User talk:Giants27/Archives/2009/June

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 Wikipedia: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) 13:39, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Terrence Wheatley

On June 1, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Terrence Wheatley, 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.

Jamie^☆S93 14:22, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks and will see you on the ballfield

I would like to thank you for coming out and participating in my Request for Adminship, which closed unsuccessfully at (48/8/6) based on my withdrawal. I withdrew because in my opinion I need to focus on problems with my content contributions before I can proceed with expanding my responsibilities. Overall I feel that the RfA has improved me as an editor and in turn some articles which in my eyes is successful. I am sure that we will see each other at more minor league AfDs in the future, thank you again for your support. Cheers and happy editing. --kelapstick (talk) 17:50, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 1 June 2009

• From the editor: Browsing the archives
• Book review: Review of The Future of the Internet
• Scientology: End of Scientology arbitration brings blocks, media coverage
• News and notes: Picture of the Year, Wikipedia's first logo, Board elections, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Tamil Wikipedia, Internet Watch Foundation, and more
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

A format error in Queue#Prep_area_2

Hi Giants27. I am not sure, if you the right person to contact about this error, but the second hook does not start from a new line here. If you are not the right person, maybe you know who is. Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:24, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Looks like it was fixed I just forgot to put a {{*mp}} in front of it.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 22:51, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK preparation

Apparently I edit conflicted with you at T:TDYK? I think you were taking the same articles (i.e., Donald G. Fink) that I was about to. ;-) If you don't mind, I'll be filling T:DYK/P1 for now, and if you want to fill something, prep 2 is open. Thanks, Jamie^☆S93 13:51, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah no problem feel free to fill it I don't mind.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 13:55, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

I noticed that you added the Gopchang jeongol hook to the bottom of T:DYK/P2. I think that would be a great image hook (food DYKs have always been successful), and was planning to add it to a fresh prep page once your prepared batch was moved off to the queue. Could you toss it back into T:TDYK for the moment? Jamie^☆S93 00:52, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah sure.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 00:54, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

All done. Jamie^☆S93 01:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Haha, just noticed that.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 01:02, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey G27, I've noticed DYK is kind of backlogged a bit, anyway I can help on the verification process? I'm not authorized to audit though. You see I've submitted 4 over the last 4-5 days, none have been reviewed yet. More articles are still unverified.--Maverx (talk) 04:02, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to review any hook (other than your own, obviously), a very help script is available, all and any help is needed and very much welcomed.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 18:55, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Stanford Keglar

On June 5, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stanford Keglar, 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.

Wizardman 03:49, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Re

Hello, Giants27. You have new messages at Dictator of all Infernal Proletariat Penguins in the USSR's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

☭Dictator of all Infernal Proletariat Penguins in the USSR ☭ 12:04, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Arena Football League Newsletter - June 2009

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page.
→ This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 23:26, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Ben Revere

Why did you nominate Ben Revere for deletion?--Yankees10 17:20, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

At first glance he wasn't notable, but the rest definetely aren't.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 17:22, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah the other ones arent notable but Revere is considered one of the best Twins prospects and usually that is notable enough for an article.--Yankees10 17:24, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

How did I not catch that? Yeah I'll make notice of it.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 17:25, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok cool--Yankees10 17:26, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I've struck the listing for Revere from the AFD page and removed the tag from the article itself, on the assumption that you want to effectively withdraw your nomination of Revere himself, given above and what you posted on the AFD. I have, however, left the AFD itself open, given the remaining bundled players. This is a weird situation with a bundled nomination, and the withdrawl of the name under while the bundle is being discussed, but the remaining AFD debate of the rest. The only other solution I could think of would have been to cancel the existing AFD and start a whole new bundle, a lot of work. I think what I have done will suffice, but there's a touch of WP:BOLD in my actions. Anyway, if you have any problems with my actions in this situation, please let me know. - TexasAndroid (talk) 17:52, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

No problem.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 17:54, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Revere (2nd nomination)

I'd much appreciate it if you'd consider unbundling all these players and making each one into its own AfD. Each one will have different sources and different circumstances -- making people research every single one before weighing in on any of them will only lead to aggravation.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Will do.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 17:56, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you much!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:57, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

