User talk:New England/July 2007

Re:Speculation
Ok. I'm not sure. I dont think dont know if he is impersonating you - his name is different. And I dont impinge on you. I know you wouldnt sockpuppet. It was just strange. Anonymous Dissident Talk 23:06, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * For the record HarryMaxwell was indef blocked for being a sockpuppet of another indef blocked account. And I don't blame you for speculating, given the similar signatures I'd have done the same. I'm more interested in why he did imitate me though.   Black Harry  (Highlights|Contribs) 23:39, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes. It is quite the curiosity isnt it? Why would he imitate you? Oh well. I guess his oppose at that RFA will be discounted. Anonymous Dissident  Talk 23:40, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Motive Interactive
Hi, I was considering submitting Motive Interactive to afd when you had tagged it for blatant advertising and recreation of deleted material. I'm not sure I agree with tagging under either of these speedy criteria, since WP:CSD (recreation) does not apply to previous speedy deletions and the page does not read to me as blatant advertising per WP:CSD although it is clearly biased. I wonder if you would consider afd instead? I realise I could just remove the tags and afd it myself, but I dislike unilaterally contesting another's judgment without discussion. CIreland 17:12, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I tagged it as blatant advertising since both the "references" are company press releases. I'd like to have an admin look at the page, but if you decided to remove the speedy delete tags and list it at AFD, I wouldn't mind too much.   Black Harry  (Highlights|Contribs) 17:18, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the quick reply. I'm going to remove the G4 tag and leave the G11 and see what happens. If it survives, I will send it to afd, if no-one else does so first. CIreland 17:26, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * As a follow up, it looks like an admin speedied it due to spam. Eventually I think we'll see the article get created again.   Black Harry  (Highlights|Contribs) 02:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
Thank you for participating in my RfA. It was successful, and I am now, may God have mercy on us all, an administrator. Look at all the new buttons! I had heard about 'protect,' 'block user,' and 'delete,' but no one told me about 'kill,' 'eject,' and 'purée.' I appreciate the trust the community has in me, and I'll try hard not to delete the main page or block Jimbo. -FisherQueen (Talk) 17:51, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Notable lists
Can you help me to thinks some reasons that the lists are not original research and we should keep them. Please post them on the talk page of Power Forward and on my talk page too so we can discuss it. Brave warrior 23:56, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The best way I can think of would be to find a source defining notability within the NBA to mean All-Star Appearances, MVPs, Rookie of the Years, Finals MVPs, etc. That might be hard to do though.  Then we could take off the tag.  The other way would be to do nothing, wait a few months, and try and take off the tags.


 * And for former players, the criteria would be inclusion in the hall of fame, or having ones number retired.  Black Harry  (Highlights|Contribs) 00:15, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * We should also only list players at one position. For instance, Paul Pierce, who plays the two and the three should only be listed as a small forward seeing that is the position he is most likely to play next season.  Of course he should also be listed as a swingman, since he is one.   Black Harry  (Highlights|Contribs) 02:28, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * If you read what I wrote on Talk:Power forward (basketball), you need an objective criteria for selecting "Notable Players". What you've recommended (having All-star Appearances, MVPs, and all that) is a good idea, but in practicality, such a list will likely have tens, if not hundreds of players.  However, if you are going to do so, I suggest you make a new page for the following reasons:
 * The position pages are strictly about the positions and it shouldn't take an Americentric stance. If you include a list of NBA players, you will have to include a list of Euro players.  Furthermore, you will likely need to include players from other professional leagues worldwide.  This just isn't practical.
 * Having a list of "notable players" doesn't add to the quality of the article. Take Film for instance.  It doesn't have a list of all the movies that have won Oscars on it.  Does that detract from the quality of the article?  Definitely not. If you want to see a list of Oscar winners, go look up Academy Award.  Likewise, if anyone is interested in a list of all the players that have won MVPs, go look up MVP.  They don't need to find it on a page about a position.
 * I don't recommend you ignore the issue.  Even if you succeed in removing the tag 3 months from now, it doesn't make the wikipedia article any better.  75.183.24.180 01:01, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * In response to that, saying that limiting players on the list to the criteria I came up with (which is supported by the NBA Project) would open the floodgates shows that you have little to know idea about what you are talking about. The reason for listing notable players at their position is so that people have an example of what the best players at each position due.  To say its Americentric is pure lunacy.  Look at soccer positions, they give examples of players, all of whom come from the top leagues in the world and not the MLS.  So basketball position players mentioned should be in the best Basketball League in the World, the NBA.


