User talk:Tedmoseby

Quinn Picture
Hello Tedmoseby - Thanks for the upload offer - it was a great picture (I remember the home uniform) that a vandal had defaced with a pink skirt - I could not for some reason revert to the original upload. Sensei48 (talk) 14:37, 25 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) 01:45, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Edit Conflict
Hi Tedmoseby - Well, I'll do what I can for dispute resolution, and gladly. It's just that I'm a civilian editor - I note you also asked ZimZalaBim, who has worked on ND articles and actually is an administrtor on Wiki, which means he has some sort of magical powers that I don't.

I'm going to post a reply on the ND football Talk page and to Tool's page; let's see what happens. Sensei48 (talk) 06:16, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

An Attempt

 * Gentlemen - I don't think that this is a dispute past resolution with a bit of compromise and, I hope, good will. As I read it, here is the problem:

a) Tedm. wants a different section in the article for other important games ND has played in addition to several already mentioned in the article.

b) Tool wants these games to be listed as wins and losses (plus maybe ties) in approximately equal proportion to maintain NPOV.

c) Tedm thinks there needs to be a rubric other than wins/losses for inclusion on this list.

d) Tool believes that Tedm in so suggesting is violating OR and NPOV rubrics.

I hope I have this right; assuming for the minute that I do, here's what I think.

First, any such list as Ted proposes is bound to be subjective to a large degree, given the gross number of games ND has played and the perspective that any editor would bring to such a list. However, by itself, I don't believe that that fact violates Wiki prohibitions against OR or NPOV.

The collaborative nature of Wikipedia permits any editor - like Tool - to amend an article according to the lights of his/her own knowledge, providing that that knowledge can be attributed to a recognized source. So the creation of this section does not by itself violate Wiki rules, I think. It's a slippery area - but if you two could agree on a compromise document of rules and guidelines, I think you'd be on solid ground for including this section in the article.

If ANY editor can justify a game's importance according to some mutually agreed upon sourced and sourceable criteria - and that could include any given game - then it should be allowed on the list.

Ted's rationale here looks pretty good to me - but if guidelines for a section like this come from one person, then Tool is right and it becomes subjective. You both are probably aware that if you start this section - even if you agree completely on guidelines - you'll have to police it constantly (especially during football season) because extremists and partisans both pro- and con-ND assault this page regularly at that time.

Proportion of wins to losses is another question. If you look above, I quite accidentally proposed one win, one loss, and one tie for inclusion (not knowing two of the three were already included). But proportion vs. NPOV is another slippery area. I am fully sympathetic to Tool's fear that such a section could become mere blatant ND puffery without some serious attempts at balance. But I don't think you'll find that in numbers, maybe especially not to Tool's satisfaction. Notre Dame has won 74% of all the football games it has ever played - shouldn't that be the measure of the proportion? If you make a list half wins and half losses wouldn't that violate NPOV in an anti-ND way?

My answer would be to avoid a question of proportion altogether. Notre Dame has won plenty of significant games and lost many as well, and I've never actually myself tried to compute a proportion. So here's what I'd propose:

1) That the two of you would agree that there should be some sort of section of this kind (maybe organized into significant games as a subset of important rivalries? - or whatever you could agree on).

2) That you would create guidelines consistent with all Wiki policies, especially or sourcing - and that these guidelines should be limited to, say, three to five bullet points.

3) That you would (after initial agreement on a limited number of games - I'd say eight to ten that you both felt belonged) would pledge your lives, fortunes, and sacred honors to support each other in policing the section for violators of your rubric, and that in what would be the then-unlikely event of a dispute between you on inclusion of a game would apply to some wise graybeard administrator like ZimZalaBim for resolution.

That's the best I can do at the moment, guys. Maybe Zim will weigh in. I'm going to post this on your Talk pages and welcome comments. Regards to you both. Sensei48 (talk) 06:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Draft Inclusions?
Hi Tedm. -

Saw your update/revision to the ND page. Just wondering if you think it advisable to put draftees on the list of NFL players - after all, they haven't made any teams yet and may not. I don't mind at all, but some hater may come along and take exception to it. Regards - Sensei48 (talk) 06:20, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Ted - got your message - thanks for the explanation. I agree that while a page of ND in the NFL might be fun, it would also be a burden to keep up.

