User talk:Ksy92003/Archive-Jul2007

Avengers article
I used arenafootball.com for stats and scoring summaries, arenafan.com for the rosters, and espn.com for other scoring summaries. 15:57, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Soxrock's editing techniques
Ksy, I too have tried to persuade Soxrock not to continue editing articles in his scattershot fashion. He seems not to care about the negative impact it can have on the database, or that it can be easily fixed by using the "Show preview" button. Considering the userbox on his userpage and from this comment, we may have a case of terminal editcountitis. I'd suggest referring this to WP:3O to have another editor with a fresh set of eyes take a look at this. Cheers, Caknuck 18:13, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Trust me, I know how you feel. Because there's nothing officially wrong with it is why I'd take it to WP:3O. Any attempt to escalate this to the Admin's Noticeboard or the Mediation Cabal would be quickly struck down. 3O is less formal, doesn't require an admin to take their time to make a ruling and there's no stict acceptance criteria. I think it'd be the best forum to have someone less invested try to persuade Soxrock. Caknuck 19:15, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

How funny, I was considering possibly a week off or something along those lines, or maybe doing something like cut 6 edits down to 4, 4 down to 2-3, 3 down to 2-1, and 2 down to one.

And, just to show the one-time that I have, I stopped doing 7 edits for the individual game logs after your request, so it's at least been done. Have a good day. Soxrock 22:25 20 July 2007
 * Sounds good. For less commonly-edited articles -- like the player bios -- you should be able to accomplish everything in one edit if you use the "Show preview" button. It's like what Ksy said on my talk page, we really do appreciate your contributions to the project and the attention to detail that you've shown. We'd just like to find a way to balance that with reducing stress on the project's servers (in terms of both bandwidth and storage). Let me know if you have any questions. Cheers, Caknuck 23:34, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Update I have referred the matter to Wikiquette Alerts. Caknuck 03:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Chris Young page move
I see you moved Chris Young from Chris Young (baseball pitcher) to Chris Young (baseball). This may cause confusion with Chris Young (outfielder). I am going to move him back. TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 01:10, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Hornberry
Hornberry is kind of busy and is kind of busy. He won't have time until July 1 I think. LADodgersAngelsfan 01:46, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Latin surnames
As a Spanish-speaker, when a last name contains "de la", should it be capitalized or not? I noticed you moved Eulogio de la Cruz to the lower case variety, but the majority of the Internet capitalizes "De La". Is it 100% sure it should be lower case? I'm just trying to figure out since we're inconsistent on wikipedia in some places. Thanks. X96lee15 03:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Angels game log
Sure, if I can resist the urge, which I will try my hardest to do, seriously.

But, that point on how I've kinda stolen the project; I check the logs the morning after the games. I know that it can be late in other places and not everyone updates them, but when at 7:00 in the morning I see the logs still empty, it's not stealing the project when i fill them in, it's simply not been for numerous hours following the conclusions of the games. So I didn't steal it essentially when I update them the day after. 23:45, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

1) I will say that I am somewhat of a wikiholic when it comes to updating those kind of things. Somedays, because there is no school, I'll work almost all day on a variety of sports-related pages (In my entire history, I have about 200 non-sports related edits under all of my accounts). Anyway, back on point, I don't have a problem not updating the Angels page, in fact, every once-in-a-while, I'll not update any logs for a day, like last weekend. But if you need me to update because your not sure that you will be able to, I'll still be glad to.

2) Yes, I'd be glad to work with you. I do need help once in a while (though in case, you've surely noticed I like to be the one who does major things, regardless the sports). Here's how you apply the fair use tag to make it fair use:

You go to the upload screen and get the image, make sure the format (gif or png as examples) is the same, and fill in the summary box, and FOR SPORTS LOGOS, USE if it's non-free, which it is unless it's 100 x 100.

3) And yes, the White Sox, even though your Angels could come to Chicago and sweep their ass because the Sox have sucked this year. And, it might be irrelevant, but I have quite some vested interest in the Yankees. I used to and might one day go back to the ESPN message boards, where I had the same name of Soxrock. I am also a Buccaneer, Laker, Lightning, and Storm fan. 00:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'm fine with splitting work with you when I need it.

Second. I believe that there are 9 or 10 Sox/Angels matchups (don't AL Cent. teams and AL West teams meet up 10 times per year?). And, with the Pirates playing better than in recent years, it holds more weight than it would've last year.

Third, yes, I live in the Tampa Bay area. I must say the Rays are much better this year than I've ever seen, and maybe they'll be buyers instead of sellers at the deadline this year. But, I'm not ashamed. I listen to a lot of radio shows where they talk about the Rays and the Elijah Dukes controversy (I listened to the show that Dukes called into and got onto Jim Rome's show on ESPN. Dukes' mother, sister, wife, and other family members had previously called in before the hosts put a moratorium on the subject).

Anyway, your main point on the Gretzky image, if you took it and uploaded it, then you've licensed it properly. Images you take and put onto public domain are properly used and properly licensed. 00:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Mudkip
Was yelling at them really necessary, Ksy? -Jeske ( v^_^v ) 21:12, 25 June 2007 (UTC) Redacted by -Jeske ( v^_^v )
 * Also, 64.40.60.55 impersonated you on that talk page; I left a note after the comment explaining that it wasn't you who left the comment. --Brandon Dilbeck 21:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Soxrock
Ugh, I know we've both beaten it to death with him before about his small frequest updates, but it looks like he was at it again today with the Around the Horn Stats. I added on to your posts on his talk page (User_talk:Soxrock), and you'll see I noted it not only did it take him 6 edits today to update the status, but I'm pretty sure (assuming i'm looking at the history correctly), that he was updating the panelist appearances before the show even began! Bjewiki 21:46, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Chrisjnelson
He has left things on my talk page like that, just read some of the comments he leaves, calling me retarded and other things, so you should also be telling him this also, I will try to stop--Yankees10 03:15, 25 June 2007 (UTC)Yankees

I didn't make any personal attacks.Chris Nelson 04:04, 25 June 2007 (UTC) 18:29, 27 June 2007 (UTC)18:29, 27 June 2007 (UTC) Well you got me with those last two. But none of the others are personal attacks. Some of them are just the opposite, so if you're at least gonna give me crap you could about it leave out the stuff that doesn't apply.Chris Nelson 04:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually I said the latter two were attacks. The first four were the ones that aren't. I even called him cute, that's not an attack at all. And as for my comment to you, not an attack either. I didn't tell you what to do, I was saying that ideally, in my mind, you wouldn't give me crap for stuff that there isn't anything wrong with. You have the right to, obviously.Chris Nelson 04:41, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I was just trying to turn the situation from a heated argument to silliness. No personal attack there, and as for this "no possible way it can be mistaken as offensive" thing, well that just sounds like bullshit to me. I think if someone mistakes something for offensive when it isn't, they should be blocked.Chris Nelson 13:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

You know what he'll say. NOW this discussion is over. HA!Chris Nelson 14:51, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Jesus, what are you talking about?Chris Nelson 15:03, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Come on guys, cool it. This is Wikipedia.++ aviper2k7 ++ 16:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Mister, mister! Yankees10 called me an asshole on this page . I am deeply offended and hurt.Chris Nelson 18:11, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


 * If my post on the talk page shouldn't be allowed, that page shouldn't exist. I was campaigning for the addition of content to a page. That's not wrong.Chris Nelson 18:29, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


 * What comment?Chris Nelson 18:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


 * His subpage, as pointless as I feel it may be, is about baseball players he thinks will reach or come close to milestones. I believe he left an obvious candidate (Andruw Jones) off, and therefore said on the talk page I felt his presence on the page was warranted. I then backed it up with evidence. So tell me what the problem is there? It's not like I went to Andruw Jones' talk page and said "Hey, I think Andruw will get 700 homers." I was discussing possible content on an appropriate user subpage. My point is, I think your accusation of my comment not being appropriate is unwarranted.Chris Nelson 18:41, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Chrisjnelson
alright I will stop, but he should mind his businees, I dont care what he thinks, and also why should he able to say:"This page is absolutely useless", talking about my User:Yankees10/Milestones, with out getting another warning --Yankees10 18:33, 27 June 2007 (UTC)Yankees10

You should send that to him because hes the one that started it on the talk page, by writing its useless and I should be banned for making such a pointless page, I would also consider that a personal attack--Yankees10 18:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)Yankees10

Dont worry I am not going to make another personal attack, and there has been so many conflicts with him, that I dont want to waste my time trying to get along--Yankees10 20:49, 27 June 2007 (UTC)Yankees10

Whatever, I hope you check Chris Nelsons, I have seen some of his edits and they have been attacks, that are pretty harsh--Yankees10 21:04, 27 June 2007 (UTC)Yankees10

I really dont know why you are so concerned about what I say--Yankees10 21:09, 27 June 2007 (UTC)Yankees10

the only reason I left that is because he thinks he decides what color should be on everybodys infobx, I see you are a baseball fan, what color do you think should be on Gary Carters and Dave Winfield infobox, because he says that Gary Carter deserves to have Mets colors because hes known for his time with the Mets, but is in the hall of fame as a Expo, and Dave Winfield should have Padres colors, and is in the hall of fame as a Padre, but shouldnt Gary Carter have Expos colors because hes in the hall as a Expo, what I am really trying to say is shouldnt they have the team they are in the hall of fame as on there infobox, I am sorry for it being confusing, but I really dont know how else to explain it--Yankees10 20:53, 28 June 2007 (UTC)Yankees10

Can you please send WP:OWN to the Ip Address 192.234.99.1, because if I send it to him, he probably wont take it serious, and probably wont read it.

