have now reverted your edits clearly shows that there is no agreement for the changes you are trying to make. The way the medals are counted currently has been decided by consensus and in order to change this the proper process, of discussion amongst users on the talk page, must be carried out. You cannot simply state that you are correct and edit the page as you see fit. Basement12 (T.C) 00:12, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Extremely witty Englishman
You must be a really funny person blessed with the most admirable kind of humour. Your contribution to the Australian medal tally of the summer Olympics 2000 was 1600000000. This is so great a thought! ... typing 8 zeros after the 16 - how ingenious you are! 20:40, 3 September 2008 (MEZ) Pjotr Morgen
 * If you'd looked more closely you would have seen that vandalism was made in the edit before mine, i will also remind you of Civility. Basement12 (T.C) 19:18, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Additionally as you used a sockpuppet to get around your block in order to make this comment I have left a warning on your main talk page about personal attacks. - Basement12 (T.C) 19:32, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Hard Work

 * You're welcome, I've been trying to figure out how to give them out and so when I got the template I knew the first person I wanted to give one to. Thank you for your kind words as well.  H1nkles (talk) 22:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

multiple gold medalists
Hi, you just undid my edit twice and wrote in the history: "Undid revision 236115779 by Olympicdreams (talk)It is unreferenced and extremely POV." But the table itself is the reference, isn't it? It is obvious from the table and its links to gold medal lists for individual athletes that the athletes with the highest gold medal counts profited from relays and other team competitions typically won by dominant nations. So the ranking itself expresses a POV, a bias towards athletes from dominant nations. I think this is a serious flaw; maybe the entire table must be deleted. But try to argue against this if you can, on the talk page of the article, where I left a copy of this message. Olympicdreams (talk) 22:42, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * See WP:V. Basement12 (T.C) 22:43, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * But then the entire article must be deleted, or can you provide a source for this ranking? Olympicdreams (talk) 22:54, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The article should not be deleted, it is simply a list of facts. A source is provided to allow you to verify the medal winners. The purpose of the article is to list athletes that have won multiple gold medals, it is not the aim of the article to explain why. Basement12 (T.C) 22:58, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Please stop removing my edits
It is bogus of you to try to sight my findings as not legit. It's not up to you to decide, but the global user base. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wuqijun (talk • contribs) 23:54, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
 * You're "findings" come from youtube and are in no way reliably sourced, until they are I (and others no doubt) will continue to remove them. Basement12 (T.C) 23:57, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Stop doing what you're doing
There's nothing in the guideline saying that Youtube is not legit. You are projecting. Report to Wikipedia if you have a problem. I will see to the end that my info gets out. Just you watch. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wuqijun (talk • contribs) 00:06, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I have explained to you why you cannot do this, anyone can upload anything to youtube, it is proof of nothing. If you persist with these edits you will be reported and most probably blocked from editing. Basement12 (T.C) 00:12, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Your an Owls Fan!?
You have no right to take off what I did to the Sheffield Wednesday page, I work at SWFC and the certain player who I added is an upcoming star in the youth academy. I added it on Wikipedia to give the player credability at what he does, he will soon make his first team debut and I think I was right for what I did. You also so called "corrected" me on Akpo Sodje's nationality, why? His brother's are Nigerian and I have talked to Akpo and he has said that he regards himself as Nigerian! So in a mark of respect to him and me change it back to what it was. You regard yourself as an owls fan? Well plaese re- correct the page, thankyou for taking this into account. 18:45, 5th September.
 * I do hope you are kidding. Mark Cresswell a player manager from the Falkland Islands added to notable managers? Firstly I think we both know that no such person exists, secondly even if he did then 1 game in charge doesn't qualify him for a list of notable wednesday managers. As for Kirk Atherton don't get me started on how made up that was. Basement12 (T.C) 17:51, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Owls
Alls I have to say is I left you a comment on your page. By the way the FIFA order of merit page what I edited saying that a certain player has a FIFA order of merit, that was a rumour Richard Wood told me. Since you are a big Owls fan, the club is willing to give you some sort of gift/present for your contributions to the page and over looking it for the club without us knowing about you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fake face (talk • contribs) 17:54, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