And I see now that a number of these players had previously been mass AfDed, which resulted in a trip to DRV. Unbundling was definitely a good idea. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:45, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which succeeded with 56 in support, 12 in opposition and 3 neutral votes. I am truly honored by the trust that the community has placed in me. Whether you supported me, opposed me, or if you only posted questions or commented om my RfA, I thank you for your input and I will be looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas :). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). All the Best, Mifter (talk)

Mifter (talk) 23:41, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

2009 Orange Bowl

Well, I'm getting ready to submit this for FAC. If you could take a look at it before I submit it, I'd really appreciate it. It should be almost good to go -- I think it is good, which is why I'm asking for other eyes. :) Thanks! JKBrooks85 (talk) 11:56, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Will do.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 12:45, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Prep 1?

Are you done with DYK Prep area #1? I can move it to the queues if you are. Royalbroil 15:08, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 15:09, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Y Done Thanks for you help! Royalbroil 15:13, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Your favourite kicker

Hey thought you'd like to see Burke Dales blog where he disses teases Sandro DeAngelis, who kicked more points with his foot in last year's Grey Cup than the whole Montreal team did altogether. DoubleBlue (talk) 21:36, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Who said he was my favorite, haha, got to love when players diss tease their teammates, haha.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 21:41, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I was teasing you there. Remember you were slamming him for holding out for an NFL job and signing/not signing with Winnipeg. DoubleBlue (talk) 22:00, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Haha, yeah now I remember, still think he's an idiot to think that the NFL would come knocking for a punter.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 22:15, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey, feel like working on a DYK for Raymond Fontaine? Cool article http://www.thestar.com/article/646910 DoubleBlue (talk) 22:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah sure, been looking for something to do, feel free to help out (obviously) and man that would be cool to be selling your house and then there's this pro football player showing up to help sell it for you.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 22:15, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey, if you're really looking for something to do sometime, the players' weights have been updated on the rosters at http://cfl.ca/page/tm_rosters from the camp medicals. Not really critically important or anything, though. DoubleBlue (talk) 23:32, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Hmm...interesting curious to see what Malik Jackson weights, haha.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 23:45, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Jackson weighs about 230, Byrne told me. Guess he's just lean, because he doesn't look like it. Byrne said Jackson's been looking very good rushing the passer and that he has great moves.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 23:50, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

The good thing for him is that Calgary has a lot of new defensive linemen, so then the coaching staff doesn't have the bias it has with players who have played for them in the past. Amd out of curiousity since you know the guy do you know of anything more interesting than these?--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 00:15, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Why exactly does Jackson have an article? I thought you were going to let me create it.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 14:26, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Wait, wtf? I thought it had been deleted....►Chris Nelson^Holla! 14:27, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

I did wait and it was deleted, then I told the deleting admin that he was now notable and he(?) moved it back into mainspace but I even was shocked when I saw that he moved it into mainspace cause I had asked them to move into userspace to see what was there.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 19:01, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

A small question about a DYK

The DYK about the Thorny Yellowwood tree, which ran on June 6th, well, the article talk page did not receive the DYK template, you know, the one that says: "A fact from ....... appeared on..... ". I tried to put one together just now, but I cannot remember the exact wording of the hook. Thanks for any help you can give me with this, Invertzoo (talk) 00:40, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I've fixed it. Shubinator (talk) 00:49, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Look at Talk:Thorny Yellowwood since the credit link was to Thorny Yellowwood instead of the correct name, the bot placed the tag on that talk page instead of the correct one.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 00:53, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw. There are quite a few talk pages that need to be fixed (for example this). Don't have time today to go through it. Maybe the weekend. There's no way I can find them all though. Shubinator (talk) 01:00, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not the biggest problem in the world, but it still is a problem I'll go check some out.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 01:02, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for E. J. Kuale

On June 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article E. J. Kuale, 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.

Mifter (talk) 03:56, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Some shameless thankspam!