Look, I know I may be butting in, but, WHAT IS THE PROBLEM YOU GUYS HAVE WITH EACH OTHER? WHAT FREAKING DISAGREEMENT? I mean, I know you all can have your own opinions, but, Chris, why did you go onto one of Yankees10's pages and vandalize it (you may edit userpages as per WP:USER that Ksy pointed out to me, but that does NOT say you may VANDALIZE it) and then go to the pages talk page and campaign he be blocked? What the hell did he do to you? Absolutely nothing! And vandalism like that and saying you want him blocked is a personal attack in my opinion. He did nothing at all to you and you say he should be blocked for creating a subpage? A FREAKING SUBPAGE. YOU HAVE ONE YOURSELF! WHAT, DO YOU WANT YANKEES10 TO COME OVER TO THAT AND DELETE HALF THE LINKS? I BET YOU'D BE PRETTY PISSED OFF IF HE DID THAT, WOULDN'T YOU?

As for you Yankees10, your summary, and other summaries you've made in the past (see here for one to Graig Nettles page), where you have called assholes is completely unacceptable. The user could take that as a personal attack themselves. How would you like Chris Nelson to call you an asshole? Bet you wouldn't like it and call it a personal attack. Now, you did have a personal attack thrown at you by Chris, but that does not allow you the right to personally attack Chris back. And, keep in mind, if he does not vandalize it, he IS allowed to edit your user page and sub pages.

Now, having said all I've said, I recommend you go to Ksy's mediation page. You obviously have some problems you need to work out, and work out now. This cannot continue, or else one or both of you WILL BE BLOCKED FOR UNCIVIL BEHAVIOR. Keep that in mind.

Peace, Soxrock 21:59, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Hahahahahaha. Funny stuff.Chris Nelson 21:02, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I thought Soxrock's post was humorous. So I laughed.Chris Nelson 21:52, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok. First off, the Kings page is fine. It only means I have 31 to consistently update. Getting back to the point;

Even though I say I do not have a problem with him, he has some fetish for changing the colors (like they matter THAT much, I am known to change them to look better and be more accurate, but he is known to revert them), but I don't know how Chris not only got involved with this, but CAUSED THIS MESS! I mean, yesterday I read over the debate with Wahkeenah/Baseball Bugs and Tecmobowl, and this is 100 times worse! I'll tell you, if Yankees10 keeps this up and/or this mess with Chris starts up again, I recommend a week-ban for uncivil behavior. And from what you tell me, in my eyes, Yankees10 is skating on thin ice. I hope he doesn't continue, because I do like his color dedication. At least he has something to do, although I'd find a better thing to consistently change. Thanks for your time and your alert on the Kings page. Like I said, this means I have 31 pages to update regularly. Peace, Soxrock 21:55, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

And Chris? How was it funny? I reprimanded you just as much as I reprimanded Yankees10


 * Definitely. I apologize straight up for all violations and disruptions I've caused this place, but, even in the disputes with you, we never needed Mediation, we never needed a block, and we always ended our discussions before they could erupt. But what Chris and Yankees10 are doing should be against policy. Why did Chris have to vandalize Yankees' page? I think that is what truly caused this mess. It wasn't as bad before, but the vandalism followed by the "great to have your opinion asshole" was out-of-line and needs to be punished accordingly. There is no place on wikipedia for users to attack each other uncivilly. Like I said, we may not be the best of buddies, but we were never uncivil with each other or vandalizing each other's user and talk pages. If Yankees' keeps up especially, as in two more (I'm being generous) notices of uncivil behavior, and I will get him reported. There is no room here to be uncivil. Thanks for the reply. Soxrock 22:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Don't really want to get involved, but Chris isn't exactly an angel in this situation either (see: User_talk:Chrisjnelson). If anything, they should probably both be reported for violating WP:CIVIL. Bjewiki 22:21, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd request you ask Zzyzx11, he/she will know someone to get them blocked. Either way, I have nothing more to add to this conversation other than this message to Yankees' and Chris: 'CALM DOWN AND COOPERATE. YOUR VANDALISM AND PERSONAL ATTACKS WILL NOT CHANGE ANYTHING!'. Thanks for your time Ksy. Soxrock 22:18, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Please do not copy and paste anything Soxrock says to me. It is none of his business, he gets into complained about all the time, and I could not possibly value his opinion less than I already do. Thanks.Chris Nelson 22:23, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I would try to help settle this, but everyone likes to reply to comments on the opposite persons page, making it nearly impossible to bring in a third opinion.++ aviper2k7 ++ 22:25, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I understand your goal in pasting it to me. However, that's what I was laughing at earlier so you knew I had already read it. I'm not angry with you for posting it on my page, I just thought I'd tell you how I feel about Soxrock and his opinion, so I was trying to save you some time in the future. As for it being the business of people like Soxrock and Bjewiki, if they are bothered it is not my problem. Nothing was said to them, said about them, and nothing was posted on any of their pages about the event. They can say what they want, but all I'm saying is that I don't care what they think, because in my opinion they do not exist in this confrontation.Chris Nelson 22:28, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd also just like to point out that the only reason this is still being discussed is Soxrock. I had no desire to discuss it with you or Yankees10 again, and I doubt he did either. Soxrock is the only one that brought this thing back up today, it would be dead if not for him. So his comments only hurt the situation rather than helped it.Chris Nelson 22:30, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

So I'd just like to say that I'm done with this, I don't care anymore. I'm not talking about it anymore to you, Yankees10, Soxrock, Bjewiki or aviper2k7. Keep talking about it if you guys want, and reprimand me later in the future. Later.Chris Nelson 22:32, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Ugggh fine one more reply. If someone else jumps into a dispute that did not involve them or anything connected to them, I simply do not consider it "disrupting" them. If anything, it's the other way around. But to say I disrupted Soxrock or Bjewiki by talking to Yankees10 on HIS page is illogical, and I will always refuse to acknowledge otherwise. If you or anyone else reprimands me for it, fine, but I will not make any attempt to adhere to a rule I know is wrong.Chris Nelson 22:39, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * What is the discussion over here? What article? That's all I really wanted to know.++ aviper2k7 ++ 22:41, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Soxrock talk page
Please do not delete my comments without a reason. It being his user page is not a good enough reason, as it is not technically true and I am allowed to edit it as well. Obviously you can edit it just like myself or anyone else, but I feel you did not have a good enough reason for removing my comment.Chris Nelson 22:46, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Yankees' block
Thanks for the update. I noticed yesterday that he had a reverted an article four times in 20 or so hours. I'm sure that is what landed the block. Hopefully he will come back calmer, but I fear, because of the block, he'll be livid at the person who blocked him, Chris, and maybe even us. Anyway, thanks for alerting me. It's useful information. Soxrock 15:00, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I think the default ban for personal attacks/being uncivil is about 1 week or so. With a block recently, I'd say it maybe extended to 10-14 days if he continues being uncivil. Soxrock 15:10, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'll try to keep it in check on Monday. As for the playoffs, you know that since I live about 3000 miles away from LA I have no problem with the Avengers, but I'm sure that for tonight's game you know who I'd prefer see lose. And for your sake, I hope LA gets revenge against Utah on Monday. A team that lost to Las Vegas should not be Los Angeles. Soxrock 15:25, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

