User talk:X96lee15/Archive 2008

Template:CFB navbox‎

Hi. I noticed you were trying to have this navbox start out expanded. We actually decided at WP:CFB that we wanted it to start collapsed, since there are many articles with 3 up to 7! of these and that takes up a lot of room. If WP:CBB is using this and wants the different case, then you could copy it and create Template:CBB navbox. MECU≈talk 14:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I was only trying to change the coaching boxes, which are generally only one line of text. Even if there are 6 or 7, it doesn't take up too much space and it's easier to see without having to "open" them. At least that's my opinion :) I didn't know there was previous discussion about the topic. That's one thing about wikipedia that is lacking, finding old discussions about "consensus". X96lee15 (talk) 17:30, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Records on College Football Templates

The more I think about it, I agree with you. However, like you said most show records before the game. Do you think we should leave them before the game? If not, is there a list of articles containing this template so we make them all after the game? And finally, is there some way we can place a note in the template to help avoid this in the future? Bcspro (talk) 22:57, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad you came around :) Here's the list of all article that use the template: [1]. Looks like there are less than 250 of them. As far as the template, each of the parameters are described in the documentation except "Home Record" and "Visitor Record". It would be easy enough to add them saying something like, "Record of the home team at the conclusion of the game being described" (or something like that). I'm just worried that there isn't a consensus and that going through and changing the templates would cause issues. Then again, it might prompt more discussion on the subject (which seems to be dead). X96lee15 (talk) 01:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Someone added to the 2008 National Championship template that records are before the game. With the majority of the 250 articles being this way already and this change (on the template) being made I don't think the majority should be changed. Bcspro (talk) 00:00, 11 January 2008 (UTC) Bcspro (talk) 00:02, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Moving of AAFL team pages.

Thank you for allowing a discussion and allowing editors to take a vote on whether the pages should have been moved or not. (not sarcasm). --Crash Underride 04:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't think there would be any discussion since it wasn't necessary to have "AAFL" preceding each team name, much like there is no NFL Detroit Lions article. X96lee15 (talk) 04:53, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Well as with the Team Florida page, it's needed. So who knows if it would have been needed after all. Just sayin' you should have brought up the move on the league talk page first. Thanks, --Crash Underride 19:50, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

AAFL

So, you enjoyin' workin' on the AAFL pages? I hope so, I know I had a hulluva time creatin' the team pages, whew took somethin' like 3 or so hours for all of them. lol Talk about sore fingers lol. Look forward to workin' with you in the future on these pages. --Crash Underride 21:37, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it's been fun. You did a great job creating all the articles. Hopefully the league can catch on and stick around for a few years. I think they have a good basis. I think they did a good thing naming the teams "Michigan" and "Tennessee", etc. It's easier to identify than Detroit or Knoxville...we'll see though. X96lee15 (talk) 04:45, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you for adding the fair use rationale to Image:2006 ALCS Logo.png. — Steven Andrew Miller (talk) 14:27, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem. The "Image Deleting Bot" ran rampant through a bunch of articles in my watchlist so I knocked out a bunch of fair uses last night. — X96lee15 (talk) 14:51, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Jeff Stanis

In my opinion, no. In my opinion, the hoax portion of the G3 criteria shold only be used for really obvious fraudulent claims. The "Bob is a high school student and President of the United States and the Pope. His sweat cures cancer" level of hoax. Other admins may have other opinions. It is possible one of them will see this at PROD and decide to speedy it. It has happened to me in the past. If it happens, I certainly won't protest. Dsmdgold (talk) 05:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Sports trades

Until a deal has been finalized (i.e., received league approval and passed physicals) it is still unofficial and relevant team details should not be changed per WP:CRYSTAL. Thanks. --Madchester (talk) 21:20, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

See [2]. Nowhere in the article does it say the deal is "pending". I don't post transactions until they are reported by a newspaper or other media outlet. – X96lee15 (talk) 21:31, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

NBA draft pages

I see you edit these pages a lot.