 * And out of curiosity, whose sockpuppet are you? I doubt an anon editor would know much about policy after only being here for two days.      Black Harry  (Highlights|Contribs) 02:20, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * If you have the time, I highly recommend you to take a look at WP:Etiquette before resorting to baseless accusations. To answer your question, I have a dynamic IP.  I have made many edits on many different IPs; just because you see two days' worth of edits on this current IP doesn't necessarily mean all my edits have come from this IP.  I am nobody's sockpuppet.  As for your football reference, it's flawed on two levels: 1) just because it's on the football page doesn't make it correct.  Last I checked, these pages do not provide any reference and have been tagged as such.  The only positional page that provides any semblance of an objective criteria is goalkeeper, and it specifically states what accolade was won by these players.  The current basketball positions make no such attempt at this distinction.  2) Not everyone agrees to those listed players.  A quick look at here will show that some concern have been raised over the list of players.
 * A question for you. I quote, "an example of what the best players at each position".  How exactly do you rate the best player?  Just recently, Alexi Lalas, the GM of the LA Galaxy, claimed that the English premier league is inferior to the MLS .  He obviously thinks the MLS is one of the best leagues in the world.  Your opinion that the NBA is the best league with the best players is strictly that, an opinion.  I'm willing to wager that there are people in Europe that would claim that the European leagues are better than the NBA. 75.183.24.180 03:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

My recent RfB
Thank you so much for your participation in my recent RfB. Though it closed with 72% support (below the required 90%), I'm still quite pleased at the outpouring of support shown by a fair percentage of the community.

I'm currently tabulating and calculating all opposing and neutral arguments to help me better address the community's concerns about my abilities as a bureaucrat. If you'd like, you can follow my progress (and/or provide additional suggestions) at User:EVula/admin/RfB notes. Thanks again! EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 04:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

My RFA
Hi Harry, just a quick note to say thanks for participating in my request for adminship. It was successful and I now have some shiny new buttons. If I can ever be of help, please let me know. Happy editing, mattbr 10:09, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: My RfB
Thanks for your support, but I assume you mean "more bureaucrats needed" not "more admins needed"? --Deskana (talk) 16:03, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'm sorry and will fix it now.  Black Harry  • Happy Independence Day  16:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks :-) --Deskana (talk) 16:09, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

My RFA
Thanks for participating in my RFA. Hiberniantears 17:23, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You know I never get thanks from people who I oppose, but I appreciate the fact that you took time to do so. In the future, I will likely support you if you keep the good work.   Black Harry  •  Go Red Sox  19:13, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm... perhaps I should have mentioned that I'm a lifelong Sox fan to tip the balance! :-) Hiberniantears 19:23, 5 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 22:54, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfB
By the way, I truly hope that you change your mind and return. Don't let disagreements bring you down, we all have them on Wikipedia. :-) Best regards, Hús  ö  nd  21:58, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thanks in part to your support, I am Wikipedia's newest bureaucrat. I will do my best to live up to your confidence and kind words. Andre (talk) 09:19, 11 July 2007 (UTC) P.S. I hope you reconsider and come back to the project. If not, good luck in your endeavors.

Welcome back!
Welcome back, BH! I'm glad that you decide to return!! Клоун  14:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm glad too; welcome back! Acalamari 23:07, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Block
Before reading this, you may wish to read: TomStar81's RFA and its talk page

