User talk:Achowat/Archive 6
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Achowat. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
Thanks!
'~) <--that's a wink!--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 19:00, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Try {{smiley}}; there's a "wink" parameter. Achowat (talk) 19:14, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Verrry cool!
--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 21:59, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Verrry cool!
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
"Crest" changes
Hi Achowat, I just wondered where you gained consensus for making such a number of changes based on your own edit that "crest" is an erroneous term for a team badge? I would have thought this kind of project-wide change would have deserved a discussion at WP:FOOTBALL, although I may have missed it? I think you should stop your mass edits until we get such a consensus. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:24, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, I've opened a discussion on your mass changes at the project talk page. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:31, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- Finally, a number of your changes have been simply to fix redirects, so could I direct you to WP:NOTBROKEN please? Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:36, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- I was being bold and making the changes based on my understanding of both football and heraldry. If a consensus is established in opposition to that (and yes, I looked into the archives at WP:FOOTBALL and on the relevant article pages for a discussion, to no result) I'd be more than happy to fix what I have 'broken'. I'll be fully involved in that discussion, but as there were no templates or any-such thing involved in the change, I deemed the move not reckless. As for this diff, I can assure you that no offense was meant to the badges of any clubs, simply that Crest is often taken (incorrectly) to refer to an entire Coat of Arms and that club badges are referred to as "crests" based on this Heraldic misunderstanding. If you, or anyone else, prefers the articles the other way, feel free to change them back, and then we'll talk about which is better. Thank you, and Cheers! Achowat (talk) 18:21, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not going to mass-revert you but I want you to engage with the community at WT:FOOTBALL to explain your unilateral decision-making. Many official club websites here in the UK refer to the emblem on the shirt as a "crest". Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:26, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- Already there, we'll continue this conversation at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#"Crest" v "Badge" (link mostly for any Talk Page-stalkers out there). Cheers! Achowat (talk) 18:36, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not going to mass-revert you but I want you to engage with the community at WT:FOOTBALL to explain your unilateral decision-making. Many official club websites here in the UK refer to the emblem on the shirt as a "crest". Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:26, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- I was being bold and making the changes based on my understanding of both football and heraldry. If a consensus is established in opposition to that (and yes, I looked into the archives at WP:FOOTBALL and on the relevant article pages for a discussion, to no result) I'd be more than happy to fix what I have 'broken'. I'll be fully involved in that discussion, but as there were no templates or any-such thing involved in the change, I deemed the move not reckless. As for this diff, I can assure you that no offense was meant to the badges of any clubs, simply that Crest is often taken (incorrectly) to refer to an entire Coat of Arms and that club badges are referred to as "crests" based on this Heraldic misunderstanding. If you, or anyone else, prefers the articles the other way, feel free to change them back, and then we'll talk about which is better. Thank you, and Cheers! Achowat (talk) 18:21, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- Finally, a number of your changes have been simply to fix redirects, so could I direct you to WP:NOTBROKEN please? Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:36, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
The Signpost: 27 February 2012
- News and notes: Finance meeting fallout, Gardner recommendations forthcoming
- Recent research: Gender gap and conflict aversion; collaboration on breaking news; effects of leadership on participation; legacy of Public Policy Initiative
- Discussion report: Focus on admin conduct and editor retention
- WikiProject report: Just don't call it "sci-fi": WikiProject Science Fiction
- Arbitration report: Final decision in TimidGuy ban appeal, one case remains open
- Technology report: 1.19 deployment stress, Meta debates whether to enforce SUL
March 2012 Move-to-Commons drive
 | Hi there! I thought you might be interested in the WikiProject Images and Media's March 2012 Moving files to commons drive. We'll be trying to reduce the backlog size by over 10,000 files so we need your help! Hard-working participants in the drive will receive awards for their contributions! If you have a spare moment, please join and move a file or two, or tell other users. Thanks so much! Note: The drive officially starts in 12 years ago, but you can sign up now! |  |
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Images and Media at 07:36, 29 February 2012 (UTC).
