User talk:Strikehold/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! AU Tiger » talk 07:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Hi, and welcome to the College football Wikiproject! We are a group of editors who love college football and work to improve Wikipedia's coverage of this sport.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:


 * Starting some new articles? Please add WikiProject College football to the talk page and list your new article in the new articles section.
 * Looking for somewhere to help? Please see our article to do list or project to do list

If you have any ideas you would like to share or if there is any way your fellow college football fans can help you, please feel free to ask on the project talk page. MECU ≈ talk 14:09, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

RE: Gator Bowl
Well, guess what?! I was wrong (along with two other sources). Clemson - Nebraska in the Gator Bowl. I'll go hide in a hole now. FSUNolez06 (talk) 19:37, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Gator Bowl
Please check the Talk page for my reply. [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2008_Florida_State_Seminoles_football_team#Gator_Bowl]

3RR Warning

 * This is a warning. I will be reporting you for continuously reverting my page.

Re: Gator Bowl
You obviously did not look at the post, or you would have realized it is not just some post on a message board. It has a reliable source (straight from the Gator Bowl). I wish I could tell you exactly who it was and where it links to, but that would be in violation of my terms of service to that site (not allowed to provide pay information to non pay members). If you just sign up, and look at it yourself, there is zero chance you will disagree with me. How stupid are you going to feel in a day or two when ESPN reports that it is true? Look, I am a die hard FSU fan. I have been updating the FSU Wikipedia page all year long and have never put wrong information on there. This is 100% true, and if you would just see that link I posted, you would agree.

As for the "reporting me to Wikipedia" thing, wouldn't you be just as guilt of that as me? You are undoing my revision 3 times (going on 4), as well. All I ask is that you look at the link, or else wait it out a day or two. You will see that I am correct. I hate to see my hard work erased because someone thinks it is incorrect.

FSUNolez06 (talk) 04:26, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Stop deleting my Bowl Updates on the FSU Page
Did you fail to see the link I posted? There IS a reliable source! Stop deleting it!

I have no idea where to put this on your talk page, so please delete this if you want. TRUST ME! FSU / Nebraska is the Gator Bowl. If you would like to join Warchant.com, and goto the premium section (Tribal Council), you will see it sourced there. Nebraska was offered tonight and Florida State will be offered tomorrow. PLEASE stop deleting my hard work on the FSU page. I have kept that page up all season long, and don't need you to come along and mess it up now. Thanks! FSUNolez06 (talk) 04:02, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

83 & 84 Clemson notes on List of Atlantic Coast Conference football champions
Howdy. I just saw your comments on that discussion page and have placed a couple of my thoughts there in a new section and would like for you to check them out and respond. Thanks for the effort you are putting into this article. Once we have all of the facts nailed down, would you have any interest in our working together to try and get this article up to Featured List status? -Gwguffey (talk) 03:48, 16 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I posted a response to your thoughts on the article's talk page.
 * -Gwguffey (talk) 06:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

1983 NCAA Division I-A football season
Per your remark on the ACC champion page, I went in and removed the ACC Champion note from 1983 NCAA Division I-A football season. I added an html comment indicating the circumstance so that others would not go in and put it back in. -Gwguffey (talk) 04:10, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Featured List thoughts on List of ACC Football Champions
There is a separate recognition of Featured Lists in addition to Featured Articles. I think this page has the potential to meet the criteria if we dig in a bit. I'm in no rush. If you are interested once you reach a stopping point with the Maryland Football article (which you are doing a great job with), I think we should give it a go. In the mean time, take a quick look at Featured Lists, the featured list criteria and the current featured list candidates when you get a second. No pressure should you decide that you are not interested.