The Predators, of course. I'm a Storm fan, meaning that, like just about all Storm fans, I hate the Predators. Soxrock 15:32, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Wait, do you mean the Utah/LA game? I guess I'd say Utah, but I don't see too many games out west. Soxrock 15:35, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd see why. And, even though I obviously hope they will, I don't think that Tampa Bay, who I think will win Saturday vs. Columbus (12:00 ESPN), I don't see them going to Philips Arena and beating Georgia, who has one of the best QB's in the league. I guess all I can say there is is that miracles can and do happen, sometimes. Hope you enjoy the game on Monday. I'll be watching. 15:39, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I like when we can discuss our teams with pride and give our reasons for liking and disliking other teams. As for Greisen, I think {they said he used to be the backup under Clint Dolezel. Whether that was when Dolezel was in Dallas or Grand Rapids, I don't know. But I think I read that Greisen was the backup under Dolezel. Soxrock 15:54, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Good luck to you. Now, don't look at the Storm's 9-7 record and think they are only that good (I know you wouldn't, but maybe a friend of yours and a casual sports fan perhaps). They were fledgling under John Kaleo (who's retiring) and even Stoney Case wasn't too effective as starter. Now, as always, you never hope that someone on your team, especially the quarterback, gets injured for the rest of the season, and that happened twice. As it turned out here in Tampa, it was a blessing in disguise. I can't believe how well Brett Deitz has done here. A rookie playing for the most successful team in Arena Football History (more than Detroit, more than Orlando) on a team that is struggling and he not only plays well (even with the back-stabbing T.T. Toliver going to Orlando), but he leads us to the #3 seed in the playoffs. That was unthinkable. No one I know thought they could do that. The only weakness I currently see in this team is that, like last week vs. Austin, they kept on shooting themselves in the foot with costly penalties on turnovers. I think twice they lost TD's due to penalties. They need to improve upon that. Otherwise, the running game has been efficient enough, Deitz has been amazing, and Terrill Shaw and Lawrence Samuels have picked up the slack for Toliver.

Now, even though Georgia has lost twice in close games, both times, they lost on the road. They are 8-0 at home. And they've also beaten Dallas this year, the only team to do so. So maybe I'm not picking along with general opinion when I say Georgia is the favorite in a Georgia/Dallas matchup. Georgia and Dallas are clearly the best teams in the conference. But, then again, and this is a partial response, maybe, because of all the miracles this year, the Storm have a miracle left in them. You always have to hope so. Good luck to your Avengers, as well. Soxrock 17:21, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I've got to give it to you, you don't let losses, especially bad losses, get away from you. Now, and I'm doing this for both of us, both a TB/LA ArenaBowl is highly unlikely. Either way, I hope we can get that matchup. Wouldn't that shut up the ESPN people from kissing up to Philly and Chicago and Colorado. I didn't watch too many games on ESPN2 because:

A) They were on too late (toward the end of the season)

or...

B) THEY FEATURED THE SAME FREAKIN TEAMS! I DON'T NEED TO SEE 7 PHILLY GAMES ON NATIONAL TV! And I know why they showed those teams. The owners! Jon Bon Jovi, Ron Jaworski, Mike Ditka, and John Elway.

Anyway, I'm not sleeping on Los Angeles/Utah. And I doubt Utah has another upset in them. Los Angeles is ready. They're gonna win. If they don't, then I'll probably spend the whole day feeling sorry for you. Soxrock 17:51, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

And remember: When NBC televised games, they were said to go out of their ways to not show certain teams. Look at ESPN at baseball and basketball, as well. Every NBA Friday and Sunday doubleheader involves the Lakers/Heat/Bulls/Suns. Every week, there are two baseball games involving Boston or New York. Now, I like the Lakers and Yankees (and I know you like the Lakers as well), but why can't they give smaller market teams a chance to have their games nationally televised. Teams like Orlando had more nationally televised playoff games than regular season games. '''THEY PLAYED FOUR FREAKING PLAYOFF GAMES! THEY ONLY HAD THREE REGULAR SEASON GAMES!'''. Another thing with the biased approach; It gives smaller-market teams little chance of building a national fanbase. It hampers teams outside of big markets.

Now, this one is purely because it bugged me the most, but I noticed there were NO NATIONALLY-TELEVISED STORM GAMES THIS SEASON. So again, ESPN in particular is a biased network. They care too much about certain teams.

Finally, my rant is over. Sorry for it being so long. Soxrock 18:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Do it. It's far too important. If you can make a big impact on a big-time newspaper, then why not try ESPN. Don't get me wrong, I watch the network all the time, but after a while, I get sick of watching the freaking Red Sox. In fact, have you seen the most recent commercial? I know all the time they have athletes on them, but Bucciidontknowhowtospellhisname had his "family" on. A bunch of freaking Red Sux fans? That's the first time I've seen a commercial like that on ESPN. I'm sick of the freaking bias. And, besides, I'm all for the College World Series, but if a game is 12 to 1 in the 7th inning, I hate to break out a crystal-ball like phrase, but: IT'S OVER! I understand money runs this world, but sometimes, just sometimes, when something is obviously decided, you could please the fans. If that game were 8 to 5, keep it on. But 12 to 1? It's over. Goodnight. Take us to wherever that game was. But don't subject us to the same exact teams. If we have to watch teams we have no vested interest in, we'll eventually watch fewer and fewer games. So I just thought I'd show more bias that I've seen. Thanks for the e-mail, by the way. Very interesting Soxrock 18:35, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I concur. The only reason Sidney Crosby gets so much flack is because the NHL is dying and needs Crosby to help it survive. But I am sick of the bias. At least you have the guts to mail these companies. I applaud you for that.

Anyway, I hope you enjoy tonights game as much as I will. 19:01, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, and I'll root for the Avengers, for you :)

As for hard proof, try to either go yourself or get a friend to go to Bristol. You'll see the studios because the exterior is a Red Sox logo (ah I suck at jokes).

And, I just thought now I'd notify you about this:

On Tuesday, I underwent a major project and came up with this:

I know your a Laker fan, but so am I. So how will we do the Lakers page? Split it? First come first do? Just thought I'd pose the question. Soxrock 19:11, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the clarification. It was important that I get your response now and prevent, say, a controversy if one of us does it entirely and the other really wants to do some. And don't worry, about 58 total teams to look out for consistently, because I'll still probably get help and it won't be difficult to do the game logs. Soxrock 19:18, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I really appreciate your willingness to help. Remember, there will be times when I won't be up to doing game logs and other stuff. But, for the NBA and NHL, updating is easier because only so many teams play per night. And due to when I wake up, I don't ruin my day doing this stuff. Anyways, I appreciate your help very much. It helps to know someone can do something I generally do when I'm not feeling up to doing it. Soxrock 19:24, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Assistance
Do you have AIM or something similar? I want to discuss an issue with you.► Chris Nelson 20:37, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * What about your Yahoo name? It's not that I want to keep it private, it's just that it'd be easier to discuss through IMing than back and forth on talk pages.► Chris Nelson 20:42, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I've sent you an email detailing the issue. If you don't have time to reply to it tonight, don't worry about it. Just get back to me when you can. Thanks.► Chris Nelson 20:59, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * So that Wizardman guy never replied to me.► Chris Nelson  16:39, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

WTF?
Have yuou tried editing the "Vandalism" section directly on User talk:PrincessKirlia? -Jeske ( v^_^v ) 01:11, 3 July 2007 (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 02:37, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Reply
I've replied on my talk page. It's simpler for me to keep the conversation in one place. - BillCJ 06:59, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Smile!