On another topic, I see that that ridiculous rivalry things is still going on with BC and Stanford listed again in the main article. I had an idea. How about doing away with the section as rivalry and instead substituting a section on opponents played most often in Irish history. That way you would get the real rivalries - USC, Michigan, Navy, Purdue (in-state 60 miles apart is not a rivalry? - shoulda been around when I was! ) likely Pitt and MSU. It would also eliminate BC and Stanford. I don't know - might be worth looking into. Sensei48 (talk) 08:25, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

ND-USC rivalry page
Thanks for the head's up. From an initial look over, it looks good --I'll take a look in detail later, most certainly as I find interesting articles or whatnot from the normal major sources. I think the two schools are generally good about writing about each other, as its a more respectful rivalry than most. I actually took the photo of Jimmy Clausen in his infobox --I got a few other players, but he was the only one I immediately recognized and I couldn't really match the others to roster photos... All the best, Bobak (talk) 15:18, 28 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) 23:16, 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) 23:41, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Eternal Vigilance....
Hello Tedmoseby - again!

You seem to be the most active and constructive editor on the ND football article - so - we've had a vandal go in there on6/16 and before posting irrelevant UM facts and slanted POV stuff - most of it in rather poor grammar, which I would like to think is not emblematic of UM grads. When you have a chance, pls check my edits and summaries:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Notre_Dame_Fighting_Irish_football&action=history

Regards  Sensei48 (talk) 08:45, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Sensei48 (talk) 09:12, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note and the further corrections to the article. I'm sure that the editor did not think of his/her additions as vandalism, but if you look carefully at the edits I reverted or replaced, that person was trying to turn both the rivalry article and the ND football piece into UM puffery - taking exception to every good thing said about ND, minimizing in language the whole ND football thing, slanting language and more (UN games broadcast nationally in Canada? non-Catholic players forced to go to Mass? and so on). I agree that the Weis section is getting out of hand in terms of proportion, so any edits you make to bring that part into consistency with the other coaching articles will help. There might be a bit more to be done over on those articles. And BTW - have you looked at the UM football article? Really a weak piece of braying, esp.compared to the proud but balanced ND effort. regards  Sensei48 (talk) 03:15, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello TedM - just a heads up: an especially aggressive BC fan is trying to reinsert BC as a rival on the ND football page. I've rv'd him/her twice and referred them to the Talk page which they ignored. Policing the page is tiring but I thought I'd mention it to you as well. regards, Sensei48 (talk) 01:17, 9 June 2010 (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) 00:45, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Ruth ND-USC picture
I know exactly the photo you're talking about, I saw it a few months ago. I would probably work as a fair use photo on the rivalry page, since its unreproducible (unique picture and they're all dead) and so long as we don't use a high-resolution scan of the photo. If you decide to upload it, let me know and I'd be happy to take a stab at the fair use information as well as keeping an eye on it. --Bobak (talk) 14:01, 9 July 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) 21:58, 1 September 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) 22:21, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

RFC on College Football logos
As the NFCC talk page was becoming difficult to navigate, I have moved the RFC to a subpage at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/RFC on use of sports team logos. If you had the talkpage watchlisted, you may wish to add the subpage also. Best, Black Kite 11:31, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Free logos
I'm adapting this reply from Oron0's page: Unfortunately, this is a trademark issue and unless a trademark can be demonstrated as "abandoned", they will still be alive. This is a separate issue from copyright law. Trademarks can be simple names (without any special font, wordmark or logo) and include even the most basic of shapes. I would strongly caution against assuming that any college logo is "free" because trademark law would almost certainly permit them --and if you ever see a ™, or especially a ®, it is a bad idea to move forward. I do not think you will find anything other than archaic, out-of-date logos. I'm saying this as a real life attorney who has lectured my company on trademarks and trademark usage. While I disagree strongly with the position some people are taking on NFC and logos, this is something I don't think can be changed. --Bobak (talk) 23:27, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks Bobak for the clarification. Tedmoseby (talk) 23:48, 22 December 2008 (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 23:21, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * As a user who responded to the straw poll regarding non-free images in sports, your further input is requested with regards to the Straw poll summary and proposed guidelines on image use — BQZip01 —  talk 01:06, 10 January 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 21:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

2008–09 Pacific-10 Conference men's basketball season
Based on your hard work on the Arizona Wildcats men's basketball, I thought you might be interested in creating an article for the 2008–09 Pacific-10 Conference men's basketball season. The 2008–09 Big Ten Conference men's basketball season and 2008–09 Atlantic Coast Conference men's basketball season articles have been going since before the conference tournaments and recently 2008–09 Big East Conference men's basketball season and 2008–09 Big 12 Conference men's basketball season have recently been created. I hope to encourage all the power conferences to create such articles this year or at least by next year. In fact, next year I hope to get all the mid majors in on the action too. I do the 2008–09 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team and the 2008–09 Big Ten Conference men's basketball season and am willing to respond to any queries.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 09:20, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