Also, I noted in the section above that I had followed up to your response on the article's talk page, so check and out let me know what you think...and I got a chuckle out of your npov comment on my talk page. -Gwguffey (talk) 06:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject College football February 2008 Newsletter
The February 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:09, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject College football March 2008 Newsletter
The March 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:36, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject College football April 2008 Newsletter
The April 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:44, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject College football May 2008 Newsletter
The May 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:15, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject College football June 2008 Newsletter
The June 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject College football July 2008 Newsletter
The July 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:44, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject College football August 2008 Newsletter
The August 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:33, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject College football September 2008 Newsletter
The September 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:57, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Great job with the Terps
I've been watching the football page and love the updates. I'm heading to Charlottesville tonight and hope to get some photos of Ralph and DHB to put up here. Also I do a website you may have seen, TerrapinStats.com --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 12:31, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Well if nothing else came out of my trip to C-Ville, I got some average photos of DHB and the Fridge to put up on their pages. It was bothering me that they didn't have an image. Also, if you want to use this image for the Terps 2008 section, go ahead.. your choice http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:TerpsO.jpg --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 23:25, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject College football October 2008 Newsletter
The October 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:20, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Your DYK submission
Hello! Your submission at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed. There still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! &mdash;Politizer talk / contribs 02:12, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Crab Bowl
Thanks for your message. There has been a lot of improvement to the article, and the concern I originally raised doesn't seem to be a very big deal anymore. The thing to be cleaned up now is the organization of the sections. Specifically, the division of the history section into cute section headings is undesirable for Wikipedia; things like "the makings of a rivalry" and "the snub" sound a little more like Seinfeld episode titles, and in this case should be replaced with more encyclopaedic titles and divisions (such as dividing the section up by dates or by significant periods&mdash;such as the period before the suspension of the games, the 40 years without games, and the period since games began again). &mdash;Politizer talk / contribs 06:54, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Username
No I'm not the Terp Fball player Omar Cheeseboro... just kind of always liked the name. Probably not the best idea to be using it, but I rather not change it now. I also use JafarWilliams as my youtube account, and frequently have people ask if I was the Jafar. Perhaps I need my username selection process.

Hey do you like Terp Basketball? I noticed the Terp's men bball page needs help! --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 03:30, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Tough game
Man, I just sat in the cold and suffered through the FSU game. What a dissapointing night.

Hey, there's a dispute on the Maryland Terrapins page. You can view it in the talk page. I thought you would like to chime in, being that you're a major Maryland Terrapin contributor. Please do so if you have a chance. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 05:14, 23 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey Strikehold, thanks for your feedback on the page. If you don't mind, please help keep an eye out for the Single Purpose Account Users who may try to revert/vandalize the page.  Note that I had to leave in the stuff about the fan incidents since that was the consensus of an earlier dispute.  I think something like that belongs more of the main U of Maryland page rather than the Athletics page. Maybe I will pursue that later.  Anyway, thanks again for your input.  --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 19:12, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Third Opinion
As requested on the Third Opinion noticeboard, I have placed my opinion on the dispute at the Maryland_Terrapins's article. I urge all editors to discuss concerns on the article's talk page before reverting the actual article. Lazulilasher (talk) 17:06, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Third opinion project
Your request for a third opinion has been edited to comply with Third opinion. If your entry as originally worded (diff) contained information vital to an understanding of the dispute, please add those details to the article talk page where the dispute exists. Thanks. — Athaenara ✉  06:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Nebraska Gator Bowl
The offer was extended on Monday evening, it was accepted today at 10am EST by Nebraska my friend's mother is on the gator bowl committee, now they want Clemson in the bowl over FSU... i could always user her in a source for articles :lol - UkrNole 485 (talk) 17:58, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject College football December 2008 Newsletter
The December 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:08, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Suter article
Excellent job! Thanks! --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 14:56, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note about the Camp. It's good to see them doing some good, and hopefully getting some young talent directed in the right (Terp) direction. There's a peculiar note on the camp page about Scooter Monroe. I don't believe he had much of a pro experience (pre-season camp maybe)?  At the big NC State game in 2003 ("Novak has redemption"), he was in the crowd down in Raleigh. Great job on the current Terp player articles. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 22:02, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Longhorn articles
Hi Strikehold, thanks for the heads-up about the page moves. I appreciate the courtesy even though of course I don't own the articles. It is always nice when someone takes the time to not only discuss their proposal, as you did on the Talk page, but also to notify the major contributor(s) as well.

