User talk:Umdgrad88

Maryland Terrapins
You say "no consensus for the traditions section material.".

Then what is this? These are not my comments, but from other users.

''I agree. This page is a mess with a lot of superfluous junk on it right now, and it needs a serious overhaul. Most of the stuff on here really doesn't belong. I support the changes Omarcheeseboro made. For instance: The part explaining pumping fists to the fight song (???), teenage mutant ninja turtle theme, and "Na Na Hey Hey" song parts... What does any of this add to the article? This is trivial at best, unsourced, and written in an un-encyclopedic manner. (The part about the "You Suck" song is in my opinion noteworthy--and Omar left it in place. Having attended the university around the 2001 timeframe, I can attest that it was a big thing, and if I'm not mistaken, I believe the school was one of the first to do this. But it needs sourcing.)''

''The Key plays, move the chains, free throw wave, shaking papers, etc. is more fluff that doesn't really belong. A lot of it is not exclusive to Maryland fans either...''

''I strongly favor the calls to revamp this page. Strikehold's work on pages for Maryland football rivalries are so detailed that they make the rivalry section almost unneccessary. The Duke-Maryland material, for which I contributed (and poorly sourced), could perhaps be truncated and the bulk of it put on a page of its own. The items on traditions and fan incidents, as pointed out above by Omar, are either not noteworthy or unique to U. of Maryland and are out of place when compared to pages on other collegiate athletic programs''


 * Take a look at User:SportsNut2k - You may want to read the policy of wp:sockpuppetry)..  --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 04:20, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigations/Omarcheeseboro
I closed that SPI case as there is no clear evidence of sock puppetry that I can see there. Furthermore, it is of my opinion that you filed that SPI case in retaliation to his suspicion of sock puppetry on your part. We don't do that here; that is considered disruptive. If neither of you two agree with the third opinion given, then there are other steps in dispute resolution to follow. Continuing to engage in an edit-war without discussing on the article's talk page with whomever you disagree with is not one of them. If you continue to engage in edit-warring and refusing to discuss the issue on the talk page, I will lock the page from editing so nobody can edit, and I may issue blocks depending on what is going on. Regards, MuZemike 00:58, 19 December 2009 (UTC)