User talk:Esprqii/Archive9

Greg Macpherson (disambiguation)
I've requested speedy deletion of this page. Theoldsparkle (talk) 16:36, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Stanford - Stanford Cardinal women's basketball and Tara VanDerveer
Hi John, I see you are active, actively working on Stanford related articles, and were the initial editor of Stanford Cardinal women's basketball. I am working on the bio of Tara VanDerveer.

Before I started

Now

I'm writing to you about a narrow issue, but given your extensive experience, and connection to Stanford, I'd love it if you were interested in collaborating on improving the article about Tara. I don't have a Good article under my belt yet, but I see you do and this has potential.

The narrow issue - the article on VanDerveer had a custom coaching record box, which I converted over to the standard CBB template. I wish I had realized that you had used the standard template on the Stanford Cardinal article, it would have saved me a lot of time.

I did use it as a double check to make sure my entries were correct :) However, I noticed that you are adding the text of the name of the conference in the conference field, when the intended use is to include the conference record. Do you agree?

I have tracked down the conference record, at least for the VanDerveer years. If you would like to add the conference record, you can copy it from the VanDerveer article. I'll go back and look up the McCrea and Coburn years.-- SPhilbrick (Talk)  21:37, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey, thanks for getting in touch. I've been fairly busy off-wiki lately, but once you feel like your article is in good shape, I'd be happy to take a pass at it before you go to GA review. Just glancing at it, I see some minor things that you may intend to fix so just let me know when you want me to do an edit. And yes, it looks like I did mess up that conference field...oops! Please go ahead and fix it if you have time. Not sure when I'd get to it... Great job on a worthy topic! --Esprqii (talk) 21:46, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

O&C
Hey there, I just noticed that Oregon and California Railroad Revested Lands isn't linked from Land use in Oregon. I know, I know, that doesn't scratch the surface on what's needed in that "article" -- but I thought it'd be good to put one in there. I think you might know better than me how to work it in most sensibly, though… -Pete (talk) 22:15, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
 * It does actually, I had linked it in the 1916 and 2000 references to O&C counties. But if you're not seeing it, it's not working! Any suggestions as to where it might be better added? I got one more place to add, but feel free to add more. --Esprqii (talk) 00:15, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see -- actually, I think this is fine, sorry for the confusion. I had skimmed through, and then did a page search for the word "California" -- which had no results, since you've abbreviated it "O&C". So, never mind, move along, nothing to see here, no profiteering public officials, etc. -Pete (talk) 16:48, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Magic numbers etc.
Clearly, I've spent too much time in my life poring over baseball box scores and thinking about magic numbers. I should remember that not all readers have been properly enlightened by similar experience ;) -Pete (talk) 21:28, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, all those numbers and arithmetics and stuff make my head hurt. Can't I just go with what my gut is telling me? --Esprqii (talk) 22:47, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Why not? Seems to work for some high profile political types…or not… -Pete (talk) 23:49, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * ...or not is right! And all those pundit-y types will be back in four years and everyone will have forgotten. --Esprqii (talk) 23:55, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Oh no, not again
The promoters seem to have found simple wiki. Now the fake sources are claiming he was a key asset in bringing down Bin Laden..... (assuming the article doesn't get deleted before you have a chance to look at it). Sailsbystars (talk) 14:08, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I spotted that one last night when the transwiki bot did its job. Thanks for jumping on it. Things are getting strange... --Esprqii (talk) 16:45, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Oregon state elections, 2012, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kate Brown (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:25, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2012 Stanford Cardinal football team, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tommy Rees (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:32, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Google Maps error
Hi, I just left a note for you here about that error on Google Maps that you found regarding "Bottom School" and "Bolton" parks. Jsayre64 (talk)  21:42, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Trevor Hooper


The article Trevor Hooper has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Never played a professional game.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ...William 13:44, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

It is
A little checking, namely going here, would have told you that playing in a professional game IS a key for establishing notability for a football player such as Trevor Hooper....William 18:02, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Just saying these things are better handled in AFD. --Esprqii (talk) 18:04, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Trevor Hooper for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Trevor Hooper is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Trevor Hooper until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. ...William 18:05, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Oregon Elected Officials
Hey Esprqii,

As part of a project I'm working on, I'm trying to get information on each of the Oregon elected officials' ages. Wikipedia articles usually include such information, but not every representative/senator has an article. Would you happen to know where I could find the ages of representatives and senators of Oregon? Thanks in advance for your help, I'll check back to your talk page for a response!

