User talk:Coeus24

UT Football

I undid you last edit only due to the fact that the school has them with this record. The record book may have made a mistake when they where publishing it. They only give the school 115 years and UT has them as 116 so someone made a mistake. I am not saying you did since the record book has what you posted. MDSanker 15:27, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

UT started playing football in 1896. 1896 to 2012 is 121 years. UT didn't have a team during six of those years = 115 years. The source you cited hadn't been updated since January; since that time, a loss to Penn State was changed to win as a result of the Sandusky scandal (hence, the added win). My source is up to date and accurate, and therefore I undid your undoCoeus24 (talk) 22:03, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

The Penn State loss is still a loss for the team that lost per NCAA instructions. Sorry. If they had forfeited the games yes they would have been a win, however they vacated the games. MDSanker 01:27, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

With respect, Wrong Again

Misunderstanding on both our parts about the Penn State thing. A forfeit would mean that UT got the win; however, Penn State "vacated" the win, meaning that neither team got the win or loss. Therefore, a loss should be removed from Tennessee's record
The links you provide are absolutely terrible. One of them only goes back to 1902, a full 11 years after TN started playing. The other one has a PDF link to a record book from 2009. My source (the freakin NCAA themselves) is accurate up to August 2012.
You have stated multiple times that UT has played 116 years
- "...According to the school it has them as 116 years of school play this record book has them as 115 the math on the record book is rong"
However, on your most recent "Undo," you stated "...they have not played 116 years since this season is not over or even started.

YOU'RE THE ONLY ONE WHO SAID ANYTHING ABOUT 116 YEARS!! You're contradicting yourself
The NCAA record book is impartial and unbiased, huge factors in a Wikipedia source. Yours comes "from the school," and therefore doesn't have the same level of credibility

Please stop arguing with me about this. You have yet to produce a valid point as to why your sources should be included; I just gave you multiple reasons why mine shouldCoeus24 (talk) 21:15, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am not "arguing" with you I am calm, I just understand that the Penn state wins do count as a loss for UTK sorry to tell you this it is not a free pass on the game.

This PDF that you are sighting as you sole reason for your case is not correct. It was written by a person, people make mistakes. Please don't undo the page until it is resolved on the talk page. That is the best way to decide if you or I is correct.

And you are a fan of UTK so it may not be best for you to be editing the page as Wikipedia does not like that. Neutral point of view

Oh and go to the NCAA talk page and look at the Penn state notes and it may help. Hope you have a pleasant day. MDSanker 03:32, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

St. Henry Catholic School, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

DGG ( talk ) 18:25, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]