User talk:Ravenswing/Archive1

This is an archive of former discussions. Please do not edit it. If you wish to revitalize an old topic, bring it up on the active talk page.

Ottawa Senators

Do what you want, I just want the space for where the jersey goes to be kept. I haven't gotten around to putting it in there. -- Earl Andrew - talk 16:36, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

It's about it being POV. Im not saying the Ottawa Senators were not the best team of the day, but saying they are would be blatant POV. Saying they were one of the best would be more neutral. -- Earl Andrew - talk 3 July 2005 20:43 (UTC)

Tampa Bay Area Group

Thanks for catching my mistake re NFL/NHL. As it regards the (St. Petersburg/Tampa Bay Area) appellation, however, it would be easy for someone not a local to be confused by my persistence on this. St. Petersburg is a city in the Tampa Bay area, in the same way St. Paul is a city in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Both Esposito's group and the other group were trying to bring the team to the Thunderdome in St. Petersburg, but they more importantly they were trying to bring the team to the Tampa Bay Area generally (and indeed both would have likely made the decision ultimately made by Esposito to move the Lightning to the Ice Palace in Tampa following the decision to convert the Thunderdome to Tropicana Field). When it comes to our professional sports teams, we in the Tampa bay Area almost universally use "Tampa Bay" as opposed to "St. Petersburg" or "Tampa." As someone who grew up in St. Petersburg, I would love for my hometown to get exclusive credit as the first home of the Lightning, but it is much, much more common and better form to refer to the group as another "Tampa Bay" group. Further, it always "St. Petersburg, Florida," not "Saint Petersburg, Florida." I will revert the page if you have no further issues. ALC Washington 22:02, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I do, actually. How the residents of the Tampa Bay area perceive themselves isn't really the point. At the time, and subsequently, it was clear in the national press and in THN that there were competing bids from "St. Petersburg" and from "Tampa Bay." What decisions Karmanos' and Rutherford's St. Petersburg group may have made in terms of future venues had they won the bid can only now be speculative and moot. Ravenswing 01:31, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Though I assume good faith, I would like to look into your claim that the debate was characterized that way further. In the meantime, I will only revert "Saint Petersburg" to "St. Petersburg" (part of the project I was originally working on when I edited the page more substantially). Though I do not recall the competition that way, it was a while ago, and I could very well be wrong in my current recollection. If you have any supporting documentation you'd like to send me way, please feel free (via my talk page). Thanks. ALC Washington 01:44, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

None unless you feel like posting your address and don't mind 14 year old THN clippings ... Ravenswing 11:47, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Founded Dates and Records

1)Ok... I wasn't too sure about Springfield. If its from league mergers it continous. I'm using that rule with the "I-6" teams. What's your verdict on Hershey Bears? I just don't want someone insisting the The ECHL Rivermen are the new AHL Rivermen. They are related in name only.

2) What's the defacto minimum games played for Goalie stats?

ccwaters 13:30, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

With the Indians it was continuous, although the waters were muddied. Even during the times Eddie Shore had the AHL franchise in other cities, he sited a "Springfield Indians" team in lower minor leagues. Then you have franchise dormancies which can last forever -- I remember that the AHL Moncton Hawks franchise (which started in 1987) was the old Boston Braves franchise that folded in 1974. The Bruins had paid a nominal fee ever since just on the offhand chance they'd need an AHL franchise they controlled, and sold it off to Winnipeg thirteen years later. The Springfield Indians/Springfield Falcons were two separate franchises, but the Falcons had the exact same Hartford Whaler players as the previous season, because the Whalers thought a great deal of having their affiliate 30 minutes north, whatever the local ownership was.

Ultimately, we have de facto vs. de jure here. Myself, I'd be more sympathetic to the notion that the current AHL Rivermen have a lot more in common with the IHL-ECHL Rivermen than they do with the Springfield Indians or the Worcester Icecats. Probably hockey historians much wiser than we would have shouting matches over which was which.

As far as goalie stats go, the NHL uses 25 games as the minimum for inclusion in a season's leaderboard. Ravenswing 16:57, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

Team lead in scoring.....

Can you give me other players that lead their team in scoring for four straight seasons? I just want to know 0459--15-Aug-05

Are we talking ever or just recently? I'm genuinely quite astonished. Mario Lemieux led the Pens SIX straight seasons. Phil Esposito, Jaromir Jagr, Gordie Howe and Wayne Gretzky each won four or more straight Ross Trophies, never mind merely leading their teams in scoring that stretch. Rick Middleton did it for Boston in the early Eighties, Guy Lafleur ran it up to six straight for the Habs, Mike Bossy did six straight for the Islanders, Andy Bathgate did EIGHT straight for the Rangers, Brett Hull's done it for St. Louis, Howe had streaks of nine straight AND four straight for the Red Wings, Steve Yzerman did seven straight for the Wings ... heck, Gretzky did it with both Edmonton AND Los Angeles. Turn the clock back, and Sweeney Schriner did it for the New York Americans, while Nels Stewart made it six straight for the Montreal Maroons and Cy Denneny made it seven straight for the Senators. This is actually a pretty common feat in NHL history, and a cursory look at the records reveals it. Ravenswing 10:09, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

RE: Los Angeles Kings - Hall of Famers

I noticed you removed Paul Coffey, Grant Fuhr, Harry Howell, Bob Pulford, Terry Sawchuk, Steve Shutt and Billy Smith from the list of Hall of Famers who played for the Kings. Just wanted to let you know that according to the Hockey Hall of Fame, all of these players were indeed elected to the Hockey Hall of Fame, and numerous sources, including the Los Angeles Kings Media Guide, show that they all played for the Kings. Please refer to the citations I posted in the article for reference. Thanks! Gmatsuda 08:07, 10 September 2005 (UTC) moved from userpage ∞Who?¿? 08:23, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

There is a consensus standard for NHL Team Pages for Hall of Fame citations. Briefly put, players listed in HOF sections must have played a significant number of games for the cited team and that their play for the team have a material impact on the players' election to the HHOF. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey/Team_pages_format if you have any questions. Ravenswing 08:43, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

Bench Clearing Brawl

In the Blazers article, I didn't actually write that part about the bench clearing brawl. I had just copy pasted it from the original Cowboys article that was on wiki to start with. It was getting late that night when I merged those articles and I had gotten a bit lazy in regards to copy pasting from the previous wiki articles. But you did a great job at cleaing up. Thanks! Masterhatch 15:02, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Oh, good heavens, no, I knew you cut and pasted all those entries; a chunk of the Screaming Eagles section I had written myself. In any event, your writing style (or fact checking, for that matter) isn't remotely close to that sloppy, but I figured since I was there I'd clean up a bit. Ravenswing 19:26, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

Blackhawks vs. Black Hawks

I have been aware of the difference but here on wikipedia i see that before '86 it seems to be a mixed usage. I am going to surf through many of the hockey sites and see if I can "fix" it; not that it matters too much but it is nice to have it right (as so many other sites on the Net are wrong). Most of the seasons are wrong (partly my fault in copy pasting) and a few other places such as player articles are wrong too. I will be diligent and start fixing the seasons over the course of the next couple of days. Masterhatch 17:57, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Oh, absolutely; in fact, it was in doing those playoff additions for those early NHL seasons that I saw "Blackhawks" used pre-86. At the time I thought, "Eh, I'll catch up with it later," but yeah, it's something on which we all need to keep a weather eye. Ravenswing 23:59, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

More missing info

There are a few "?" on the 1920-21 NHL season, 1921-22 NHL season, 1924-25 NHL season, and 1925-26 NHL season. If one of your books has the missing dates and scores, could ya fill in the missing data? That would be great! Thanks Masterhatch 02:42, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Gah, sorry about that; just made the edits. Ravenswing 13:19, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! Me so happy now. Masterhatch 14:15, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Jean-Paul Parise vs. J.P. Parise

Personally, I don't care which is used. When I add to the team player lists, I also check links. While I was adding to the List of Toronto Maple Leafs players I had noticed that the majority of links used his full name and only the North stars used J.P. When players are red linked, I look and see which is the most common name used (if more than one name is used) on Wiki and switch the minority names to the most common one. That makes thinks simpler if someone creates an article for that player (all the links are on the right track before the player article is created). Since, as you pointed out, J.P. is more common outside of Wikipedia, I will switch all the links to J.P.Masterhatch 10:15, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Done. Now all the red links use J.P. and not his full name. Masterhatch 10:26, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Mm, thanks. In certain ways, it's the danger of using Wikipedia-only sources; Wikipedia is so often at the mercy of the first person to get his licks in. Jean-Paul's certainly his real name, and I have no idea where "JP" started, but it's what was used throughout his career, everywhere from radio broadcast to the hockey cards I still have (grins) Ravenswing 12:55, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

I think the same goes for Jean-Pierre Dumont. I've never heard him called that. Its always been J.P. ccwaters 02:35, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Ugly current squad templates

Ravenswing, have you thought about putting your vote in to have those horrible templates deleted? Masterhatch 12:17, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Oo, I didn't know I could. I'll get right on it. Ravenswing 23:01, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

We have another ugly template at NHL. It's like people are falling in love with ugly templates and then trying to force them everywhere. Masterhatch 01:25, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

I just had a look at other leagues (EarlAndrew's template promted me to do that) and I just realised that those ugly templates we just got rid of out of the NHL and CFL are thriving in the NBA. And that really ugly template I removed off of NHL is in many other leagues. But of course, the NHL isn't those other leagues and just because they are all jumping off the same bridge doesn't mean we have to to.Masterhatch 01:44, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Nope, any more than I bought the argument for the ugly Senators team box that it's what was used in soccer leagues. Ravenswing 07:41, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Nose Nuggets

a user by the name of Nosenuggets has been going around making drastic changes to all of the team pages. Some of the changes are good, but a lot of them are bad. The worst thing he is doing is his spreading of the "white space". take a look at the Montreal Canadiens for a perfect example. Anyways, i have reverted some of the white spaces out, but every time i do, he puts them back in. I see that other people have also taken out his "white space" but agian he puts it back in. What are your thoughts on this matter? Masterhatch 09:22, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Ugh, that's not attractive at all. I'll revert that myself, but I figure we ought to flag this guy down first, and if he doesn't feel like following format to go for the arbitration provisions. Ravenswing 16:20, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Some of the team pages (like Les Canadiens) are heavy on the graphics. That is why there should be white spaces. As for the color boxes on the teams, they refelct the "home" jersey (or primary) team color. For example, the Philadelphia Flyers wear black at home, hence the black box at the top of the info box with orange lettering. Agreed? NoseNuggets 7:41 AM US EDT Oct 7 2005.

