Jump to content

User talk:Killervogel5/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11→Archive 15

2009 World Series

While I can appreciate the fear of FAC (I haven't don't anything there since Wesley Clark and Alison Krauss years ago, other than the occasional review when someone asks), I would really appreciate at least a short review (and hopefully support) when I nom it in the new year. FAC, like FLC, needs reviews and every little bit helps! Staxringold talkcontribs 17:16, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

I'll consider it; I just don't like fighting with the regulars. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 17:19, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
  • I'd have to check in with BnG29 if I wanted to do the 2008 World Series, as he and I worked on that together, but 2008 Philadelphia Phillies season is the main reason I fear FLC. I think it's a great article, comprehensive and complete, but it got held up over simple MOS issues that are common to all MLB season articles. So honestly, I just didn't want to deal with all that. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 17:27, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

List of managers of defunct Major League Baseball teams

As we discussed a while back at WT:BASEBALL, I created an article for List of managers of defunct Major League Baseball teams. Although the prose still needs to be done, the list itself is complete. But before I proceed, I wanted a little input. Right now the list is very long. So I was thinking of splitting it into subsections for each league - i.e., an NL subsection, an AA subsection, etc. The problem with that is that some teams played in multiple leagues, and some managers managed a particulr team in multiple leagues, so splittling that information could be awkward. But it may be readable, and I suppose the multiple league issues can be addressed via footnotes and prose discussion. But I would like to get your thoughts. Thanks. Rlendog (talk) 17:56, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I have actually looked at the list several times already; I happened upon it while working on the List of MLB managers in my sandbox. I added it to the see also section expecting a redlink and found it already existed. I did notice that it was rather long but I think it could easily be addressed by splitting it into league subsections as you mention above. If you need any assistance, let me know. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 18:00, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! Rlendog (talk) 20:22, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey, hey, hey

I haven't been on much, or at least done much writing for a while, because of school but I'm on break now if there's anything you want to do. I never got to Whiz Kids (baseball), but I do a c/e if you still want. I'm not entirely sure which article you're working on in your sandbox, but it looks incredible. blackngold29 20:03, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

That's ok; I took it to peer review and apparently it's a lot farther from GA than I thought, so I pushed it back to the bottom of my checklist for a while. The article in my sandbox will eventually become List of Major League Baseball managers, hopefully the lead for the project's fourth FT. The awards FT is almost complete: MVP is at FLC right now and the list of World Series champs is the last thing. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 21:10, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Mets draft picks FLC

  • Thanks for helping answer MM40's points at the FLC, would you mind actually laying a vote down (since you've capped your comments) if you think the list is pretty well polished off? It's just been idling at FLC for a while, don't want it to wait longer than it needs. Thanks! Staxringold talkcontribs 21:10, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Baez

In those cases always better to just not use admin powers in an issue you're already involved in. Went ahead and protected for a day, at least, per this story that makes it clear the deal ain't done til the physical is. Staxringold talkcontribs 22:07, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

  • BTW, did you know that's not really the "Phillies" site, but just MLB.com with some wallpaper plastered on? Obviously they're all hosted by MLB.com, but if you replace the philadelphia.phillies.mlb bit with just mlb.mlb.com and delete the bit after the content_id (so you get this link) you get precisely the same story but just as an MLB.com story. Staxringold talkcontribs 22:16, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
  • A copyedit would be much appreciated. I'll add some more images, and if you can find that source awesome. The color tinting really is annoying. Personally I somewhat like the style of List of NBA champions, keeping the two leagues in set columns and simply highlighting the winner, but this method (Winner/Loser) works as well. Staxringold talkcontribs 22:47, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Idea

I like our managers list idea, but I've got a question. We already have Phillies, Mets, Yankees, and Mariners draft pick lists. I'm doing Sox right now. Think we could (way down the line) have a "First-Round Draft picks" FT? Only issue is what the controlling article would be, maybe List of first overall picks in the Major League Baseball draft? Staxringold talkcontribs 16:47, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

List of Major League Baseball first overall draft choices is a perfect overview and is already a featured list. Sounds like a long-term goal to me. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 17:12, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
  • I think it's fine; the purpose is served by linking together the draft articles instead of the first overall pick lists, and a navbox can take care of the rest. By the way, mind taking a look here and letting me know how it's coming along? KV5 (Talk • Phils) 17:34, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
  • Do you think that the draft article itself would have to be part of that topic? Or should that just be the topic proper? Make it about the draft and then have all of the lists be subordinate to it? KV5 (Talk • Phils) 17:59, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
  • I think a general draft topic would be a separate topic. This topic would just be about the picks, not the entire process. Honestly I dunno if there could really be a draft topic, other than just "Drafts in Major League Baseball" and have the First-Year Player Draft, Rule 5 Draft, and Expansion drafts. Staxringold talkcontribs 18:07, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
  • It looks good. The lead could use some work (some sentences need sentences, more manager "facts" like all-time championships, things like that). I love that Connie Mack image choice for the lead pic. Really is amazing how many Yankees managers are in the HoF. Staxringold talkcontribs 17:43, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I'm doing all the prose first and then all the referencing later (I assume you meant some sentences needs references above). The lead's not done yet, just a work in progress, and once I'm done, it will be easier to sort through this article and get the info like all-time championships and victories and such since I've already culled out everything else from all of the OTHER articles! KV5 (Talk • Phils) 17:51, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Service awards proposal

Master Editor Hello, Killervogel5/Archive 9! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.

If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 04:44, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Request

Hey there KV5; hope you had a good holiday season. When you were first made an administrator, you deleted a few pages in your userspace, such as User:Killervogel5/Support, on the grounds that you don't use them anymore. A valid reason, but unfortunately these templates were transcluded onto old FLC pages (see for example Special:WhatLinksHere/User:Killervogel5/Support), and now that you've deleted the templates, they appear as broken links on those FLC pages. If you get the chance, would you mind restoring those pages, substituting the templates on each FLC page (I can help if needed), and then re-deleting them? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 17:49, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Sure, I'll look into it. I thought they had all been removed from the old FLC pages when I was using them since we weren't allowed to use graphics. I didn't even realize they were still around. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:13, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Should be sorted now. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:46, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:48, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Phillies

Hard to figure why they'd be vandalizing it now. In early November I could see it, but now? "News flash, dude! The Yankees beat the Phillies!" "That was 2 months ago. Where you been, boy?" "Duh, I was at a village idiots convention!" ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Look what I found!

KV5! Never knew you were so old. Also, I'm about to FAC 2009 World Series! Staxringold talkcontribs 19:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

That's... totally awesome. I'm definitely putting a hatnote on my userpage that I am not to be confused with a tomb. Also, congrats and good luck! KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:55, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Inner Hebrides/archive1

When you get the chance, this needs a revisit. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 23:19, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Have done, Chief. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 23:27, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:BrettMyers.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:BrettMyers.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. ccwaters (talk) 11:49, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Nobel Prize

Hey! I saw you as a member on the Award Group and am wondering if you could help me out with an article I am working on, the Nobel Prize. A quite important article since, many link to it etc. I think the content is starting to get good but it really needs some copy-editing which I isn't suited for. Do you have any chance to help out? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esuzu (talk • contribs) 18:26, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I may be able to help out a bit, but I have a lot of other projects on my plate right now, so it won't be right away. If you want places to look for improvement right now, fix the formatting of your references (they go after punctuation, not before) and check the article for overlinking - there's a lot of it right now. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 18:34, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok thank you very much. I've acctually been wondering about the reference thing so I will try to fix that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esuzu (talk • contribs) 18:38, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of World Series champions/archive1

When you get the chance, could you stop by again? Staxringold talkcontribs 15:50, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Done done done, done-done-done, done-done-done... *sung to the tune of the Imperial March* KV5 (Talk • Phils) 15:54, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Charlotte Bobcats all-time roster/archive2 needs a revisit (Wizardman's question was answered). Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 17:28, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Re:

Hello, Killervogel5. You have new messages at Tide rolls's talk page.
Message added 23:58, 16 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

List of Texas Tech Red Raiders men's basketball seasons FLC

Thanks again for a good review of Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Texas Tech Red Raiders men's basketball seasons/archive1. I've replied to your comments on the FLC archive page. I appreciate the comments and suggestions! NThomas (talk) 23:48, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Fixed multiple problems. Thanks again! NThomas (talk) 03:40, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
I know I shouldn't bother you here but... when you get the chance, I could use some clarification on what you meant about inclusion of the current season. NThomas (talk) 19:06, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
I was wondering if you had come to a conclusion about the "In progress" column and if so, could I get your ok about that comment. Thanks. NThomas (talk) 06:30, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

2008 MLB seasonal game logs

Just wondering why you reverted my edits to the 2008 seasonal game logs? They look a little silly having the records greyed out for postponments. Only things that didn't happen because of the postponment (ie score/win/loss/tie/attendance) should be omitted. If it's just an issue of consistency, I plan on converting all of them, just didn't have time to finish when I started. Danlaycock (talk) 23:38, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I didn't revert all your edits; I just reverted the others after someone else reverted on the Phillies page, which was on my watchlist. You shouldn't go around making sweeping changes like that without discussion. Where you think it's "silly", the rest of the Baseball WikiProject still does it this way. The 2008 Phillies season is a good article and was passed that way; the 2009 Phillies season, a good article candidate, also follows the same format. There's no reason to duplicate the information again; people can see that the line is incomplete and can easily transpose the numbers over a blank space. It's just a step that doesn't need to be taken. Consistency already existed; you just changed it to something else. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 12:43, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Well, I'd suggest that there is less consistency on the formatting of this than you might suspect. Looking through some of the older game logs, it was done several different ways and I was just trying to make things uniform, not set a new precident. As for your argument about the GA status of the article, that's kinda beyond the point as the article certainly isn't perfect (nor is any article). The relavant question is wheither this is an improvement or not. I'll raise the issue at Baseball WikiProject to see if anyone else has an opinion.Danlaycock (talk) 16:59, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
I certainly don't see the logic behind adding redundant code and calling it an "improvement". I also never claimed that the 2008 Phillies season article is perfect, but it is the only baseball team season good article to this point and can easily be used as a model for later seasons. Feel free to raise the issue at WT:MLB. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 17:16, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Major League Baseball awards/archive1

We've finally finished off the topic guys! Given your role as a major contributor to one or more of the articles in this topic, please stop by the FTC when you get the chance! This is what Wikiprojects are all about! Staxringold talkcontribs 01:31, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

List of Gunsmoke television episodes

I've responded to your comments regarding the List of Gunsmoke television episodes. Care to take a second look? Thanks — Jimknut (talk) 17:52, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

I've already done so, and per the note at the top of my talk page, you don't need to remind me, as I've watchlisted the page. Thanks. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 17:53, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Laudian Professor of Arabic

Just a note to say that I really appreciated your swift review and kind comments. Bodley's Librarian had to wait 3 days for its first and 15 days for its second review, so I was rather hoping someone would take the plunge sooner than that! (And now that you're in an Oxford mindset, can you see anything you'd like to improve on the Bodley list?) Regards, and thanks. BencherliteTalk 21:40, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Managers

Looks great! Staxringold talkcontribs 16:41, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Pretzel

A new wiki series of authors (mostly Sundar) has completely diluted the article and information. I think that German overtones have overwhelmed the real story and has artfully destoryed earlier versions. I talk to you because I think you will understand what I mean. What can be done?John Jr. (talk) 13:22, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I am no longer participating in this article due to Sundar's uncivil attacks. Sorry. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 13:27, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Gunsmoke

Care to take another look at the List of Gunsmoke television episodes? I've made some upgrades to it, which are discussed here. — Jimknut (talk) 15:28, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Tug McGraw

I'd like to point out that before I started reediting Tug McGraw's entry, it said that the way he got the nick-name "Tug" was due to his inability to cut hair.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 18:07, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok... does that matter? KV5 (Talk • Phils) 23:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Of course it matters; it was inaccurate information in a wikipedia entry. This is the kind of thing that gives wikipedia a bad name. I've worked hard on Tug McGraw's entry, just as I have just about every entry I've ever worked on. I can't even tell you the amount of inaccurate information I've removed from wikipedia articles. When do I get to the point where people actually trust my edits?--Johnny Spasm (talk) 01:22, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
It's not that I don't trust your edits; it's that there wasn't really any reason to notify me that you didn't add the info that I tagged. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 01:29, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

List of Boston Red Sox first-round draft picks

Mind stopping by this FLC if you get the chance? It's the oldest of my FLCs but only has 2 votes. Staxringold talkcontribs 00:02, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of forty-plus point games by Kobe Bryant/archive1

Hi. This FLC on which you have commented has been restarted because the consensus was unclear. Can you revisit to make sure your comments have been addressed, and if possible, make a declaration of Support, Oppose or Neutral? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 16:37, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

User:J04n/ABN

Thanks for userfying that for me, you can delete it now there is nothing of any use. Sorry to be a bother J04n(talk page) 13:59, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Batting champs, etc.

I do not agree with chopping the non-NL 19th century stuff, and have raised the issue at [1] ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:30, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

The information that you're referring to isn't part of Major League Baseball. Those leagues are not, and were never, part of MLB. We're prepping for another featured topic, and that info isn't part of it. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 22:34, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Table colors not forbidden by WP:ACCESS#Colors

Hi, Killer, there can be several good causes for reasonable editors to disagree in good faith over the use of colors in a table, but I'm slightly mystified by your references to Wikipedia:Accessibility#Colors, which (as I read it) certainly doesn't prohibit the use of them. It is important to (1) not rely solely on colors to convey information (so that a reader with monochrome eyes or a monochrome monitor can still draw all the information), (2) avoid, where possible, red/green and other common color blindnesses and (3) avoid dark shades that don't allow enough contrast with overlying type or images. I don't think any of those have been problems with the shading at List of World Series champions. Best wishes for the new year and 2010 season (pitchers and catchers should be reporting this week). —— Shakescene (talk) 02:48, 1 February 2010 (UTC) P.S. (I've put this page on my watchlist, so there's no need to post a talkback tag on my page for any responses.) —— Shakescene (talk) 02:57, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

The color was the only method being used to convey that information, which is why I removed it. Regardless, the incarnation that I just removed wasn't adding anything to the article anyway, as it was much too subtle, and it didn't need to be there in the first place. I know how the policy is interpreted as we deal with at WP:FLC all the time. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 13:12, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Killervogel5/Archive_9&oldid=1139588943"