WarthogDemon, whom will like talking in the future tense, has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Suffice to say, I hope this will brighten your day. Or tomorrow. ^_^ -WarthogDemon 03:51, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Another apology
I was just looking at the 2007 Atlanta Braves season‎, and realized you had not removed the Wild card standings after the last tiem I put it there. I honestly thought you had, but with the sevreal pages back and forth, I got mixed, and never did check back till tonight. Sorry. I was pretty hard on you for having to have the last revert, when it wasn't the case. I just wanted to let you know I had realized my mistake. Sorry! - BillCJ 07:22, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Jr.
MLB.com rosters trust you to know Tony Gwynn, Sr. or Ken Griffey, Sr. aren't currently playing for the Brewers or Reds, respectively, so why can't we here? I think the rosters here should be identical to the official ones.► Chris Nelson  17:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I think it's safe to say that anyone who is aware of both Griffeys would know which is currently on the Reds when viewing the roster template.► Chris Nelson  17:54, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I actually agree with Ksy9 on this one, though I have an additional reason: If the article name includes "Jr.", why add unnecssary piping? Clarity in most cases is best, except when doing so is over-complicated, which is it not in this one. If the name were on 3 or more lines, tho, Chris might have a point. But as all the other names are on 2 lines anyway, why bother piping the link? While I will add that any reader clicking to the article will immediately see it's the son, not the father, I still think the piping is unnecessary. - BillCJ 18:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * That's fine. I really don't feel that strongly about this.► Chris Nelson  19:05, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism on your User page
Did you make somebody mad? Corvus cornix 18:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I've seen mentions about that on a couple of other User's pages. Such fun.  Corvus cornix 20:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

July 2007
Please do not assume ownership of articles such as Mudkip. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you.  Kai  talk 07:29, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Dragonfire (Yu-Gi-Oh GX)
NO reason has to be given for removal of a prod. Can't be reinstated. Should be taken to AFD. I did that for you already but you should state your case there. 172.149.41.100 23:11, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Chris Young
I can tell you are a very serious baseball editor, but I do not see any biography experience. The edits you have made do not take this article in the direction of a WP:FA bio. I woke up to do a copy edit and saw what amounts to blanking from my perspective. I appreciated your peer review comments, but have expressed disagreement and willingness to discuss. This will be up at WP:FAC with two weeks where major changes are very appropriate. I would suggest userfying (at somewhere like User:Ksy92003/ChrisYoung your version for comparison when this goes to WP:FAC. I will be reverting this to my highly cited and extensive version later today.  You can see in the edit history that I have been actively editing this article this weekend.  I am going to get a copy of my last edited version from before I went to sleep and reverting after editing offline within about 4 hours. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 10:53, 8 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I appreciate your effort to improve the article. If you want to shorten the article to the bare essentials, the article could read Chris Young is a baseball player.  However, that would not improve the encyclopedia.  It is cute that you attempted to use my argument against me about going to sleep after editing and being disappointed to see the article hijacked in a major new direction when you awoke.  I will make 4 points.


 * 1) I know all about WP:OWN. The fact that I reverted to the direction I have been taking the article with a hopeful mid month WP:FAC nomination in mind.  I have over 20000 edits without a WP:3R violation on me or against any editor I have worked with.  I have worked out every disagreement I have had in my 20000 edits without the type of war meaning that I understand what other editors are trying to do and have worked with them to smooth things over when I disagree.  Since we want to go in two directions with the article I have given you a solution.  The solution is to take it in your direction as a userfied article and when I post at WP:FAC I will post a link to your version asking if they would prefer yours as an alternate direction.  I did not say that explicitly in my prior communication.  I have never had a case where anyone wanted to take an article in so completely different a direction than I did before.  However, I have given you a solution that I think is the best one.  I encourage you to userfy your version.  We can essentially nominate with an either or choice for the WP:FAC community.
 * 2) I did not revert your edits. I worked from my prior version offline.  See this diff.
 * 3) I did read your version. It cut out every interesting fact that would make the article broad enough for FAC success.
 * 4) I have discussed my thoughts on citations and said I would bring it up at WP:FAC where the experts on encyclopedic excellence would render an opinion. This article just completed its WP:PR on July 4th.  Within 2 weeks from that date I intend to get this up at WP:FAC.  You can come at me with all your suggestions then.  That is really the best way to go since you prefer the 20KB light version and I prefer the the 61KB stout.

I apologize, but I am going to revert and suggest you userfy your version again. This is a very special case of disagreement where because it is likely to before a judging community in a very short period of time disagreement resolution is not as necessary as it would be. Please be patient and watch at WP:FAC to make your comments.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 20:20, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for userfying your version. Within 10 days and probably by next weekend a discussion will be up at WP:FAC on Young.  I appreciate your patience in advance. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:10, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I am not denying you the opportunity to edit. In this unique case the direction you want to take the article is so different than the direction I want to take it that when combined with the fact that we will have numerous people evaluating the article in the near future this unique solution is probably the most beneficial.  I am comfortable with most of your edits to TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:19, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I see I agree with you in one edit at Chris Young...or at least part of your edit...a very little part though...I agree with you for the most part of the revision. It doesn't look as good. Hornberry 03:46, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

(unindent) I had at one point edited the article with respect to Manual_of_Style_%28dates_and_numbers%29 in preparation for WP:FAC submission. I think your changes may conflict the manual of style. If you get a chance look at this and revert as necessary. I will get to it later this week if you do not.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:46, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You cropped an image that is linked to 5 or 6 other articles in a way that affects the other articles. Do not crop out the scoreboard (especially the clock).
 * 2 reasons 1. Starting pitcher makes no sense if you do and Bullpen may lose some context as well. 2. Artistically it looks crappy.  Have you taken a look at reeditting the numbers stuff I mentioned above?  You can see other editors are complaining about how the numbers are written now in the baseball talk page discussion.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 22:40, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The reason they did not tell you directly is that with all of the editing it is difficult to tell who screwed up the numbers. However, you and I know it was you.  Please fix them when you get a chance. Read the caption on the image at starting pitcher and try to convince me you aren't smart enough to know why the clock needs to be in the picture.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 23:06, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Um, i'm pretty smart, and I still can't figure out why TTT insists on the clock being in the picture??? Bjewiki 00:50, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You seriously took a high resolution photo with a nice crop and turned it into an awkwardly cropped image that is 300px wide.++ aviper2k7 ++ 01:02, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Nolan Ryan
I reverted your edit because he should include the California Angels colors as they were in the 1970's - which was red and gray. That is where he had his greatest success. Pascack 17:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Nolan Ryan
hmmm... you may be right. However, when I look at those colors, it looks as if you are instead portraying his time with the Texas Rangers.Pascack 17:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

ok, I'll leave as is then, and I also changed Frank Tanana to reflect those colors as well. Pascack 17:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Nolan Ryan
The kind of debate on that page is what I ran into (from the same user and/or sockpuppet) on the Casey Stengel page. It would probably be best not to use team colors in the retired-players template. Baseball Bugs 17:53, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Colors
Sorry they lost. And for Nolan Ryan, I agree with you. The colors should be of when they played, not current day (I'm going to change all the Astros colors for players who played during the navy and orange days, they shouldn't be tan and black. Soxrock 19:03 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * How do you handle retirees who can't be easily defined as being with one club (which Ryan can't be) and what about if the colors changed while they were on the team? Baseball Bugs 18:09, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Some bozo put the modern Cubs bright red-and-blue on the Cap Anson page. Gimme a break! Baseball Bugs 18:11, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That's what happens when you edit an article... you catch the attention of anyone watching it. Even if your only interest is in the Angels' colors, you could still provide valuable input as to whether it's appropriate to try to include past colors, or to just skip it altogether. Baseball Bugs 18:32, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I am in full agreement with disabling colors on retired player templates. So, we could either wait for someone to decide, on the project page (where it seems to have drawn very little interest), or someone could just take it away from the retiree page and see who complains. What do you think? Baseball Bugs 19:21, 10 July 2007 (UTC) Baseball Bugs 21:48, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * If you remove that line from the template, doesn't it simply take it down for everyone automatically? Also, I don't detect much interest on the project page. But if, instead of asking about it there and getting no response, if I say "I think I'll do this in the next 15 minutes", maybe that will catch someone's attention. As long as they don't accuse me of turning into Tecmobowl. 0:) Baseball Bugs 21:57, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I should maybe point out that I have NO experience messing with templates. But given my approach to programming, I would probably make a copy of it, change it, and test it in ONE article or maybe just on my own talk page to see how it behaves, before doing something drastic that will get everyone mad at me. (I don't want to get anyone mad at me without a good reason.) Baseball Bugs 22:20, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The key issue, based on my ignorance of templates, is what happens if you simply comment out the stuff about colors? If a page refers to that template, does it just ignore any parameters that no longer work? I'm thinking that's true. If you feel confident in doing that, you could just open one window to the template and another to a sample page (Nolan Ryan, perhaps), then change the template, refresh the Ryan page, and see how it looks. If it looks wrong, you can quickly revert back. Then hope nobody noticed. :) If you're wanting to do so, go ahead. As I said, if it either doesn't work or if somebody yells at you, you can always go back to the previous version. And don't worry about IP addresses. You have the right to make a fair change, and others have the right to make fair complaints. Just don't get into an edit war. 0:) Baseball Bugs 23:09, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I created a template called Mlbretiredtest, in which I hard-coded black for background color and white for fontcolor within those background colors, except for the Hall of Fame part which I left as-is. Please give it a try on any page (without necessarily saving edits, just do a "preview") and give suggestions. Baseball Bugs 00:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Don't create an entirely new template. Just use default colors or I can code default colors in if you guys really want.++ aviper2k7 ++ 00:16, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I already created one, as noted, and using default colors. But ultimately, I don't want any colors "selectable", or it will be a source of POV-pushing and edit-warring (as it already has). Baseball Bugs 00:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * What you did was really not that bright. First of all you made a test template outside of your userspace. Having a second template is a bad idea, because it is essentially the same thing and you'd have to replace the name of it, instead of just deleting the colors all-together and having the default colors display.++ aviper2k7 ++ 00:35, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, you're right, it wasn't too bright, so it's fitting that I made the background colors black. My intent was to experiment with it, and if it looks good, and if it's acceptable to others, I could replace the current one with the contents of the new one, and then have someone delete the test one. Baseball Bugs 00:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello
I just came back from the administrator notice board and saw you were attacked by a troll. Don't take it too personally. Trolls are internet bullies. They just like to make other people feel small so they'll feel big. Allow me to introduce myself. I am Connell66, a fellow Wikipedian editor. And let me say thank you for all your hard work with the redirects. Just wanted to say that your work really is being appreciated; if it weren't, you wouldn't have gotten any barnstar's, would you? Connell66 08:45, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Vote of Confidence
Thank you for your vote of confidence. If it is not too much trouble a short not on the WP:MLB talk page might be helpful to my ability to get back on track. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 17:21, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Click on tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM and see where it takes you.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 17:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No, if I did I would be the Linguistics Director or some such. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 18:04, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Keep an eye
Keep an eye on User:Zaphraud. He just left a none-too-civil comment here because of Articles for deletion/Mudkip egg. -Jeske ( v^_^v ) 17:41, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