Err, no. For one thing, your color choices don't always reflect the actual home uniform colors -- Edmonton comes to mind -- and it strikes me at least that readability is significantly more important than aping home jersey colors down to the background and trim. For another, plainly from the number of users doing reverts, many do not agree that there should be more white spaces. But most importantly, we have a consensus Team Pages Format used throughout the NHL and AHL entries, to which those entries should conform, and it's quite improper to charge in and alter them unilaterally without even an attempt at gaining consensus. I've linked to that page before, and you're certainly welcome to make your pitch over there if you think you can gain a consensus for your ideas. Ravenswing 16:09, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

1966-67 NHL season

First, I want to say good job on the stats for Lester Patrick on the List of NHL one gamers. I guess hockeydb's stats were a little off, eh? It's now kinda funny because there is more information about Patrick on the list of NHL one gamers than there is on his actualy article. Second, for some reason, hockeydb doesn't list the PIM for the 1966-67 NHL season. I checked a few other sites and they too were lacking. Do any of your books have those PIM stats? The table is built, it is just a matter of plugging in the minutes. As for the IP address who was working on the rosters, he seems to have stopped and he didn't respond to my attempts at communication. Anyways, I am going to list those for deletion. Masterhatch 14:44, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

HockeyDB is a great and convenient resource, but it lacks in accuracy a lot of the time. I do have those numbers and I'll plug them in right now. And yeah, as far as Patrick goes, I put his page on watch so I would be reminded to do up an article. Lester Patrick is one of the genuine giants of hockey history, both on and off the ice, and it's damn near criminal for his entry here to be neglected. Ravenswing 19:10, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

RE:hockey logos for the teams. Over the past two days, i went through and finished all the season standings for all the seasons prior to the seventies. I just wanted to get them done. As you saw with the 1967-68 NHL season i put all the correct logos in. Many of the logos are wrong from the 40s onward and I know that. I just wanted to get the standings over and done with (it was annoying me that I had been so lazy with the seasons of late). Today i had uploaded all the right logos for the teams prior to the seventies (uploading is tedious) and I will backtrack tonight when i finish work and fix all the logos. As you may have noticed with the logos, i put the dates in use on the file name to make it easier. Of course, if you beat me to it, well, you beat me to it. But that is my "to-do" for tonight. Also, as you may have noticed, the seventies havent been touched yet. I will try and do a season a day over the next ten days so that there will be no more redlinks for the seasons. Masterhatch 05:57, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Oh, I'm not fretting. I just saw that one set off and figured I'd fix it. I know we'll get to things as we get to them. Ravenswing 14:38, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

I just finished back tracking to the late forties and then I noticed that different sites say different things for different logos. I am going to leave it where I left off as it looks pretty good. If someone comes and corrects the odd logo or two prior to the late 40s, all the better but I am done with that. Now to move forward and take care of the 70s. Masterhatch 16:14, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm calling upon your help yet again

I thought I had it all figured out, but now I am clueless again. Is it "Saskatoon Shieks" or "Saskatoon Sheiks"? The proper way to spell "Sheik" is in fact "sheik" [1] and "Shiek" comes up empty on Dictionary.com [2]. hockeyDB spells it Shiek and I was sure that hockeyDB simply made one of many spelling errors. Today, after finishing 1974-75 NHL season, I was going to create the sheiks article and so I started my research. After running across this page [3], I all of a sudden became unsure which spelling was right. That site uses both spellings on the same page!!! I will hold off on creating that article until I know which spelling is right. A google test for "Saskatoon Shieks" gets 235 hits. "Saskatoon Sheiks" gets 356. Thanks in advance! Masterhatch 17:09, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

One more thing, there are some "?" on 1921-22 WCHL season. I couldn't find the Edmonton Eskimos (hockey) stats for that year. All I know is that they came in first. Masterhatch 17:37, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Not a problem. Charles Coleman used "Sheiks" and I consider him considerably more reliable than most of today's writers, both gifted with an inability to spell and an unwillingness to look things up. I do have the 1922 stats, I'll get right on it. Ravenswing 19:51, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

And yet again

For the 1987-88 NHL season there are a few blank spots in the playoffs for the Bruins and Devils series that need filling. If you have the stats and the time, could you toss those numbers in? thanks! As you will probably notice, I didn't actually add info for the playoffs that year, I just changed the tables but I noticed that not a single game went into OT. That can't be correct. Thanks for your help! Masterhatch 05:28, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Wayne Gretzky

Judging by his last post, I think he is finished his trolling on the Gretzky article. If you want to report him, don't hack out the trolling. Leave it there until the people you report him to see it. If you aren't going to report him, just hack it out. I had a look at his contributes and he seems to be trolling on other sites too. Masterhatch 17:11, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Did you report that IP address? It doesn't matter anymore. He used a different IP address today on the Gretzky article and the other articles he has been "toying" with. I am just going to remove that trolling rant off the gretzky talk. Masterhatch 14:41, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Mediation

Hello, Nlu has filed an RFM here. If you are unaware of what mediation is, see WP:M. Then go to the above link and accept or reject the case. It is normally recommended that you accept, in order to cease edit warring, and to get us to a fair compromise. Once the three of you accept the case, I will act as the mediator, unless you choose to reject me in favor of another mediator. Cheers. Redwolf24 (talk) 21:30, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

I would appreciate it if you went to Special:Preferences and set an e-mail address. However if you don't wanna set an address, we can do mediation over IRC or on-wiki. Reply at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Derek Sanderson Jeter. Thanks, Redwolf24 (talk) 22:58, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi. On the subject of this Derek Jeter mediation, there was an agreement between some of the complainants on both sides to accept revised wording. A 'Trivia' section has been added which currently includes the text;

• • "While it has been reported that he was named after 1970s Boston Bruins' hockey player Derek Sanderson [4] this information is not confirmed by the biography on Jeter's site or any other verifiable direct source."

You haven't commented on this change so it is not clear whether you accepted it or just haven't visited the page recently. The mediator is suggesting that this should go to RfC, apparently in an effort to restore wording more in line with what you had before, but I wanted to check with you if the current version is ok, needs further tweaking, or is not acceptable. --CBD ^T _C ^@ 13:00, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Montreal Canadiens

Hello Ravenswing, as I respect & trust your hockey knowledge, I ask for your opinon. Lately I've been in an edit conflict with anon Users: 66.131.149.19 & 69.157.184.205 over Kovalev & Souray being alternate captains along with Rivet & Zednik. They say it's only Rivet & Zednik, I say it's all four. I'm just not sure anymore, what do you think. GoodDay 22:11, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

I've no idea, actually. I'd check out the Habs website myself. Certainly a team can only dress two, but I suppose the 'A's could rotate among as many players as the team desires. The degree to which players are "officially" alternate captains has always been a great deal more hazy than many people would wish. Ravenswing 08:14, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

disagree on wiki-wording

I am a lifelong historian of the great game of hockey Going back to the 50's when the game was actually a game and not a business. I am not naive enough to fall into the 'greatest of all time' arguements because they are simply not valid. Example: to say that Wayne Gretzky or Mario Lemieux are the 'greatest' players of all time is simply not a correct statement. No TRUE hockey fan should ever fall for that kind of rubbish either. Why are they not the greatest of all time?.....because they didn't play 'for all time' The greatest in the last quarter century....SURE, now there's a possibility. Not too many can argue that. But they(and other elite notables like Messier, Yzerman, Francis etc) did not play in the 40's against Schmidt or Apps. They didn't play in the 50's against Belliveau or Howe or Bathgate. And they didn't play against Mikita or Bucyk in the 60's. It's like saying Patrick Roy is the greatest goalie of all time simply because he has the most wins. It just isn't a valid statement and should not be found in the Wiki-Encyclopedia, If the Wiki Encyclopedia is to remain a decent and respected source of information. To claim anyone as the greatest of all time 'at anything' simply CANNOT be done. Whether they are in sports or music or art or politics or journalism etc etc. We both have a love of the game and I am sure that a 'proper' wording to descibe certain players will eventually arise among the hockey contributors on this interesting and always changing webpage.

All that may be so, and you may have a valid argument there, but we are not talking whether a certain player is the greatest of all time. We are talking about whether a certain player is widely acknowledged to be the greatest player of all time. Orr didn't even get a plurality on the issue a couple decades ago, before Gretzky's career got underway -- I'm minded that Stan Fischler ranked Orr 13th all-time (with Howe first) back in 1984, stating with some justification that a superstar who played eight full seasons couldn't be legitimately ranked over a superstar who played a quarter century.

Does saying that Orr OR Gretzky is the greatest of all time violate POV? Yes. Does saying that Gretzky is generally regarded as the greatest of all time do so? No, because most hockey experts and commentators do claim he is. I am comfortable with that phrasing. Ravenswing 19:58, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

-- I still tend to disagree. There are areas in Europe that could care less about the NHL and if you ask 'experts' or commentators there who the 'greatest' was/is they may name a player that neither you or I have even heard of. A player from a different era who simply did not get the chance to play in front of an NHL audience. I do know one thing. I still love the game despite it's degeneration into a 'business' over the last 25 years. Up until this season, it just turned into the dullest hockey I've seen in 40 years. The new rules are helping some. Let's hope they just stick with it so we'll all be entertained by the sport once again. Oh, and, uh, please don't quote Stan Fischler on anything to do with hockey....the man's a dolt.(he still thinks the game was invented in the U.S.....PLEASE!, give me a break)

I have to go coach my AAA Juve's now, Take Care.

And keep your stick on the ice.

PS forgot to mention: I expect you have a great hockey library but just in case you want another...and if you dont have it already:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/189212985X/ref=ase_webmill0c33-20/104-3606952-4618325?s=books&v=glance&n=283155&tagActionCode=webmill0c33-20

Considered by some as the greatest hockey book of all time...  :) color="green">Talk]]), 15:44, 4 January 2006.

Bobby Orr

Let's see: Bobby Orr is NOT arguably the greatest Hockey Player of All-time; yet; Wayne Gretzky is considered by MOST to be the greatest Hockey Player of All-Time. I find this highly inconsistent (and disingenious) on your part. What is your proof that WG is considered by MOST (an highly inaccurate sum I might add ...) to be the Greatest ? I will delete this POV until you provide proof TrulyTory 18:32, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm surprised you are having trouble wrapping your head around this. Whether or not Orr (or Gretzky, for that matter) was the greatest player of all time is a subjective POV we can't actually say on Wikipedia. Whether Orr (or Gretzky, as to that) is considered the greatest player of all time isn't subjective at all; it is a quantifiable, verifiable fact. I'm likewise surprised you need proof of this: stop for a moment and forget that you think Orr is the greatest ever. Ask yourself, honestly ask yourself, who does the hockey world consider the greatest ever? THN's panel of fifty experts -- broadcasters, ex-players, journalists, general managers, coaches, statisticians -- picked Gretzky first. The NHL gave Gretzky honors no one else -- Orr included -- has received (has #4 been retired league-wide, for instance?). If I actually felt like doing it, I could give you citations and quotes until the cows came home. By contrast, how many verifiable, current quotes could you obtain citing Orr over Gretzky or Howe?

The funny thing is that while you toss around phrases like "wikinazi", you don't actually know my position on the subject, because as a Wikipedia editor that position is irrelevant and counterproductive. In the meantime, since you and Mr Pyles are new to Wikipedia, take a gander at the following: Wikipedia:Edit war and Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox Ravenswing 21:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Ravenswing, Although I agree with you on this whole Mr Pyles and TrulyTory Bobby Orr/Wayne Gretzky, however going as far as saying is that TrulyTory is a sockpuppet might be going a little bit far. Although it is not out of the question, it does not help the situation to post accusations of those nature, especially when their isn't much evidence to support it. Croat Canuck 06:24, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Certainly more evidence than Tory/Pyles has managed. Their tactics seem to be to proclaim POV!, misrepresent the positions of the people they characterize as enemies and wikinazis, demand evidence, and then ignore or disparage the evidence when it duly appears. I have repeatedly invited them to come up with some evidence of their own; they have repeatedly refused, while characterizing their position in terms of battles and war. I am not looking forward to the subsequent holy wars of these folk, and their ignorance of the concept that Wikipedia is built around consensus. Ravenswing 14:34, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I am not associated with TrulyTory. He simply has the same opinion that I, and many others(judging by the history of the page) have. That the word 'most' implies 'fact' where fact cannot be proven. I do not agree with TrulyTory as far as trying to hawk and edit over and over. Nor have I encouraged it. I have tried to use the talk pages as much as possible to plead for the case which I feel is a valid one. And I will continue to do so. I have also refrained from making any corrections to the WG page until today when someone used the word 'all' which just made he disputed sentence blatantly false.(and at least that is a point everyone would agree on)

Quick Question about Hockey Bios

• Rather than chase down just anyone in the Wiki-hockey community, I'd thought I'd put this question to someone who I've had a spirited debate with on the subject. I notice a few bios here and there that contain info which is, more or less, pointless. I'll use Randy Burridge as one that I've seen recently. You'll notice a lot of "While playing for Team A, he played with Player O, Player P and Player Q. And then he played for Team B and played with Player X, Player Y and Player Z" These 'played withs' are just fluff info in many cases. Say, in Burridge's bio...listing Charlie Simmer as a teammate is pertinent(perhaps) as it was him that gave him his nickname. What is the concensus in the Wiki-Hockey group when it comes to these sorts of bios? Again, in this example, the article is already a stub. Reducing it is really not that big of a deal unless it's a practice being done to clean up all the bios in the same manner. Your thoughts? Mr Pyles