Some random guy (DP80) totally messed with the colors of awards from NBA drafts 1980 onward. I'm fixing the stuff that's revert-able, and I hope you can take a look at the rest.

Thanks  Cdcon  22:55, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Oakland university logo.gif

While I appreciate you quickly adding the requested form to this page, you carelessly removed the detailed sourcing and verification information I had put on the page when I uploaded the image. I've re-added it. Please be more careful in the future -- we don't need to be in such a hurry... But, thanks in any case. JesseW, the juggling janitor 19:21, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Playboy's Top Party Schools 2006

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Playboy's Top Party Schools 2006, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 23:00, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Geno Ford

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Geno Ford, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://article.wn.com/view/2008/04/02/Geno_Ford_said_to_get_Kent_St_job_f. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 16:46, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Template:2007-08 Detroit Pistons season game log

Thanks for spotting my error and correcting it.--Crzycheetah 22:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Consistency?

You care about consistency in 2008 NBA Playoffs, but yet do whatever you like in Template:2007-08 Detroit Pistons playoff game log? Nothing is consistent about the log, and it is quite different from the other logs (wider score columns, W and L before the score). All the logs should have a common format, but the Detroit log, which you manage, stands out. A pitty. ● 8~Hype ^@ 20:13, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

The Pistons game log conforms to Wikipedia standards. It conforms to WP:COLOR, WP:LOGO/WP:FAIR and WP:MOS#Times, which none of the other game logs do. It's not my job nor my goal to make similar articles consistent, but for the articles I am interested in, I try my best to keep them to WP standards. I agree with you, all of the game logs should have a common format. However, that format should match Wikipedia standards.

On a side note, I'd appreciate more civility from you in edit summaries and on talk pages. — X96lee15 (talk) 20:28, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiCookie

Just stopping by with cookies for those editors who started new articles today. --Rosiestep (talk) 00:30, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Template:NBA season

Hey, can you maybe let it stay superscripted? It really doesn't look good when it's not, because basically you must only see the number. If it's not superscripted, the "st" etc. looks redundant and confuses. Basically, it can be removed at all, but I want to keep it small (superscripted). Let's agree on something. I really haven't touched your Detroit articles, so let's keep this my way. ;) I really don't want any disputes over this. ● 8~Hype ^@ 17:36, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

By the way, this format was agreed upon. And please don't act like I don't understand anything (edit summary). ● 8~Hype ^@ 12:03, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

For future reference, "consensus" shouldn't be reached on someone's talk page. That only allows people to who are watching the talk page to know what's going on. Also, consensus can't be reached by only one person. You're the only one with any input in the section you referred me to. As far as the edit summary you pointed me to, I'm not sure what you're talking about. I removed the "sup"s based on the Wikipedia Manual of Style.

All that being said, I don't care enough to continue discussing this. You think it looks better with superscripts, I think it looks better without. I'm also following the MOS. If you want to continue to sneak the "sup"s in under the guise of "test" edit summaries, so be it. — X96lee15 (talk) 14:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

5/11 DYK

On 11 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Matt Joyce (baseball), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Bedford 21:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Detroit Tigers Game Log

I noticed that you have reverted my edit which placed the Game Log in the main article 2008 Detroit Tigers season. The members of the Baseball WikiProject have decided here that it is more appropriate for the game log to be in the article itself, to make it easier to update. I understand your reasoning for the reversion, however we have decided that it is unnecessary to have a template just for one article. --Willy No1lakersfan (Talk - Contribs) 16:25, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw that discussion after I made the change. I had meant to ping you about my change, but it slipped my mind. The only reason I changed it was because duplicate info was in two places. I agree with having it inline in the article, but until the template is deleted, I think we should use the template to reduce chance of the information getting out of date/sync. — X96lee15 (talk) 17:26, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

CBB Schedule Entry

FYI, your edit to Template:CBB Schedule Entry messed up the way schedules were rendered on team pages. I went into a little more detail at Template Talk:CBB Schedule Entry. Is there a way we can clean it up, but still get the correct rendering? Hoof Hearted (talk) 18:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Hoof, I'd just ignore my change. I was trying to be careful when cleaning up the templates, but I forgot to go back and check to see if my change to this template messed anything up. — X96lee15 (talk) 21:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Template:NBA season