ND NCs
Hello again Tedmoseby - I note that you have had to rv the guy from Alabama about the number of NCs ND vs. UA. I don't know if you checked his talk page, but after someone (neither you not I) reverted his original change several days ago, I assumed good faith on his part and posted a longish explanation on his talk page here. Clearly, it did no good and he continues to vandalize the page. This is just an FYI - if he continues this patter, I'm going to post a vandalisn warning and then seek to get him blocked if he persists. Regards, 02:54, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Formal Mediation for Sports Logos
As a contributor to Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/RFC_on_use_of_sports_team_logos, you have been included in a request for formal mediation regarding the subject at Requests for mediation/Use of Sports Logos. With your input and agreement to work through mediation, it is hoped we can achieve a lasting solution. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Replied

 * Just reverted and sent a final warning. I'd been gone for the past few weeks. --Bobak (talk) 05:59, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Independents page
Based on your editorial interests you might want to create an Independent's page for 2009-10 NCAA Division I FBS football conferences.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:26, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Ties in college football
The overtime rule in college football was implemented in 1996, making ties impossible since then. There is a note that stated this in article, but a formatting error hid it. I have since corrected the problem. --Pgp688 (talk) 22:22, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

U of L win %
Louisville is 19th in all time wins and 9th in win %. Look at table again and click win % column to see win % rank then you have to count to see its 9th. Theworm777 (talk) 05:41, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Biggest ND rival?
When I moved the 4 long running historical rivals to the top, I ordered them by games played. But good call moving USC ahead of Navy. Navy is a bigger tradition, but it isn't a competitive national rival like USC. ---70.74.212.25 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.74.212.25 (talk) 17:08, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok... gotcha... I listed them by relevance when I revamped the article a few years back. But to me it made more sense to go by importance. The article looks great though! Glad to see someone else has taken some interest.Tedmoseby (talk) 23:53, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

RE: Requesting protection of several Notre Dame football pages
Hey, I looked at the pages and so far they seem pretty calm over the past few days--I'm not saying it's entirely peaceful, but not as crazy as I've seen things get. The anons aren't going too bananas (is this a sign that vandalizing Wikipedia isn't as fashionable as it was?) and there are plenty of editors reverting quickly. Don't get me wrong--I've had to occasionally protect a college football page during a rivalry week, but this isn't looking quite as bonkers. Please let me know if it gets worse and I will protect them. --Bobak (talk) 15:14, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

...
Please check out WikiProject Council/Proposals/Collegiate sports (USA)... GWFrog (talk) 22:10, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Notre Dame Invite
Hey! I know you are already a member and you've been one of the most active members of our project, but I just wanted to give you a heads up on the fact that I've been revamping the project. If you'd like to contribute, please follow the links below. Especially, check out the To DO list, and our talk page. I also created this invite banner, so we can all invite people we believe might be interested. Thanks!

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Notre Dame
Hello , I just wanted to thank you for your work for the WikiProject Notre Dame. I am currently making an effort to revamp it and improve all articles. I was wondering if you could help out, since any and all help is needed. If you want, you can check out the To Do list for the top priority, or take your own initiative and work on what's needed the most. The top priority articles in bad condition, like the colleges or the grotto, need a lot of help too. Additionally, photos or translation in other languages are also great.

Best and thank once more for your work on Wikipedia, Eccekevin (talk) 02:40, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

You're invited! Wiki Loves Pride in Indianapolis
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 19:20, 13 June 2022 (UTC).)

July 28: You're invited! Food Deserts & Food Policy in Indianapolis editathon
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 08:55, 18 July 2022 (UTC).)

You're invited! Environmental Justice editathons in Indianapolis & Bloomington
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 01:52, 10 October 2022 (UTC).)

You're invited! In-person WikiConference North America Meetup in Indianapolis!
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 17:17, 4 November 2022 (UTC).)

March 17: You're invited! Indiana Women in the Arts editathon
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 21:02, 8 March 2023 (UTC).)

You're invited! Indiana Politics & Government Editathon on Saturday, May 13
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 01:28, 5 May 2023 (UTC).)

You're invited! Wiki Loves Pride in Indianapolis
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 16:30, 19 June 2023 (UTC).)

You're invited! Indiana State Fair Wiknic on Sunday, July 30
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 13:54, 22 July 2023 (UTC).)

You're invited! Underrepresented Artists of Indiana editathon on Oct. 11
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 00:50, 5 October 2023 (UTC).) "