I'd like to thank everyone who took part in my RfA, which closed 79/3/6, so I'm now another proud bearer of the mop-and-bucket - hopefully I'll wield them with success! I'd also like to say that I found the process to be welcoming, friendly and supportive, with the support comments encouraging and the oppose and neutral comments offering good feedback, so I had a very positive experience, despite the fact that, from all the comments and discussions, I was expecting something much more negative - thanks for helping to make it a worthwile experience! Many thanks once again, Colds7ream (talk) 13:01, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Automatic processing of your editor review

This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 14 June 2009 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. Adding <!--noautoarchive--> to the review page will prevent further automated actions. End of line. DustyBot (talk) 10:00, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Csaba Balogh

Did you mean to overrule all the objections and the delete vote in this diff? Art LaPella (talk) 21:15, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh my God no, that was an error I never picked up on (not sure how) but I was going for the hook underneath it, Verne Meisner. If you haven't already fixed I'll do it.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 21:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually looks like it's already in a queue, so you'll have to remove it and add a different one.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 21:22, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Done. As a copyeditor I've never done that before, so you might want to doublecheck this edit and this edit. Art LaPella (talk) 22:00, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Yep, looks right.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 22:28, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Why

I know I couldn't put my time into regathering my arguments regarding disambiguations in good time and haven't followed developments but what is the rationale for this http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_McGrath_(Canadian_football)&diff=295873901&oldid=295873271 ? There is no other Joe McGrath that plays any kind of football. Surely there is no controversy there? DoubleBlue (talk) 05:25, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm just following the current consensus.--Giants27 (t|c) 19:00, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Sig

Hi Giants, I like the look of the new signature, but I think the code breaches the guidelines about signature code length. Just by tightening the code you can crop it to [[User:Giants27|<font face="Bauhaus 93" color="black" size="3">Giants27</font>]] (<span>[[User talk:Giants27|<font color="black">t</font>]]|[[Special:Contributions/Giants27|<font color="black">c</font>]]|[[WP:Editor review/Giants27|<font color="black">r</font>]]|[[User:Giants27/guestbook|<font color="black">s</font>]] without changing the appearance, but that still leaves it at about 300 bytes. ϢereSpielChequers 09:11, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll just cut it down to [[User:Giants27|<font face="Bauhaus 93" color="black" size="3">Giants27</font>]] (<span>[[User talk:Giants27|<font color="black">t</font>]]|[[Special:Contributions/Giants27|<font color="black">c</font>]]) --Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 18:55, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Should be good to go, now.--Giants27 (t|c) 19:00, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Giants, nicely done.

ϢereSpielChequers is offering you a Wiki Beer! Liquid refreshment promotes WikiHarmony and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the harmony by offering a beer to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Best served refrigerated (not applicable in England). Temperature and Alcoholic strength varies according to age, religion and geographic location of recipient, US residents below the age of 21 are best advised to keep this beerstar until travelling in a country with less ageist drinking laws. NB This Beerstar is compatible with all known fake IDs

Thanks!--Giants27 (t|c) 00:24, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Raymond Fontaine

On June 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Raymond Fontaine, 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.

Jolly Janner 17:28, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 flag

With regards to this edit, wouldn't Cannabis legalization in Canada be a more apropos link? — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 21:37, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

There we go, I was looking for an appropiate link, I'll go make the change.--Giants27 (t|c) 21:41, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Update

Hey Giants. If your online and have nothing to do, an update for DYK would be helpful. ;) \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 12:25, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely.--Giants27 (t|c) 12:26, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Great Job, thanks! \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 12:42, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

WP:SHARKS

Hi and Welcome to the project! I'm sorry to say that it is not a very active project. As of now it is really only me that does any work (and that is very limited). The user User:Yzx is very actively updating shark pages and getting them to GA status, but he is not a member of the project. There is not any organised activity in the project. The latest thing that I'm trying to do is, Outline of sharks part of WP:WPOOK. ANy ide or things you would want to collaborate on just put a message on the project talk page or my talk page!! --Stefan ^talk 00:29, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome! I'm probably not going to be the most active but I will try to expand the odd article or so, again thanks for the welcome!--Giants27 (t|c) 00:37, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Malik Jackson

On June 15, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Malik Jackson, 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.