I have added stats from Basketball-Reference.com in the same way as in {{Infobox NBAretired}}. Are there any other mainstream sources for each team season dating back to 1946-47? ● 8~Hype ^@ 23:03, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, would "{{{year}}} statistics" look better than the current stats link? ● 8~Hype ^@ 07:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Woodling/Busbey coaches

The following articles Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Homer_E._Woodling were nominated for deletion. You are welcome to share your opinion on if they should be deleted or not. Thank you for your time. --SportsMaster (talk) 16:48, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Detroit Pistons

• Template:Detroit Pistons roster: Injuries are not transactions. It must be the date of the last transaction, which is March 4.
• 2007-08 Detroit Pistons season: The roster won't be changed there, as it is final. It is a substitute version of Template:Detroit Pistons roster.
• Template:2007-08 Detroit Pistons playoff game log, Template:2007-08 Detroit Pistons season game log, 2007-08 Detroit Pistons season: The own score always comes first, win or lose. Check this. ● 8~Hype ^@ 17:21, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

See Talk:2007-08 Detroit Pistons season — X96lee15 (talk) 17:25, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Detroit Tigers shortstops

Template:Detroit Tigers shortstops has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Cbl62 (talk) 16:34, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Bolding in the Michigan college football template

Hi, X96lee15. I hear what you are saying about the bolding used in those templates. However, the sets of the templates need to be consistent instead of just changing the michigan one and leaving the others. I have started a discussion at WT:CFB#Use of bolding in stadium templates about this formatting and would encourage you to swing by and express your thoughts so that a consensus can be reached for the entire group of templates. Until a consensus is reached that your proposed change should be made for all of the templates, I have reverted {{Michigan college football venues}} to its original prior (matching) state. Best wishes. --Gwguffey (talk) 05:05, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

fyi, I posted an experiment you should look at and comment on in this thread. --Gwguffey (talk) 05:15, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:OWN and Boston Celtic/NBA articles

You have to remember not every one of your edits are the "right" edit and not every one of other people's edits are "wrong". You are not the final authority on articles involving the Boston Celtics and the NBA. Your reverting of my and other editors edits make Wikipedia editors not want to participate in improving article. That may be your goal, but it is not the goal for Wikipedia.

Regarding my edits on the Lakers-Celtics rivalry article, it is not correct that you keep reverting. Because the 2008 matchup is "ongoing", neither team should be in the "champion" or "opponent" column. You should also take things to a talk page before getting into edit wars. — X96lee15 (talk) 15:34, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Does it really matter right now? The Celtics will finish off the Lakers in just 36 more hours. And as I said, the word "ongoing" cancels the column names, because it is clear that neither team is the champion. ● 8~Hype ^@ 16:27, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

You're totally missing the point. Your way is not the always the right way. You flaunt Wikipedia rules because it's not what you want to do. — X96lee15 (talk) 17:22, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Mr/Ms 8-Hype seems to be at it again; he seems to be reverting good-faith edits to the Ray Allen article as well, as you can see by perusing the edit history. I don't know what to do here, so if you can help, or need anything from me, please leave a message on my talk page. Samer (talk) 02:59, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

His/her edits are continued, and now s/he claims s/he has "(changed very poorly written text, removed biases)". Again, any help or guidance you can provide would be greatly appreciated. Samer (talk) 19:35, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry you've had to deal with him/her Samer. It's unfortunate when editors make decisions on what is "right" and "wrong" in articles without any input from anyone else or without any regard to Wikipedia standards. Unfortunately, I'm not very well versed with Wikipedia policies on this type of matter. I do know he/she has violated the WP:MOS in many instances in the past. If the edits are contrary to that document, then I'd use that as a basis to revert changes. Also, I'd make sure all your edits are referenced. It's tough to back removal of sourced facts. If neither of those work, then I've seen people use the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard for extreme cases. I would venture to say this could be in the group of cases that would fit on the noticeboard. Hope I've helped! — X96lee15 (talk) 20:01, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Detroit draft picks

Template:Detroit Pistons roster

Detroit acquired Walter Sharpe and Trent Plaisted from Seattle in exchange for the draft rights to D.J. White. Click here.