There isn't really one in that particular case, although in general I agree with you that trimming meaningless fluff is a virtue. In the case of Burridge's particular bio, it's wasted words to say that he finished second in team scoring to Hall of Famer Pat Lafontaine; just mentioning that he came second in scoring ought to be enough. Of course, a lot of these stub bios just plain need rewriting -- again using Burridge, it's plain that it was written by a Sabre homer, because his career in Buffalo was less significant even than his time as a Capitol, never mind as a Bruin -- and you might as well go for it. (Although in looking carefully back at the article's history, to what you're referring's probably the version before Croat Canuck revised it, yes? If so, his edits are on target in wiping out all of those extemporaneous teammates.) Ravenswing 17:56, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm a Sabre homer and even I see it as just filling empty space. It's easy expanding some of the more elite bios for players like Glenn Hall, Red Kelly or Roger Crozier. Players like Burridge are hard workering chaps who play with a lot of soul and passion for the game....but there's hundreds of players who fit that description and sometime's just coming up with enough intersting info for a stub is hard. If I see a 'Burridge' here 'n there I'll try to clean it up. Maybe with more luck than Croat Canuck had with ol' Randy. Thanks ~Mr Pyles

Pretty much; I agree with you. As time permits, I'm working my way through less-than-superstar ex-Bruins, but what I'm revising or creating are the Ken Hodges and Bill Cowleys of the world, not the third-liners, however much like Burridge they did their part in their day. Even with that, there are a lot of famous Hall of Famers with stubs -- it bothers me, and I had damn better get on with it, for instance, that Lester Patrick's got a measly stub. Ravenswing 19:18, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

List of players with 1000 points

About Brind'Amour, although I believe he won't make it, he still has a decent shot of making, as he is currently averaging point-per-game and who knows, he could get on a hot streak and get the 53 points he needs just to get in there, and with the players like Staal, Whitney and Stillman playing like their playing who knows? His career high in points is 97, and although he is older he still could potentially reach those numbers with the season he has had so far.

Like I said, I doubt it, but I'd hate if we dropped the ball on this one and Brind'Amour somehow dug deep and got there. Chelios was ahead of him with 914 points going into this season, but you and I both know he'll never make that this season. Also, in reference to your above discussion with Mr Pyles, I'm going to be working on improving articles of hall-of-famers from the 70's, 80's and 90's, and I do agree that Hall of Famers should get higher priority over other player bios. Croat Canuck 19:01, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Mm, but it isn't as if we get gold stars if he does. Brind'Amour's on track to fall twenty points short, and that's a hell of a lot to make up with less than half the season left. Even if he was on track to make it, there's a lot of hockey left, and speculation's a policy violation. Ravenswing 19:36, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Ha! No we don't get gold stars, but that would be great if we did. I guess you are right though. Next time you take someone off the end of a chart, remember not to take the end of it, because when you took off Brind Amour you also took off the thing that ended the table, and then it got a little screwed up. I'll take him off myself this time. Croat Canuck 20:27, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Urp, sorry about that!

tis okay, I used my superpowers to fix it. Croat Canuck

hockey violence

Regarding the merger of Violence in ice hockey: the merge tag was placed there about just about two months ago and no one has objected to it. The merge category is backlogged out of all recognition. We need to get the uncontested merges out of there. If you want to dispute the merge, please let me know. Otherwise I will revert it to its merged state in a couple of days. Kerowyn 11:34, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

an attempt to standardise

Hello Ravenswing! Long time no talk. I am not sure of your viewpoint when it comes to the use of diacritics for hockey articles, but i know you are a reasonable, level-headed guy. Can you have a look here and throw your two bits in? Thanks in advance! Masterhatch 20:24, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Al hamilton

That fact about handing the captains jersey to wayne is true he is my uncle and i wanted to add to his wikipedia.. Could you please add it back.

Unfortunately, if it is not independently verifiable, it doesn't belong on Wikipedia in the first place. Even so, is it notable? Hamilton's article is a stub as it is, and there are surely biographical or career notes significantly more notable than whether Hamilton personally handed his own Oilers' captain's jersey to Gretzky. There's certainly no succession involved; Gretzky's stint as Oilers' captain started three years after Hamilton retired and seven after he had last been captain. Ravenswing 06:16, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

If you were al Hamilton and found your name on wikipedia he would appreciate that he was the last captain of the oilers before Gretzky, give him a call if you want.... Why would i just make up a stat like that

If I was Al Hamilton and I found out that the Wikipedia article on me claimed I was the last captain of the Oilers before Gretzky, I hope I'd take the trouble to correct that, because he wasn't. Glen Sather and Paul Shmyr captained the Oilers in the WHA after Hamilton. Ron Chipperfield was the team's captain the first NHL season, followed by Lee Fogolin the next two seasons. It's important to get one's facts straight before making Wikipedia entries. Ravenswing 06:25, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

old stat question...

Hi... I made a article for Randy MacGregor... hockeydb lists him playing in Austria for half a season. http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php3?pid=6419 Can you clarify that? What team and league? ccwaters 22:47, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Got nothing, I'm sorry. Total Hockey doesn't even list him being in Austria, and I can think of few records from European hockey in that time from insignificant leagues like Austria's that have come to us. I've got a small listing of the top players for the top five teams in the Alpenliga, but of course MacGregor's time there was insignificant. Ravenswing 00:59, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks anyways... ccwaters 01:05, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Curious

Hi, just wondering... what does "Bugseen Havch" mean? -- ran (talk) 20:13, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Basically it's Mongolian for "Go F*** yourself." Ravenswing 20:18, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Les Habs

Hi, I just got this email back from Liam Maguire

---

I’ve got all three volumes of that set. It’s a fantastic compilation of material no question about it however I don’t recall reading that particular association. Unfortunately Mr. Coleman has numerous errors in the books although most of them to my knowledge are incorrect numbers, typos, etc. This is obviously something different. To my knowledge the Montreal Canadiens were an expansion franchise first and foremost and not a franchise like the Portland Rosebuds who became Chicago or the Victoria Cougars who became the Detroit Cougars or the New York Americans who were the Hamilton Tigers who were the Quebec Bulldogs. The Canadiens were a separate entry, unto themselves. To the best of my knowledge and I think Michel backs that up with his research.

Liam Maguire

---

I noticed that my local library has the Coleman book, so I'll check it out myself. Thanks, Lorne lpearlis@rogers.com

Coleman certainly has some typos and some items for which just plain superior research came through in the succeeding years, but his account of the NHA franchise shifts is detailed and serves as the foundation of modern hockey scholarship. If you've more accurate research, I'd like to see the cites myself. (Not to mention that despite popular opinion, the Rosebuds did not "become" Chicago, nor the Cougars Detroit, and the Amerks franchise was awarded months before Hamilton's was revoked. Ravenswing 20:06, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Teemu Selanne

An admin just abused his powers and without discussion move protected the Teemu Selanne article. It pisses me off that all these people keep adding the diacritics calling the English spelling a "misspelling". None of them have yet to come up with a convincing argument for the inclusion of diacritics yet they keep edit warring by adding them. What part of "nonEnglish characters" do they not understand? Anyways, I am getting frustrated with their refusal to come up with anything other than It's misspelt!!! Masterhatch 04:31, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Need Hockey Help

I noticed your intrest in my hockey player template and was wondering if you wanted to help. Although I am a fan, I'm far from being knowlegeable and I'm not really sure on what should be included. thanks --T-rex 01:53, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Easthampton, Massachusetts

For your convenience, I'm cross-posting this to your Talk page (in case you're not monitoring its talk page). In the spirit of cooperation, I will refrain from making any edits until we reach a consensus.

The jist of that section is that important landmarks should be mentioned, not such things as non-notable pizza restaurants and coffee shops. Pizza Wings and Things and Shelburne Falls Coffee Roasters may be busy and successful businesses, but they're not by any stretch of the imagination a landmark or otherwise important point of interest - except perhaps in a travel guide. I lived in E'ton for ~20 years - the businesses I removed are simply not points of interest. I originally left Nini's and the Silver Spoon because they have been there for quite some time and perhaps could be considered historical or a landmark. --AbsolutDan ^{(T a lk)} 13:46, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Isotolo's Trolling

RGT, I thought I would write, we have never spoke before. I write up most of the hockey league articles from Junior D up to Tier II Junior A. Maybe what Exolon did was not exactly trolling, but this Peter guy is now making personal attacks on me due me trying to break up the argument that you two were engaged in. He wrote the same hotshot warning in mine, and inturn a co-wikipedian very quickly came to my support. This Peter guy just seems to be looking for a fight, although you don't need my suggestions, just laugh him off - he's not worth it. DMighton 19:08, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Quite. Considering that he has not, before or since, participated in any way in any hockey article or discussion on Wikipedia, this guy's behavior is trollish and threadcrapping, and I wonder what led him in the first place to rampage over the discussion here spewing his arrogance around. As you say, though, he isn't worth the bother, and it's just as well his spew was left out of the refactored archive. Ravenswing 04:06, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

SIHR

I just came back to see what you wrote back and I see that you are a member of the SIHR. If you could, could you de me a favour, if it isn't too much? I'm looking for stats like W-L-T records for the Durham Huskies and any Durham team they might have listed there. Could you see if they actually have anything? There is nothing on the net, and the OHA doesn't seem to have a clue. I am having one hell of a time and they are part of my hometown's heritage. DMighton 04:42, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Please? DMighton 19:00, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I put in an inquiry; we'll see what's afoot. I don't think much will come of it, and you might have to do some legwork with old newspapers. Ravenswing 19:07, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Alright, thank you, I appreciate it very much. I had seen they had something on their website, thought there might be a chance... if you come up with something, please do tell me. Thanks again. DMighton 21:36, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Logo Problems

Hey I noticed put the NHL logos back onto the main NHL page, and for that, I commend you. The same user took down the logos from the NBA page, which is my main area of contributions. I honestly don't know why he has a problem with using logos as "decorations", but all I can tell you is that I 100% agree with you with the notion of logos as identifyers. Dknights411 06:19, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I plan to do more besides. From what I saw of this guy's contribution list, he's a deletionist who's going around Wikipedia slashing anything he doesn't understand ... and among other things he doesn't understand is US copyright law. Ravenswing 14:24, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Knee jerk?

The deletion request in question was one user who listed over 50 articles, admitting that some of them probably should not be deleted, and listed no adequate reason for deleting them. Of course I have a knee jerk reaction to that. For great justice. 19:59, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Uh, no. Leaving the Polynesian articles aside, the AfDs I've been seeing today universally give reasons for deletion, and in each and every case you've voted to keep, generally in face of unanimous opposition, and giving no answer for your position beyond ones like "It's a company" or "A free game". What is your basis for alleging that Dannel Gomiller does indeed have a worldwide cult hit? Upon what do you assert Axion Quake's notability? And so on.

That's knee-jerk. Ravenswing 20:33, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

It's not, and I don't know why you'd care if it was. I don't know why you'd care if someone votes against the majority. So what? I don't feel like writing a dissertation - it appears obvious to me, and if someone wants to ignore that, and delete anyway, well, there you go. It wouldn't be the first time. I'm not griping about that, and I don't really see what your complaint is. For great justice. 20:42, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

My complaint -- plainly shared by several others as well -- is that you're spamming the AfD log with Keeps that have no grounding in fact, never mind common sense, and that it could be concluded that you're doing so to be disruptive, given that AfD is governed by consensus. Ravenswing 21:11, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Article for deletion Shiv Goraksha Babaji [5]

Hi I would like to ask you to reconsider your vote. I worked very hard on that page, and it's being listed by a user that has a personal vendetta against me because I've reported him for sockpuppeting and 3RR and vandalism..etc... anyway, I've included more evidence that it is notable - article gets 32,000 hits for search gorakhnath, which is a popular variant of his name [6]. Thanks, Hamsacharya dan 18:21, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

The degree to which you worked hard on a page, or to which any particular user has a vendetta against you, has zero bearing on its notability. I agree that Gorakhnath is notable, and should anyone file an AfD on it, I'll be happy to vote Keep. This is another article altogether. Ravenswing 19:28, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Macedonia poll

Hello. In your answer on the Republic of Macedonia poll you said if the country has adopted a title we must use it. As a nuetral outsider with no axe to grind who has done some study of this, I can say the RoM has not adopted any such title. The phrase referred to comes from the resolution which admitted the state to the U.N., "provisionally referred to" by the U.N. as "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia".
This circuitous language, which I gave in full on the article talk page, was just a diplomatic way of sidestepping the naming issue, not a new name for the country. Note the use of lower case in "former", for example, which the option you voted under gets wrong. Would you reconsider that vote? In my view, the best way to get the naming dispute right, getting the sources correct and in context, and giving all sides, would be in a footnote, as option #1 does. This was what was done before the recent edit war. Regards, Jonathunder 20:30, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Mod notability bar

I would concur that there is a "bar of notability", but I don't know for WCIII what indicates whether the bar has been passed or how to verify that. I am perfectly willing to follow such a schema if it can be described or codified. It appears that there is a lot of chaff in the WCIII custom map list, but that may simply be due to my ignorance, lack of a clearly known bar and article quality. --Habap 16:14, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Any ideas? --Habap 11:48, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Welll ... this might not be anything about which I agree, but it seems that game mod pages are prima facie non-notable, so there probably isn't any suggestion I could make short of working to change consensus on the policy. Ravenswing 17:57, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, why don't we start with some criteria so that people can't just say they are all non-notable? If there's a system, then we can base AfD arguments on that instead of just being forced to debate each one extensively. Some criteria that come to mind that make a mod notable:

1. Article written about the mod in a major gaming magazine or on a major gaming website
2. Mention of the mod on the publisher's website in other than a "fan-submitted" section
3. Tournaments held in the mod which have $X or more in prize money

Does that sound like a few good ones to start? --Habap 18:06, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

They certainly look sound to me; mention on the publisher's website in particular is verifiable, which people like. If you're serious about this, I strongly recommend you hit the talk pages for the most major computer games out there and see if you can whip up support for guidelines under which game mod pages can be notable. A couple people won't change policy. Fifty or a hundred editors well might. Good luck. Ravenswing 18:20, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Adminship?

I was just wandering around, and I was just wondering if you were gunning for adminship? I noticed you've voted on a lot of AFD's recently and seem to be making more edits in the Wiki namespace... If that's what you are going for I'd be more than happy to nominate you for it. If not, that's cool too. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 04:05, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Heh, I certainly wouldn't turn down a nomination, and thanks a good deal for thinking about me in that respect! What the deal is, actually, is that I've got significant downtime at my new job, but it's not anything where I can count on particular blocks of time, so AfDing is something upon which I can take a few minutes here and there and research the backgrounds involved. Just doing my part in making Wikipedia a better encyclopedia! Ravenswing 13:29, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Ah I see... that's how I basically passed the vote into adminship by piling on those AFD votes in the couple of weeks previous back in December. I don't feel like doing it today, but I could nominate you sometime this week. (I work backwards, I ask the person first before their nomination... it spares everybody involved a lot of time if the person doesn't want to be nominated). Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 03:04, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Works for me, and thank you kindly! Ravenswing 13:20, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Nomination

Here it is, the official nomination.

Your RfA

Hi. I notice that you have answered the questions on your RfA and that it has been posted, but you also need to formally accept. Cheers TigerShark 15:50, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, the week-long process is a nail-biting thing, as you don't know who or when the next oppose will come from. I got pretty familiar with the 'refresh' button during my stay on RfA. And then of course some people came up with completely ludicrous remarks, and that is bound to happen. 10-2-4 though, that ain't bad so far. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 00:36, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

16-13, however, seems to suck. Looks like I might as well withdraw; sorry to prove a disappointment. Ravenswing 13:25, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Eric Goertz

This is the author of the Eric Goertz article, not Eric Goertz himself (he is remorseful but not remorseful toward the media).

Of course he wasn't amused by the exploitation and defamation of character.

I realize the article needs editing, but look at the facts, look at the year we're living in, and look up the artist Borf.

There is no such thing as a vanity article when it comes to bad reporting by the media, justice has its place in history and in this case the history will be wrong if the truth isn't published somewhere.

This article is more about principle and even though this IS my FIRST contribution to Wikipedia who says I won't be contributing more? Everyone's wikipedia cherry has to be popped at some point.

Instead of making comments based solely on technicality maybe you could make helpful suggestions.

Fair enough. First off, while a number of Wikipedia editors are (not completely unreasonably) prejudiced against first time editors or those who haven't yet earned their spurs, that doesn't actually affect the merits of this AfD debate. The fact of the matter is that Wikipedia isn't a public blog into which anyone can write whatever they want. It's a private (however much open source) encyclopedia with certain standards for articles, upheld by consensus policy.

For biographies of living people, guidelines for inclusion are in WP:BIO, which I urge you to read. Neither I nor several others so far believe Mr. Goertz qualifies under them. All he is is a serial vandal who got nailed in a Florida county and was sent down for it; even as a common criminal he's non-notable by the standards of Wikipedia. He bears no relation to this "Borf" fellow, save that they both committed the same crime. The verdict of "history" in this matter is that even for the locals in West Palm Beach, Mr. Goertz has probably already been forgotten.

For your part, you're certainly free to contribute more to Wikipedia, and I hope you go over the various policies so your effort has a greater chance to survive in the future. Good luck to you. Ravenswing 18:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Adminship questions

Did you mean to delete your answers to the original questions? If not, you may want to restore them. -- JamesTeterenko 05:27, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Disgusting

This is absolutely disgusting. You get maligned for talking to Ccwaters about opposing you, while other users go on a campaign against you over that silly diacratics argument. See User_talk:Hazelorb#User:Ravenswing.27s_RfA. I already posted a comment about that on your adminship page, but it isn't right. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 14:39, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Quite; I responded to that observation myself. C'est la guerre. Thanks anyway for fighting my corner, my friend; I know you strongly disagree with me on that issue, but somehow we manage to respect one another and the process without turning it into some silly vendetta. Ravenswing 14:51, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Well I don't really have a strong opinion either way, other than that what materialized out of that diacratics argument was just too much considering the simple argument that was at hand. I personally don't mind either way, just as long as there are redirects from both versions. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 15:23, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

It is a shame, things were looking good the first day and then boom, the civility people came. But anywho, I hope you take something away from the experience, and who knows, within a few months you could be voted in with flying colours. If it makes it feel any better, you got strong support from the WikiHockey crew. However, I would like to see more admins involved with WikiProject Ice Hockey, because we are getting are tails handed to us in the aspect of vandalism, I might try and nominate someone else. We do have a number of quality editors there. Any suggestions? Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 15:47, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Eh, I rather doubt I'd ever be voted in, if you have to convince people on a 5:1 ratio that you're a fluffy inoffensive bunny who never, ever, ever says anything edgy -- except, of course, when they themselves think someone's being a sockpuppet or an idjit -- and if anything I'm more likely to get caustic in consequence. I agree with you on the admin shortage here (I've pleaded for one to drop in often enough), and suggest people like Masterhatch, CC and Rasputin; they've all been around for a while and are good, sound editors. I'd also keep an eye on DMighton down the road ... he's relatively new, but he's putting in some monster edits and he's a dedicated digger. Ravenswing 15:58, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry. There are very few RFAs I would feel confortable voting on either FOR or AGAINST. My support vote for you was a no brainer. In case anyone gets any ideas: NO. :) Administrative duties are a burden, not a power. A burden I'm not willing to accept at this time. ccwaters 01:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Hey! RG, if things went my way, you'd of been elected Administrator by acclamation. As I've said in my Support Vote, I trust your knowledge, accuracy & honesty. GoodDay 01:31, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

And you could put Flibirigit in the same category as DMighton, he's a good one. I asked Masterhatch if he wanted to be voted for adminship a few months ago, and he said it wasn't something he was willing to take on either. Ccwaters doesn't want it... I personally am not as familiar with Rasputin, every time I've encountered him he's fine, I especially like what he did with the Gretzky article. I'm an admin, but I've had to drastically cut down my Wiki-time in the previous month and a half. I was at a 2000 edit per month clip, but now I'm down to about 300-400, and less and less of them are actually in the main article space and I've also practically abandoned my watchlist cuz it was taking too much time out of my Wiki time because of the cutbacks, and because I'm still on a dial-up connection. So I was that guy that was watching all those player articles, but I'm more of a floater these days. I want to get one or two guys from the WikiProject into adminship so the vandalism doesn't go unnoticed for days at a time (there was multiple vandalism on the Radek Bonk article a few months ago, that stayed on for a month before anyone caught it). Ideally what we need to find is a guy who has no life, spends 6 hours a day on Wikipedia and who has a huge interest in hockey. Oh well, once again RG, its too bad about your adminship bid. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 02:29, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Hello

Hi Ravenswing, please do not be vindictive with me. You seem to be able to have difficulty understanding my position. I think that Wikipedia can be a great way to host information so that more people can be aware of what is happening in their communities. For instance, students from other universities in Canada might find it interesting that Laurentian has been able to produce a very interesting event. This can foster the generation of stronger intellectual communities. So, I hope that we can come to terms with a common agreement. If you need to vent, please send me an e-mail.

Your sincerely,

Kevin

I'm not being vindictive at all. Nor is this a matter of failing to understand your position; it is that I -- as well as the vast majority of the respondents -- do not agree with it. I think you're still failing to wrap your head around what Wikipedia is and is not. It is an encyclopedia, just like the Encyclopedia Britannica -- and perhaps a useful exercise would be to submit your articles to the Britannica for inclusion, using the same arguments you've used here, and see how you fare. I anticipate you'd get the same result: that Britannica has a minimum standard for notability in order to merit inclusion (just like we do) and that you do not meet it. Just out of curiosity, what of the specific standards for notability in WP:BIO do you feel you do meet?

Please understand: Wikipedia is not a public service forum. If you want to foster inter-university communications, there are any number of websites, blogs, bulletin boards, usergroups and forums out there. I wish you well there. Ravenswing 18:13, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Response: I found your comments about model parliament as being a "make-pretend game once a year," and the fact that you would be required to mention that we are simply interested in having "photo ops with smiling politicians" to be highly condescending. Realisitically, for someone who states that are not interested in recieving "hate mail or rants," the fact that you would go out of your way to put someone else down would imply that you are looking for trouble. Anyways, my concern is that while you draw comparisons between Wikipedia and Britannica, there are major differences between the two institutions. The most obvious being that Wikipedia is available online and can be edited by any individual who wishes to. In this respect, by publishing articles in Wikipedia that are relevant to the community I am attempting to connect with, I am using Wikipedia for its full potential; to be a resource which can reach out every community. While Britannica is a service that someone must pay for, Wikipedia has the advantage of being able to communicate to anyone and everyone!

I made no such assertion about photo ops, and stand by my comment about annual make-pretend games: an activity where you pretend to be prime ministers, MPs and government ministers and debate and rule on bills you cannot actually enact is a glorified LARP, however educational it is. I was a "state senator" in a similar such (likewise annual) effort back in high school, and it was in fact make-pretend in every particular.

