User talk:Crash Underride/Archive/March 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]]

Labyrinth (band)
Just a couple more pointers- single sentence paragraphs are poor, try bringing some of them together. It's alright to reference the band's own biography (and other first party sources) sparingly when mentioning the band history- they will generally be honest about some things, like how and when they formed, but just be careful when you're doing so. Scrolling references are very, very rarely used- I'd just stick with the two columns you're using now. Also, remember refs are formatted like this- The sky is blue. not The sky is blue. or The sky is blue.

Good luck with the article, feel free to contact me if you need any pointers. J Milburn (talk) 10:44, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I know what you mean! Take as long as you need, there's no need to hurry. J Milburn (talk) 18:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi
When I saw your userpage I felt a need to contact you. We have the same politics, the same IQ (mine also read lower do to uncontrolled variables), and we both refuse to sugarcoat what we think. Have you ever taken the Meyers-Briggs personality test? Peace,  Sexy Sea  Bass  23:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, somewhat odd that you'd come up three conflicting results, but then again the MBTI is notorious for breaking when the person taking it has ADD or ADHD. I am ENTP, as my userpage says. In the past I have come up as INTP, but I am pretty borderline between them. So, which result do you think was the most accurate?  Sexy Sea  Bass  00:09, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, yeah, any kind of personality disorder tends to break the test. In some minor personality disorders, such as depression (which I have), only the E/I will fluctuate. With ADD, however, that isn't the case, apparently. I thought that the MBTI would be mostly fine with such a thing, but obviously I was wrong. Perhaps this makes you superior, as you possess a little bit of everything. If one description fits you a little bit better than the others, then that is probably what you should be typed as. You should also only be typed using Keirsey's four main types: NT, NF, SP, and SJ, as the other letters are subject to change over time for everyone anyway, not to mention you. Like I said, perhaps this means you are superior. I know for a fact it isn't a bad thing; the MBTI is meant to be unbiased and neutral. There are no good or bad types, nor is it bad to defy typing. Hmm, like I said, I'm surprised ADD breaks the test so definitively, but then again who am I? Cheers,  Sexy Sea  Bass  22:01, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Here's a list. So, it appears the range is from very gifted to genius, depending on how inaccurate the test was. I suspect that you cross the border to genius, as it should have been rather inaccurate. I finally took a test that compensated for everything myself, and my IQ came up as 147. So, basically, Libertarians are superior :). Cheers,  Sexy Sea  Bass  21:54, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

RE:
I must remind you that just because you haven't heard of someone, doesn't mean they aren't notable. Steve Rickard was a popular wrestler in the 1960s, who also trained several wrestlers, including Peter Maivia. Victor Rivera has won the World Tag Team Championship (WWE), NWA World Tag Team Championship (Los Angeles version), WWF International Tag Team Championship, NWA Americas Heavyweight Championship, NWA Americas Tag Team Championship, and was a major player in the WWF in the 1970s. There's a chance both could eventually get an article, especially the latter. As for the linking NWA territories to NWA, I don't really care too much about that, but at least one of them should be linked.

Lastly, the shorthanded reference list goes in the Notes section (also known as Footnotes). In the References section is where you list the articles and/or books you used longhand. Check the following Good Articles for confirmation that this is the way it is supposed to be: Amy Dumas, Candice Michelle, Lisa Marie Varon, Torrie Wilson, Mickie James, Kurt Angle, etc. You can also check the following Featured Articles: Shelton Benjamin and Royal Rumble. Nikki 311  15:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I can live with Rickard's name only being linked in the infobox. Nikki  311  19:35, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Hakim Akbar
Looks pretty good. I made like two edits to a few mistakes you had in it, but it looked really good. But if he's still with the Calgary Stampeders, which I'm not aware of, then you need to change his free agent status. John (talk) 19:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Amy Winehouse
I'm not sure I understand why you went through and unwikilinked the dates throughout the article, and in at least a couple cases, switched the format (example: 12 March to March 12). Removing wikilinks negates the autoformatting for user preferences and by converting from 12 March 2008 to March 12, 2008 also changes the format more commonly used in the UK. Wildhartlivie (talk) 05:57, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

All-Americans
Who all do you have so far? John (talk) 23:42, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Here's the full list of consensus All-Americans:

Aaron Beasley, Brian Jozwiak, Bruce Bosley, Canute Curtis, Dan Mozes, Darryl Talley, Grant Wiley, Ira Rodgers, Mike Compton, Steve Slaton, Todd Sauerbrun.