Template:Detroit Pistons current roster

The current roster only includes players under contract, and until Sharpe, Plaisted and Washington are signed, they shouldn't appear on that template. Also, free agents such as Ratliff have to be removed. ● 8~Hype ^@ 15:47, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm just basing the Wikipedia rosters off the roster on the Pistons web site. Wikipedia doesn't have to be factual, it just has to match its references. I also think both rosters (the team roster and the current roster) should match. There shouldn't be different rules for each. — X96lee15 (talk) 16:30, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

But {{Detroit Pistons roster}} actually has an option for notes like FA or DP, whereas {{Detroit Pistons current roster}} doesn't. That's why {{Detroit Pistons current roster}} should only feature players under contract.

2008–09 Detroit Pistons season

There is a special trades section for trades. No need to mentioned it twice in the same article. ● 8~Hype ^@ 16:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there is a separate section for trades. However, there is no need to remove the information in the NBA Draft section, as it relates to the NBA Draft and includes references. As the article exists now, it appears that the Pistons have the draft rights to DJ White and there's no mention of the other two guys they got in return until the end. Ideally, articles should include more text than tables and lists. Please discuss here before you continue reverting productive edits. — X96lee15 (talk) 17:08, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

You know that the mention of two exactly alike facts is excessive, right? In the draft pick section, it shortly mentions where Detroit's pick was traded, and if one would like to know more, he would go to the trades section. Also, the draft pick section is about Detroit's picks, which were White and Washington, and there is no need to mention Sharpe and Plaisted, since they were Seattle's picks and are included in Seattle's season article. ● 8~Hype ^@ 17:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the facts are the same. But, like I said earlier, articles should not be only tables. At this point, most of the 08-09 NBA team articles are just lists. Adding a paragraph that is closely tied to the NBA draft, even though the information is later in the article, improves the article. — X96lee15 (talk) 17:25, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Ignoring Wikipedia rules again

Regarding, 2008–09 Detroit Pistons season, you continue to ignore Wikipedia rules. References to D. J. White should include the space between the "D." and the "J." per this: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names)#Exceptions. "DJ" is his "common" name, per www.nba.com and countless other sources. However, as noted above, the WP MOS says people with initials as "first names" should include a space between the initials. — X96lee15 (talk) 17:03, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

However, "D.J." is not an abbreviation of his first and second names and therefore is an official name used by the NBA. You also said that Wikipedia is based on references and sources, and the official source says it's "D.J.". ● 8~Hype ^@ 17:09, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the sources say White's common name is "D.J.". That is the information that is used to make up Wikipedia. However, the WP:MOS defines the rules on how that information should be presented. That is why the proper way to reference DJ White on Wikipedia is "D. J. White". — X96lee15 (talk) 17:19, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

However, WP:NCP: The name of an article should be "the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things". ● 8~Hype ^@ 05:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I've replied on the talk page

While I still disagree on Mayo, as he uses the unusual punctuation as his proper name, I agree whole-heartedly on all of the other ambiguous draft picks. If there is any confusion at all, the space should be employed. Keep up the good work. y'american (wtf?) 01:33, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

J.J. Hickson

I made a comment on the J.J. Hickson talk page about the naming of the article. After seeing that you recently moved the article from J.J. Hickson to J. J. Hickson, I checked out your talk page and saw that you've been doing this sort of thing a lot. You usually reference WP:NCP in your edit, but you seem to be blatantly neglecting the central principle of that page:

the name of an article should be "the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things