Thanks for the compliment also. I think they are in pretty good shape overall, though of course I know they have some room for improvement always. The 2007 article may be close to FA quality. I was working it up in the off-season but I ran out of time when the new season started.

Is there a bot yet to fix all the articles to keep them from pointing to the redirects, or do we still have to do that manually? That work is rather tedious, but it should really be done if we are moving the pages. Best, Johntex\talk 19:39, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK entry issue
Hello! Your submission at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed. There still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Nsk92 (talk) 01:00, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

unlock 2008 seminoles
can you please unlock the 2008 seminoles page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.233.168.198 (talk) 00:28, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed. There still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!

DYK for Steve Suter

 * Hey Strike, congrats on the DYK. I actually just got my first one for an article I created so that's how I saw yours. There was some funny vandalism done to Suter.  --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 14:43, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Damn they already put up new ones. They don't leave them up for long do they? --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 14:46, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

December 2008
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. SRX 00:00, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Reply
Technically, footnotes are not references, they are just notes for the reader to see to better understand the content. So all you have to do is treat it like regular prose and place the citation next to the note. Best, --SRX 02:51, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Instead of using those parameters, I recommend using the note and ref templates for footnotes. Then you can cite the footnotes.--SRX 03:30, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Collin Mooney

 * I rated it C, for not being quite complete in the sense that a biography shouldn't be entirely focussed on sporting achievement. Mind you I don't know how easy it is to dig up non-sporting aspects of his life and another reviewer might consider it worthy of a B.--Grahame (talk) 12:25, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

G1
Hi. I removed the db-nonsense tag on Eenyo because G1 is for nonsense articles. If you can understand what the article is about G1 doesn't apply. I've listed the article at WP:AFD, feel free to comment there.  Matt  (  Talk  )   06:16, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Request for Comment on College Football logos
Users opposing the use of College Football team logos being used in articles through out the College Football project have filed a Request for Comment trying to ban use of team logos. As I am sure you know our current standard/system of using logos legitimately with fair use rationales do not violate any wikipedia policy. It would be appreciated if you could take a moment and voice you opinion on the subject here: RFC: Use of logos on sports team pages. Thank you in advance and thank you for your contributions to the College Football Project. Rtr10 (talk) 04:59, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

RE: Maryland Terps seasons list
Next time you message a user on their talk page, please read the headers on top of the talk page first. Thanks and cheers. --  SRE.K.A nnoyomous .L. 24 [c] 22:19, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Marylandhelmet.gif)
You've uploaded File:Marylandhelmet.gif, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 05:53, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Navyhelmet.gif)
You've uploaded File:Navyhelmet.gif, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 15:43, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

New straw poll
You are a user who responded to Use of logos on sports team pages. As someone interested in the discussion a new straw poll has been laid out to see where we currently stand with regards to building a consensus. For the sake of clarity, please indicate your support or opposition (or neutrality) to each section, but leave discussion to the end of each section. — BQZip01 — talk 23:18, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Just a reminder...
When writing a story about American football games, the proper use of dating is to be done in the American style of English such as "January 1, 2009", not "1 January 2009". I had to fix every dating within the 2008 Humanitarian Bowl story to the proper American English style. Thanks anyway for contributing to Wikipedia. NoseNuggets (talk) 12:30 PM US EST Jan 8 2009

WikiProject College football January 2009 Newsletter
The January 2009 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:10, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

DYK
Hello! there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath and respond there as soon as possible. --Eustress (talk) 02:34, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

College team colors
You can't just put "purple" and "red" for some teams, you need to put the hex codes. This is why you shouldn't have bothered. I'm going to have to re-do most of them so you wasted your time.► Chris Nelson Holla! 19:27, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

DYK for J.D. Maarleveld
--Dravecky (talk) 22:53, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

DYK for David Johnson (American football)
--Dravecky (talk) 05:41, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