24.22.31.155 (talk) 04:17, 12 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't know of any one place where this is found. It seems to be up to the member as to whether they provide it. Let me know if you find a centralized place. --Esprqii (talk) 20:00, 12 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I'll let you know if I do. :) 38.103.168.4 (talk) 20:59, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Butting in - Project Vote Smart seems to be the place most likely to have them, if available. Aboutmovies (talk) 23:56, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Good call, yeah, I have found lots of birthdays there. Facebook is also a reliable source, though probably not a WP:RELIABLE SOURCE. --Esprqii (talk) 06:35, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia edit-thon: Saturday, February 9, 2013
Hope to see you there! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 16:35, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Oregon Webfoots
Esprqii, I saw your article moves for the Oregon Ducks football season articles. List of college nickname changes in the United States says that "Oregon Ducks replaced the "Webfoots" in the 1940s". You might want to amplify that with a note about "Webfoots" remaining the official name until 1977. Thanks and all the best, Jweiss11 (talk) 12:38, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the suggestion. It is really confusing as unlike many teams which officially changed mascots (e.g., Stanford Indians->Cardinals->Cardinal), both names were used almost interchangeably from the 40s to the 80s. I haven't been able to find a smoking gun yet that indicated when one became the "official" nickname and the other changed to the alternate nickname, but the university archivist points to a 1978 student vote as the date when "Ducks" was officially approved. But clearly before that, Ducks was becoming more commonly used. Since there were no individual football season articles written from the 40s to the 60s, there was no pressure to really change yet, but it was starting to get filled in so I made the call. I'll keep digging and I will update that page you mentioned, as perhaps it will provoke other research. Thanks again. --Esprqii (talk) 17:17, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I see you made the edit to that list. Nice job.  Thank you. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:28, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

1906–1917 Stanford rugby teams GA
I will be reviewing this article to see if it meets the criteria. I've gotten through everything except prose so far with no real issue, and good job on the article. :) Toa  Nidhiki05  19:54, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Great! I look forward to getting your input. Thanks. --Esprqii (talk) 21:01, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I've noted a few concerns, mostly with prose and nothing of major importance. Other than that the article is excellent. Toa  Nidhiki05  18:13, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello, I just want to remind you that there are some issues that need to be addressed on this nomination. These are minor for the most part, so I would hate to have fail it due to inactivity. :) Toa  Nidhiki05  18:27, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've just been busy. I will look at it this week! --Esprqii (talk) 21:26, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * That's fine, I posted this before realizing you hadn't edited for three days. :P Toa  Nidhiki05  22:15, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Alright, I've passed the article. Great job on it and keep up the good work! IToa  Nidhiki05  17:34, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and thanks for reviewing it! --Esprqii (talk) 17:38, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem. :) Toa  Nidhiki05  18:27, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Tara
Last time we spoke you were pretty busy, and that may still be the case.

However, I reached a point where I ran out of steam on Tara VanDerveer, but I really only covered her career up to the Olympics, so there is a need for her accomplishments since that time. I met a couple Stanford fans when I was at the Final Four, and they expressed some interest in Wikipedia, but perhaps they were just being polite, as I have not heard back after some initial email exchange. I had hoped to collaborate with one of them to add the more recent material. Any chance you'd be interested? I'd like to do more collaboration, and this seems like a good candidate.-- SPhilbrick (Talk)  21:40, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I would definitely give what you have a look. You're pretty close to the end, so don't lose heart! I'd say you can wrap it up if you add a new section on her post-Olympics Stanford accomplishments, where the team looked to be going downhill before she shaped them back up to elite--though still no recent championships, the team has won the Pac-12 for 10 straight years! --Esprqii (talk) 21:53, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * As I mentioned, I'm interested in a collaboration, and frankly, haven't done that often. To me, collaboration sounds like identifying some tasks, dividing them up, both working on them and then, together, copy-editing the result. I see the big gap as the year-by-year accomplishments over the last 16 years. One possible way of breaking it up is for me to identify a list of relevant sources and for you to take a first pass at a text summary. Another option, which makes more sense to me, is is to split the time period, and both work on a segment. I just finished updating information for some of the NCAA tournament pages, which included the Cardinal and Vanderveer record tying five consecutive final fours, so it may make sense for me to work on the most recent eight years or so, while you work on 1996-2004 or so. Or maybe there's a better approach. Any suggestions?-- SPhilbrick (Talk)  17:09, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Portland "Wiknic" 2013!
Hope you are able to attend! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 22:45, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Tom Crabtree (journalist) for deletion
A nomination is taking place as to discuss whether Tom Crabtree (journalist) should be deleted or not. The discussion will be held at the Articles for deletion/Tom Crabtree (journalist). However, do not remove the AfD message. WisconsinBoyClevelandRocks228844 (talk) 02:11, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Rose Garden
Hello. You clearly don't care about the Rose Garden. I get it. You care more about "accurate" information and invisible internet points. Since I've been banned from editing (as expected), would you be willing to compromise? Add a section about how the fans are currently petitioning? Thanks.

Here's the facebook page:  https://www.facebook.com/RoseGardenForever

Here's the petition:  http://www.change.org/petitions/renaming-the-rose-garden-the-moda-center-keep-the-rose-garden-name-that-has-been-around-since-1995  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikirip8 (talk • contribs) 21:40, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * You're not blocked; that article is just protected from editing by new or anonymous users due to excessive unconstructive edits. You will be able to edit the article's talk page. I suggest you make your proposed edits there in a constructive manner (i.e., avoid personal attacks and questions about the motives of other editors). I understand that you are passionate about this issue and I agree the name is pretty lame, but had you read the notices on your talk page, you'll see that what you are suggesting now is exactly what was suggested there: discussion rather than constant reverting. Be sure to include reliable sources to support your contention of a viable movement, such as the links to news reports about your group and so forth. I'll take a look at it, and I'm sure other editors will too. Good luck and happy editing. --Esprqii (talk) 22:19, 15 August 2013 (UTC)