The key point here being the most common name of a person. Hickson is most commonly (if not always) referred to as J.J., not J. J. I gave the example of his NBA Draft page, but if you do a simple Google search for Hickson, you'll see that every single credible hit (except his Wikipedia article, notably) refers to him as J.J.; nowhere is he referred to as J. J. His article should be moved back to J.J. Hickson as that is how he is most commonly known. MTR (talk) 15:40, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't notice your message on Hickson's talk page, or I would have already responded. Yes, I reference WP:NCP, but specifically the Wikipedia:NCP#Middle names and abbreviated names section, which show that abbreviated names should have spaces between the abbreviated letters. Hickson's is most commonly referred to as "JJ" as opposed to whatever it stands for. However, Wikipedia has its own style conventions, and that says there should be a space between the letters. I took this issue a few weeks ago to get a clearer interpretation here and here. Hope that clears my intentions up. — X96lee15 (talk) 15:56, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I've read the discussions at the two links you've posted and there seems to be absolutely no consensus either way. And no, Hickson is not most commonly referred to as "JJ". Like I said in my previous comment, ever single credible source refers to him as "J.J.", this includes NBA.com, ESPN.com, Scout.com, and Sportsline.com. In light of no consensus being reached thus far, I see absolutely no reason why the only guideline we have in the matter (that persons on Wikipedia be referred to by their most common name) be violated and the page moved. There is no reason for his page to be located at "J. J. Hickson", that is not his name and he is seldom, if ever, referred to as such.MTR (talk) 22:30, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

When I say "JJ", I mean all forms ("JJ", "J.J." and "J. J."). I do not disagree that he is commonly referred to as one of those forms. That's where WP:NCP says to use the most common form ("JJ", "J.J." and "J. J."). But WP:NCP also says that whenever you use abbreviations in a persons name, they are to be seperated by a space. That's why "J. J." is the form that should be used. Each website you listed has it's own style conventions that do not put a space between the letters. However, Wikipedia states that a space should be between the letters; that is why "J. J. Hickson" is the correct form here. — X96lee15 (talk) 04:59, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Spaces

The spaces are not necessary, none of the others have them, they are pointless and dont do anything--Yankees10 16:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't matter that none of the other templates have the spaces. It's my opinion that they all should have spaces since it makes the information much easier to read with the parameters and values vertically-aligned. I'd also guess that any newly-retired player does have spaces since the empty form on template documentation uses spaces:

{{Infobox MLB retired | name = | bgcolor1 = | textcolor1 = | bgcolor2 = | textcolor2 = | image = | width = | caption = | position = | birthdate = | deathdate = | bats = | throws = | debutdate = | debutyear = | debutteam = | finaldate = | finalyear = | finalteam = | stat1label = | stat1value = | stat2label = | stat2value = | stat3label = | stat3value = | teams = | highlights = | hofdate = | hofvote = | hofmethod = }}

This discussion should probably occur at Template talk:Infobox MLB retired to get a wider opinion. — X96lee15 (talk) 16:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Forget the whole thing i'm not going to waste my time for just two out of hundreds--Yankees10 16:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Template:NBA season

In the 50's there was an "Eastern Division", which was shortened to "Eastern". Therefore, the "Eastern Conference" is shortened to "East". Stop doing meaningless edits. ● 8~Hype ^@ 16:00, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Started section on talk page. Please show civility and do not call my edits meaningless. — X96lee15 (talk) 16:03, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Bottom 10

Thank you for your concerns on the notability of Bottom 10. The Wikipedia:WikiProject College football welcomes discussions and collaboration on issues surrounding college football. You can read and discuss notability issues of college football at the College Football Notability essay.

The College Football project considers notability discussions of existing articles in the project a priority. While the project maintains in good faith that the article does indeed meet notability standards, we will begin additional work to improve the article in question through addressing specific concerns, providing more details, and supplying stronger sources as much as is appropriate. In return, we ask that you consider our essay on notability. If you feel an article needs a specific improvement, please feel free to make those changes yourself.--Paul McDonald (talk) 17:06, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Added lots of changes, sources, and a logo. Please inspect and if it meets your approval, remove the tags. If you desire more or wish to discuss, please let me know!--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:24, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Paul, thanks for contacting me about the article. I've removed the notability tag as there are enough non-ESPN references to establish its notability. I'm still not 100% sold on the notability since it's just a "poll" created by one "writer" on a sports website (albeit a very large sports website), just as I'm not sold on the notability of Directional Michigan (but I wasn't around for the AFD of that article) since it is a term that originated (as far as I can tell), from the Bottom 10 "poll". — X96lee15 (talk) 16:57, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello

Can you please fix up the 2008-09 LA Clippers season over here It really is out of whack at the bottom, hopefully you can help. Thanks Monster Under Your Bed ^(talk) 02:54, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Should be all set now. Was just missing a "|}" to end the table. — X96lee15 (talk) 03:12, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Yovani Gallardo Image

I have an image that I took of Yovani Gallardo that I would like to contribute but I am unable to upload it. Let me know what I can do to put the image on Yovani's page. Thank you! Brewers2017 (talk) 15:27, 6 August 2008 (UTC) Brewers2017

Notability of 2011 Kansas State Wildcats football team

Thank you for your concerns on the notability of 2011 Kansas State Wildcats football team. The Wikipedia:WikiProject College football welcomes discussions and collaboration on issues surrounding college football. You can read and discuss notability issues of college football at the College Football Notability essay.

The College Football project considers notability discussions of existing articles in the project a priority. While the project maintains in good faith that the article does indeed meet notability standards, we will begin additional work to improve the article in question through addressing specific concerns, providing more details, and supplying stronger sources as much as is appropriate. In return, we ask that you consider our essay on notability. If you feel an article needs a specific improvement, please feel free to make those changes yourself.--Paul McDonald (talk) 11:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

NBA season by team templates

I very well understand that your version is consistent with 50 other templates, but the league didn't have 30 teams until 2004. Before 2004-05, the league was split into six divisions, and not only is it now possible to have it in columns, it also looks much better. I would have done the same with all other templates if it was possible, but it isn't, because the league had 29, 27, 25, etc. teams at times, so that it couldn't be split in columns. Also, my version has been in use since May 2008. So why don't you want to have those 5 templates in columns? ● 8~Hype ^@ 07:37, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I think that when the template is in columns, at first glance, a reader thinks that the vertical columns are the teams within a division. For example, when looking at this version: [3], it could be determined that Boston, Chicago, Atlanta, Dallas, Denver and Golden State are related in some way. That obviously isn't the case, but the average reader may interpret that.

The other thing is that the non-columned version uses the {{navbox}} template while the columned version uses a table of the navbox class. The navbox template is easier to read and edit (although these templates will probably not be edited much). That was the original reason why I changed them to to the non-columned version. I really don't care though what version we use. — X96lee15 (talk) 00:37, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Curious math...

Hmmmm on Simon F. Pauxtis, you changed the win ratio from .500 to .528. With 90 wins, 80 losses, and 10 ties, that's 90 wins out of 180 games, or .500... that's how I've always calculated the win ratio. Just wondering what method you are doing (or otherwise interpreting the ratio?)--Paul McDonald (talk) 16:38, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

My formula is as such: (wins + (ties/2)) / (wins + losses + ties). I'm pretty sure that's the same formula the NFL uses (the only major sport with ties and winning percentages). I don't think a tie should be equivalent to a loss. It doesn't seem to me that a person with a 90-90 record should have the same winning percentage as a person with a 90-80-10 record. I'm curious if the NCAA lists winning percentages and how they calculate it. — X96lee15 (talk) 16:44, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the winning percentage article lists no references. — X96lee15 (talk) 16:48, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Interesting... probably worth a discusson on "which unit of measure should be used" ... sometime... later... maybe... if we're up to it...

To me, a "winning percentage" means "percentage of games resulting in a win" which would also mean one could calculate a "losing percentage" and a "tie percentage" if one wanted to (okay, the "original resarch" gang is gonna come have a field day with this one). And in calculating a "winning percentage" a game is either a "win" or "not a win" and no weighting would be given for a tie as being "half a win" or "half a game" -- probably my statistics background rearing its ugly head!

Thanks though! I'm cool with it!--Paul McDonald (talk) 16:56, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Again?