The Mark Cresswell thing was a mess up, he does exist. He exists as one of our most loved, Vice Executive of Transfer Policy Adviser's. Kirk Atherton is the player who is the upcoming star I mentioned, I hope you understand what I have just said because the club wants the best for it's admirer's. supporters, fans and local sponsors. Regarding Akpo Sodje, where do you stand on that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fake face (talk • contribs) 18:03, 5 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I have literally no idea what you are talking about. Your edits were vandalism simple as that. Basement12 (T.C) 18:05, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism? Wikipedia is about the truth, the Cresswell situation was a problem, I'll admit that! But he is a member of the football company, he may not belong on that web page, is that what your saying? Kirk is a wonderful athlete and we shall invite you to see him! Since he is in the youth academy we can't tell you his details. but please believe the club you trust! Please note SWFC have appologised to you for the mention VETP Mark Cresswell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fake face (talk • contribs) 18:13, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * A google search for "Kirk Atherton" sheffield wednesday gets exactly one, irrelevant, hit. At best he is in one of the youth teams and is not notale in any way at worst you are simply making stuff up and wasting my time. If you wish to do so please do add, constructively, to wikipedia but stop wasting my time regarding your vandalism. And don't forget to sign your posts using ~ . Basement12 (T.C) 18:20, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Re:Paralympic Opening ceremony
Hi. For now, as you can see, I've only put a few basics... I don't know whether the section on the Opening Ceremony will be expanded enough to warrant its own article. However, I've found an official list of the participating nations and their flagbearers, so I'll make a seperate article out of that, a Paralympic equivalent to 2008 Summer Olympics national flag bearers. Aridd (talk) 16:37, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Georgia (country) at the Paralympics
I have nominated georgia (country) at the paralympics for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Brougham96 (talk) 22:51, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

-Brougham96 (talk) 22:55, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Retracted upon further investigation. Sorry for the confusion.

Great Britain at the Olympics
I've unprotected it. Glad to see people reach an agreement. - Rjd0060 (talk) 01:16, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: This might be of use to you
Thanks! I wasn't aware of that. Aridd (talk) 19:34, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks:
Thanks for helping out with the paralympic articles - I've had it to here with User:Fatmaxy and his cut and paste edits. I've tried reasoning with him, to no avail. Could you leave the Michael Johnson article as I was going to edit that one tomorrow...? Anyway, maybe that user will listen to you... Cheers, Spawn Man (talk) 12:11, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem, i'll leave Johnson for you to do, i've already got plenty to be geting on with. It seems fatmaxy always does just enough not be considered an outright nusiance but not quite enough to be constructive doesn't. Basement12 (T.C) 12:21, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

No apology necessary!
In fact, I really appreciate your determination to establish clarity in a somewhat hazy area. I think it's important to have these discussions now and then -- if we didn't, the project might spiral off in all sorts of crazy directions. (Not that it doesn't anyway!) It's all good, I'll be interested to see what the footyfolk have to say. Thanks for staying engaged on the matter. -Pete (talk) 21:27, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

2008 Summer Olympics
Thanks for your clear thinking:) Much appreciated. Malick78 (talk) 18:28, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Olympic Games
Good luck with, e.g., this. As you can see from Nipsonanomhmata's talk page, he's made edits such as those before. You might want to keep an eye on the Evangelos Zappas article as well, though Nipsonanomhmata's edits there tend to be less problematic. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 22:00, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed, his previous history was the main reason I simply reverted the whole lot. What he adds is more or less correct but gives the events greatly undue weight without and seems to be poorly sourced at best. I'll keep an eye on both pages, hopefully he will take the suggestion I made on his talk page on board and at least discuss any further changes before making them. Basement12 (T.C) 22:08, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Oi, You!
Thank you very much. Just a bored student trying to do their bit :) Basement12 (T.C) 02:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

re:
yeah that was my bad. I saw the word "dong" and jumped. sorry about that. Thingg &#8853; &#8855; 21:21, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem, that seems fair enough, it hadn't occured to me that that may have been the reason. Basement12 (T.C) 21:25, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