"repairing"?
In this edit you said you were "repairing" a link to a disambiguation page. I would think that would mean linking to the appropriately disambiguated article---in this case by putting in a link to personal identity (philosophy). But you merely destroyed the link instead. Michael Hardy 00:32, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * ... and maybe in this case leaving the link to the disambiguation page intact would be the better course. Michael Hardy 00:34, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

In this edit and, I think, some others, you definitely picked the wrong one. This one should obviously link to personal identity (philosophy). Michael Hardy 00:38, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

...and this edit is weird. It is misleading. The section title is "philosophy". Obviously that leads the reader to expect certain things. Moreover, in this case the phrase is not embedded within a sentence, thereby requiring concealment of the article's exact title from the reader. I've edited it so that links to both articles appear, with the titles fully visible. Michael Hardy 00:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello. I certainly didn't mean to imply you shouldn't be working on things like that. Only that those particular cases seemed to choose the wrong target. (In this case there's some overlap between topics, but if the article is on a general philosophhical topic, then that would seem to indicate which choice is better.) Michael Hardy 02:04, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Trolls
I see that this is now taken care of. I'm assuming either you or someone else took it to an admin. The guy was obviously a loony. Don't let that type bother you too much. They can't get to you. And the admins are our friends. 0:) Baseball Bugs 00:02, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Good job on all counts. I've been here about 2 1/2 years. Don't let vandals bother you. Give them a reasonable chance to repent, and then take them behind the administrative woodshed for a good blocking. :) Baseball Bugs 00:39, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The only downside is... what if they change their names again? And what do you think of my idea, which has not really caught on, of the Dodgers following suit and renaming themselves "The Brooklyn Dodgers of Los Angeles"? :) Baseball Bugs 00:41, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Indeed, "Under the Bridge", about as subtle as a sledgehammer. Well, it's all "water under the bridge" at this point. I don't understand which you couldn't use CTRL-V to insert your text, but at least "California Angels" is a little shorter. What I meant about the name change is that they started as the Los Angeles Angels in 1961, became the California Angels in 1965, then in recent years became the Anaheim Angels and the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. What if they become the Los Angeles Angels of Disneyland, for example? 0:) Baseball Bugs 00:50, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Rrrrraaaaaawwwwwwggggghhhhhh!
Welcome. :P -Jeske ( v^_^v ) 21:13, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Angels/Rangers
Well, I hope Anaheim wins for you, and, as for the game logs, a few people have been doing them lately, so I may not do it if it's already done tomorrow morning. Soxrock 20:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Template edits
I agree with your year in baseball changes, not so sure about rming the smalls, but the repeated links is probably O.K. for templates. Thanks for the help.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:53, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Smaller type is common on templates I see. As the Chicago WikiProject Director, I should just send you to look at the templates at Chicago. Young is a pitcher who has already won the hits/9 innings and opponent batting average crown which is like a batter winning the batting average and on base percentage crosns in his Sophomore season and leading at the All-Star break in both the following season.  He could be a superstar with tons of templates as his career progresses.  I think we should use small.  He may even eventually rival Lou Gehrig.  BTW, I want to do a succession box for opponent batting average, but am not sure who won in 2005.  Do you know? Clemens would be a good guess since the ratios are similar, but we can't guess. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 06:39, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I went with ESPN sortable stats. I assume that since Clemens officially qualifies for the hits per nine innings leadership he qualifies for the opponent batting average as well.  I also assume that Ugueth Urbina does not qualify.  When you get a chance check out the edits I made to hits per nine innings and opponent batting average.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 14:15, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Clemens pitched 211 innings in 2005. Did you get a chance to check my edits at hits per nine innings and opponent batting average.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 13:46, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Individual season articles
Can you assure me that, in the event that articles like 1921 New York Yankees season are put up for deletion that you will vote keep? Thanks Soxrock 22:08, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, sorry for the late reply (and that it's 4:15 in Long Beach : but thanks for saying yes. The articles work well but the hard work I have and have yet to put into them is what makes me even ask, because, and I'm paraphrasing, but it said somewhere that some wikipedians don't think individual season articles for teams that didn't win their leagues championship, those seasonal articles don't merit notability (a total lie, any major league sports teams individual seasons not only merit notability, they shower in it). So I just wanted to make sure that you, Wahkeenah (or Baseball Bugs), and the people at the project talk page say yes as well. It would suck for a bunch of people and me personally that all the hard work I put into those articles would be gone (snap) like that. Thanks for the support. Soxrock 11:21, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Chicago
You moved Chicago to Chicago, Illinois with a summary of "All cities..." yet it is the only move of this kind you made. Can you explain?? Georgia guy 14:12, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You appear to be thinking that Chicago (disambiguation) should be at Chicago per what your argument on my talk page says. Georgia guy 18:17, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Your Signature
Hello. In my opinion, the colors in your signature as I observe them here are a bit bold. Is there any chance that you would consider tweaking them a bit? I've got your talk page on my watchlist, so if you chose to respond, please do so here. --After Midnight 0001 19:36, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Ironically, I was thinking of doing just that for the same reason. It feels awkward to stand out like that.  I've just now taken care of that.  Ksy92003 (talk) 19:50, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your response. I appreciate your consideration. --After Midnight 0001 02:56, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Popups
I think you have to change the "User:Lupin" to your username. As for reverting, there's a drop-down menu on diff popups (i.e., the "diffs" link on the watchlist) named "Actions". You can select "revert" from there. That's Firefox, anyway. On IE popups are more cluttered, but there's a "rv" link for that.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 21:39, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

