User talk:Crash Underride/Archive/April-June 2008

All I ask is the following:
 * No Irish jokes please. [[Image:Flag of Ireland.svg|30px]]
 * No redneck/southern jokes. [[Image:Battle flag of the Confederate States of America.svg|30px]]

Every few months I will archive my talk page and you can go here to see what has bee talked about, etc.

Saunders/Foreman
Saunders has always had an article. The Shawn Foreman one looks nice though, good job. John (talk) 01:25, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but I've already made a ton of edits to the Saunders one a long time ago. So why did you think I didn't know? lol John (talk) 01:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the Advice
"After all, we beat you almost both times we meet you in the season." Is that even english? I guess thats what happens when a hillbilly West Virginia fan starts hanging out with Cowboys fans. Lets not even go into the fact that we have beat you guys 4 out of the last 6 times we played. Oh I forgot to ask hows that 1996 playoff game feeling? still fresh? Dont talk to me. Jwalte04 (talk) 20:22, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:2008 Fiesta Bowl Champions
Template:2008 Fiesta Bowl Champions has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. —  Grsz  talk  21:06, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Mountaineer
http://alumni.wvu.edu/traditions/mountaineer_mascot

Follow the link provided at the bottom of the page. John (talk) 19:42, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Schmitt
I didn't. I had read reports that he already had the #. John (talk) 02:40, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Well it doesn't really matter. John (talk) 04:17, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Owen Schmitt, Seahawks number


He wore 35 at WVU, and Seahawks don't have a #35, and it's posted on that site with all the new players' numbers. Need any more proof? Refrain from getting smart with me. :\

Did you seriously get upset over the internet? You got smart, I told you not to because I proved that I was right. You need to chill out and not take that as a big personal insult. I did prove it, though, so no reason to get all pissy, chief. --UTC 01:33 AM, 4 May 2008. L-Burna

Links
Well, I'm so sorry you had to clean up my mistakes. Cry me a river. ;] John (talk) 23:23, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'll go back and fix any I see. Thanks anyways. John (talk) 01:02, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

hmm...
Judging by the comments on your talk page, it doesn't look like anybody likes you lol.

Don't get mad, I was just stating a fact. Honestly, I don't know why I did this. L-Burna (talk) 20 May 2008. 20:24 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Weapons of SOCOM: U.S. Navy SEALs Combined Assault
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Weapons of SOCOM: U.S. Navy SEALs Combined Assault, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? --Silver Edge (talk) 16:16, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Weapons of SOCOM: U.S. Navy SEALs Combined Assault
I have nominated Weapons of SOCOM: U.S. Navy SEALs Combined Assault, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Weapons of SOCOM: U.S. Navy SEALs Combined Assault. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? --Silver Edge (talk) 01:41, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject College football June 2008 Newsletter
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:02, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Reply
First of all, remain civil. Second, the article was in horrific shape and its "programming" content had absolutely nothing to do with the subject. The logos were also removed because WP:FU specifies that those images are copyrighted and their use in multiple articles compromises their fair use status. The edits I've made are only part of a longer expansion process that intends to give the articles its much-needed qualities that our wikiproject's featured articles already have. Once again, remain civil, as this process doesn't happen over night and will probably last a few weeks as other experienced WP:PW editors take a crack at improving the article. If the rant you posted on my talk page is in direct response to me removing the content that you added to the article please note that per WP:OWN you do not own the article and it can be edited on freely. Cheers -- Unquestionable Truth -- 20:24, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow considering what you said on my talk page, you know absolutely nothing about the Era. The Attitude Era didn't start with Austin's 3:16 speech. That just marked Austin's rise to stardom. The Attitude Era as stated in his 3 disk Anthology, the Monday Night Wars DVD, and hell even Austin's own article, started when he won the WWF Championship at WrestleMania XIV. -- Unquestionable Truth -- 21:13, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I noticed your last comment at 3bulletproof16's talkpage. You said PPV's are italicalized. See here where it clearly says: Pay-per-view events are to be written with no italics. Just thought I'd let you know. D.M.N. (talk) 18:14, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Because it wasn't part of the Attitude Era. If anything it occured in the late stages of the New Gen era.-- Unquestionable Truth -- 20:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * You are taking too many irrelevant things into consideration to make an argument. Arena lighting, color schemes, and logo changes have nothing to do with what the Attitude Era was. However, if you do want to go through that alley to make an argument, when was the first time the WWF scratch logo was used at an event? When was the first time the "Attitude" tagline was used below the WWF logo during event intros? It was at WrestleMania XIV and afterwards. Hmm oddly enough it was also the event in which Stone Cold Steve Austin won his first WWF Championship. Hmm even more odd than that, it marked the first time the tide of the Monday Night Wars started changing to the WWF's favor. ...Is it possible that these are the reasons as to why WWE themselves consider the Attitude Era to have started with Austin winning the WWF title as they state in the Monday Night Wars DVD and Austin's Legacy DVD? Hmmm. Now as things stands right now, its your original research vs. WWE's word. I think we both know who wins here. -- Unquestionable Truth -- 20:41, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, couldn't resist... "and that's the bottom line, cause Stone Cold said so"-- Unquestionable Truth -- 21:52, 30 June 2008 (UTC)