2008 Summer Olympics medal table
Previously in the discussion page there was consensus that there needed a picture of Chinese athletes winning medals. I have now added one. I think it is fair. Please revert to my previous edit.Jammyfox (talk) 21:16, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The suggestion in the discussion was to add maybe one picture containing a Chinese athlete somewhere in the article. An image with 2 out of 3 medal winners being Chinese as the main picture on the page is seen as being biased towards the Chinese team. Also in future please place new messages at the bottom of talk pages. Thanks Basement12 (T.C) 21:23, 16 September 2008 (UTC)


 * So having two pictures of Netherlands athletes is not biased? China is host team and with the most gold medals their performance should be acknowledged. Plus there is also a Canadian in it too. I don't believe it is biased. It is a decent image and should be added for now as it has been requested for a long time. Jammyfox (talk) 21:33, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The two pictures of the Dutch athletes are there simply because they are the best free images we have of individual athletes that clearly depict the medals. If you have a suitable free image of a single Chinese athlete, that displays the gold or silver medals in a similar way ,then i'd be quite happy to let you change it. The image at the top of the page has no issue though, and is a far more neutral than the one you are proposing. Chinese athletes may have won most gold's, but USA won most medals in total and 87 different nations won at least one medal. It is not about recognising any nations achievement but depicting the appearance of the medals in the manner most aceptable to all. Basement12 (T.C) 21:42, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Then how about not putting the picture as main image but part of the gallery of images along with the dutch pictures? And also Gold medals tally are more superior than overall medal tally i think. At least according to the IOC. Jammyfox (talk) 21:51, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes the IOC do rank by gold medals when they produce a table, but no "winner" of the games is recognised by them. The issue with putting the image with the others is that it then allows any other user to come along and say "Nation X" doesn't have an image so i want to add one to the page and we end up having to allow 87 different images. There is no need for this particular image on the medal tables page but it could be put in China at the 2008 Summer Olympics, either under the medallists section or in the section on the trampoline results (see Great Britain at the 2008 Summer Olympics for an idea of how it could be incorporated). In addition it would also be good to have in Gymnastics at the 2008 Summer Olympics - Men's trampoline, used in the new style infoboxes WikiProject Olympics are implemeting (e.g. at Cycling at the 2008 Summer Olympics - Men's team pursuit). If you need any advice on doing this I can help you out. Basement12 (T.C) 22:07, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

connective tissue
Hey, I just saw your tag to the Mirjam de Koning article. What I meant there is that she was born with a damaged or disordered connective tissue, or something like that. As I know English, but it's not my mother tongue, I don't really know the best way to describe it, but it would be nice if you could use the most common one for me ;) Thanks, Amanda  T / C  01:18, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Amanda  T / C  01:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm still not sure exactly how it should be worded but I think the explaination of what Paralympic class she competes in is a suitable alternative. Basement12 (T.C) 01:40, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:ATHLETE
Hi I have started a disccusion here and here would you like to comment. BigDunc Talk 09:32, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Alternative to N/A in tables?
Nice job on Great Britain at the 2008 Summer Olympics. It is obvious that lots of tedious work went into that article. I have one minor comment though. Several of the tables contain unused cells with N/A in them. The N/A's seem to add clutter and distract from the other results – particularly in the Gymnastics section. Have you considered replacing the N/A with a dash or leaving these cells blank entirely? It might result in a cleaner appearance.