Talkback
Hello. You have a new message at User_talk:Benzband#Another_one.21.3F's talk page. benzband (talk) 20:16, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
USMNT kits
I was just including the home and third kits in the table for completeness' sake. They're still included in the infobox. --Kevin W./Talk•CFB uniforms/Talk 21:30, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- The whole Kit Gallery idea seems like a pretty poor choice, anyway (per the Manual of Style), but if we're going to have one, it should only be historic kits, which is why they're not already there. The goal shouldn't be to show every shirt ever (the gallery is notably incomplete), but to show an "Evolution" of our distinctive style (which, since we don't have one, the Gallery can't possibly succeed at). Cheers! Achowat (talk) 21:33, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Barnstar Barnstar
|
The Barnstar Barnstar | |
| For consistently participating and helping on the talkpage of Wikiproject Wikipedia Awards. Pinetalk 22:02, 29 February 2012 (UTC) |
- Thank you, sir; your kind words are appreciated. Achowat (talk) 13:18, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
WikiCup 2012 February newsletter
Round 1 is already over! The 64 highest scorers have progressed to round 2. Our highest scorer was 
Grapple X (submissions), again thanks mostly to a swathe of good articles on The X-Files. In second place was 
Tigerboy1966 (submissions), thanks an impressive list of did you knows about racehorses. Both scored over 400 points. Following behind with over 300 points were 
Ruby2010 (submissions), 
Cwmhiraeth (submissions), 
Miyagawa (submissions) and 
Casliber (submissions). February also saw the competition's first featured list: List of colleges and universities in North Dakota, from Ruby2010 (submissions). At the other end of the scale, 11 points was enough to secure a place in this round, and some contestants with 10 points made it into the round on a tiebreaker. This is higher than the 8 points that were needed last year, but lower than the 20 points required the year before. The number of points required to progress to round 3 will be significantly higher.
The remaining contestants have been split into 8 pools of 8, named A through H. Round two will finish in two months time on 28 April, when the two highest scorers in each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers, will progress to round 3. The pools were entirely random, so while some pools may end up being more competitive than others, this is by chance rather than design.
The judges would like to point out two quick rules reminders. First, any content promoted during the interim period (that is, on or after 27 February) is eligible for points in round 2. Second, any content worked on significantly this year is eligible for points if promoted in this round. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which would otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:50, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
User:Dark Laughter
Hello, Achowat. I have replied to you at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Dark Laughter. Please reconsider your vote. Polisher of Cobwebs (talk) 04:25, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- I have responded there, thank you. Achowat (talk) 13:18, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Barnstar
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Algarve Cup
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
The Signpost: 05 March 2012
- News and notes: Chapter-selected Board seats, an invite to the Teahouse, patrol becomes triage, and this week in history
- In the news: Heights reached in search rankings, privacy and mental health info; clouds remain over content policing
- Discussion report: COI and NOTCENSORED: policies under discussion
- WikiProject report: We don't bite: WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles
- Featured content: Best of the week
- Arbitration report: AUSC appointments announced, one case remains open
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:01, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
WikiProject Kentucky
I made some of the changes we talked about to the Kentucky project. I am having a little trouble with a red border showing up but other than that I got a lot of it figured out I think. ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 14:56, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
- I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Perhaps a link to the discussion we were having would help? Achowat (talk) 23:07, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
- DOH! I'm sorry I somehow messed up the names. I was thinking of Acdixon. Sorry about that. Please disregard. ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 23:38, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Deleted Hal Glassman, Legion of Merit and Jewish Americans in the Military
Please do not delete my listing under "Legion of Merit" and "Jewish Americans in the Military" again. You know nothing about my military history and service which is "notable" by any standard. You do not need to be my editor and make decisions for which you have no knowledge. I was awarded the Legion of Merit and cited the orders when it was posted to Wikipedia. That should be more than sufficient for proof to be listed under "Legion of Merit" recipients. As for other notable achievements, I am the 12th recipient in the 32-year history of the Department of Defense Public Affairs Hall of Fame (inducted in 2006) and served in the infantry for more than 32 years including during two wars and three combat expeditions. I also was assigned to four years at the Pentagon in key leadership roles involving Army policy. At the risk of not sounding humble, I believe my military background is sufficiently notable to be listed in Wikipedia. Respectfully, Hal Glassman 1Doodle (talk) 15:13, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- Hal, I understand that you feel pride for your distinguished service. As an American myself, I can say that I have nothing but the fullest respect for the service of all veterans, especially when it rises to the level required for awards such as the Legion of Merit. However, on Wikipedia, our general notability guidelines require a very specific set of pre-requisites to be available before inclusion. Specifically, a topic needs to have recieved significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Do you have examples of such coverage? Perhaps news articles concerning your Army Service. If such coverage exists, by all means you should have an article in the Encyclopedia and I'll volunteer to help you craft that. Just let me know. Cheers! Achowat (talk) 15:24, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- Dear Achowat, Thank you for your