Are you going to put them on the football page? John (talk) 23:49, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I like the All-Americans one, but I believe Major Harris was too so I'll add him. And I had to change the other template because you accidentally put "2008 Sugar Bowl" instead of Fiesta Bowl.

Great job though.John (talk) 03:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Jerome Mathis return.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Jerome Mathis return.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Polly (Parrot) 23:33, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Jerome Mathis return.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Jerome Mathis return.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Polly (Parrot) 00:11, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Jerome Mathis return.jpg
A tag has been placed on Image:Jerome Mathis return.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only," "non-derivative use" or "used with permission," it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. , and it was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19, or is not used in any articles. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Wikipedia under one of the permitted conditions then:
 * state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
 * add the relevant copyright tag.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on  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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Polly (Parrot) 01:08, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry
That you make incorrect edits a lot and I have to undo your changes and it offends you on a personal level.► Chris Nelson Holla! 21:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Grant Wiley
Owwwwwwwwww. That's horrible. I'll look closely into WTF it was doing and how much more of a mess I have to clean up on other articles. Sorry, sorry. I'll get onto this shortly - David Gerard (talk) 22:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Chrisjnelson
Gosh, that was some time ago. I remember what that was based on, also.. about the sourcing of roster template edits. This is something that still bothers me whenever I see either Chris or Pats1 revert an edit, saying "source?" I see all the time that somebody makes what appears to be a good edit, and it's reverted on-sight by Chris and Pats1 because they didn't give a source. Then, Chris and Pats1 make every single edit without giving a source themselves, which still seems quite hypocritical.

I think it's unfair for everybody whose making good-faith edits, and it does seem like they are being bullied away from those templates. It really doesn't seem fair to me at all, and even now it frustrates me every time I see it happen; I was just thinking about it the other day after Pats1 reverted somebody. I really wish I could do something about it.  Ksy92003  ( talk ) 22:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * First of all, to Crash Underride - boo hoo. Secondly, I'm pretty sure I am smarter than you and most of the people here. Thirdly, I wasn't stalking his talk page. As you can see there, I recently posted on it and therefore it was on my watch list. When you posted on it, it jumped to the top.


 * To Ksy - there is absolutely nothing wrong with the practices of Pats1 and myself on the roster templates. We don't simply undo something and say "source?" We check all the sources we no of before making such an edit. We can be sure that each other's edit is correct because we are familiar with each other's work. But when an IP makes an edit, we are not familiar with that editor's work. So what we do when we see that is look at all the sources we know of (official sites, new sites, team sites, transaction sites, etc.) and if we can't find it we undo it. I add something to a roster template because I saw it sourced with my own eyes - that's how I knew of it in the first place. But if I can't find a source for something another user has done, I don't know if they have a source and if I can't find one, I cannot reasonably let the edit go until I can find one.


 * For example, edits were made regarding Oliver Hoyte joining the Chiefs a good 2-3 days before there was any source of it. Perhaps it was a family friend making the edit, someone with inside knowledge before it got the the media. But I undid it until it came out in the news because I can't just let an edit I can't source go, for the sake of consistent accuracy. This is not an issue of arrogance and there is simply nothing wrong with such behavior.► Chris Nelson Holla! 22:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Me too, he's bein' buggin' me for almost a year now, he always thinks his edits are THE ONLY way to go and if you do it differently it's a sin. He sent me a message and told me that he's sorry that I make bad edits.... However if you read a review of what someone left on my Editor for review page (link on my userpage) I make several good edits per day, or something to that effect. Besides, at least I have a source for mine (about 95% of the time) as opposed to Chris, all of let's give him the benefit of the doubt and say, 1-2% of the time.

I think just because he's and admin, he thinks he can do whatever the hell he wants and get away with it. I know this much, I truely believe he should no longer be an admin. It should, nee, MUST be taken from him for his bullying tactics, and just down right hard rudeness (which I'm not complainin' about today, just the bullyin'). But that's just my opinion.  Cra sh U  nderride  22:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Chris, that's a lie, you've reverted some of my edits almost as fast as I put thme up!  Cra sh U  nderride  22:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * After some time, it gets to a point where it seems that you have to trust them 100% of the time and you don't get the same trust. Eventually, you're fighting a losing battle and there's nothing you can do about it.  It does frustrate me, but that's why I don't edit the templates: too much drama.   Ksy92003  ( talk ) 22:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, no it's not just templates! It's also player pages. He thinks he's too hot to trot on those things, God help, he's EVERYWHERE if he see me make an edit, almost all the time he reverts it. It's insanity!!!  Cra sh U  nderride  22:44, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * If you want to believe it's a lie, Crash, that's fine. But I won't undo something (outside of blatant vandalism) that I didn't check first.