My userpage
I have no idea who it is and I'm 99% sure I don't know them, I think it's just someone being retarded. I appreciate your concern about the vandalism. In all honesty, I find it amusing and I really couldn't care less if it happens. In pretty much every instance another member of the community has gotten to and reverted any vandalism before I saw it myself. I can't say I really mind it all that much. I appreciate you watching the page though and you continuing to do so is fine with me.► Chris Nelson  04:43, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Redirects
I realize you're probably done with your run fixing redirects to the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim but I'd suggest against doing stuff like that again. Making edits to just fix redirects is usually a waste of server resources, and in this case makes the links less precise, as most of them were referring to people who played on a team called the California Angels, on which consensus might be to have a separate article at some point. Yet it's unlikely that as a redirect California Angels will ever point anywhere else, if it does we can solve that when it actually happens. --W.marsh 13:55, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, what W.marsh said. Now if someone does create a California page, all of those articles you changed will be wrong.  We do have articles for "defunct" teams like Montreal Expos.  Of course that's a different situation but if the Angels page gets too long, I can see someone splitting along the California/Anaheim lines.  —Wknight94 (talk) 16:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * When I was doing that, it was because there weren't any California Angels or Anaheim Angels pages individually, except for the page that re-directed. And I kinda have a pet-peeve of everything going exactly where it should with no detours.  I also don't like looking at the top of an article and see that it was re-directed, my pet-peeve.  Additionally, I don't think that it should be split up into another article because, for the Expos and Nat'ls, they changed names, moved cities... moved countries.  Their entire team upped and moved to another country.  The Angels have been playing in Anaheim since (correct me if I'm wrong) 1964.  They haven't left the city... they've played in the same building since then.  And because of the current contract with the city of Anaheim, the Angels can't move out of Anaheim until after 2031, a good 24 years after the current season.  So I don't see the article being split up into California Angels and Anaheim Angels because it's not like they moved to a completely different location like the Expos->Nationals, Pilots->Brewers, Orioles->Yankees.  It would make sense for the Giants to have a SF Giants and NY Giants article, and it would make sense for the Dodgers to have a LA Dodgers and Brooklyn Dodgers because those are two different histories.  They had a different history in New York and a different history here in California.  The Angels have been "together" for their whole existence and haven't had much history when they played in Los Angeles for a couple seasons before moving to Anaheim Stadium in the early- to mid-60s, where again they have played for over 40 seasons.  For example, the Mighty Ducks of Anaheim changed their name to the Anaheim Ducks prior to the past NHL season.  But they have the same history.  They didn't move venues or cities.  They still play in Anaheim and play in the same building (albeit a different name), but their history is still all a part of when they played there.  The same thing for the Angels: their history is still all a part of when they played in Anaheim Stadium/Edison Field/Angel Stadium of Anaheim.


 * Per your request, I will not do these types of large-scale edits again unless absolutely necessary, but taking the fact that I did do these edits, I don't think there will or should be a cause for concern about this right now. Ksy92003  (talk)  17:38, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * It doesn't need to be split into separate articles. Doing so would be confusing and would make it seem like they were two separate franchises. I think if the history gets too long, it could be split into "The history of the California Angels" but essentially, they just changed names and they do it every other year.++ aviper2k7 ++ 17:43, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that's exactly my point, Aviper2k7. They have played in the same building and have only changed their team's location in their name (from Los Angeles->California->Anaheim->Los Angeles) since their inception as an American League Franchise as the Los Angeles Angels in 1961.  They're all the same franchise and have the same history, and as Aviper2k7 said, it would be confusing to have to go from California Angels to Anaheim Angels to Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim because they have different names.  It's not a significant change, like the Nationals, Giants, and Dodgers, so it doesn't need to be split up into different articles like that.  Now, look at California Golden Seals.  They began their existence as the California Seals, then changed to the Oakland Seals, then California Golden Seals.  They became the Cleveland Barons, who merged with the Minnesota North Stars, now the Dallas Stars.  Cleveland was its own little thing with its own little history, but a completely different city and location than the Seals, so it has its own article.  But California Seals and Oakland Seals don't have their own articles because they are all related to the California Golden Seals because they all played in the same building.  The Cleveland Barons, Minnesota North Stars, and Dallas Stars all have their own articles because they are the same team, but played in three different cities and have three different histories.  The Angels are in the same situation as the Seals, and thus it isn't necessary for them to have their own separate articles.  As Aviper2k7 suggested, a "History of the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim" would be a better way to go.  Ksy92003  (talk)  18:01, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That's fine. The original point was about the "pet-peeve of everything going exactly where it should with no detours".  There should be no need for such a pet peeve.  It can be quite helpful to link to redirects.  It doesn't hurt anything and it can help in cases where a redirect may later be changed to a new article.  No, this is not a particularly good example of such an advantageous redirect but the redirect linking also wasn't hurting anything.  It's replacing 0 risk and 0 reward with a very small risk and 0 reward.  Unnecessary and time consuming.  And slightly more risky.  —Wknight94 (talk) 20:08, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

What's the purpose of re-directs? The reason we have re-directs in the first place is so if an article gets moved, the link will be transferred to that article so we don't have broken links. It's so we can still get to an article, even though it has been moved. So I fail to see what the harm is of fixing it so we don't have re-directs. If the re-directed article were deleted because it were moved and there was no more use for that article (not using the Angels' re-directs, but re-directs in general), then anything that previously linked to that article would turn into a broken link, am I right? I know that's not a good example, but I don't see how what I did does any harm at all. It certainly doesn't hurt to make sure that a link is directly linked to what it's supposed to link to. I mean again, the purpose of re-directs is so when a page gets moved the link will still go where it needs to go. How does it do any harm to make sure that the links go there?

And if the team does get re-named again, then it will just create another re-direct when the page moves to its new name. And then, whatever links to Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim can always be pipe-linked to the new name with no harm. And there is even less of a problem with the servers because I made all those edits using AWB. There isn't anything wrong with making sure links go to where they are meant to go. Re-directs are helpful, but it's best to try to avoid them if necessary. And it doesn't do any harm to try to avoid re-directs if the link still takes you to where you want to go. Ksy92003 (talk)  21:32, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You might want to read Redirect and WP:PERF. Links to redirects are actually encouraged if the redirect and the name it redirects to are referring to different entities - such as Philadelphia Athletics and Oakland Athletics.  Yes they're the same article now but they may not be in the future.  —Wknight94 (talk) 21:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I read that guideline. It's just that: a guideline.  It doesn't say anywhere that I can't change it, just that there is no need.  First of all, it's a guideline which says that "there is no need to edit the link".  It never says that I can't do what I did, does it?  Ksy92003  (talk)  00:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No it doesn't. It just says there's no reason to do what you did and in some cases, it could end up needing to be completely undone in the future.  Seems like common sense to not waste your time given those odds but you're free.  —Wknight94 (talk) 00:33, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Ichiro Suzuki
I thought it would be a good idea to drop you a note. Being bold is ok, but sometimes you will have to engage in discussion before making systematic changes to an article. The naming issue can be contentious, as you would know if you look through the talk page. Obviously you don't need mine or anybody else's permissions, but neither does anybody need your permission either. Rather than engage in fruitless reversions, why not explain your reasons on the talk page?

I see you are a baseball fan, so presumably you know that Ichiro Suzuki is often referred to by "Ichiro". This is not a lack of respect, nor is it limited to Japan (as you seemed to be suggesting in an earlier edit summary). Obviously, many editors have thought it appropriate to keep references to him as "Ichiro". I myself am open to the idea of using "Suzuki" as befitting a number of print publications. But in any case this matter should be discussed.

If you want to address just me, you can respond here, but I suggest making some comments on the talk page about your rationale for your edits. --C S (Talk) 20:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Individual seasons
Thanks. Now, I'm scared because of an article that is said to dispute all of the individual seasons that the team did not win their league's championship as not being notable, so I'm trying to build big support bases by going to the project talk page.

Having said that, I guess I'll put a hiatus on my current creating stubs and work on the Yankees seasons first. I've got quite a few done but I've got a long way to go. So, if you want to, you can give the underconstruction tag and I'll start work on them either tonight or tomorrow. I may even get to creating game logs, but lets think logically first. I'll do the stats and standings templates for all articles and then add on afterwards. Thank you so much for your support. I really appreciate it. Soxrock 21:43, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Again, thanks. But it's a total lie in my mind that when you don't win your league's title, the season isn't notable. Doesn't matter what the end result is, when it's a MAJOR LEAGUE SPORTS TEAMS season, it doesn't just have notability, IT SHOWERS IN IT! So that is why I'm trying to build support, so if they are put up for Afd, they'll be kept. And, for me personally, it would be so much wasted time for me if NOTABLE ARTICLES are deleted that I could quite easily declare an indefinite break if not leave wikipedia all-together. I know it sounds harsh, but if 50 hours on notable content were to be deleted, I would simply be pissed. Thanks for your support, and, along with Baseball Bugs, it would currently be 3-0 keep :) Soxrock 22:00, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, true. It's just the fact that it's a major league team that gives it notability. And, yeah, it could be used to shorten other articles. My goal is to get all of them done by August 21st (My editing will curtail somewhat for a time after that date) and have them all as quality articles. I'll be working on the existing articles tonight as a jump-start. And I'll gladly accept your help in finding information to put in those articles. And, for your interests, I've created all the Angels articles (1961-2005, the others are already created by someone else), so that's something you'd probably enjoy working on. Soxrock 22:09, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for tagging all the articles. I'll try to commit to finishing these all within a week (excluding game logs, again, those will come later). And, if they were to go up for afd, I just figured this out; Everyone on the Yankee project would vote keep! So the Yankee articles (and a lot of others) are safe, at least I feel safer about it. Nevertheless, thanks for your help, it's not the last time we will be helping each other. Soxrock 23:35, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, just don't rush yourself! Do it at your own pace. All contributions, as you know, are accepted. I'll be working on all these teams this week, mostly Yankees, but some other teams I'll help out on. Soxrock 23:42, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Hope you have fun on those days (note: send happy birthday message on July 24th. Hmm, isn't that Barry Bonds' birthday also?, ahh, it's still a good day) Soxrock 23:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Reply
Thanks. Is there not a "Congrats, you're not a dick anymore" barnstar you could have given me? :-p ► Chris Nelson  00:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Haha I was just kidding. That's definitely true.► Chris Nelson  05:04, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Your email to the LA Times"
That's a great story about how you called the Times's attention to their inequality of treatment to the LA sports teams. I would appreciate very much a copy of it - send it to twf_2112 at yahoo.com. Do you go to the same high school where Erin Gruwell taught? Take care, Googie man 05:02, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Help me...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR. User Pats1 is trying to rile things up for something that Chrisjnelson approved of me doing last night. Stop him and support me at the link. I need your help this time. Thanks Soxrock 15:38, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * 1. My approval is irrelevant.
 * 2. He violated 3RR. His problem.