message about documentation. This method of communication is not easy for me. If there is a way for me to talk to you via email and send you an attachment, our communication would be simplified. If you give me your regular email address, I will be glad to send you an attachment that should satify your requirment. Short of that, please go to "Bing," (not Google!) and type in my name. One of the listing will include the official documentation from the website "DINFOS" which is the Department of Defense Information School, the proponent agency that decides inductees in the DOD Public Affairs Hall of Fame. You will see my name at the bottom of the list because I was the 12th and most recent inductee in 2006 which signifies how selective the process and the amount of people in the Hall of Fame is. I can not imagine what other proof you would require after seeing the DOD - DINFOS page and my citing permanent orders from US Army Pacific Command awarding the Legion of Merit to me. Respectfully, 1Doodle (talk) 15:38, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- You can email me using Wikipedia's email functionality by clicking the "Email this User" button on the left-side taskbar on this page. Though I should state that no one is doubting your claims of being a Jewish-American veteran having been awarded the Legion of Merit. The real discussion that we're having is whether that information is worth including in the encyclopedia. Essentially, if you opened a paper encyclopedia to the article on the Legion of Merit, would you expect to see a list of every awardee with similiar credentials? Our goal should not be to list everything that is true, but rather to find what is notable and list it in a way that is best for the reader. I'll take a look at your source, but I severly doubt that your inclusion here is notability enough for inclusion, given that the only other inductee to that Hall with articles is an MOH recipient with significant coverage in reliable sources. Achowat (talk) 15:56, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- Dear Achowat: Regarding your most recent response, however restricitive you set the criteria, I do believe my background singles me out for inclusion on both Wikipedia pages. I am not suggesting that every colonel and general, many of whom are awarded the Legion of Merit as members of the "old pals club," be listed. But that's not me. You would go a long way to find a sergeant major who is awarded a Legion of Merit, a decoration reserved for many senior officers. As for the DOD Public Affairs Hall of Fame, only 12 inductees in more than 32 years of existence of the award speaks to the highly selective criteria. When you combine awarding a Legion of Merit to a sergeant major and induction into any DOD branch Hall of Fame and narrow down both notable acts of recognition with how many career Jewish soldiers are in the Army in the last 50 years, I think you are going to find a short list in the low single digits. Without delving into my infantry combat record, it seems intuitively logical to me that this should be an easy decision for you to reach in my favor for both Wikipedia listings. I have the attachment to send you for the DOD Public Affairs Hall of Fame but I have no clue how to get it to you unless you send me a normal email address. This method of communication is very difficult for me. Resectfully, 1Doodle (talk) 16:17, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- As I've stated before, you can email me simply by clicking the "E-mail this user" button on the left side of the screen, or by clicking the Envelope icon on the upper-right hand corner of this page. What you seem to not be grasping is that the standards for inclusion are not based on merit nor exclusivity, but based on the simple standard "significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject". Please take a look at WP:N and specifically WP:LISTPEOPLE. I think those pages will help you understand the guidelines and policies in play here. Achowat (talk) 16:26, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- Dear Achowat: Regarding your most recent response, however restricitive you set the criteria, I do believe my background singles me out for inclusion on both Wikipedia pages. I am not suggesting that every colonel and general, many of whom are awarded the Legion of Merit as members of the "old pals club," be listed. But that's not me. You would go a long way to find a sergeant major who is awarded a Legion of Merit, a decoration reserved for many senior officers. As for the DOD Public Affairs Hall of Fame, only 12 inductees in more than 32 years of existence of the award speaks to the highly selective criteria. When you combine awarding a Legion of Merit to a sergeant major and induction into any DOD branch Hall of Fame and narrow down both notable acts of recognition with how many career Jewish soldiers are in the Army in the last 50 years, I think you are going to find a short list in the low single digits. Without delving into my infantry combat record, it seems intuitively logical to me that this should be an easy decision for you to reach in my favor for both Wikipedia listings. I have the attachment to send you for the DOD Public Affairs Hall of Fame but I have no clue how to get it to you unless you send me a normal email address. This method of communication is very difficult for me. Resectfully, 1Doodle (talk) 16:17, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- You can email me using Wikipedia's email functionality by clicking the "Email this User" button on the left-side taskbar on this page. Though I should state that no one is doubting your claims of being a Jewish-American veteran having been awarded the Legion of Merit. The real discussion that we're having is whether that information is worth including in the encyclopedia. Essentially, if you opened a paper encyclopedia to the article on the Legion of Merit, would you expect to see a list of every awardee with similiar credentials? Our goal should not be to list everything that is true, but rather to find what is notable and list it in a way that is best for the reader. I'll take a look at your source, but I severly doubt that your inclusion here is notability enough for inclusion, given that the only other inductee to that Hall with articles is an MOH recipient with significant coverage in reliable sources. Achowat (talk) 15:56, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- Dear Achowat, Thank you for your message about documentation. This method of communication is not easy for me. If there is a way for me to talk to you via email and send you an attachment, our communication would be simplified. If you give me your regular email address, I will be glad to send you an attachment that should satify your requirment. Short of that, please go to "Bing," (not Google!) and type in my name. One of the listing will include the official documentation from the website "DINFOS" which is the Department of Defense Information School, the proponent agency that decides inductees in the DOD Public Affairs Hall of Fame. You will see my name at the bottom of the list because I was the 12th and most recent inductee in 2006 which signifies how selective the process and the amount of people in the Hall of Fame is. I can not imagine what other proof you would require after seeing the DOD - DINFOS page and my citing permanent orders from US Army Pacific Command awarding the Legion of Merit to me. Respectfully, 1Doodle (talk) 15:38, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Achowat:
I clicked on the "email this user" link. I see where I can write an email to you. But it does not allow me to add an attachment. I have documentation to forward you. Hal Glassman 1Doodle (talk) 16:41, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- Hal, I've tried to do this as diplomatically as possible, but the facts of the matter are that your service and status do not fulfill WP:GNG or WP:LISTPEOPLE. If you have a reliable source that is independent of the subject that gives you significant coverage, we could have something to talk about. But a DoD citation about inclusion in the Hall of Fame of a subset of a subset of a subset of the US Army will not, by itself, establish notability. If you absolutely need to email me the attachment (which, to save you time, I sincerely doubt will help make your case), just send an email using the Wikipedia functionality and I will respond from my person address. Achowat (talk) 17:10, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
List of American and Canadian champs (per BigSoccer)
Are you referring to the 'Overall Totals' table? If so, the initial sentiment was that there's five accomplishments, here's each team that's done them. However, the USOC and the Voyageurs certainly do have different levels of difficulty and prestige, and the table makes Montreal look like one of the behemoths of North American soccer when they're not. It would make sense, make things more accurate, to separate the two. I had also been considering giving defunct teams their own table, but perhaps that would be too cluttered, particularly if the US and Canadian teams are going to be split. -- Fifty7 (talk) 16:17, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- I meant keeping them on the same page. Why not have a List of American soccer champions and List of Canadian soccer champions, I guess is my question. Achowat (talk) 16:26, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. The original title of the article was 'List of North American soccer champions,' before another editor made the case that such a title would imply the inclusion of Mexico. I always just considered the two countries to be a singular whole when it came to professional sports leagues, similar to MLB, the NHL, and NBA (and should they ever expand north of the border, the NFL). And since both countries share the same top-division league, both back in the day and now, it just never occurred to me to separate the two. -- Fifty7 (talk) 16:33, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, football-wise MLS is just weird, and whether Canada even has a "First Division" (as defined by FIFA) is tricky at its heart. When you say "back in the day", I'm going to assume you mean during the old NASL. Did a Canadian team ever win the NASL title, either of them? Achowat (talk) 17:10, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- Yep, Toronto Metros-Croatia won in 1976 and Vancouver Whitecaps won it in 1979. No Canadian team finished with the best regular season record. -- Fifty7 (talk) 17:32, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- Well, that complicates things. I guess the two combined is the only real way to go. Achowat (talk) 17:34, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- Yep, Toronto Metros-Croatia won in 1976 and Vancouver Whitecaps won it in 1979. No Canadian team finished with the best regular season record. -- Fifty7 (talk) 17:32, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, football-wise MLS is just weird, and whether Canada even has a "First Division" (as defined by FIFA) is tricky at its heart. When you say "back in the day", I'm going to assume you mean during the old NASL. Did a Canadian team ever win the NASL title, either of them? Achowat (talk) 17:10, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. The original title of the article was 'List of North American soccer champions,' before another editor made the case that such a title would imply the inclusion of Mexico. I always just considered the two countries to be a singular whole when it came to professional sports leagues, similar to MLB, the NHL, and NBA (and should they ever expand north of the border, the NFL). And since both countries share the same top-division league, both back in the day and now, it just never occurred to me to separate the two. -- Fifty7 (talk) 16:33, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
The Signpost: 12 March 2012
- Interview: Liaising with the Education Program
- Women and Wikipedia: Women's history, what we're missing, and why it matters
- Arbitration analysis: A look at new arbitrators
- Discussion report: Nothing changes as long discussions continue
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Women's History
- Featured content: Extinct humans, birds, and Birdman
- Arbitration report: Proposed decision in 'Article titles', only one open case
- Education report: Diverse approaches to Wikipedia in Education
The Signpost: 19 March 2012
- News and notes: Chapters Council proposals take form as research applications invited for Wikipedia Academy and HighBeam accounts
- Discussion report: Article Rescue Squadron in need of rescue yet again
- WikiProject report: Lessons from another Wikipedia: Czech WikiProject Protected Areas
- Featured content: Featured content on the upswing!
- Arbitration report: Race and intelligence 'review' opened, Article titles at voting
The Signpost: 26 March 2012
- News and notes: Controversial content saga continues, while the Foundation tries to engage editors with merchandising and restructuring
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Rock Music
- Featured content: Malfunctioning sharks, toothcombs and a famous mother: featured content for the week
- Arbitration report: Race and intelligence review at evidence, article titles closed
- Recent research: Predicting admin elections; studying flagged revision debates; classifying editor interactions; and collecting the Wikipedia literature
- Education report: Universities unite for GLAM; and High Schools get their due.
| | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Achowat. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |