Hosta

What do you call the big gap in between the College career header and the writing. It looks stupid. I can understand if it was a closer picture of him, but its not, you cant even see the name on the back of the jersey. The picture serves no purpose at all.--Yankees10 15:31, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"It looks stupid" isn't a good enough reason. It really doesn't cause any problems and it would be remedied if the article were of proper length, which it will be hopefully one day. Plus, the image itself is quite large and is certainly worth having on wiki.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 15:49, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How it does it not cause problems. It leaves a huge gap between College career header and the writing.--Yankees10 15:55, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not in my browser.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 16:02, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I had the large gap too, until I made it so the image appears on the left.--Giants27(c|s) 19:03, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They look better on the right when the articles are long enough, because the paragraphs begin at the same place horizontally.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 19:12, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It can be moved back whenever it's expanded but for now leaving it on the left makes most sense.--Giants27(c|s) 19:14, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you just stop? The bots are going to change em' back everyday there's no point in changing it back. Just leave it with DEFAULTSORT, since it does the same thing as Lifetime.--Giants27(c|s) 00:34, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No thanks. The discussion on Template:Lifetime indicates there isn't a consensus against it, therefore the bots likely won't be doing that all the time. In the mean time, I'll undo them because I prefer the template. You have no right to undo my edits because they are completely within the bounds of the encyclopedia.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 00:35, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No they're not there's barely any pages using Lifetime anymore. Start a discussion to the template talk for it to be implemented fighting over it on five pages, is just plain stupid.--Giants27(c|s) 00:38, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Was nominated for deletion last year and voted to keep, and from the research I've done I've seen absolutely no consensus against it. Therefore, you have no right to make your edits undoing mine. I'm not going to back down, bud.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 00:39, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See here, where editors determined that a user what needlessly using Lifetime. Plus, do you really think the bots would continue removing Lifetime, if there was a problem with?--Giants27(c|s) 00:41, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Read it. Doesn't change the fact the template is still active and is not under review for deletion.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 00:42, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which doesn't change the fact it's being removed and is not at deletion since some users still insist on using it.--Giants27(c|s) 00:44, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When it's nominated for deletion again and deleted, I'll stop using it. Until then, I'll add it, and undo you as well. The end.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 00:44, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why you guys are fighting over this. Most people who are on WP don't know the difference anyway. It is a stupid argument since they both do the same thing. I heard that Lifetime hides some of the categories and it won't be sorted thr right way and DEFAULTSORT does'nt. There is a reason why bots are undoing it and keep undoing it. I at first thought that Lifetime was better even when bots undid the template, and I corrected it and found out later that the bots changed them back. You are not going to win with is and I don't see why you have such a problem over this since the people running the bots see an error eith the Lifetime template. Just my thoughts sice you two have been at each others necks with is. Ositadinma 19:27, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to assume that now that I have begun to fill in the text at Jake Long, you no longer think the pictures are in the way.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:55, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine. I just didn't think they should be all crunched together in one box, especially horizontally.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 03:00, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It appears you do massive re-orgs of pages and make your own decisions as to what stays and what goes. Then you don't even leave a comment to indicate why some content was rewritten or removed with your flavored opinion. What you are doing is simply wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.228.114.120 (talk) 15:33, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Way to be specific.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 16:02, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since this applies to almost every edit you make, you are a Wikipedia bully and you should be prevented from further edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.52.154.202 (talk) 17:10, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell are you talking about? Give an example.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 17:11, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I trust you and fellow Wiki Dolphin fans to keep the Tyler Thigpen article I expanded and got to good article status. You guys got the best QB that the Chiefs had on their roster! Here's to our two team's 0-3 starts! Haha conman33 (. . .talk) 23:24, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I'm pretty happy with the trade. I'd definitely give up a mid-round pick (which I expect it was) for a decent young prospect like Thigpen.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 04:39, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From the Eagles' Wikipedia page:

However, both the logo and uniforms were radically altered in 1996. The primary Kelly green color was changed to a darker shade, officially described as "midnight green"; silver was practically abandoned, as uniform pants moved to either white or the aforementioned midnight green; and the traditional helmet wings were changed to a primarily white color, with silver and black accents. The team's logo combination—the stylized eagle and club name lettering—also changed in 1996, with the eagle itself limited to a white (bald eagle) head, drawn in a less realistic, more cartoon-based style, and the lettering changing from calligraphic to block letters.

Considering that the Eagles have an all green jersey and an all black jersey and silver is only an accent color, black, not silver should take precedence in their navbox. Commandr Cody (talk) 01:14, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree, and I think you'll find most will too. The black jerseys are alternates and are never found with a heavy dose of green. That's why your color scheme looked so bad.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 01:16, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The silver works better, since it is a alternate just like black.--Giants27(c|s) 01:24, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's a reason you don't see the Eagles wear green jerseys and black pants - they look like crap together.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 01:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've already been through this with someone else. Yes, I NOT the best at writing summaries. It just seems like everyone after me when I write these articles. What is wrong with telling people how the scores came to be? It's like my articles gives everyone the middle finger just for existing!

--Alakazam

Chrisjnelson, are you still having issues with Alakazam? Because I am. He keeps writing game summaries for several 2009 NFL teams which are subpar. They lack an encyclopedic tone, contain slang, and have duplicate wikilinks. On top of that, most of his summaries contain the exact same idiomatic phrases from other summaries. I don't mind if you do or not, but I've started yet another section on his talk page about his lack of respect for writing guidelines, if you want to chime in.

63.124.111.130 (talk) 19:41, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Geoff Pope.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --aktsu ^(t / c) 01:05, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Firstly, sorry for templateing but I assumed you wasn't aware of the above since none of you images have evidence of permission. Another thing that could be a problem here is that is's not enough that "[person] has given me permission to upload to Wikipedia". The copyright holder needs to explicitly agree to license the image under one of our acceptable free-licenses, not just agree to it being uploaded here. Cheers, --aktsu ^(t / c) 01:10, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Also, I've not tagged the other images yet as I figured it be best to give you some time to respond first. --aktsu ^(t / c) 01:12, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really know how to provide evidence, they were verbal permissions or facebook chats, of which I don't have transcripts.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 01:50, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked Moonriddengirl to chime in to make sure, but to my understanding we need a statement from the copyright holder or a notice on the website where the images appear or similar to be able to use them. Sorry :/ --aktsu ^(t / c) 02:34, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is correct. I'm afraid that verbal permission or facebook chats directed to you are not sufficient. We need a legally usable licensing statement from the copyright holder either at the source of original publication or an e-mail from a clearly associated address to the Wikimedia Foundation. Steps for requesting these, including a link to a boilerplate release form, can be found at Wikipedia:Permission. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:13, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging

Just to let you know, I've tagged the images that I've found that are a concern. If you can't get verification before the usual time passes, please don't worry about it too much. The images are likely to be deleted, but will be restored when the verification process completes. That said, I'm a bit concerned about File:Travis Williams.jpg. Unless Travis Williams was using a tripod, he seems unlikely to be the photographer, and the copyright ownership is almost always with the photographer, not the subject. This is true of a number of images below.

For your convenience, images tagged as needing verification of permission include:

• File:Travis Williams.jpg
• File:Onterio McCalebb.jpg
• File:Tristan Davis.jpg
• File:Anthony Toribio.jpg
• File:Babatunde Oshinowo.jpg
• File:Brandon London.jpg
• File:Wale Dada.jpg
• File:Brice Butler.jpg
• File:Keith Saunders.jpg
• File:Scorpio Babers.jpg
• File:Pedro Sosa.jpg
• File:Zac Diles.jpg
• File:TJ Rushing.jpg

I'm looking back a bit further and will add more when I've completed. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:27, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the decision to tag because ignoring WP:AGF because of copyright concerns is the correct move IMO. And Chris, why can't you just have them e-mail OTRS. If I have it correct, the e-mail is: info-en@wikimedia.org --Giants27(c|s) 19:30, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are just a couple of more.

• File:Mike Byrne.jpg
• File:Dan Carpenter.jpg
• File:Vonnie Holliday.jpg
• File:Jalen Parmele.jpg
• File:Allen Ervin.jpg
• File:Chris Horton.jpg

But I do want to add that it's not so much about ignoring AGF. It's just the procedure. I'm a member of the team that answers those letters, and I would have to go through the process, too, if permission was given to me. :) But while the e-mail address is above is correct for many contact situation, contact for permissions is permissions-en@wikimedia.org. You should read over WP:Permission still, though, because if the permission is not properly worded, it still won't be accepted, and it can be a total pain going back and forth until the wording is right. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:36, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source for his retirement or are you just assuming since he hasn't played in two years and probably never will again?--Giants27(c|s) 12:59, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He hasnt played in two years, hes 34, and he sucks, so its highly unlikely he will ever play again.--Yankees10 16:15, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a source, I feel the same way but it doesn't mean he's retired.--Giants27(c|s) 16:16, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article also says he's coaching.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 16:21, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, I actually never paid attention to that.--Giants27(c|s) 17:08, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So what do you think of Cobbs being out for the year with a torn ACL? Big blow to the all mighty Dolphins or will Lex Hilliard follow through? Stealthninja545 (talk) 05:46, 15 October 2009 (UTC)Stealthninja545[reply]

I don't think it's a big blow at all. He's likable because he's versatile and a hard worker, but he's not a huge contributor on offense. He's carried the ball six times and caught three passes so far this year. The offense runs without him. The real loss is on special teams, but that unit's never really been good anyway.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 13:32, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chris,

Ryan Baker wears #90 during practice, and indeed this is his number. I confirmed with Ryan himself that this is his current number.

Stephen Baker MrSCBaker —Preceding unsigned comment added by MrSCBaker (talk • contribs) 20:13, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but we don't know that. Seems like you might be a family member. We need some sort of source to make your allegation true. So tell us one and if it is true, then you can change his number. Ositadinma 05:57, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Ryan Durand, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, image description page, image talk page, mediawiki page, mediawiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your reasoning on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:54, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm here to ask you if you can help me improve Jairus Byrd's wiki. I know he's from a rival of the Dolphins but I think is important due to the impact he is making in the league and more important, in the AFC East. --Octa62 (talk) 17:04, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ouch. Can I have a real life that doesn't require me to revert, drop everything and search for a transaction?--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 23:33, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then don't revert if you aren't going to check something like that. We're not talking blatant vandalism here. Do you really and edit that has someone moving a DT to IR and moving another DT up from the practice squad doesn't have a chance of being accurate? Not to mention, it's been online for hours now. Either check it online or don't revert it, simple as that.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 23:36, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How much of a problem is the Dolphins secondary in!!! You lose your best CB in Will Allen and now you have to trust two ROOKIE Cornerbacks. The one Ill like to trust is Sean Smith because of his height but it looks like Vontae is starting to play really good. I loved that pick versus the Patriots.

Also, you think the Dolphins should try and select Dez Bryant in next years draft? Because Ginn is not going to cut it. I cant believe they had Dwayne Bowe on the board in 2007 but of course they dont choose him. Man Im one frustrated Dolphin fan but Ill always love them.

I also have a concern about Ronnie Brown's ankle injury he suffered versus the Bucs. Looks like he wont be ready for Carolina on Thursday. Thats a big blow for my fantasy team. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stealthninja545 (talk • contribs) 05:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It hurts losing Allen because he's very good, but I also feel the season is pretty much lost and I like both Smith and Davis as prospects, so I'm excited to see their progression even if they'll have their struggles initially.

It wouldn't surprise me to see a receiver high, but Parcells doesn't typically do that. I'd personally like Alabama ILB Rolando McClain if he comes out early.

Yeah hopefully Brown's injury isn't serious, but I doubt he'll play against Carolina with the game so soon after the last one.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 16:57, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is with this? Are you just a racist little bitch? - Maybe that was a little harsh, but you have done this on a constent basis. I don't even expect this from you. Ositadinma 19:20, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have a black best friend, black girlfriend, and black cousins. No, I'm not a racist. I just say nigga sometimes in a friendly manner.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 09:35, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but your white, and to me when a white person says the N word it sounds racist, wether it was sarcastic or not; it's like a black person calling a white person cracker or opposite a porch monkey, and that type of behavior is unexcusable on WP. Ositadinma 14:42, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Look, I'm sorry you're not cool enough with the black community to say 'nigga' freely, but that's just how it is. Maybe if you're really nice to them they'll let you in the club one day. Teach you the handshakes and dance moves and everything. But until then, try not to be so bitter.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 19:03, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, okay, good remake Chris like you always do. Ositadinma 19:33, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What a baby.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 20:40, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No. That edit summary was way out of order. I noticed your comments below too (related to the Pat Murray AfD). You're really pushing it now. Aditya Ex Machina 15:34, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The last thing I wanted. For Ronnie Brown to get hurt and be out the rest of the year but also thats what I said when Pennington went down. This is also good for the kids like Hilliard and Pat White to show what they got to show for. Hell, on his 1st career carry in the NFL, Hilliard made a 3rd and 16 conversion. I was also very, VERY impressed on how Ricky played today. He didnt play like he did in his prime in like 03-04 but, Wow he did great! Back to the topic. Is the Wildcat dead? I think its alive but on life support with out Ronnie in the mix.Stealthninja545 (talk) 08:48, 20 November 2009 (UTC)Stealthninja545[reply]

The wildcat isn't dead, but there's just no one to run it as efficiently as Brown could. Ricky doesn't look good running out of it.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 09:36, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Pat Murray. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pat Murray. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:07, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is this the type of statement consistent with collegial editing? Grsz¹¹ 02:47, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you're wasting everyone's time because you don't know what you're talking about. I have a problem with that and I don't respect it.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 02:57, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't waste anybody's time, nobody is obligated to respond. He's a non-notable player who hasn't played in a game and fails WP:ATHLETE. Sure, it's open to interpretation as to whether simply sitting on the bench in sweatpants makes one "notable", but there is nothing I did in reading WP:ATHLETE that is somehow inaccurate. Grsz¹¹ 03:02, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ATHLETE is not a policy. Anyone with a brain knows an active roster NFL player is notable enough for inclusion here.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 03:05, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And there's the root of the problem. Practice squad guys are not notable IMO, but guys on active rosters are. WP:ATH is a guideline, i.e. you can follow it but you should really use WP:COMMONSENSE for individual articles.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 03:10, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You just explained why Murray is notable...►Chris Nelson^Holla! 03:10, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Was that directed at me?--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 03:12, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, didn't look at who said it haha!►Chris Nelson^Holla! 03:14, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do we really need a new AfD? Grsz¹¹ 04:40, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CSD G4 says the article is the same, which it isn't because if you look at the previous version of deletion it had barely any refs. Since then I've added 3 or so and college career section.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 13:41, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a link to ufl-football.com for use in the NFLactive infobox, I've also attempted to add UFL stats to the infobox but it's not showing up when used with the NFL stats.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 16:45, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Cullen Harper, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cullen Harper. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:24, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Chris, I see you created all of the Dolphins Draft Picks navbox templates. Why is it that you stopped at 1983? Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:35, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can't remember. Most likely laziness.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 21:43, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But the Cowboys ones and Colts ones stop at '83, and the Bears ones stop at '82. Or were they just copying you? Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:47, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No clue.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 22:03, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me how frustrated you are on how the Dolphins played. I just cant believe how they just let Buffalo (of all teams) just run all over them in the 2nd half. Hmm...this sounds familiar. Week 7 all over again??Stealthninja545 (talk) 03:30, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:National Football League running backs, Category:National Football League wide receivers. I don't like them, nevermind the fact that they're only populated by a few articles. Pats1 ^T/C 23:35, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, there's no need for the categories to exist considering that Category:American football running backs is more neutral.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 23:37, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the point of them.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 18:34, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good...so can we get rid of them now? Pats1 ^T/C 04:05, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beautiful Win today. Man, Henne deserves that game ball. Also, Ive been editing all recently promoted/demoted, cut, signed and injured players.Stealthninja545 (talk) 21:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

think we edit conflicted once or twice there, oops. Regardless - think it's right now. Thanks for adding in stats :) StarM 21:14, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't been able to confirm that Tanner is his birthplace. What website confirms this? Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:30, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some website list it as a birth place. Does that necessarily mean it's his birth place? No, not really, because a lot of websites take "hometowns" and make them birth places and the facts get lost along the way, but it's verifiable and it's better than nothing.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 03:32, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I guess it's safe to assume it though, because he went to high school there and the hometown/birthplace is always consistent. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:34, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you revert my changes on those Alternative Color Templates for NFL teams? I made those to actually have alternative colors for those teams, because right now, the actual and the alternative colors are the same for a number of teams. --bender235 (talk) 20:24, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some of them just don't look good.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 21:57, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Template:NFLAltPrimaryColor. 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 several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. --bender235 (talk) 20:35, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DTR.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 20:38, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stop fucking things up and we can move on.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 22:26, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does this solve the matter? If not, I encourage you to develop a consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Football League#NFL color templates before reverting further. Yes, I recognize that you were restoring the "last good version", but it would still be nice if you would edit a little more collaboratively and avoid any edits which might be construed as an attempt to drive off other editors or imply article ownership. - 2/0 (cont.) 05:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case you didn't notice: you can "turn on/off" the use of the alternate color templates in the player infoboxes with this Template:NFLusealtColor. --bender235 (talk) 02:33, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But some teams look good with the alternates (Bills, Dolphins, Patriots, etc.). The Saints looks weird with Black on gold and then gold on white. It's not very consistent.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 03:13, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey whats up? I didnt get to watch the game. But what happened to Pat White? I heard he got a helmet to helmet hit. Was it that bad? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stealthninja545 (talk • contribs) 23:52, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This user helped promote Jake Long to good article status.

Thanks for your involvement in the development of Jake Long which has become a WP:GA in recent months.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:09, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know which team is more of a blank slate, looking at their rosters now: STL or KC. If KC trades Bowe and/or Dorsey, I think they'll take the cake, although at least they have a QB. Pats1 ^T/C 00:43, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Haha.

Also, you have my sympathies on Wes Welker and his torn vagina. Good thing he's the most replaceable player in football.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 00:52, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We haven't talked about him in a while, but somehow I knew you were going to say that. Pats1 ^T/C 00:54, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Serves the cocky little bitch right. Miami has three receivers that can do what he does in New England (obviously Ginn not being one of them). Mike Furrey's done what he does. Julian Edelman, a rookie college QB, can do what he does. The love for him is ridiculous. It's David Eckstein syndrome - the media and fan obsession with scrappy, little, trie-hard white guys.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 00:57, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's some truth there. Some media members around here feel the same way. Others gush. Never like to see an injury like that though... Pats1 ^T/C 02:55, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What are you guys doing at OLB this offseason? Pats1 ^T/C 03:00, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? What do I think Miami does? I think Anderson and Wake (especially Wake) obviously stick as situation pass-rushers. I believe Porter could be cut due to high salary, age and one-dimensional play (sucks against run). JT was very good in all facets and I'd love another one-year deal similar to this one, and I don't see why Miami wouldn't do it. We obviously need another young guy to develop if Wake's not going to be well-rounded enough to start full time (sucks in coverage) so I'd expect an OLB in the draft within first three rounds.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 04:13, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, Pats will also focus on that. Thomas will be out the door ASAP, and Burgess and Woods probably won't be back. They extended TBC and Ninkovich; TBC will start at OLB, but they still need another guy, or even two, at OLB. Sounds like they may trade for someone, or draft someone early. WR was a need before this weekend (Galloway flopped, so they had no #3 WR), and it will obviously be a bigger need now. Someone also said the Pats like Spiller, but it would be tough to get him. They'll probably do some tweaking at RB - Maroney may be gone. Pats1 ^T/C 16:33, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Spiller is more of a luxury pick than a RB solution. I could see a team like the Giants or Steelers getting him - a team without a big list of glaring needs. Spiller might end up being Reggie Bush 2.0 - good receiver, returner, situational back, but not a feature guy.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 20:52, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Giants and Steelers are not really in to splashy guys, there too old school. Run/pass block, harding runing and not comiting stupid plays. Ositadinma 21:55, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Giants have 5 RBs so I'm not so sure they'd get another one.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 21:58, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My point was just that the Giants don't have many glaring weaknesses and are pretty sound at every position (despite their recent troubles).

Also, the Giants may have five backs (like most teams do in the offseason) but only two are worth anything right now and one of those guys (Jacobs) had a very sub-par year.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 22:59, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That may be all the Pats need though. Not that they have anything special at RB, but once you mix in Morris and Taylor, you have a nice group there. Faulk too. Pats1 ^T/C 23:08, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, probably one of the worst groups in the league. Not a legit starter in the bunch. Though neither is Spiller. Morris is better suited as a backup, and so is Taylor at this point in his career (which I'm sure won't last much longer as RBs in his position fade FAST). Not saying it can't work that way, with just a bunch of decent guys that can do different things, but just saying the Pats don't have a legit No. 1.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 23:10, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Most teams don't. RB by committee seems to be the trend now. Pats1 ^T/C 00:58, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's a difference between Ronnie Brown/Ricky Williams or DeAngelo Williams/Jonathan Stewart. All four of those guys are legit No. 1 backs if needed. The Pats don't have any of guys on that level. You have a handful of No. 2's and third-down backs.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 01:04, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Who needs a RB when you got Tom Brady. The Dolphins have Chad "hurt shoulder" Pennington and the Panthers have Jake "no good, Tommy John" Delhomme. They need RB's. Ositadinma 01:20, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That was horribly unfunny and strangely bitter for a Giants fan. Obviously the Patriots can get away without a star back because they have a great line, QB, Randy Moss and head coach. I was just pointing out the lack of a stud No. 1 back. Never said it was vital.

Also, Pennington isn't Miami's quarterback. Future Pro Bowler Chad Henne is.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 04:06, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bitter, I think we have a hell of a QB and two good RB when healthy (Which none of them were this year). And I think Henne will never be a pro bowler since 1) Miami runs a more unorthodox offense and 2) Manning, Brady, Rivers, heck even Schaub are still around. Who do you want to set out of the Pro Bowl every year so Henne can get in? Ositadinma 04:34, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did you even watch a Dolphins game this year? They aired it out on numerous occasions. Henne had a few 50+ attempt games.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 14:48, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not all of us Giants fans are bitter, some of us choose to blame the defensive coordinator and apparently some of us choose to blame quarterbacks who we never faced this year. Also, while I haven't watched many Dolphins games the few plays I've seen of Henne show me that he could become a top quarterback within a few years.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 21:48, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that is why I said unorthodox, most teams don't pass the ball 50+ times, including the Giants. Then you get in trouble with that. Ositadinma 20:27, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you stick to talking about what you know...whenever you find out what that is.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 20:33, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I'd be willing to help out updating the articles for players currently on an AF1 roster if you need it. Cheers,--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 20:18, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That'd be good. The league is releasing daily transaction logs here, so the rosters I've made so far are based on team sites that have 2010 rosters listed, plus the league transactions. Don't be fooled by some team sites rosters - some say 2009 and some are from when they were part of af2 or another arena league.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 20:20, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yea because mostly when I edit, Its when Im about to fall asleep and stuff. I dont have a lot of time during the day because of homework. So Im mostly not paying attention. Sorry If I do. Im human. GO DOLPHINS. Stealthninja545 (talk) 21:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why the article needs a link to his Twitter account, nor what the edit summary "dumb" is supposed to mean. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:49, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because the presence of such a link is obviously useful to his encyclopedia entry. Hence, the decision to remove it was dumb.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 05:03, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how a link to his Twitter account is useful, even if it is his official account. Twitter is not the best place to get encyclopedic information about a person. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:12, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Check out the TfD nomination from 2009, the outcome showed that Twitter was an apporopiate link.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 20:16, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did see that TfD. IMO, the reason it was not deleted is that there are a few instances (not always) when a Twitter link is appropriate, and that template should be used in those cases. That the TfD was closed as a keep is not prima facie evidence that Twitter links are acceptable in all bios. If Chris (or anybody else) can explain to me how Stephens-Howling's Twitter is necessary, I will be happy to let the issue go. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:24, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's almost like an official website for NFL players. Some NFL players have official websites, others have Twitters. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:27, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should hold off putting that account on his page until Twitter verifies that it is official. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:28, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed it because it appears there's some "talk" about it being a fake. Until confirmation (which I doubt twitter'll do, guess you could ask Beanie Wells or Fitzgerald) please don't re-add.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 21:25, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

LaQuinn Stephens (his brother) said that the account is fake. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:31, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you re add the height and weight for retired players? I dont see the point of having the weight they played with their final year, It most likely changed since the beginning of their career, so what makes the final weight any more special than the first weight.--Yankees10 00:57, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any listed weight from their career is good, it gives the reader an idea what kind of player they were. Why do you think Pro Football Reference lists them? It's good info. It's worth knowing right off that bat that Dan Marino was 6-4, 220 as opposed to Doug Flutie-size.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 15:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have you ever thought new town, new name? Originally the Orioles listed him as Mike, then Michael. Now why would they do that? Is it immoral for him to call himself Michael? Ositadinma 01:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, but it doesn't apply fit WP:COMMONNAME.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 15:03, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for picking up my slack there. I've been lazy and/or busy. Pats1 ^T/C 04:48, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, problem, little homie.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 20:42, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I do, do you know who Dshibshm is? The user that posts everything false. I would need a secondary source to confirm the edits for him. If you could confirm the edits or find a secondary source that would be awesome.

P.S. Do you hate me? Cuz I hate you :) Ositadinma 01:40, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Jerry Babb has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced, no notability established.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 02:22, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Beast from da East has been removing practice squad teams and CFL teams and any team besides NFL teams that they played for in Infoboxes. Like he discussed here (but no consensus was ever reached). I have reverted several of his edits, but there appears to be alot of them. Keep an eye out. RF23 (talk) 03:29, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ridiculous. Revert him.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 04:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any reason you reverted my changes to the Patriots templates? The change was discussed here and here. ~ Richmond96 t • c 05:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not every team has silver as an accent color. The Pats do, and thus using the silver makes it more "Patriots-colored."►Chris Nelson^Holla!

You're right it does give it a more "Patriots-look", but all other team templates in the entire league have white as the font color. I think that should continue here. ~ Richmond96 t • c 15:53, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's no basis for that.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 16:18, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, silver is fine. ~ Richmond96 t • c 17:00, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So he is a LB or DE? He's on the roster twice now. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:49, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

LB.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 19:07, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my comment at WP:AN3. Thanks TigerShark (talk) 23:54, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Britton Colquitt. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Britton Colquitt. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:10, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Jerry Babb, 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/Jerry Babb. 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. PackerMania (talk) 03:21, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here you removed Charles Grant from the Saints roster even though Schefter said that they were going to release him the following day. Is there a double standard now? Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:50, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There were reports at the time it had happened. The reports on Bodden have been contradicted by saying it certainly has not happened yet, which is why we go with that.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 03:56, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where did you find his new number? It's not on the official site. RevanFan (talk) 15:23, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[1]►Chris Nelson^Holla! 15:27, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your friend removed my comment about personal attacks. Dlohcierekim 21:54, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I really do need to work on not being so stupidly stubborn. I wanted to wait and see what the Panthers listed him at- but since they list him as a WR (not a WR/QB like Isiah Staanback for the pats) He's a WR. You were correct, i was stupid. RF23 (talk) 23:58, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I was harsh, you just have to know the situation. Obviously with Moore, Clausen, Cantwell (and later, Pike) the Panthers weren't picking up Edwards to be a QB.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 01:08, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the whole deal with Tank Daniels now. I'm sorry I didn't get it before. RevanFan (talk) 04:19, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes, BLP applies everywhere. Grsz¹¹ 20:04, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 21:27, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]