2008 Humanitarian Bowl
Not a problem. It's a good article, and if imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, it definitely made me feel good to see the format you followed for the article. Before submitting it to FAC, I'd suggest merging some of the one- or two-sentence subsections into one: The first three subsections in the Pregame buildup should either be expanded or merged. I'd suggest having someone unfamiliar with American football read through it to find any areas where the jargon is unclear. You'll also have to insert non-breaking spaces between numerals and their labels, and wikilink the first usages of common football terms. Positions, trick play types, scoring methods, and other common football jargon usually have a page that can be linked to. After all that's done, try throwing it out there to see the comments you get back. I failed more than a few FACs until I got the knack of it, and if you build up a stable of reviewers you know are willing to take a look at the article, it can help. Try contacting other editors on the college football project to see if they're willing to take a look at it. It might take time to get the responses you want, but it's worth it. JKBrooks85 (talk) 08:57, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure. When you have something like 145 yards, it should have & nbsp; (remove the space) between the 145 and the yards. This keeps the numeral from being separated from its label from line to line if the page is resized. It's a big pain, but it's one of the things that people pick out the most. The other things are photo/graphic copyrights, disambiguation links, and dead links in citations. There are tools for picking out the latter two items available in the FAC page. JKBrooks85 (talk) 09:22, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I know you're hard at work getting 2008 Humanitarian Bowl ready for FAC, and I ran across an interview that might help you out. Check it out. I also wanted to let you know that I've submitted 2008 ACC Championship Game to FAC, and any comments, questions, concerns, or support you'd like to put down on the review page after reading the article would be appreciated. Thanks in advance, and let me know if you run into anything you'd like me to take a look at with your FAC. JKBrooks85 (talk) 05:58, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the awesome review! Those factual fixes were a big help. I had a few questions on content, and replied on the review page. JKBrooks85 (talk) 00:57, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

resp to logos
I concur that this is almost the exact same proposal as before...but with one major difference. With a new understanding of copyright/trademarks, I think you'll find that every team has free logos available. The problem is that most logos are improperly uploaded under a copyright notice when, in fact, they are trademarks. As an example, please challenge me! Give me any team and I'll find a free logo for use in an article. Give me any game last year, and I'll provide a photo for it. That someone hasn't uploaded it is pretty much irrelevant because Flickr and other image hosting sites have thousands of these images. I agree that photographs are not necesarily relevant, but there might be a single shot that captures the game. I'm not going to prevent that shot from being used if consensus on that page is that this is the best lead image. I think that, if you'll read this, most of your concerns will be allayed. You seem like a reasonable guy and I think this is simply a misunderstanding with regards to copyright law. — BQZip01 — talk 17:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi, I see you feel strongly about coming to a solution that both sides of this issue can agree upon and I applaud you for that. I have a few concerns, which I didn't completely expand upon in the !vote due to brevity's sake and the fact that most of them have been mentioned by other comments in the thread. Here are some I can think of:
 * You provided several examples of "generic" logos of schools names spelled out. Personally, I think that, due to the lack of recognition to the general population and, well, their generic nature, that that is really only a very marginally better choice than simply leaving out an image altogether in favor of a simple text caption of the school/team's name.
 * I think there is a lot of gray area in the "generic" letters logo approach. For instance, examples were given of the interlocking USC logo and the cursive "A" inside the disc Alabama logo. Personally, I would think that those do meet the minimum requirement for originality under US copyright law. I'm not a lawyer, so that is just a layperson's opinion, but that is my belief. (As for Wikimedia Commons, I don't have any experience with it, but being connected to Wikipedia, my assumption is that anyone can upload to it. So, based on that assumpation, I would tend to believe that the presence of something on there doesn't, in and of itself, indicate that it is in fact not copyrighted.)
 * You propose using an action shot or image of the team to represent a team's particular season. One issue I see with that is that a photograph like that isn't iconic or representative of the team in the way that the commonly known logos are.
 * Also regarding pictures, I do think it is very difficult to find free images for most teams. You give Flickr as an example, but it is almost always the case that the uploader there marks them as "all rights reserved", often, I think, without really knowing what that means. In my personal experiences searching Flickr, I found no relevant pictures uploaded as share alike (for a subject related to this discussion).
 * I also think that it would be biased against smaller schools and less well known teams for the last two reasons, but to a far greater extent.
 * It is also an unsatisfactory solution for seasons from by-gone eras, where it is even more difficult (if not altogether impossible) to find free images.
 * You say challenge you with any game to find an image. Well, just off the top of my head, a random game I can think of would be Rice vs. Tulsa, two Division I FBS football teams. Strikehold (talk) 18:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)