► Chris Nelson  15:40, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I quote Soxrock, on my talk page earlier today in reference to 3RR: "Jesus christ, I know about that." Why should someone that knows about policy and is responsible for their actions need to be warned? ► Chris Nelson  17:17, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Open the collapsible dispute think on his talk page.► Chris Nelson  17:23, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Well...
The freakin ban is over. Jeez, I still was screwed. In my mind, it's a 2 strike thing:

Strike 1: Warning Strike 2: Block

All subsequent violations equal harsher block. But me, it was warning and then block without anything in between. I hope your happy Pats1 and Chris, because I certainly am not. Soxrock 16:47, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I've messaged your e-mail

Sorry for being late, I've messaged it again Soxrock 20:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Hyde Park Township
I think you should undo the move according to Category:Townships_in_Cook_County%2C_Illinois.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 22:37, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I am often on the losing side or WP:RM debates, so I won't try to sound knowledgeable other than to say look at all counties in Category:Townships in Illinois.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 22:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * It seems a reply has come to my user talk page that makes sense.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 22:58, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for responding on my talk page to that anon. I've since added a note stating that I am not the complaints department for the merging and have left links to WT:PCP there. -Jéské ( v^_^v ) 04:48, 20 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Hehe ironically, I was just at your talk page, and I saw that you had added that. I had just gone back one reversion, the one that you made before you capitalized the "P" in "WikiProject" and I saw I had a new message.  Don't worry about it.  But I think it's best that you make it "abundantly" clear.  But I've a question... well, I've a couple, actually:  First, why aren't you a member of WP:PCP and second, why do you mainly monitor the Pokemon articles and detect vandalism there if you aren't a member of the project?  I guess you can scratch the second question, since I'm in a similar situation.  I still monitor the articles, but I dropped out of the project because I don't want other people to think that I'm one to go to to ask about anything related to the project.  Oops... I guess you can skip the first question, as well.  Hahaha that wasn't planned at all... seriously.  But is that the same reason why you aren't a member of the project, or is there another reason?  Ksy92003  (talk)  04:54, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The reason I'm not a member of the WikiProject (and never have been) is because I use the Pokémon articles for Dungeons & Dragons custom material, and as such would be caught in a conflict between the PCP and WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons, which I am a part of (and which is going through a bit of a similar phase). I know a bit more on D&D than on Pokémon, and D&D doesn't have as many articles to maintain. -Jéské ( v^_^v ) 04:58, 20 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Ah, okay. That makes sense to me... I think.  But I understand.  I think it's good to keep yourself as neutral as possible.  Ksy92003  (talk)  05:02, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Socks from the bridge
Not a problem ... I'd report this to ANI as well. Sounds like anyone whose nick consists of any deriviative of that guy's name should be blocked on sight per WP:U. Blueboy96 22:18, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Seasonal articles
Well, my friend, it was inevitable. has taken it upon himself to redirect the articles 2006 Kansas City Royals season and 1980 Tampa Bay Buccaneers season. I've saved them and put the underconstruction tag on them, but enough has been said, he's going with the non-notable card. Just an FYI that he is trying to redirect them, and your help is needed. Thanks for voting yes like you have said you would Soxrock 23:31, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

It's because I've "canvassed", which is against policy, although I have edited all the messages to make them alerts Soxrock 00:26, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I think Jaranda has a vandetta against me. He removed them even though I CLEARLY removed the canvassing. Soxrock 00:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. I did canvass, but I fixed it as mentioned on the canvassing page. I think the dispute is over for tonight... hopefully Soxrock 00:32, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Keep up the good work, and I won't canvass again. And, FYI, I don't consider telling people about a controversy "spamming", I think it's just notification Soxrock 00:38, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I knew it wasn't spamming. I canvassed (I keep repeating myself, D'oh!) and fixed it, but that is the worst I did. I did not spam Soxrock 00:46, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I didn't even need him to notify me to edit them. I did it myself to make them alerts and he removed them himself Soxrock 00:56, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I have e-mailed you. We can carry on our discussion privately from there Soxrock 01:05, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll retire for the night. I'll work very hard tomorrow, and sorry for this mess. The e-mail I sent you is meant to make it easier to talk without having to worry about language! Soxrock 01:09, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I've e-mailed you. We can discuss this very well from there. Thanks Soxrock 13:40, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I want Jaranda Fired. He is going overboard now Soxrock 16:08, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations
''Note that I have already put this on your barnstar page. This is to let you know about being awarded this barnstar.''

Baseball seasons
Okay, let's see. Firstly, I'm not involved in this issue, so I think you can accept my opinion as unbiased.

Secondly: I'm really, really sorry, but numbers can be owned. It's all about format and context. An mp3 is just numbers, but try telling that to the RIAA. Those numbers, in that format, in that context, do belong to MLB.com, and we would need their permission to reproduce them. And we do not have that permission.

Thirdly, having an article on an individual season for an individual baseball team... that's fine. There's nothing wrong with that. But they can't just be stat dumps, or the copyright lawyers will have our heads. Do it in prose - example, 1985 Kansas City Royals season. Talk about the season. You can construct the article in your userspace, and move it out into articlespace when it's ready.

Until such time as you have an article about an individual team's individual season, links to that season will have to be redirects to the article about the team itself.

Okay? DS 17:04, 23 July 2007 (UTC)


 * You know what. I think that some people don't understand that we may have copied the actual stats, but the order and the tables do not reflect that, unless it's inadvertent. I think it's a little ridiculous for people to suggest not to do it in a table. That's the only way we can do it. Soxrock 17:37, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Jaranda doesn't get it. Whereas ESPN and B-R may have licensed rights, citing them as sources is perfectly fine. He thinks that we have to get MLB's permission for this. We aren't claiming the stats as our own. And we are giving a source with rights to put those up. He is crazy to dispute this Soxrock 17:53, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

He loves arguments, apparently. He needs to calm down. He loses an argument, so he decides to keep up a dispute involving something else. He had a problem with me doing a Marlins game log this morning. I just wish he could lay off. Again, he should be Fired. Soxrock 18:03, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Tomorrow
When are you leaving tomorrow? I don't ask to make you work, I ask simply because I have a surprise for you. Soxrock 19:46, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok. And I suspect you will watch carefully due to the charging Mariners? Hey, good luck to the Anaheim Angels (sorry if you feel disrespected, but some people say Los Angeles, some California, and some Anaheim, that what happens when you change your name every decade). They should beat Oakland.

As for the stats quickly, I'm involved in a discussion with Sean Forman from baseball-reference.com. I'm currently awaiting his 2nd response. Either way I'll post a copy of the discussion to you and maybe the scout guy once it's completed. Soxrock 20:04, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh I hope it will mercifully be done soon. It's delaying how I do work because I am stuck watching talk pages.

As for your parent's anniversary, I hope the whole pineapple thing is a good thing. You don't need to go into detail about this. Also, I wouldn't be afraid of Oakland for the simple fact that they just traded their starting catcher. I think they are selling. Soxrock 20:17, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I had to laugh at the pineapple thing. It's a good idea for an anniversary considering that's how they met.