Mifter (talk) 20:35, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 15 June 2009

• Book review :Review of Cyberchiefs: Autonomy and Authority in Online Tribes
• News and notes: License update, Google Translate, GLAM conference, Paid editing
• Wikipedia in the news: In the Google News, London Review of Books, and more
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Chemistry
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 11:29, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Have you time

to tackle the Alouettes updated injury list ahead of tomorrow's game? http://cfl.ca/roster/index/team/9 If not, I may get to it this evening. DoubleBlue (talk) 22:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

When did the bus crash happen, my God how can so many guys be hurt already. Yeah sure I've got it.--Giants27 (t|c) 22:18, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Heh :-) I think the coach just felt he could spare his older vets the trip and play. Thanks. DoubleBlue (talk) 02:28, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Even so, I'm counting 26 inactive players which is about 42% of the total roster, which is insane then again those hangnails take a little while to go away ;).--Giants27 (t|c) 02:31, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Jonathan Wilhite

On June 17, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jonathan Wilhite, 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.

Dravecky (talk) 14:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

AFD

Can you check this out: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brandon Jackson (wide receiver).--Yankees10 16:43, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Damian Sims

On June 19, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Damian Sims, 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.

Wizardman 08:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Fred Reid (Canadian football)

On June 19, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fred Reid (Canadian football), 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.

Wizardman 08:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

DYKSTATS

Re this fix, I had put the other article because actually that's the one that got over 5K hits. The hook article only got 2K hits, but interestingly, the DYK did result in 8K on one of the other articles mentioned in the DYK.  Frank  |  talk  20:09, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Undid my edit, that's strange that the non-article got more hits than the hook article, weird.--Giants27 (c|s) 20:12, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it was odd, and not by just a few hits, either. Maybe the name just catches, or people had heard of it way back when and just thought "oh, I wonder what ever happened to Biosphere 2..." Thanks!  Frank  |  talk  20:39, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not surprising, I would much rather read about Biosphere 2 than a biography :). That being said, Ed Bass is a nice article. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 20:44, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Haha true, plus Biosphere 2 sounds like a more interesting article at first glance than Ed Bass.--Giants27 (c|s) 20:48, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Swellshark

On June 21, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Swellshark, 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.

Mifter (talk) 08:36, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

BAD IDEA? but why?

i placed reggie jackson in the african american portal. why is that a bad idea? since u did revert it. [1] CashRules (talk) 21:00, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

It's a bad idea because it's useless and serves no purpose plus if you put it on one page you'll have to put the portal on every single black person in the entire world, which is impossible.--Giants27 (c|s) 21:03, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not for every black person in the world. It's for prominant African Americans. Reggie Jackson was a super star for his era. Such as Jessie Owens, Jackie Robinson, Joe Louis, etc. You could remove it from elijah mccall, but for Reggie Jackson, a hall of famer, one of the first million dollar contracts, Mr October... that is a bad idea. I would prefer you to change it back. CashRules (talk) 21:07, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Looking at numerous pages histories such as Jackson and Carlos Villanueva you've met serious opposition to your portal adding to "prominent" athletes (which is original research because there is no definite criteria) and your adding of this repeatedly despite opposition is disruptive and I suggest you cease adding it without consensus.--Giants27 (c|s) 21:23, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Originally I believed it to be worthy of all African Americans... and than I realized it was for prominant African Americans. why have the portal if we aren't going to use it? I was simply being WP:BOLD and if there is an issue approach a person about it. The Reggie Jackson was initially removed b/c the tag said stub, I corrected the stub status and it was removed for the same reason. So I dropped a message, and then you removed it with the rationale being that its for black people all over the world. The portal is African American. Reggie Jackson though is a very prominant African American. 21:32, 21 June 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by CashRules (talk • contribs)

Being bold and using original research are totally different things, being bold is creating a reconformation RfA, while using original research is what you're doing as there are NO guidelines to inclusion discuss with other people involved with African American page editing about what the guidelines should be then feel free to add it.--Giants27 (c|s) 21:41, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Tim Sims (gridiron football)

A tag has been placed on Tim Sims (gridiron football) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Trevor Marron (talk) 23:10, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kwasi Nkansah

A tag has been placed on Kwasi Nkansah requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Trevor Marron (talk) 23:11, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I removed the speedy deletion tags (as you know), being a CFL/NFL football player is an indication of notability. --kelapstick (talk) 23:25, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Can't a guy not be on Wikipedia for half an hour and not get bombarded with speedy tags? :) Thanks for that, although I have to say they probably wouldn't survive and AfD.--Giants27 (c|s) 23:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I tagged them because there is no evidence that either player has played a fully professional game, being signed for a team is not usually enough to ensure notability as per WP:ATH, quote - People who have competed at the fully professional level of a sport, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming, golf or tennis end-quote. There is no evidence supplied that either player has played in a competitive professional game so they are not of sufficient note to have their own article. I doubt they will survive AfD Trevor Marron (talk) 09:40, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 22 June 2009

• Special report:Study of vandalism survival times
• News and notes: Wikizine, video editing, milestones
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia impacts town's reputation, assorted blogging
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:46, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Joey Hamilton

I just saw this message now though you sent it several days ago. The article does look a good deal better, though I think it needs more non-stat information added in. Hopefully the GAN goes well. Wizardman 03:59, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Kwasi Nkansah

I have nominated Kwasi Nkansah, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kwasi Nkansah. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Trevor Marron (talk) 09:56, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Tim Sims (gridiron football)

I have nominated Tim Sims (gridiron football), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Sims (gridiron football). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Trevor Marron (talk) 10:00, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Lowber

That's weird, eh? I looked for some kind of confirmation but forgot to look at the cfl transaction page since it's usually slower. All the rosters and newspapers for today's game report him on the IR. I think there's a mix-up here. DoubleBlue (talk) 20:58, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Maybe waived/injured?--Giants27 (c|s) 21:13, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

We'll see what transpires. By the way, did you see the US TV schedule? DoubleBlue (talk) 21:16, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I did, but I don't have America One so it doesn't make a difference unless they change it to something like Versus.--Giants27 (c|s) 21:21, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Time Warner? You may just have to take some road trips to see those TiCats beaten down. DoubleBlue (talk) 21:32, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah. And no way, it's gonna take a few years but a few more wins aren't out of the question but definetely we're going to be better than Toronto this year. ;)--Giants27 (c|s) 21:36, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

There are quite a few games on TW26, whatever that means. I enjoy the TiCats rivalry but I do like Marcel Bellefeuille from his days with the Ottawa Gee-Gees and wish him well. DoubleBlue (talk) 21:45, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I've noticed that in between 24 hours of Syracuse Orange coverage car sales, crappy local commericals, high school sports, low level college sports and Syracuse Chiefs stuff there are occassionally CFL games on. (BTW TW26 is basically a local sports channel). And yeah I love rivalries makes sports fun but sadly for some people it blinds them to what's actually happening. haha--Giants27 (c|s) 21:53, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

See an example of a blinded sports fan (see comments section)--Giants27 (c|s) 22:01, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

He, he. Yeah, well, have you ever smelled Hamilton? ;-) Generally, CFL fans are pretty good about making the rivalry fun and we tease and drink beer together. I do think that Hamilton will be improved this year but, then again, I thought so last year too. DoubleBlue (talk) 03:54, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I've never left the US so I wouldn't know. ;) Usually rival fans here hate each other, but I'll admit I've met some okay Red Sox and Cowboys fans. haha--Giants27 (c|s) 14:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Hamilton is a funky city and that comes from a Hamilton-friendly source. :-) DoubleBlue (talk) 18:07, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in, but I couldn't help it. Have you ever heard the joke?

Q. "Where's the dirtiest place you have ever kissed your girlfriend?

A. Hamilton

--Kelapstick 18:11, 24 June 2009

:-D DoubleBlue (talk) 18:14, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

@DoubleBlue-so I guess the commenter wasn't so far off, haha.

@kelapstick-Haha, that's a good one. :D

--Giants27 (c|s) 18:24, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Re:

Yeah, I'm mentally topic-banning myself from WP:CHU for 6 months XD Inferno, Lord of Penguins 01:57, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Use of Sports Logos. For the Mediation Committee, Ryan Postlethwaite 02:24, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

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.

Hmm...really? Not gonna lie though not really sure what the whole deal is, just let the logos be, why does it matter?--Giants27 (c|s) 02:30, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Wilfrid Lacroix

Moved to Canada Day. Note that I removed the image because i'm finding it very doubtful it was a self work as described, and may nominate it for deletion. Wizardman 21:57, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Richie Hall

I've written all I can on Richie Hall but it's not five-fold. Perhaps you can find some more info or re-write. I also thought about adding in his statistics as a player. I'm out of time though as well. I'll be away from now till Monday on a kayaking trip. Cheers! DoubleBlue (talk) 23:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

3069/666=4.6x prose expansion, to me that's in the discretion (I hope I spelled that right) area if needed I'll add the stats but hopefully the reviewer will see the long article since its over 3k characters and realize that its close enough and let it go. But some stick by the rules and some look at them as guidelines. I guess we'll see. PS, have a great time and sorry about the late response been watching the new Transformers movie, great one (then again any movie with Megan Fox in it is great, :P).--Giants27 (c|s) 02:06, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

3443/666=5.2 prose expansion, got it there by adding the thing I went with for the hook fact since it sounds ironic and obvious. Thanks for taking the time to expand!--Giants27 (c|s) 02:39, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I hadn't noticed or forgotten that the hook had already been proposed. It's best to be able to get the three articles mentioned, I suppose, but is certainly one of the least interesting things you can say about the first African-American Eskimos coach, who interviewed for seven HC jobs in the CFL over four years, was a star defensive back despite being only 5'6" tall, and was nearly killed as a child when he was ejected through the windshield of a car. DoubleBlue (talk) 16:58, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

You want to separate the noms?--Giants27 (c|s) 17:00, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

(shrug) I don't really know. The triple-play is great, in that you can draw attention to three articles at the same time. A more interesting hook, though, would encourage more people to check it out but, then, it's probably only one article they're looking at. DoubleBlue (talk) 17:09, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Hall and Restelli have some interesting stuff, while I can look for something on Abanikanda. But like you said with three you get possibly more looks but you can get that with an interesting hook.--Giants27 (c|s) 17:14, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Got something for Abanikanda, so my suggestion is to separate the noms.--Giants27 (c|s) 17:24, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry. Sure, I think those are pretty interesting hooks actually; particularly Restelli's "hair on fire" and stop asking me if I surf! DoubleBlue (talk) 18:42, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Re-nommed all three separately.--Giants27 (c|s) 19:00, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I said it could be vandalism

And as to why it is or isn't useless, take it up with people who can explain it better than I can. All I am saying is that as long as wiki has a policy of orphans being tagged, and articles appear on the list of articles that need them, then they will be tagged whether I tag them or not. If you don't like the policy, then take it up with the appropriate person/people. If you don't want your articles to be tagged as orphans, then do what you need to do in order to make sure they don't deserve the tag - that is, make sure they aren't orphans. Postcard Cathy (talk) 03:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I have to say that I agree with Giants27 on this. Sure creating links between articles is useful and nice but it hardly makes it a broken article in need of repair. This kind of thinking is 10 to 15 years out of date and comes from the portal idea that the only way to get from one article to another is by clicking links. I'm sorry, but nobody uses the internet that way anymore. You search for what you want and go directly there. DoubleBlue (talk) 17:02, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

If you truly believe what you are saying, do as I suggested to Giants, which he/she hasn't done - take the issue up with the orphan people. Talking about it here does nothing. Bringing your views to the attention of the people who can do something more about the issue is much more productive.Postcard Cathy (talk) 09:59, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