That being said, you're simply misusing Wikipedia, which is not intended to be a public outreach forum, and you have no more right to unilaterally decide it ought to be than I would of joining LUPSA and declaring it to be an intramural lacrosse club, no doubt in contravention of your rules and bylaws. Frankly, I'm surprised; given your interests, you cannot be unaware that organizations have purposes and rules, within which interested parties must work. Why are you so determined to ignore ours? Ravenswing 19:13, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Ravenswing, are you communicating with a newcomer? As a member of the Welcoming Committee it does not please me to see Wikipedians arguing with newcomers. If you disagree with a newcomer's point of view, let it be. You can welcome them and give them advice and point out references to Wikipedia policy and suggest things they can do here. If they are really causing problems, there are many here (RC Patrol) who will prevent any such problems from disrupting Wikipedia. --ElectricEye 15:33, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Why, yes, I do seem to be communicating with a newcomer ... who, in point of fact, communicated with me first, after he's been receiving (generally rejected) advice from several parties on AfD. Now if you can point out to me the Wikipedia policy specifically forbidding veterans (err, sorry, unapproved veterans) from communicating or debating with newcomers, that is one thing, but until and unless you can, there really is no fluffy-bunny-chat way to say "you're systematically flouting the rules and guidelines" without, erm, saying exactly that, and I rather doubt Mr. Roche would feel any better by being condescended to as one would an errant three-year-old. Come to that, you showed no compunction about barging into my talk page and giving your personal opinion about my behavior, did you? Ravenswing 15:58, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I have had similar episodes with other editors, before I contacted you. Anyway, one of the first things new comers read about when coming to Wikipedia is WP:BOLD. They vandalize, create vanity articles, write nonsense, start original research, "blogs," etc. Let them do it, while we revert/delete/speedy as needed. Welcome them. Assume good faith, and tell them about Wikipedia's policies and leave it up to them to reform. If they continue to be a problem they are eventually blocked. I see no need to breed potential uncivility by debating their actual or perceived behavior. If a new comer's first experience is from editors who are harsh, they often leave. Many recent newcomers have left because of Wikipedia regulars biting them, and some of those newcomers were somewhat notable people in society. That's all I am trying to point out. If you disagree with me, well ok. Everyone has their own POV. I'm not going to thrash it out.--ElectricEye 17:58, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Charming; so we let them piddle on the rug, smiling at them all the while and never dare even to utter the phrase "You're violating the rules" until some admin one day just blocks them outright (but without criticizing their behavior!) ... there's a way to educate newcomers, if in capriciousness and disproportionate response. Perhaps you could saunter over to the links James posted and see how well the soft approach is taking. In the meantime, enjoy your welcoming. People like James and myself and the rest of the RC Patrol will keep on cleaning up the newspapers while you do. Ravenswing 18:11, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

ElectricEye, I too am somewhat confused by your statement. Do you believe that all discussion with alegedly disruptive newcomers should come from the Welcoming Committee? Should we not be talking to you because you have only been a registered editor for two weeks? What is it that us other editors need to learn in order to communicate with new editors? Before giving this advice to Ravenswing, did you read through the deletion discussion about the article that user wrote about himself or even his user page? Or how about the edits of other users that seem to edit the same articles: Gordg (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), Mjclevan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), Pubdownunder (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), 63.135.25.223 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), 208.96.78.122 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)? Much of the disruption did get past RC patrol. I still plan on doing a bit more digging when I have a little time, since there are more questionable edits. -- JamesTeterenko 16:45, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

James, although I do appreciate your apparent concern, I think I've clearly stated my point above in my 2 messages to Ravenswing. Thanks. --ElectricEye 17:58, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I'll assume by your response that you did not do much digging before leaving your comment. I understand why you believe that Ravenswing was biting a newcomer. You are reading a comment that occurred after a number of other discussions that you probably did not read, thereby being completely out of context. Please assume good faith on our part as well. I do assume you mean well with your comment, but I do not believe you did much research before giving your opinion. -- JamesTeterenko 19:27, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

(blink blink blink) Good heavens; it didn't remotely occur to me that a two-week newbie would be implying the grounds upon which veteran editors were permitted to speak to newcomers. Now certainly the institution of the WalMart greeter as applied to Wikipedia's a worthy one -- seeing as the number of ElectricEye's main namespace edits are outnumbered by cut-and-pastes of his welcome template on newcomers' talk pages on the order of 10:1 -- and I'm perfectly happy for fellows like you and me to do our business while they keep on smiling and waving. Ravenswing 17:45, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Are you being rude? WP:CIV --ElectricEye 18:10, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Frankly, I rather think you have been, starting with your unsolicited statements of displeasure. May I ask what is rude about (accurately) identifying you as a two-week newbie and (correctly) citing that the overwhelming number of your Wikipedia edits have involved putting your welcome template on newcomer pages? Are these facts about which you are ashamed, for some reason? Ravenswing 18:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I am really starting to feel like an "old timer". Along with this, I had advice today from an admin on what I can do as a non-admin. At least he found the humour in it when I pointed out that I have been an admin for about as long as he has been an editor. -- JamesTeterenko 19:27, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh my, that is amusing. Sometimes you just have to laugh! Someone wanted to lecture me last week about how being a sysop is an incredibly important responsibility, and having glanced at the bio on his talk page, I manfully forbore to reply that I was sysop of the University of Massachusetts bulletin board and forum system three years before he was born ... Ravenswing 19:38, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Is this for real? We can assume good faith till the cows come home, but when a new user plainly states goals that SHOW that he isn't creating articles in good faith it's absurd to expect us to not say anything. Tomb Ride ^{My Talk} 04:40, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I'm sure it's for real. There really are a lot of people on Wikipedia who will jump on your back and wave links at you for any statement that might possibly be construed as conceivably less-than-completely positive. That a surprising number of them show no hesitation in whipping out judgmental behavior all the way to screeching about sock- and meatpuppetry when they feel their own bailiwicks dinged is only human nature. But who knows? If they only brought the hypercivility they preach into their daily lives, the world would be a nicer place. Ravenswing 06:36, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Statistician?

Hi again RGTranor,

I noticed that you credit yourseld as a statistician. I was wondering if you had an statisitical analyses of the United State's welfare reforms in the 1990s, most significantly those having to deal with the TANF program.

Thank you,

Kevin

Not from here, because I'm at work without access to many of my resources and websites. Do you have any particular numbers you're interested in obtaining? I can certainly see what I can rummage up for you. Ravenswing 18:46, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

• You're working on a Good Friday? Oh Lord. You need a holiday! I'm mainly interested in information about the impact of these programs, and if they were successful in helping people to get off welfare and out of poverty. If you know of useful resources off the top of your head, that would be helpful, please let me know. Thanks 208.96.78.122 18:59, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in getting back on that. At least from the resources I have available (after a few hours of digging), I don't have any data I'd myself consider reliable. There's certainly raw data in abundance, but with the mass of welfare reforms over the last decade I wouldn't myself dare to present any figures from the pile that would reliably reflect the efficacy of TANF one way or another. Anything of the sort would be sheer speculation. Ravenswing 16:06, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Rvv =

Hi, I was clicking around at articles that user:Kroche14 had edited and noticed that he had removed sections of your talk page. I left a note on his page about it and reverted it here for you. Cheers. Tomb Ride ^{My Talk} 03:49, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you kindly, good sir. I ought to drop him a line regarding Wikipedia etiquette concerning such things. Ravenswing 17:28, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

NHL page

I see the latest reinstatement by Pnatt (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Most of his previous edits have been speculative like this. The three-revert rule doesn't entirely apply in this case. The most recent edit is factual, even if it is not really important. So, I personally am willing to leave it for now. If he continues with edits such as this, then I will take further action. -- JamesTeterenko 22:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

AFD

Hey I noticed my edit count was down and i was scanning my watchlist and found out that List of NHL Draft Steals was deleted. I also noticed that you were one of the few who voted "keep". I hardly sift thru AFD anymore, but since you cruise thru AFD a lot more now, if you ever see a hockey page unjustly up for deletion, feel free to let me know about it so I can add my say on it. Thanks. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 03:54, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't think much could have been done, though; that was the latest in a wave of draft steal/bust pages eliminated from all sports, with fairly overwhelming majorities. Bleh. Ravenswing 13:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

True, but if I can conjure up an argument that others may have thought of, it still can sway votes in a certain direction. Thats why its more discussion oriented and less about voting, and why the more users involved the better because everyone has their own POV that can be beneficial as well. Obviously you know that though. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 01:35, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Monicasdude being an asshole, as was usual

I think you should look at this discussion [7], where Eusebeus says quite directly that he looks only at the reasons for the prod ("prima facie case") and ignores the reasons for the deprod. Whether one calls that "bad faith", "disruption", or a WP:POINT violation is mostly semantics; it's not consistent with deletion policy, and it's irresponsible. The Thayer article is a paradigmatic example of why this is bad behavior; the subject is clearly notable, under previous AfD precedents, given his substantial Google Scholar presence -- a factor I cited in my deprodding, and which Eusebeus takes pains to avoid, citing other, mostly irrelevant, Google counts as grounds for deletion. I also believe it's quite accurate to say that Eusebeus has been targeting me for unexplained reasons, which is what attracted to me his track record. He has been going through the list of articles I deprodded yesterday and nominating virtually all of them for deletion, typically simply repeating or rephrasing the original prod rationale, even when that rationale is demonstrably inappropriate. His contribution list makes clear that his real criterion for proposing deletion is the identity of the deprodder, not the merits of the dispute, and his behavior should be viewed as Wikistalking, and as bad faith effort to damage the Wikipedia project. his only explanation, which he has since posted on my talk page, is that he wants to encourage discussion; since he doesn't seem to ever have posted on the relevant talk pages, it's hard to view that explanation as credible. I find it particularly hard to seen your comment that responding to an editor who is trailing me around Wikipedia as a "vendetta"; I think you should either retract that comment or direct it at Eusebeus, whose activities more properly reflect that description. Monicasdude 16:57, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I have looked at the comments you linked, and he says nothing about "ignoring the reasons for the deprod" or looking solely at the reasons for the prod. Further, it's disturbing that you feel free to charge others with bad faith, while suggestions that your own behavior constitutes bad faith is only "semantics," or that for some reason WP:POINT is a policy that can be ignored at will as long as you claim to defend your own interpretation of deletion policy. Ravenswing 17:11, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I think you're not reading my comments correctly, or at least as I intended them. When Eusebeus says that his criterion for nominating a deprodded article for deletion is whether the prod nomination makes a "prima facie case," he is saying that he looks only at whether the original prod claim is consistent with deletion criteria, and that he disregards the deprodder's argument. As the Wikipedia Prima facie article indicates, a prima facie case is one which, if unchallenged, is sufficient to justify an action; whether a prima facie case has been made is pretty much irrelevant after a challenge on the merits. And Eusebeus consistently ignores the merits. My comment about "semantics" refer to the description of Eusebeus actions, not mine, and your reaction puzzles me. As I said elsewhere, if the motives behind a set of nominations are inappropriate, it's fair to base one's decision on that. If I nominated every article created in a given one-hour period for deletion, regardless of its content, I think an across-the-board speedy keep response would be appropriate. My point is that Eusebeus is acting indiscriminately; that some of his nominations might prove appropriate doesn't support a claim of good faith (as with my one-hour hypothetical). Monicasdude 17:34, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

It isn't that I don't understand what you're saying; I don't agree with what you're saying, and in that light, no, I'm not taking from your comments the meaning you want. You are not pushing what Eusebeus actually said -- you're pushing either (a) what you think what he said means or (b) what you want people to think he means. The intent doesn't matter; the speculative nature of it does. Beyond that, I disagree with your other assertions as well, although I don't think it's a fruitful use of either of our times for me to spell out what and why. Ravenswing 18:25, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

• At the very top of Eusebus' talk page it says, "As a result, I am working to bring contested prods, where the prodder has made a reasonable prima facie case, to AfD for further discussion." When you take your list of deprods from "known deprodders" but don't actually consider their arguments (if any), and paste the prod reason in the AfD template, that pretty much says he's choosing who to believe. In the case of Gypsy Sun Experience, for example, it would have taken all of thirty seconds for Eusebus to ask Monicasdude what he meant by so obviously meets notability standards there should be no argument. This morning he nominated 6 articles for deletion in 14 minutes, when contacting the deprodder for an explanation or working on cleanup would have meant working on fewer articles. I won't say its bad faith, but it's certainly nonselective, and its a priority that I certainly don't share. Thatcher131 19:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I certainly wouldn't consider arguments any such "known deprodders" didn't actually make, myself. For my part, it would have taken Monicadude thirty more seconds to say what he meant by "so obviously meets notability standards" etc; it is not my job, nor that of any other editor, to drag out of anyone more than he chooses to say.