As for the A's, Billy Beane likes to have a low payroll for some reason, and he giving away big talent isn't helping the team stay in contention. Beane is overrated as a GM, he builds good teams but he lets go of good talent like Mulder and Zito. He needs to learn when to keep players and when to let other players go. Soxrock 20:34, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Damn, that's pathetic. Just goes to show the AL's supremecy over the NL. Because the Mets would lose to the Yanks very easily, and the Yanks weren't even a top 6 team.

FYI, I just got my fourth reply from Forman, it doesn't look good, but that can still change. He says that the numbers are in public domain, but, at the same time, I don't want him to be affected by what we take from his website, even if we source it (nofollow tags put us on top of every search, he is "galled" by that). Soxrock 20:45, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

'''It looks good! Forman said this in reply #6: entering data, but I would be opposed to machine-aided copying of large numbers of pages."
 * '''"Thank you. You are welcome to use stats in a manner such as hand

For assurance, here was reply #7: My concern is in you using a robot to grab the data and auto-enter it into wikipedia. You should also keep in mind that occasionally the data does change as corrections are found."'''
 * '''"Yes, if you want to go and type in all of that data, that would be ok.

Interpreting that, it means we can do it because we are not using a robot for this. It was Okay'ed by Forman, who operates that site, and saying the stats are in public domain, '''WE WIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'LL REPORT THE GOOD NEWS :)''' Soxrock 21:21, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Discussion with Baseball-Reference.com
Ok, you wanted this. Here is my conversation with Sean Forman, operator of Baseball-Reference.com

of your stats for our seasonal pages? I only ask because I read the Terms and Conditions. Any response will be appreciated
 * Soxrock: Hi there. I am someone who edits Wikipedia. Are we allowed to use a portion

culling of the stats on all pages, or just a citation of stats from a handful of pages?
 * Forman: To what extent will you be using the stats? Will this be an automated

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1921_New_York_Yankees_season). The plan is to use the prominent stats, you know, Games played, At-bats, HR, RBI... but not to use the in-depth stats (like OBP). In the external links, we have you cited for the in-depth stats. As for the usage, we'll have you cited on every page that we have stats from your site on (that's every single individual season page we create, which will be for all 30 teams). If you cannot grant it for us on all those pages (roughly 2500 pages with a portion your stats and citation), then we'll try to find a reduced way to use them, if you allow. Thanks for the response
 * Soxrock: Check out the 1921 New York Yankees season

your pages. Why do you want to take so much time entering that data when there are much better formatted sources for statistical data available? Why not focus on the narrative for the team rather than factual data that is available elsewhere? I'm assuming the gamelogs are also being transcribed from my site or retrosheet's. Wikipedia takes a lot of traffic from my site and due to the use of the nofollow tag, I get only some benefit from the use of the data and the links to my site. Would it be possible to have my site white-listed and have the nofollow tags taken off of links to my site? I'm not saying no out of hand, but I feel like Wikipedia does not compensate the content holders for the data they provide. The use of the nofollow really galls me.
 * Forman: I have to say I have some problems with using this much of my stats on

Let me explain the nofollow tag. Search engines rank sites on the basis of the sites that link to them. Adding a nofollow tag (do a view source on a page with my site and you'll see a rel="nofollow" in the code for links to any external site) tells the search engine to ignore this link. I have thousands of links from wikipedia and there is some benefit to that, but my standing in the search engines is hampered because Wikipedia is a giant link juice sink. It benefits from everyone's link to it, but does not return the favor to sites it links. It is very selfish behaviour. I would appreciate if you would ask someone in charge that you are going to use data from my site on 1000's of pages and will be linking to it, but would like to remove the nofollow from those links. If this really is such a great project, that should be no problem. I'm not a spammer. The other issue is that reference.com and answers.com and others can take a dump of wikipedia database strip out the external links and then make money off of my content.

That is all well and good, but what happens when I go out of business? You say you enjoy the site, but your work actively undermines its health. You can say "C'est la vie", but those are the facts.

I can't stop you from using the data and I appreciate the link, but I feel that these actions essentially only benefit Wikipedia, and damage me.

we will reduce the number of visitors on your site, which will lead to fewer ads, which in turn will lead to less money, makinf ir harder to keep your site on. I see your concern now.
 * Soxrock Oh, so your concern is that, by using a portion of your stats on our pages,

I'll continue to find white-listing. I mean, I hope that you say yes, but, then again, I would hope that saying that wouldn't hurt your website and your life at the same time. Thanks for your response

ahead of me on searches for ballplayers, it is not outside the realm of possiblity that I would be forced to quit working on the site full-time as I've been doing for a year and go back to my day job. I have a hard time encouraging that to happen.
 * Forman: Yes, that is what I mean. For example, if Wikipedia were to move

I know that the data is in the public domain and can't be copyrighted, but I just wish WP was a little better at compensating their sources.

I'm not trying to hurt people's lives or sites. And seeing how Wikipedia is always ahead of your site on searches (sometimes I don't even see you), I see why you wouldn't be happy about the nofollow tags. I feel sorry that they apply, because it affects what both of us do, because if there were no nofollow tags, you might be able to say yes and not be affected. I feel sorry for that. Eitherway, I'll look into white-listing, it might be fair compensation for you. Of course, there is a dispute over at Wikipedia about how the numbers are copyrighted or not. It appeared we might be able to use stats until I saw your terms of use, which is why I'm talking with you. Thanks for the reply
 * Soxrock: Yeah, I see now. I try to list all my sources whenever I make pages, but

entering data''', but I would be opposed to machine-aided copying of large numbers of pages.
 * Forman: Thank you. You are welcome''' to use stats in a manner such as hand

paper or something? And, by machine-aided copying, do you mean using something like a robot to do so quicker? Thanks
 * Soxrock: Wait, by hand entering, do you mean typing it in, or writing it out on a

My concern is in you using a robot to grab the data and auto-enter it into wikipedia. You should also keep in mind that occasionally the data does change as corrections are found.
 * Forman: Yes, if you want to go and type in all of that data, that would be ok.

too-similar and it would look crappy anyway, so it will be hand entering. It takes at least 20 minutes to add stats to a page, and we do not use robots for adding stats, it would create a huge mess. Thanks for your permission to use the stats and your site will be linked on every page. I'll tell other users. Thank you so much, and, again, they will be hand entered, not machine-aided copying. I don't even know how to use a robot on that site
 * Soxrock: Oh, why didn't you just say so? Of course it's hand entering, we have to format it and everything, we can't just copy and paste or it would look


 * Forman: OK, that's fine.

In other words, it is OK to use the stats from baseball-reference. Soxrock 21:34, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, keep in mind that there is the discussion on whether we should do it because of concerns by Wknights94. Legitamite ones. He has said this on the project talk page:


 * "Wow, this makes me want to remove all stats from the site. Never mind the copyvio issues, we're actually hurting Mr. Forman's bottom line for no particular reason! We're just doing this for fun - now we're actually hurting someone's life and livelihood. This is one of the reasons I never make huge copies of stats when I put articles together. Then it just makes Wikipedia like other sites instead of an encyclopedia. Sheesh, now I feel awful... I've had discussions with folks at baseball-ref and Retrosheet and they're all very good people trying to do a good thing. The Retrosheet people aren't even doing it for profit!"

So, even though he has said OK, there is not the concern that we will affect his life. I mean, I said this in the message, if you remember:


 * "   * Oh, so your concern is that, by using a portion of your stats on our pages, we will reduce the number of visitors on your site, which will lead to fewer ads, which in turn will lead to less money, makinf ir harder to keep your site on. I see your concern now... Yeah, I see now. I try to list all my sources whenever I make pages, but I'm not trying to hurt people's lives or sites. And seeing how Wikipedia is always ahead of your site on searches (sometimes I don't even see you), I see why you wouldn't be happy about the nofollow tags. I feel sorry that they apply, because it affects what both of us do, because if there were no nofollow tags, you might be able to say yes and not be affected. I feel sorry for that. Eitherway, I'll look into white-listing, it might be fair compensation for you. Of course, there is a dispute over at Wikipedia about how the numbers are copyrighted or not. It appeared we might be able to use stats until I saw your terms of use, which is why I'm talking with you. Thanks for the reply"

Just an FYI before you continue, this is a real concern that the people I've talked to today have told me Soxrock 23:51, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

No, I would wait until Zscout370 is done talking to him. He asked to talk to him, and I gave him the e-mail address. Soxrock 00:12, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

What kinda chips you want?
Hey, there's a party going on at Talk:Mudkip, and your input is needed on what type of chips you want. -Jéské ( v^_^v ) 00:09, 24 July 2007 (UTC)