 * And Ksy, you can act like our system is messed up all you want, but the thing is it's not. I guarantee you that you cannot sit there and give Pats1 and myself a better way of going about things. Really, try.► Chris Nelson Holla! 22:45, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Really huh? Blatant really? When I put on Hakim Akbar's page, in his infobox form "Super Bowl Champion (XXXVI" to "Super Bowl XXXVI Champion]]" you had to revert it. Normally I wouldn't be upset if he had more than one ring, however HE DOESN'T! So, that's not Vandalism yet you still reverted it. So the blatant vandalism line is a lie.  Cra sh U  nderride  22:52, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * In the article you gave me, it looks like he did several things in that one edit, so I can see how it just slid by very slyly. Would've been helpful if Chris had given a reason, definitely.   Ksy92003  ( talk ) 23:01, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I will clarify. I do not undo things without reason unless they are blatant vandalism or go against a standard. That was my reason. I'd like to keep the way information is expressed the same for every player's box, it makes things a lot easier.► Chris Nelson Holla! 23:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Then why when I edit things the way the are with many others do you still revert sometimes (60%+) when the are fine the way the were? And also, why are you such an ass to me and other edits and bully us away from articles? Where you bullied in high school and are makin' up for it on here? Or are you just so inadequate as a man that you have to make up for it here?  Cra sh U  nderride 


 * No offense, Crash but your getting a little harsh--Yankees10 23:16, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * You're right, Crash. I was bullied in high school and I have a two-inch penis. So I come here to bully you on Wikipedia. It gives me thrills.► Chris Nelson Holla! 23:18, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Yank, your pint??? Chris, odds are it's true. It's either that or you think you know it all cuz you are a journalism major. So, straighin' yourself out and get your head away from your colon.  Cra sh U  nderride  23:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Your right, I should just stay out of this--Yankees10 23:25, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't think I know it all because I'm a journalism major. I know it all because I just do. Being a journalism major doesn't mean shit. Hell, most actually journalists in my experience are dumbasses.


 * And by the way, you really have to stop trying to act like a badass because you just can't pull it off.► Chris Nelson Holla! 23:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * If it's a website that he contributes to, then that could either be a conflict of interest or it could just be a situation in which it could be quite possible that he is putting up false information over there and using it as a source.  Ksy92003  ( talk ) 23:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not actin' anything. I'm just sick of you THINKING you're better than the rest of us. You just need to learn to not push people around. That's why I don't think he should be able to use it.  Cra sh U  nderride  23:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I actually don't think he's allowed to; I think that's a clear conflict of interest.  Ksy92003  ( talk ) 23:47, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Can someone give me a cliffnotes version of this argument?  Pats 1  T / C  23:49, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Pats1, why? Chris, dragged your name into this, not me. I never once mentioned you.  Cra sh U  nderride  23:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Let's put it this way: Another violation of WP:CIVIL (namely, petty: rudeness, insults, accusing someone of being a liar and serious: taunting, personal attacks, profanity directed towards another user) and it's a 24-hour block. I don't like to block people during tense times like this, but with the volume of incivility and personal attacks, it may be necessary. Secondly, I have as much as a right to contribute in this conversation as you do, per WP:OWN. It is my job as an admin to help break up this type of scuffle, and I find your comments to be highly disruptive to me doing so. I have seen the interplay among the user talk pages, and I am concerned. Besides, you mentioned the word "admin," and the only admin present in this discussion is me -- Chris is not an admin. I highly suggest you make a good-faith strike-through of your derogatory comments.  Pats 1   T / C  00:02, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Pats1, first I honestly coulda sworn that he had the admin logo thing up in the corner on his page, however it appears that I was wrong. Secondly, I wasn't sayin' you weren't welcome, I was just wonderin' why cuz he's the only one that had mentioned you to that point. That's all.  Cra sh U  nderride  00:09, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually, Crash, for the record, I first mentioned Pats1 in my first comment here. Now that's got nothing to do with why he came over here in the first place, but don't accuse Chris for that.   Ksy92003  ( talk ) 07:02, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I think you'd look better if you apologized to Pats1 and Chris.  Ksy92003  ( talk ) 07:20, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Green Bay Packers WikiProject

 * « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs)  02:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Chris Crocker
First of all, I didn't add that to the article so don't come to my talk page with threats as If I did something wrong. Secondly, it was a $300,000 signing bonus and it's true and verifiable. Ever heard of Google?► Chris Nelson Holla! 15:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject College football April 2008 Newsletter (full contents)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:15, 2 April 2008 (UTC)