BN thread on TomStar's RFA

Archived ANI thread on OldWindyBear's actions

Archived ANI thread on StillStudying's actions

Checkuser case on OldWindyBear, StillStudying, and others and its Talk Page

Report on Sockpuppetry by OldWindyBear

ANI thread on OldWindyBear's Sock Abuse I have blocked you for one week for the comments you made about me on TomStar's nomination talk page. You accused me of nominating him for having nominated me. That was provably false. He did not nominate me, Stillstudying did, and he formatted the nomination. Further, the links you placed showed that I never said, as you claimed, that I nominted him in return for nominating me. I blocked you for 24 hours, and lifted it after teling you I would block you again if you continued false statements. I warned you that continued false statements would result in another blocking, and you made additional false statements last night on the RfA talk page. I have blocked you for one week for making false accusations. I will not lift it. Perhaps someone else will, but I would hope they would make a stand for our policies on false accusations and wikipedia assume good faith which you have grossly violated. old windy bear 09:48, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I will unblock you immediately if you wish me to, New England. It is totally inappropriate for an administrator to block someone they are clearly in a dispute with. The fact about whether you were even lying is in dispute, and for the person who is accusing you to act as prosecution, judge and executioner (proverbially) is utterly ridiculous.  Daniel  10:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * It seems that I have to go offline, and Oldwindybear will be posting to ANI about this. Regardless, I still find this block to be totally inappropriate, and unless damning evidence to the contrary exists, my view is stationary at the above. 'Night,  Daniel  10:11, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree completely with Daniel. I have watchlisted this page, so I'm likely to see any unblock request that comes along. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 10:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I am moderating my tone in accordance with what Deskana told me. But I want it on record that I nominated oldwindybear, and everyone who read the record knows that.  The real issue here is that personal attacks are supposed to be barred on wikipedia, yet this user was allowed to repeatedly lie, and no one seems concerned at all.  The only fault I find with the bear is that he waited so long to act to stop the endless lying.  Stillstudying 11:40, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I've unblocked per my reasoning above and that of Daniel and (posted elsewehere) Deskana. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 12:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Just for the record, I have left wikipedia except for following up on the nomination fiasco. I nominated oldwindybear, as anyone who could read would know.  I have left the encyclopedia over this, but wanted it plainly on your talk page, that I was nominator, so you cannot say you did not know.  Stillstudying 13:57, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Signature
Aug, my eyes. Can you change your signature to a colour that won't burn itself into the collective retinas of Wikipedia?-Wafulz 15:25, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I just submitted a request at the sig shop to have it changed (I suck at using HTML code). New England 15:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Admin request
Thanks for the support. :-)  Lra drama 17:11, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Hehe, thanks for the compliment! I will support you when you make a request for adminship (if you want to!). With regards,  Lra drama 17:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Statements like that make bureaucrats cry. --Deskana (talk) 20:12, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Just trying to be nice. But looking at it now it seems awfully foolish. Sorry for bringing you under fire for it too (New England I mean). At least some people take this RfA seriously, and that is good to see. Others don't. See my discussion I've posted on Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship, because that highlights those who don't take it seriously.  Lra drama 08:50, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

86.112.195.147
I noticed you gave him a vandalism warning for vandalizing his own user talk page. There's also the talk vandal series, Template: Talk-vandal1 2 3 and 4. Hope it helps. Cheers, Je tL ov e r  (talk) 22:22, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll use that in the future.  New   England  (C) (H) 22:24, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Previous message
Hello, I'm sorry about the warning I left earlier. I realize now that the text was entered accidentally. I'm just quick to revert that stuff when I see it. Take care, Postoak 06:37, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Don't worry about it, no harm was done.  New   England  (C) (H) 08:15, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

please, please don't pick at scabs
Hi New England, please consider the possibility that your presence on the RFCU is not going to help. This is hard enough. --barneca (talk) 18:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * while I understand your sentiment, you must understand that I was only giving a brief observation of two of the users in question. Despite my recent dispute with them, I am still a member of the community, and it is a community discussion.   New   England  (C) (H) 18:09, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * thought about this overnight, and you're right. you had to deal with a lot of crap for a couple of days, and to ask or expect you to not participate in something affecting you was stupid on my part.  only thinking of me.  sorry. --barneca (talk) 12:26, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-admin AFD closures
As a note, when closing an AFD, the top template and the closure statement go above the header, not below it. I've fixed the two I stumbled across. (example diff). GRBerry 18:36, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Please subst them too, New England. --Deskana (talk) 18:41, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * And it's a discussion, not a vote, so don't call peoples comments votes.  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  18:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree that it's a discussion, but I still call it them votes. :-) --Deskana (talk) 18:46, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I just think that if a non admin is closing AfD's and they call it a vote, it's a bit of a slippery slope.  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  18:48, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You're probably right... --Deskana (talk) 18:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay I'll make note of substituting and placing of the template. But was I wrong in closing them?   New   England  (C) (H) 20:16, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You were not wrong in the slightest. From the ones I've looked at, the only comments were to keep the articles so you are fine to close them (in fact, it's a great help!), just make sure that you only close unnanamous keep AfD's or people tend to get a little stressed! If there's only a few comments, it's often good to relist them. Thanks,  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  21:53, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