In any event, whether you share Eusebeus' approach isn't at issue; you don't see me flooding AfD with noms either. It's whether someone is deliberately and explicitly subverting the process. In your rush to judge Eusebeus' intent in AfDing some of Monicadude's deprodded articles, you're ignoring Monicadude's clear and unambiguous intent to interfere with all of Eusebeus' AfD nominations, his complete lack of intent to judge any of those noms on the merits, and his ongoing (and one-sided) personal attacks against Eusebeus. From looking at the Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Monicasdude, this behavior is near-to-chronic on his part and levied against a number of editors. Ravenswing 19:53, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Aye!

Your spirited and articulate defence, of my good faith in bringing contested prods to AfD and of the general process itself is highly and warmly appreciated. Your response above is better expressed than I could have done. Eusebeus 20:34, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, thank you kindly. It isn't as if I know you from a hole in the wall, but there's nothing any more sinister in you deciding your shtick on Wikipedia is AfDing removed prods, any more than there is in me being on a current kick of AfD voting and research ... whereas this guy, like Kappa, is fairly blatantly out to subvert the process and is a pretty nasty customer to boot. All those other posters to the RfA on him are exactly right: he seems to reflexively interpret anyone who disagrees with his POV as doing so only out of perversity and evil. There are already too many people like that in the world -- radio talk shows seem to spawn them -- and I see no need to encourage them. Serious props to you for keeping your head in all of this; you've been far more even tempered than I'd be in your shoes. Ravenswing 13:30, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree with everything you say except that Kappa, while undeniably an extreme inclusionist, is one of the most effective and conscientious editors on WP and the project would be sorely diminished wihout him. As if to underscore the point, I nominated a raft of his deprods for AfD and you don't see him screaming up and down like a three year old. To lump him in with this paranoid and incredibly rude editor is quite unfair. Other than that, though, I appreciate your efforts. Cheers! Eusebeus 18:48, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I'm not suggesting that Kappa is a nasty idjit; as you say, his demeanor is perfectly civil. But it is clear that he's out to subvert the prod process, and that's not nearly so charming. The whole notion of a consensus-driven process is that sometimes you're on the wrong side of it, and after a certain point you simply have to shut up and either get with the program or get out of the way. Ravenswing 19:05, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, Kappa has a standard that many feel is too low (though not all!). However, I doubt he has a problem with his deprods being subjected to review and aired for full discussion. After all, anyone can, for any reason, object to a prod and that is as it should be, even if they do so at a rate or with a reason that you or I might find somewhat extreme. MD, on the other hand... well, what to say. However, I suspect that MD deprods will become a lot more circumspect after his needless, bad faith and unjustified provocation of this mean-spirited, petty contretemps. That was certainly not my intention in bringing some of them to AfD for review, but it will be a most salutary development. Heh! Eusebeus 19:30, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Libraries

I'm searching the WorldCat database. The university where I work has a subscription, and I can only access it from a computer with a hard IP connection to the campus network. It shows the number of libraries holding different titles (useful for requesting interlibrary loan, for example). I don't think there are free access points to the full database but I may be wrong. It's a tool I sometimes deploy on AfD, especially regarding books published more than a few years ago that currently have low amazon rankings but were once popular and notable. Thatcher131 15:06, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Mush from the wimp

• Well, let me take on your points one by one.

Thanks for "cleaning up" the Eurogamer entry. Can I therefore assume that the entry for Gaming Age Forums (as mentioned in the discussion of the Eurogamer entry) will be completely deleted also?

• Beats me. Do you have any intention to do it yourself? I edit the things I feel like editing, as does every other editor on Wikipedia.

I find it ironic that you delete it for "self referential" reasons and yet you are listed in the section "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedians_who_use_Mozilla_Firefox". If that isnt self referential and useless to anyone other than "Wikipedians" themselves I dont know what is.

• It seems like an automatic listing for anyone who uses the Firefox userbox. That aside, I quite agree with you that such a list has no useful purpose.

I really dont understand the issue. The site itself was explained in great depth, and at the same time a little bit of the history of the site and its mannerisms were explained. Many of the things in the "forum" section crop up in the main reviews, and as an outsider viewing the site, alot of that information would have been useful. None of them were factually incorrect and have been part of tradition for over 5 years now.

• If you want a long, lyrical section detailing things about your forums you want visitors to know, I recommend putting one on your webpage. As it happens, while you're citing "tradition," Wikipedia has a strong tradition of deleting out trivia deemed useless. Certainly -- among other elements edited -- there is nothing whatsoever notable about a list of (pseudonymous) forum users arbitrarily deemed important by ... well, themselves. Information, in order to be included on Wikipedia, does not merely have to be verifiable; it has to be notable. If any of those users fulfill the notability requirements of WP:BIO, please inform me.

Can I ask, if I were to make a page about the Pittsburgh Steelers and drew attention to the fact fans wave yellow towels at alot of games, would that be subject to moderator deletion?

• Almost certainly not, since that is a thirty-five year old tradition famous in the sports world and known to quite literally millions of sports fans, an order of magnitude greater than will ever visit your site.

All of this was covered in the discussion page of the Wiki entry, and yet none of it was addressed before you took the unilateral step of deleting it. I understand the importance of keeping the Wiki a valid source of information, which was the entire reason myself, and others who have contributed have been careful about what we have put in there inline with guidelines, and also deleting information which is flawed.

• All articles on Wikipedia are subject to change by any editor, none of whom are generally bound to gain permission before making edits unless there is a strong chance they would go against consensus.

If however, inspite of highlighting why we feel certain items should be included, it can be deleted with no explaination other than the subjective opinion that it was "self referential" then this really seems to be against the very ethos of an opensourced, user-contributed resource.

I'd be interested to hear your comments, my email is fowler9@gmail.com.

Regards Furbs

• Ultimately, the issue is this -- if you are monitoring the deletion discussion, you will see that the objection to the article comes principally in the greatly overbloated and trivial sections about the forum. Gaming fora are not notable in of themselves; they proliferate like weeds, all talk about pretty much the same things, and their contributions to knowledge are scant at best. Editing out all of that (while keeping the only important fact, that Eurogamer has a forum) improve the article's survivability.

  That being said, since this article represents your sole contribution to Wikipedia, you may be unaware of the various rules and guidelines governing the notability of articles. I recommend WP:WEB, WP:NOT and WP:VAIN as applicable points to start. Ravenswing 18:53, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

OnRPG Forum

when you checked out our thread about the article and said that the locals were by and large furious about the flamers and sock puppets, was that a good thing? Anyway, post a reply on my user page or talk page. see you around (PowerGamer6)

Couple questions

Hey RG,

I noticed you've updated the ECHL pages, I'm new to Wiki and still learning. Many of the scores for the playoff wins are in Bold textboldBold text but don't have the required bold tag when I go to edit them, does the bolding tag not show up or am I missing something obvious?

Another question, Friday's game the Storm got beaten not only by the Nailers but by the Refs (to be fair, we played bad and would of lost anyhow) but exactly how often does a team get 62 penalty minutes in a game?! I'm a sql admin, was half tempted to write up a script to download pages an import the relevant text for a couple years' history to compare, but I assume someone out there has similar data already, any pointers? Toledo plays rough, but the penalties in that game were far from excessive, to the point that I would use words like 'vindictive' and 'punative'.

Finally, good to see you're a paralegal! After 20+ years of being a techie / applications designer / sql code monkey I went back to school last fall and just got my paralegal. I'm going to start doing some volunteer time at A.B.L.E. and the NW Ohio legal services to get some real experience and decide if I want to quit the computer job (or just get a part time one) and go to law school. Who knows, maybe I'll like it, maybe it'll suck and the paralegal degree will just be another wall decoration, at least I can say I tried.

Thanks for any responses!

Nik

Sorry for the delay. For one thing, a 62 PIM game is nothing horrifically unusual; the NHL record is 213. For another, the format for bolding text is BOLD, in comparison with what you have above. Hope that helps! Ravenswing 22:29, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rationales to impeach George W. Bush (2nd nomination)

You are invited to vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rationales to impeach George W. Bush (2nd nomination). The issue of the name has not been resolved and therefore people are now recruiting others to delete. Feel free to make your judgement known, thank you. Nomen Nescio 21:39, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

• Thank you for pointing that out. Sincerely Nomen Nescio 22:34, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

RGLE

I agree. I saw that too so I put the speedy tag on. The other option is to start a second afd, but I'm afraid that would just get stacked with anon users 'voting'. Speedy is really the best option. Ardenn 04:13, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

An admin told me it had to go to afd. Ardenn 05:26, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Template:NHL Team Infobox

Just notice that you revered these changes. This usere has a tendency to do what he did in the way that he did it, most of the time in my experiences it has eneded up being more problems then not considerng the the css for wikipedia does not work correclty in many situations. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 04:20, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I figure that if any changes to the Infobox are to be made, one ought to gain consensus on the Talk page first, is all. If he can get that, more power to him. Ravenswing 14:13, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Goodspaceguy

nicely argued. I had been a little less direct about the fact that, after all, it was the Libertarian party, and his vote total was damned low -- but you really put it in perspective. and I'm not sure what I think about 15,000 people voting for someone named "Mike The Mover". bikeable (talk) 21:18, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Heh, either Mike ran a heck of a campaign or there are a lot of bored people in Washington state! Ravenswing 00:45, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Northern Virginia Scholastic Hockey League

Hello I made a new Category for Northern Virginia Scholastic Hockey League and would like you to check it out to see if I did everything correctly. I think I did I would just like someone to check it over. Thanks John R G 18:18, 10 May 2006 (UTC).

It certainly is a well-written article, but I wouldn't bet on it passing notability standards myself. Generally the only league articles revolve around professional, collegiate or major junior loops. Ravenswing 18:24, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I was talking about the Category at the bottom of the page that I made that includes the teams. That is what I wanted you to see if it looks good. John R G 18:26, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Yep, that looks fine. Ravenswing 18:59, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

This is an archive of former discussions. Also do not set your pubic hair on fire; it is bad for you.

Huh?

What for? CJ DUB 19:16, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

You are kidding, aren't you? Why you have a mad on for the Senators I've no idea, but your unconstructive edits, from "choker" jerseys to parodies, are unwelcome, constitute vandalism, and are soaking up the time and trouble of other editors to fix; this is a neutral, serious encyclopedia, not a partisan blog. I suggest WP:VANDAL if you're unfamiliar with Wikipedia's rules on the same. Ravenswing 19:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Well re: Sens thing. I say we put it to a vote. I noticed some people reverted that choker thing before I even did. Haha. They must be looking at the history list, which by itself is pretty funny. CJ DUB 19:28, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure there are many blogs and bulletin boards out there where you can frolic to your heart's content. Wikipedia isn't the place for it. Ravenswing 19:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Would it be appropriate to include a Team Parody section on team sites to the page to categorically archive the many creative statements that fans and rivals have put together over the years. It would spur on original thinking for future endeavors at being the ultimate fan or ultimate rival. This would embiggen the overall history of the encyclopedia. These sorts of things are very cromulent.Djjtox 19:39, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah! Exactly what I've been saying all along. The image is a legitmate Wiki entry. Accoridng to wiki rules we should discuss the relative merits, of including peripheral stuff to the team (Sens); such as mascots, team myths and legends, famous fans like Mike Myers, the kinds of drinks they serve in the concessions and how much the cost to buy. I think it would improve the page. CJ DUB 19:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

• I've started a new discussion forum to deal with this sort of thing for the OTT SENS site hopefully it will end up on other teams discussion pages and ultimately on the team page in some form. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ottawa_Senators#Team_Ultimate_Fan_and_Rival_Section

Djjtox 20:08, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

• I'll double post it there, but basically, no, it would not be appropriate per WP:NOT, WP:NOR. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a fan forum or a blog. To quote: "Wikipedia is first and foremost an online encyclopedia and, as a means to that end, an online community. Please avoid the temptation to use Wikipedia for other purposes, or to treat it as something it is not." Ravenswing 20:13, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hannah Hobley

Please do not use AfD to make disparaging comments about the subject of the article, it disrupts the discussion (as you can see). 68.166.50.142 16:19, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

As it happens, the disruption was caused by an anonymous user and serial vandal who chose to launch personal attacks in violation of WP:CIVIL before vandalizing the AfD discussion archive itself. Perhaps you could save some ire for that user, something I note you have not yet done; for my part, I'd prefer to blame the arsonist rather than the fellow who dared to build a house which he might have predicted could possibly be set ablaze by vandals. That being said, noting that a 17-year-old wannabe actress has failed to perform at a level higher than local community theatre (which is true) and that she's willing to perform in the nude for money (which she indeed stated on the bio link) might be "disparaging," but certainly factual. Ravenswing 16:40, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

NHL Hockey Hall of Fame

I reverted your edtis that reverted my edits, the Hockey Hall of Fame in Toronto is the NHL Hockey Hall of Fame. It was established by the NHL in 1961 not 1943, it has been to this day operated by the NHL. I see you are a member of the Society for International Hockey Research. You can check with them. --JohnnyCanuck 15:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I am a hockey historian myself. I reviewed JohnnyCanucks edits as well as yours. His edits appear to be correct although not popular with the NHL, (some edits is new info to me but most I knew about like dates and NHL seizing support to establish there own Hall) the edits that are new to me appear to be correct based on that the are inline with the facts I do know about. As he mentioned this could be confirmed with the Society for International Hockey Research. All his edits about the Hockey Hall of Fame’s appear to be correct. How many NHL books mention about the 1970’s NHL European team London Lions? This is another thing the NHL just wanted to sweep under the rug and hope it is forgotten. --69.156.148.239 09:51, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Summer camps

Ravenswing, I've asked a question on the Camp Miriam AfD, specifically, what are the "guidelines for notability" regarding summer camps? Where are they found? Jayjg ^(talk) 21:37, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I take it you went ahead and posted here without reading the blurb on top of the page, huh? Ravenswing 02:21, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Your real name Traynor?

Hello: Just discovered your user page. Out of curiosity, are you related to Roger J. Traynor by any chance? That would be really cool if you were. Then perhaps you could grant permission on behalf of the Traynor family to release photographs of the famous Chief Justice under the GFDL! --Coolcaesar 04:55, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

It's likely, but the connections would go back to Ireland, in any event, and since my own branch of the Traynors weren't from Ulster, at least five generations. Of course I've heard of the great jurist -- considering I'm a paralegal -- but he would be the first to say that the only people who were legally entitled to execute any such release would be his heirs-at-law, which I'm not. Ravenswing 19:01, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Red Mile

May I make an edit to the article about the Red Mile about how the local Police would like to put a complete end to the Red Mile and have it exist no more? Let me know if this is suitable. Max.pwnage 22:50, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

You sure can; that's what Wikipedia is for! Your best bet, though, is to provide a source for the assertion, either by footnoting it to a newspaper article quote or to an external link to a local Calgary paper online. The source must be credible -- in other words, a newspaper or TV article, not some forum or blog post. Go for it! Ravenswing 20:45, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

World Hockey Association (proposed)

I was thinking of doing some major cleanup on World Hockey Association (proposed) but I figured I better ask before doing so so is it ok to clean up the site? John R G 05:56, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, you seldom need to ask, per se; we're all editors together. Your work may be ruthlessly scrutinized and changed, of course, but that's par for the course. Go for it. Ravenswing 13:04, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

This user thinks that registration should be required to edit articles.

This user thinks that registration should be required to edit articles.

I like that idea it should be made into a category. Alot of people would join that category including me. Go ahead and make it a category. John R G 19:29, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

It already is: Ravenswing 19:57, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Pittsburgh Penguin HOFs

I realize Horton and Kelly only spent fractions of their careers with the Penguins, but even their media guides list them as Penguin Hall of Famers. If it's good enough for the Pens themselves, it should be good enough for this forum.SportsEditor 02:15, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

You're certainly welcome to make the argument over at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey/Team_pages_format and see if you can win a consensus for your POV. The current governing consensus is, however, that despite feelgood efforts by NHL teams to plump up their totals, no one (for example) looks at Tim Horton or Red Kelly as HHOFers and think anything other than Toronto Maple Leafs. The governing criteria is that to be listed under a particular team, an Honoured Member must have played several seasons and/or otherwise had impact seasons that materially affected his election to the Hall. This certainly wasn't the case for either Horton or Kelly. Ravenswing 05:55, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, this is amusing

I don't think I've ever stumbled across someone online whom I already knew in real life. Any articles you think I should be helping with? Ladlergo 12:51, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Why, hello there! How goes it with you? Hm ... truth be told, our areas of expertise are likely divergent, and you don't look like you just stumbled across Wikipedia last week or anything, so I bet your judgment is trustable. (grins) Ravenswing 19:55, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

If you were online when I was, we wouldn't have to exchange pleasantries here. ;) I hit WP during work, although I'm shortly to become unemployed again.

I've been working on Wii recently, although I've also poked at a number of the Amber-related pages and some assorted anime pages. However, my most common edit seems to be "WP is not a crystal ball," followed by "PoV, no reference." I was appalled when I went to the page for minor dark wizards in HP. I'll be stripping out the speculation there, though I might have to remind people that what I'm doing is not vandalism, because "WP is not a CB." Sigh. Ladlergo 20:40, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

It could be worse; you could be an AfD frequent flyer like I am. (It's something I can do in five minute burst from work, away from my home library which I use for article creation) Just push my button and I spew out "Delete per nom, NN, fails WP:V, WP:NOR and WP:BALLS." Works like clockwork, I tell you! Ravenswing 20:44, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

List of NHL players

Hey Ravenswing, how are you? Long time no talk to. Anyways, i want to make you aware that the entire list of NHL players has been speedy deleted without discussion in a matter of hours. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NHL players A Wikipedia:Deletion review#National Hockey League player lists this is the guy that did it User:Pschemp. What are your thoughts on the matter? Masterhatch 07:37, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Jean Pronovost

Sorry, i just thinking I'm in the french wiki... --Woww 02:07, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

World Hockey Association (proposed)

I have been removing some information from World Hockey Association (proposed) but someone keeps putting it back on the site. I do not feel that you need to have the problems with the NHL lockout on the World Hockey Association (proposed) site. It is two seperate leagues. That is why I removed it. I think it is unnecessary. John R G 05:01, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I disagree. The whole notion behind WHA II was that they'd take advantage of the (then-potential) lockout to get some serious major league players and action, and that certainly was the thrust behind most of the press coverage at the time. Ravenswing 08:18, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

This is the World Hockey Association (proposed) site not the NHL site with its labor problems. The World Hockey Association (proposed) probably doesnt even have a union which is great. I really dont think they need the info about the NHL labor problems in this site. It is not related. John R G 17:46, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

It's not the point; the point is that the proposed WHA never would have even been a pipe dream, nor received any serious coverage or interest at all, if it hadn't been for the impending lockout. That's a valid bit of information. Ravenswing 23:30, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I still dont understand this but im not mad at you. I hope you see my point. I will take this to the talk page of WHA proposed and see what happens. I just feel that the nhl is something different than the wha proposed. John R G 05:28, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Merge and naming proposal for world junior championships

Talk:World Junior Ice Hockey Championships If you're interested. Thanks.
D'oh! forgot to sign ... ColtsScore 09:18, 9 June 2006 (UTC) (not used to entry boxes soo fancy-schmancy). :)

Junior B Teams

Hello, a user has decided that he does not want us placing hockey stubs on Wikipedia to expand later into teams. In particular he doesn't like Junior teams... I was wondering if you could please voice your opinion. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thunder Bay Northern Hawks DMighton 03:44, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

NHL featured?

Hey Ravenswing, I want to apply for featured article status for the NHL status, can you post any suggestions to improve the article on the talk page. Thanks, -- Jeff3000 03:35, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

English vs non english names for cities

Hello Ravenswing, i hope all is well with you. Right now there is a poll here Talk:Plzeň about whether to use the English name for the city or the czech name for the city. Your input would be appreciated. Thanks Masterhatch 02:42, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Edits

I'd really like to know what your reasoning is for the edits you've made. I realize there's a rule that Hall of Famers should only be listed if their contributions to that team were significant, so that's why there was a secondary "also" list. Don't you think that some people might be interested to know that some Hall of Famers spent fractions of their careers with certain clubs? By that logic, you may as well delete Gordie Howe from the Hartford Whalers. Also, what's the sense in deleting Leo Boivin (who played two season with the Penguins), but keeping Andy Bathgate (who also spent two seasons with the Penguins) listed. Also, why delete the list of notable players? If it's good enough for the Pirates and Steelers to have such lists, let the third Pittsburgh team as well. I thought this whole Wikipedia thing was all about making these entries better and more comprehensive.SportsEditor 23:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

In WP:HOCKEY, our Wikiproject does things in a number of ways hammered out by consensus. A couple of those are how we handle Hall of Fame listings and that we don't have "not to be forgotten" sections. A secondary "also" list is a way to weasel around the former, and the latter we decided to delete because such lists are inherently POV, suffer from pervasive bloat, and get overloaded with the current favorites of individual editors. If you disagree with our policies, feel free to go over to the Team Pages Format talk page and try to change consensus to your own views. Ravenswing 00:38, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the merge tag from Thunder Bay Northern Hawks

Consensus has been reached. The only person post-AfD who wants a merge is Rob. It's gone on for five days, and the AfD was another five days previous. The matter is closed. If you feel that this is a horrible miscarriage of justice, go ahead and file an RFC. It's time to move on. I'm posting this to associated users' talk pages as well. you know, this has really torpedoed my wikibreak  RasputinAXP  c 15:59, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Traynor, I've sent you an e-mail. DMighton 05:40, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Article Deletion

Why has my article, List of NHL players who have scored 8 points in one game, been put up for deletion? I don't see what's wrong with it. If something needs to be fixed please tell me so I can change it because I had to do alot of work to make that.

Also, if that article is deletion-worthy then I think this one certainly should be: MLB hitters with four home runs in one game This one too- National Hockey League goalies who have scored in a game

I refer you to the top of this page, where I state that discussions about my AfD activity belong in the deletion articles in question. Ravenswing 14:22, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I find it hard to believe...

...that you haven't received one of these yet!

		The Running Man Barnstar
		For your tireless contributions to the Hockey WikiProject, please accept this barnstar. BoojiBoy 20:49, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Aw! Now you're very gracious ... and I hadn't had one yet, no. Yer a pal! Ravenswing 00:22, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Bio Box move

Thanks, I must have put it on the article page, not what I intended. Cheers. KenWalker | Talk 16:14, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

ECHL Wheeling affiliation

I need your imput I have been putting an affiliation for Wheeling Nailers under the ECHL and someone keeps removing it. Now I am bringing this up to you for your decision on wheather or not to keep the affiliation or not. To be fair if you want it removed I will leave it alone I am not trying to be difficult. John R G 03:40, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Umm ... but that list is for NHL affiliates, not for teams in lower leagues than the ECHL itself. Certainly this is info worth putting in the Nailers article itself, though. Ravenswing 03:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Captain (Ice Hockey)

Thanks for adding the tag to the Captain (ice hockey) article, RG. If one more (usually an anon) user had listed Lidstrom as the Red Wings captain, I think I would have eaten a hockey puck. GoodDay 21:33, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, between that and listing Crosby as the Pens' captain or Jagr as the Rangers', I wouldn't wonder. I've no idea whether an edit tag will work, but it can't hurt. Ravenswing 04:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Black Hawks

Hey RGTrayor! You were right I was wrong. Sorry about changing of Black Hawks to Blackhawks in the Vic Stasiuk article. Totally overlooked it. Also, I like your style of player pages and your dedication to NPOV and research. We'll have to work together sometime! --Schmackity 15:55, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh, no problem; that's a common enough error. And thank you for the kind words! Ravenswing 20:46, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Western Massachusetts

To someone not familiar with US geography, it might seem as though the tunnel runs from the state of Florida to North Adams (hey, when I was young I didn't realize that Portland ME and Portland OR weren't right next to one another, and I'm American, so it's not that farfetched), so it might be a good idea to leave in the "MA" for Florida, at least. Septegram 15:01, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

And it looks like someone Bolder than I went ahead and did it.