Why do you always ask for trouble? Why do you always think you know better than somebody else? In Template:2008–09 Detroit Pistons depth chart, and all other team depth charts, only 12 players are allowed on the active list; also, Rasheed Wallace has started at Center in at least the last two games, check the NBA.com box scores. And don't use ESPN.com as source, because their depth chart are different from the depth charts on Wikipedia. As for Template:NBA depth chart, "2nd" and "3rd" don't define anything, but "bench" is a common term for the second unit, and "reserve" for players who are used sparingly but are on the active roster, because players who aren't on the active roster are in the "inactive" column. ● 8~Hype ^@ 18:48, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

What source are you using for the depth charts? I'm willing to keep it up to date with espn.com, yahoo.com, etc. I'd use nba.com, but I don't see depth charts there. It's original research to use the box scores to generate the depth charts. I've never heard of the terms "reserve" and "bench" when used to distinguish players. However, 2nd and 3rd string is pretty intuitive. Take a breath, relax. — X96lee15 (talk) 18:53, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I started discussion Template talk:NBA depth chart so greater visibility can be seen on the discussion. — X96lee15 (talk) 18:59, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Please don't change Template:2008–09 Detroit Pistons depth chart just like that. There are only 12 players on an active roster. ● 8~Hype ^@ 19:33, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Not in the preseason. There are no inactive players until the regular season. — X96lee15 (talk) 19:41, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Template:Bowling Green Falcons men's ice hockey roster

Thanks for making a template for the roster! Also I noticed that Maxwell is no longer a Captain and Svendsen and Schmidt are Assistant Captains. After this was changed by another user I reverted the edits becuase I couldn't find proof from the BG official roster/website, CCHA roster/website. Is there anywhere that is reporting this change?Bhockey10 (talk) 04:13, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Spaces pt. 2

Having those spaces in the infobox are pointless and ridiculous, they dont do anything, just because YOU think they are helpfull doesnt mean that thats how it should go. Seriousley you edit baseball articles what once every couple of weeks, I dont see why you care, you just want to be a pain and start trouble for no reason at all--Yankees10 16:05, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

The spaces, IMO, make the templates easier to read instead of everything being bunched together. Obviously this is a difference of opinion between the two of us. That's why I've proposed (now and in the past), to take it to WP:MLB. Also, it doesn't matter how often I edit baseball articles and I'm not trying to be a "pain". I'm just trying to make Wikipedia better for readers and editors. That comment of yours screams of WP:OWN. — X96lee15 (talk) 16:09, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Taking it to WP:MLB would be pointless, I mean we could still do it, but it is not even an issue that is a big deal, if they thaught the colors on the infobox werent a big deal, they are no way going to think this is.--Yankees10 17:25, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

2008-09 Bowling Green Falcons men's ice hockey season

Sorry about moving your comments on the 2008-09 Bowling Green Falcons men's ice hockey season deletion page. I figured it was out of place, because it's a reply to the wrong individual/out of place. — Hucz ^{(talk · contribs)} 21:33, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Recommended move of Bear Bryant to "Paul Bryant"

I have recommended moving (renaming) the Bear Bryant article to Paul Bryant, since this is an encyclopedic site it seems to me that Coach Bryant's real name would be more appropriate. I would appreciate it though, since you are a regular editor of the article, to include your opinion in the (discussion) of the pending move. Thanks! Rtr10 (talk) 23:07, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Just a Note on Formatting Standings...

When a team is ranked, as is the case with Ball State in the MAC football standings, the ranking is to be placed inside the link, such as [[2008 Ball State Cardinals football team|# 14 Ball State]] as seen here unwikilinked. Your edits on the Ball State rankings are incorrect and I have fixed it to the newer standards. NoseNuggets (talk) 11;11 PM US EST Nov 23 2008.

I disagree. It doesn't make any sense to put it inside the link as the ranking isn't a part of the team's name. And the "newer standard"? Where'd that come from? — X96lee15 (talk) 04:12, 24 November 2008 (UTC)