For comparison:

Of course you might have to ask the dash police if this is a permitted use of the dash and which dash should be used. -- Tcncv (talk) 03:56, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I do see what you mean, but leaving the cells empty isn't an option, it just looks like the result hasn't been put in. I think dashes are already in use in some tables, to represent occurances of an athlete not starting a competition DNS is placed in the time/result cell and a dash in the rank column. N/A is also used to show that rounds of competition did not actually exist in some sports, for consistency I think one style should be used in all sports and personally I don't think a dash conveys the same idea i those cases (even if it makes more sense in some). The decision is probably bigger than my opinion and N/A is what, currently, is suggested in WP:OLYMOSNAT. Basement12 (T.C) 11:27, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Your edit of South Africa at the 2008 Summer Paralympics
Hi. I think I understand what you are trying to do there but there is a problem with the way you are doing it. In your edit you moved the medal table up to above the list of team members, but unfortunately you overwrite the Aquatics section of the team list. I'm not sure whether you actually intended to remove the entire team list or not? Roger (talk) 20:21, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I actually moved the "aquatics" section to "swimming", we decided this convention at WP:OLY as it was thought readers would look for the sport under swimming not aquatics. I've redone my edit at the page. Basement12 (T.C) 20:24, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Oops sorry I missed that. Roger (talk) 20:35, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about it, no harm done. Basement12 (T.C) 20:37, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help with improving the article. Roger (talk) 13:43, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Helen Clitheroe
A tag has been placed on Helen Clitheroe requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Pirate452 (talk) 13:18, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - She has competed at the olympics a long established criteria for confering notability. Perhaps giving someone time to work on an article instead of immedietly trying to delete would be a good idea in future. Basement12 (T.C) 13:22, 20 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I was on new pages patrol. I went to the page, and all it said was that she was a long distance runner from Britain.  It didn't say her qualifications or medals or anything.  If you are planning to work on it more, please add hangon below the speedy deletion notice, and leave a note on the talk page. Pirate452 (talk) 13:25, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * There was a reference to her olympic profile provided, together with the fact i added the page to various Olympic related categories, confirming her notability. Tagging for speedy less than a minute after the first creation, thus infact causing an edit conflict with my attempt to add more, is not very helpful at all, you quite clearly didn't even look at the source provided. If you had bothered to you would have realised that there was no need to tag in the first place. Thanks Basement12 (T.C) 13:33, 20 September 2008 (UTC)


 * There is no need to be rude. All I did was add the tag.  Its not up for you or me to decide whether or not it shouldn't be deleted, it's up to the admins.  Like I said, when I first got there, all there was was "Helen Clitheroe (born January 2, 1974 in Preston, England) is a British long-distance runner.", and a link to her profile.  A link to her profile doesn't made a page almost devoid of information good.  I will be leaving that page alone from now on, I don't want an edit war. Pirate452 (talk) 13:41, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I was in no way rude, merely trying to pint out your mistake, as I see from your contributions you are a relatively inexperianced editor. I suggest therefore that you familiarise yourself with all the notability and sppedy delete criteria before wantonly tagging pages where, as I state, notability was already established. Just because a page contains very little information it does not make it deletable, and as I state all you achieved was delaying my expansion of it. I will also direct you to WP:DTTR with regards to the first message you left here. Thanks Basement12 (T.C) 13:48, 20 September 2008 (UTC)


 * All right, thanks for the tips! :) Pirate452 (talk) 13:51, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Cubs Win flag
Is this article on hold. It is customary, to say to change the talk page template, the WP:GAN page review template and notify the editor if it has been put on hold. See GAN instructions.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:34, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No, I realised that the page would be on the main page for a few hours, it was in the same DYK update as one of mine, rather than put the whole thing on an official hold a thought it best to wait a short while before completeing my comments, by the time it was off the main page it was six in the morning local time. I will continue my review shortly. As far as i'm aware there is no requirement that the review be done in one go, all reviews i've been a part of have infact gone much slower, over the course of a week or more to allow comment and improvements, whilst never being put on hold. Basement12 (T.C) 12:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It has been my experience that once an article gets to the point where its editor is merely responding to reviewer feedback that it be placed on hold. That way others who are interested in the topic will know to look for a comment page with activity.  Otherwise, people might miss the activity while the reviewer still has his eyes on the article.  This artilce should be put on hold, IMO.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 13:32, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I respect your opinion, you've obviously been involved in a lot of GA reviews, but I believe putting the article on hold is only for when the reviewer has completed their comments and some major changes need to be made, leaving it on review at this stage made sense as I hadn't finished commenting. I intend to leave the review open for a couple of days before I pass/fail it after eveything I bring up has been addressed, to give sufficient time for others to bring up any concerns (unlikely for this article admittedly but good practice in general I think).Basement12 (T.C) 13:50, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Opening Ceremonies of Olympic Games Article
I'm seeking a little advice. I know you're busy so when you get a chance could you take a look at the Opening Ceremonies subheading of the Olympic Games article? Specifically I'm wondering if we can remove all the references to the various times that non–heads of state opened the Games. It seems to be unnecessarily detailed and burdensome. I think it would suffice to say that there have been several instances when the heads of state did not open the Games and leave it at that. There are no citations for this section and in looking for ways to trim down this article, I feel that this would be a good portion to delete. That being said, your insights on other areas for possible deletion have been spot on so I'd like to get your input before I take out my scissors. Thanks. H1nkles (talk) 20:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Reply copied in from H1nkles talk page - Personally i'd be tempted to split off most the section into a seperate Olympic Ceremonies (Olympics?) article and then link to it using the same summary style as for the rest of the sections, only keeping the most important elements in the main article. I think the information on things such as when teams have entered in an order different to alphabetically by the hosts language, the paragraph on doves, or the three different flags (in the closing section) are interesting enough to be included somewhere but too detailed/specific for an article trying to encompass the entire 3000 year history of the Games. A decent seperate article could be made using this info and would allow more scope for adding specific occurences in individual ceremonies and the history of the ceremonies (which can be done at a later date). Something else that comes up here is that the whilst the "medal presentation" ceremony should be mentioned in a "Ceremonies" section it seems a bit odd to have it disembodied from "Champions and Medalists". Perhaps moving it there and changing "Ceremonies" to "Opening and Closing Ceremonies" would be an idea. I'm also unsure if the "O"s and "C"s should be capitalised, but I guess it's the same as choosing to capitalise Games as long as we're consistent? Hope i've helped there and haven't just confused matters further Basement12 (T.C) 21:51, 30 September 2008 (UTC)


 * First off - sorry for breaking the rules and responding on your talk page, but since you responded on mine I felt compelled to return the favor. Your suggestions make sense but of course now you've made more work for me. :)  I was wondering about the O's and C's being capitalized as well.  I've tried to make it consistent but an argument could be made either way.  I'll make corrections if it is suggested that they be changed in FAC review, whenever that happens.  H1nkles (talk) 22:10, 30 September 2008 (UTC)


 * True, don't know why but I replied there without even thinking, i must be losing it, sorry about that. I'll really confuse things now by replying here :). Waiting until the review is sensible, its trivial to change capitalisations if someone has an issue with them. If you need any help splitting and tidying the article drop me a line (so to speak), no doubt i'll be on here more often than I should be even though I have other things i'm meant to be doing. Basement12 (T.C) 22:20, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Sounds good, I'll start to work on it on Thursday (Wednesday is my birthday). Thanks for your help and suggestions.  H1nkles (talk) 22:54, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Cubs Win flag
Please reconsider Cubs Win Flag


 * ✅ and passed as a GA. Well done. Basement12 (T.C) 11:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

GB at the 2008 Summer Paralympics
I wanted to let you know that I haven't forgotten about this review. I've got two reviews I'm trying to finish first and I'm going out of town until Friday 10/10 but I will get to it. I just didn't want you to think that it had fallen off my radar. Thanks. H1nkles (talk) 18:18, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