And if you cannot justify their use, then I would suggest that you do not revert when an editor removes the tag with an explanation as Giants27 has done. DoubleBlue (talk) 13:34, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I might not be popular for saying this, but I somewhat agree with Postcard Cathy (although both of you need to stop reverting one another...it looks like that has already stopped, though, fortunately). Right now WP guidelines are that articles should categorized, have incoming and outgoing links, etc. when possible. That guideline may well be bad, but if you think it should be changed the best thing to do is to start a centralized discussion (Template talk:Orphan, WT:Orphan, or WT:Orphanage) about whether or not the guideline should be changed, or whether some articles should be exempt from being templated (ie, one possible solution would be that articles that could feasibly be de-orphaned can be templated so that people will do the cleanup, whereas articles that are obscure or simply never will be orphaned could have the template removed, since there is no cleanup to ask for and we don't need to 'warn' the readers about content problems like we do with {{unreferenced}}, {{pov}}, etc.). Since a decision like this would affect many articles, it should be made through a centralized discussion rather than an argument at any particular article. If either of you does start such a discussion I would be more than willing to comment there. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 18:25, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Incoming links are a good thing, of course but does the lack of them mean that the article is in critical need of repair and a self-referencing clean-up tag at the top of the article? I don't think so. I am very much in favour of encouraging readers to contribute and edit our articles, even new and anonymous readers but "orphan" articles are firstly not a real problem and, secondly, not a problem that they can "hit" the edit button and correct like any other clean-up tag. It is useless and obtrusive. A list of orphaned articles can be generated. The articles can be added to categories. Tags can be added to the Talk page for editors to see. But adding it to the top of the article is a wholly unhelpful idea. DoubleBlue (talk) 18:49, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Like I said, let's have this discussion at a centralized project page somewhere. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 18:59, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

And, Postcard Cathy may be going with the current guidelines but if she tags an article and an editor removes that tag with an explanation, then she needs to discuss that and come to an agreement; not start an edit war. WP:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle DoubleBlue (talk) 19:00, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Regarding a centralised discussion, I'm too busy at other things at the moment and when I might have time have other Wikipedia problems with a higher priority in my mind to rile up to bother starting up such a discussion. I've shared my thoughts here and if a discussion were to open, I may share them again but that's all. DoubleBlue (talk) 19:03, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I always feel like I word these big policy discussion things wrong ;) so I'll see if somebody starts such a discussion, in which case I will comment if I find out about it that is.--Giants27 (c|s) 19:12, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

You know, I've never been a big fan of these team navboxes but since they count against making an article an "orphan", it seems a nice stupid way to avoid a stupid tag. I'm giving User:Marc87 a barnstar. DoubleBlue (talk) 22:12, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Man, I hate getting those "This wiki has a problem" messages. :) And yeah the current team roster ones work until the guy gets cut but the championship ones (which JimboVI and Marc87 did) help keep those stupid tags off of articles. Then again the tag can always be deleted, but that's a battle for a different time. PS Don't know if you noticed but check this out.--Giants27 (c|s) 23:23, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I was paused on an edit that I eventually gave up on. Thanks for the heads-up on JimboV1. I gave him a new one too. Don't feel left out; I've got one on hold for you :-) It's nice to see all the Canadiana on the Main Page. Did you know the Hardy Boys were written by a Canadian author? His son is Brian McFarlane, the hockey writer. DoubleBlue (talk) 00:36, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Haha, thanks. And no I didn't know that very interesting, although I have to say I never read the series because when growing up I was anti-reading, then again I still am. ;)--Giants27 (c|s) 00:57, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 29 June 2009

• News and notes: Jackson's death, new data center, more
• Wikipedia in the news: Google News Support, Wired editor plagiarizes Wikipedia, Rohde's kidnapping, Michael Jackson
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 01:52, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

It is now gone to admins

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Postcard Cathy (talk • contribs) 09:56, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

If you won't go to the mountain, Mohammed's asst. will bring the mountain to you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#toc

You couldn't just discuss it with me, could you?--Giants27 (c|s) 12:47, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I told you to talk to the people at the Orphan Group here on wiki but you didn't. I told you they could explain it better than I could. But you insisted on reverting the orphan tags without talking with them. What was I to do? Postcard Cathy (talk) 05:53, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

If you don't know anything about the tag, then why do you place them on articles?--Giants27 (c|s) 12:29, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

one Link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Howard_University_people#Athletics

How many do you need to get rid of Orphans? David.snipes (talk) 23:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Usually one link should do it and when added you can remove the tag until that "policy" hopefully changes.--Giants27 (c|s) 23:49, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Wow, didn't noticed Andrae Townsel going through there, thanks for doing that, now I can remove the stupid tag. Cheers,--Giants27 (c|s) 23:52, 30 June 2009 (UTC)