"Notable" players
Which side are you on on this issue? Brave warrior 12:40, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I am for listing players voted as members of the top 50 NBA players of all-time. Meaning all PGs on that list would be listed on the Point Guard page, etc.   New   England  (C) (H) 12:42, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Oldwindybear
His block on you was wrong, but it would be more dignified for you to back off now. You're keeping an inflamed situation open, and honestly, it's not helping. If Stillstudying comes back, and behaves disruptively, admins will deal with the situation. I don't think your recent posts on the subject have been helpful; even if the posts themselves weren't of themselves making things worse, the fact that it was you making them only adds fuel to the flames. Please consider letting your last comment on the situation be your final one. Cheers. ElinorD (talk) 20:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I was actually planning on that anyway (though if my opinion is asked for I wold give it).  New   England  (C) (H) 20:59, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Perspicacite RfA
... I've just re-listed it, as with five opinions in so far, it's way to early for a WP:SNOW closure. Give the guy a chance here - A l is o n  ☺ 06:11, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * While I respect your opinion on the issue, I snowballed because I didn't feel it would pass, and I didn't want the candidate to have to go through the whole process. For the record, I asked a 'crat to take a look at it on WP:BN before I closed it, and I was anyone could close per WP:SNOW   New   England  (C) (H) 06:17, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * While I thank you for your concern, I would really rather bear the hardship of letting the RFA take its course. I appreciate your looking out for me, but, shucks I'd prefer to hear the criticism so I can improve my editing habits. Perspicacite 06:21, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * It's going to go the way of WP:SNOW anyway, but due process needs to be followed, and IMO, 5 comments isn't enough to judge yet. User:New England is correct in saying that anyone can close an RfA per WP:SNOW, however it needs to be really blatant. I'm deliberately not answering your question yet, BTW, because it will certainly not help your case. May I suggest Editor review for feedback and commentary once this ends? - A l is o n  ☺ 06:25, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

For the record, Perspicacite, you should probably try again in a few months if you wish to become an admin. While your attempt to help out at WP:AN3 was a nice idea, you really should know that admins can block for a reason; they have gained the community's trust. I should also tell you that your RFA would likely have failed anyway had you not been blocked, you've only been here since may and have amassed fewer than 2,000 edits. However, as I said, give it a few months and you should pass.  New  England  (C) (H) 06:35, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Zakim bridge change
Removing another user's data is a Bad Thing. I'd just put in the height information a bit earlier than you added your conversion to feet, and you lost my text. Bad editor. Spank. Denimadept 19:02, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey that spank was a little raunchy. I didn't realize you had just added the info.  I didn't mean to erase your info, just to update it using feet.   New   England  (C) (H) 01:16, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, being that you're not a cop (I figure), I can't take away your donut.

Denimadept 03:15, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you
New England, I never did this publicly, did I. Thank you very much for your help in all this. --barneca (talk) 00:38, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I just had a chance to read the report after I saw the link to it on WP:AN/I, and I'm impressed by the work you all did in putting it together. As a new user I'm a little surprised (maybe even scared) that one person could use so many accounts for such a long time and get away with it. Hopefully this won't happen again.  Pats Sox Princess  17:26, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your support at my recent Requests for adminship/Angus Lepper RfA, which failed, with no consensus to promote me. However, I appreciate the concerns raised during the course of the discussion (most notably, a lack of experience, particularly in admin-heavy areas such as XfDs and policy discussions) and will attempt to address these before possibly standing again in several months time. Angus Lepper(T, C, D) 16:02, 28 July 2007 (UTC)