United States at the 2008 Summer Olympics too big
An IP understandably added a long tag to United States at the 2008 Summer Olympics; it's quite huge. The trouble is, I don't really know how to solve the problem and was hoping to get your input. One idea I had was to remove the qualification summaries/alternates with the roster lists before table conversion and place it all under United States at the 2008 Summer Olympics - Qualification. But I think that will only slightly decrease the size of the article. An additional idea would be break up the article, either by moving sections to subpages or splitting the article in some fashion. United States at the 2008 Summer Olympics - Swimming? --Jh12 (talk) 12:12, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * First off splitting by sports probably wouldn't work, you'd end up with twenty+ small articles that are different from those used by every country for every other Olympics. Hopefully the article being too long is only going to be problematic for US, China and Russia (GB is next longest and is just about OK), but they are always going to be prety damn long. Some initial ideas i can give you for shortening it a bit are;


 * Replace the big colourful football and basketball rosters with simple lists in two columns, ideally we'd have the full stats previously discussed at WP:OLY but this will help for now.
 * Split the softball and volleyball rosters into two columns, similar to how the water polo teams are listed. I think some indication of who was in the teams is necessary.
 * Have been split. --Jh12 (talk) 16:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * remove gold, silver, bronze and wheat bg colours per WP:OLYMOSNAT, this obviously won't decrease the length but i'd hope it will lessen the loading time.
 * Removed --Jh12 (talk) 16:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Listing all the rows before the results boxes is unnecessary, all the names are basically written twice
 * Removed, alternates moved to the bottom. --Jh12 (talk) 16:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Try combining some of the multiple gymnastics results tables like at GB or Russia. The same could be done for sailing.
 * see below


 * The sections on modern pentathlon and triathlon could be given using slightly less detail, again see GB.
 * Probably can be reduced, though I wonder why Triathlon at the 2008 Summer Olympics doesn't include the all-important transition times? --Jh12 (talk) 16:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * No need for the full medal results after team sports, just use a medal icon like there was at Brazil if the US won a medal.
 * Removed. --Jh12 (talk) 16:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Possibly split references into 3 columns (not sure if that'll help)
 * I remember reading at Template_talk:Reflist/Archive_2008 that >2 columns can actually cause technical problems.


 * It might be an idea to remove all the tables where teams were grouped and just state where the US finished and whether they qualified, it doesn't matter as far as this article is concerned where anyone else finished. This could be done by just leaving the relevant line such as
 * Could work. However, this is probably when the benefits of size-reduction start to take away from the benefits of seeing the team performances of the United States in one collective place. --Jh12 (talk) 16:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Not sure how effective any of those suggestions will be, my guess is not very, but its a start. When GB was GA reviewed one thing that was sugested to remove all the flag icons next to competitor names but before doing something like we could have a general discussion at WT:OLY to help gather some ideas. If you eed any help making changes let me know, i'm a bit busy atm but should have some time to work on something. Basement12 (T.C) 13:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I think everything you mentioned is definitely feasible, except perhaps for the gymnastics merger. For artistic gymnastics, the qualification and finals are different events and the scores don't carry over. As a result, it looks like the apparatus scores under Russia_at_the_2008_Summer_Olympics only list the scores for individual qualification (also used for team qualification), but not the scores for the individual all-around or team finals. --Jh12 (talk) 14:55, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, I think it's quite important for the article to follow the guidelines set by WikiProject Olympics, but Article size is also an over-riding Wikipedia guideline that actually says "if necessary, split the article arbitrarily". I can't help but think that at some point, it might be necessary to have splits somewhere. --Jh12 (talk) 15:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

October Baseball WikiProject Newsletter
--  jj137   ( talk )  23:51, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 19:42, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Maylene.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:Maylene.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:09, 18 November 2008 (UTC)