 * (comment moved here for the sake of continuity/clarity from my talk page) — BQZip01 —  talk 05:03, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * The generic logos I provided were simply quick, simple logos that weren't copyrighted. They were there to show that there were other options. They aren't necessarily ideal.
 * "I think there is a lot of gray area in the "generic" letters logo approach..." I concur, but perhaps not in the same way you are thinking. The issue is in regard to whether they are trademarked or copyrighted. Copyrights are completely protected from reuse outside of fair use considerations. Trademarks are limited within marketing circles and/or association. We can certainly use a trademarked logo for identification, but you cannot print it out to use on a baseball cap to sell since that would give the impression that the owner of the logo endorsed the creation of that hat. We are not using the logo for anything other than identification, not endorsement. As for the Alabama logo, it cannot be copyrighted as it lacks copyrightable traits. If you don't like the opinion of a Wikipedian, perhaps Yale's legal department's opinion would be better? Rice University's? Tulsa's? The images from the Commons do not prove that these are free images, but they do provide circumstantial evidence. They are high-profile images and have been there for some time with no objections.
 * I concur that a photo is not always iconic, but one may exist. I'm trying to provide alternatives to each article. There may be an image that isn't a photo or logo that might be much better. I'm open to that and consensus on each page can determine what is the best option, but free logos should be allowed and having a basic framework and a default image will prevent arguments and simplify debate significantly. I also concur that by-gone eras are indeed problematic, but arcane/deprecated logos will likely be the best solution. If you have a solution, feel free to propose it, but I think this is the best solution at this time.
 * I agree it would be biased against smaller schools, but the bias already exists. People will write a lot about the national championship team, game, season, etc, but the football team for the North Mollenburg Community College for Blind Women finishing 0-11 isn't going to have much detail because it isn't generally notable. If they aren't notable, then they aren't significant and won't be covered in Wikipedia. If they are significant they will likely have images. Like I said, an image is an alternative, not a mandate.
 * Ok, then Rice and Tulsa it is:
 * Trademarked logos for each team: Tulsa Rice (For the sake of simplicity in this discussion, just take your pick of those that consist entirely of letters... (realize these are not all-inclusive and others may also exist).
 * Free picture of the game: just one as an example (For reference, pretty much all of photobucket's images are Free (see section 6.1).
 * — BQZip01 — talk 05:03, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Army Black Knights
You made a revision to the Bill Yeoman article stating that Army was not referred to as the "Black Knights" at the time. Do you know what they WERE referred to then? Thanks. Brianreading (talk) 08:37, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

College football seasons
Hi there. Going forward, I will start using the appropriate schedule template for the CFB seasons. Maple Leaf (talk) 17:12, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Morgan Green
Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself. Please use the template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion. ttonyb1 (talk) 01:21, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Ralph Friedgen
His page needs an update with a summary of the 2008 season. Do you want to take it on? Thanks. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 05:34, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure. I'm working on a couple other things at the moment, but I'll get to it soon. Strikehold (talk) 05:53, 1 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Great Job. Thanks! --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 18:48, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback
...on the USMA article. I've addressed your concerns, so let me know what you think. — BQZip01 — talk 19:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Oyster Bowl
Thanks for letting me know! JKBrooks85 (talk) 22:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Final version
As a contributor to the discussion regarding sports team logos, I am soliciting feedback as to the latest version of that guideline. Your support/opposition/feedback would be appreciated. — BQZip01 — talk 21:08, 2 February 2009 (UTC)