Septegram 20:16, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Non-notable collectible card game players

I noticed that you recently participated in the discussion of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roy St. Clair (4th nomination). You may also be interested in the following discussions for the following collectible card game players:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darwin Kastle
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Olivier and Antoine Ruel
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tommi Hovi
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Selden
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kai Budde (2nd nomination)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Long
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Magic: The Gathering people

Thank you. -- Malber (talk • contribs) 12:20, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

World Hockey Association

Is the World Hockey Association and the World Hockey Association (proposed) two seprate companies or are they the same organization. I would appreciate your imput on that question. Thanks. John R G 19:50, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

About Niklas Bäckström

Hi, is there a specific reason why Niklas's surname should be written without the diacritics (ä and ö)? Thanks in advance & happy editings, –Mysid^(t) 10:39, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Sure is; English doesn't use such diacritics. Neither does the English-language media, the NHL website, the team websites, or any other English-language source. Nor does the Swedish Wikipedia conform to English-language usages, but has its own idea how such proper names should be rendered. Ravenswing 03:50, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Admin

Hey its been a few months, would you like another crack at RFA? I'd be willing to nominate you a second time if your willing to try again. Methinks you'll do better this time, but then again i don't know as much what you've been up to recently. So what do you say? Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 02:54, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Mm, thanks for thinking about me, but no. I'm sure the bashers would likewise pore over everything I've done to come up with the one phrase in a hundred proving I'm not as touchy-feely as they claim they want (but somehow never themselves manage to be). The previous experience was discouraging enough. I also haven't been doing AfD nearly as often as I had been ... a bit of burnout, I guess. I hope all is well with you? Ravenswing 03:00, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, yeah everything's going well with me, hence the reason I'm not at my old editing pace, i've got myself a job that keeps me busy, and a few other endeavours that are taking up my time. I did hardly anything on Wikipedia over the summer. But I've been coming back a little more over the last month, because i still want to help out on Wikipedia, even if its in a more minor role. I'll be sticking around still, just not at 50 or more edits per day clip... Yeah i went off the wiki-bottle for awhile and now i just enjoy it in moderation, ha ha. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 03:05, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

RGTRAYNOR!!!

Long time no hear! I miss the old Hockey Pub days and I especially miss your postings. Go Sabres!

SabreSword

Ray Bourque

Hi, I'm sorry, I'm new to this Wikipedia thing. I mean, I used it but never edited it properly I guess, with a log name. I never was aware that I should consult other Wikipedia user to change an article neither was I aware of how I can do it. And why did you change the Raymond Bourque's article back to "Ray" Bourque if you care so much about precision? I don't think he should have a French and an English name. Raymond is his first name as he was once baptised.

It's quite simple: Ray Bourque is the name by which he is known to the English-speaking world, in the same fashion that the name of the article for the 42nd President is not "William J. Blythe," the name by which Bill Clinton was baptized. "Ray Bourque" returns over 156,000 Google hits, while "Raymond Bourque" returns 14,000. Since this is the English Wikipedia, I'm quite comfortable with the way he's generally known in the English language to prevail here. I'm sure the Francophones can tend to their own knitting over on the French Wikipedia. Ravenswing 12:49, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

TrulyTory being an asshole: dicdef of "oxymoron"

I could ask the same of you, quite frankly. The particular edit you have tagged stood unchallenged for many, many months - until you decided to resurrect the debate. Your Gretzky edits are weak and still not justified in my - and many others' - opinions. Referring to past debates on my talk page as a justification for your position is weak, as most of that occurred early in my Wikipedia days, and in most of the cases I was personally attacked first. Additionally, any conflict I have found myself in with other editors has been over their lack of knowledge on subjects they claim to master, and over their tendency to rely on their own POV as truth and/or fact. Don't you find your behaviour in light of all of this thus ironic? Many of us out here sure do ... Your behaviour continually indicates that you consider yourself some kind of superior resource, when in fact all you are is a pervasive editor and dogged edit warrior. You can wear others out over time, but you will not do so with me. If you wish to play semantic games, then let it continue. Oh yes, I also see that you did not win election to Administrator around here, so perhaps you could consider ceasing to act like one? TrulyTory 14:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Riiiiight ... so all the fights you've been in have always been the other guys' faults, I see. As far as your purported legions of supporters, we'll let that one go as well despite the lack of evidence they exist; that's irrelevant as well. There isn't likewise any point to belabor the breathtaking nature of "you will not do so with me," as if you thought Wikipedia was some strange kind of boxing match, or the irony in you claiming that your past behavior on Wikipedia isn't pertinent but that a debate on an unrelated article is. Nor will I dwell on the fact that the first citation didn't arrive until precisely seven days ago, or that the edit to which you refer wasn't made until an anon IP did on October 9th, scarcely "many, many months."

The simple fact is that the cite doesn't say what you claim it said. "One of the greatest hockey players of all time fought back tears on Friday as his old jersey was hung up in a new museum showcasing his career," it says. Not "the greatest." "One of the greatest." Where I confess fault is not watching the article like a hawk, but then again I have a real life. Now as of today there's a proper statement to match with the cite. If you just can't wrap your head around that, then I'm quite content with having arbitrators decide.

Whatever. Nice attempt at misdirection though. Here's a question for you that may or may not be relevant: Did you ever play competitive hockey? I eagerly wait on your reply ... TrulyTory 18:48, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

For fifteen years, and that you could remotely consider the question relevant to Wikipedia's policies, copyright law, your ongoing mistakes or the careers of professional hockey players says a great deal about your mindset. The "If you haven't played X sport you don't have any right to an opinion" malarkey -- it isn't as if there was any other place you were going there -- is one of the surest signs of someone lacking any real grounds upon which to stand. I've no further need to communicate directly with anyone going in that direction; kindly refrain from future forays onto my talk page. Ravenswing 18:38, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Wal-Mart in Plymouth

No shit? You move away for a few years and everything changes. Stilgar135 19:07, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

1966-67 NHL season

I will use whatever source I feel is available to use as a reference! You are not to interfere! I attempt to give the reading public the best and most complete source in which to reference from. Do not interfere with my attempts to do so!Corey Bryant 21:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Using sources as references are allowed ... especially (as you do not in fact do) when you credit and properly cite them. Copying them word-for-word is a violation of copyright law, never mind merely of Wikipedia policy. I strongly recommend you review both WP:COPYVIO, and, at this rate, WP:OWN. Ravenswing 12:12, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Mary Garden Unsourced Tag

I see you have left an 'unsourced' tag on the Mary Garden article despite the fact there is a sources section with three references. I am puzzled. Can you tell me why you put the tag? - Kleinzach 11:32, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Winnipeg Jets: Return to Winnipeg POV

I don't agree with your characterization of certain elements as speculative POV. Your edit from 00:41 5 Dec 2006 eliminates objective fact rather than speculation:

• There is a new arena in Winnipeg;
• The Canadian dollar is much stronger; and
• Atlanta in Minneapolis have received replacement expansion teams.

mdk

216.163.247.1 18:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

... and none of those random facts have any direct link to expansion for Winnipeg. There are new arenas all over the continent, the Canadian dollar fluctuates like any other currency, and quite a few more cities have not received replacement expansion teams: the NHL doesn't seem to be breaking down the doors to site teams in Hartford, Quebec City, Cleveland or Oakland, all of which are larger metro areas than Winnipeg. But that's all pure speculation, and being speculation, is perfectly acceptable on a hockey (or Winnipeg-oriented) bulletin board or blog. Ravenswing 12:05, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

1966-67 season NHL at wikipedia

You AND every other complainant are to cease at once calling what I have been submitting copyrighted material! The original submission might have been copyrighted, but NOTwhat I have been posting lately. You will cease from taking down my submitted material AT ONCE!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Corey Bryant (talk • contribs) 19:49, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

As long as you keep on posting the exact same entries you were earlier, which aside from being copyvios were often unencyclopedic trivia, myself and other editors will continue to revert them, and you backtracking on your previous heated assertions to admit that you have been violating copyright doesn't ring well. If you don't like that, you could engage us in discussion as to which news notes and recaps are pertinent to any given season article, and arrive at a consensus as to what entries are both newsworthy and encyclopedic. Strident shouting isn't likely to win many over to your POV. Ravenswing 15:13, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Antero Nittymaki

Hello, RG. I've offered a compromise to User: Hazelorb to remove diacritcs from the Title of Nittymaki page (leaving the diacritis in the article itself). However, I fear she's not open to compromise. Not to start up the diacritc war with her again, but could you restore the 'English' version to the Title. Though I've read the instruction (on Moving pages), I'm still not familliar enough with it.GoodDay 17:19, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually, that's where I wouldn't. I don't object to appropriate diacriticals in individual player articles, as long as they're kept out of articles pertaining to North American hockey at large: NHL and AHL team and season articles and the like. As long as User: Hazelorb isn't spamming the Flyers-related articles, my own inclination would be to let them have that one. Ravenswing 17:52, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeh, I see your point. But those diacritcs still bug me, oh well at least those diacritcs aren't on Nittymaki's Flyers jersey. GoodDay 18:51, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

New Jersey Devils

I'm afraid, my objections to the way the 'Famous Players' section was introduced, has been denied. Oh well, just felt peers should have had a say in format changes. I guess, can't win them all. GoodDay 20:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

See Devils 'talk page', I've got my consenses after all. Now I'm alright with the 'Famous Players' section. GoodDay 21:19, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Philadelphia Flyers

Hello RG, I've re-edited ALL 30 teams pages, listing team captains 'by players' as the consensus called for. However on the Flyers page, anon-user 'Darthflyer' continues to resist (choosing to copy off of list at Flyers official website, wich is 'by season') consensus. What do you think, I should do about it? GoodDay 19:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

A remark

Hello, I don't think we've met before. Was it really necessary to impugn the character of everyone who opposed Geogre's arbcom run? I may be reading too much into that vote, and please slap me with a trout if that's the case. Mackensen (talk) 11:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Probably no less necessary than that many of the same impugned his; if the shoe fits, and all. Beyond that, I'm right -- do you genuinely believe that legions of hardcore Wikipedians believe so strongly in Civility that they hold a couple of insufficiently-nice episodes to be enough to disqualify people from important public positions? Do you genuinely believe they themselves carry such hypercourtesy into their real lives? The world would be a far different place if they did; if only. Ravenswing 14:20, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I like to hope that they did; certainly I have no reason to believe otherwise. For my part I supported those whose civility was above question (Paul August, for example). Thanks for your response. Mackensen (talk) 14:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Real life attitudes

In response to your comment:

'Support. I rather doubt the naysayers exhibit in real life the hypercivility they seem to demand of others here. Ravenswing 17:12, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

It's a well-known fact that people are ruder on the Internet than they are in real life. In real life there are consequences for being a rude jerk. On the Internet, not so much. You may even become an administrator and ArbCom candidate. It's rather rude of you to suggest that everyone is expecting some abnormal level of civility from Geogre, a level of civility they cannot personally attain in real life, because I cannot even remember ever saying things so mean as some of the comments I've seen said on here, and I suspect it will be the same for most others (unless they happen to live in NYC). --Cyde Weys 18:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

And rather rude of you to call me rude; where is the civility now? All sarcasm aside, I disagree with you: the level of civility demanded of admin/crat/Arb candidates has gotten to the point where scores of editors pore over every last byte to crow over finding Incidents!, while hitmen with blatant axes to grind are excused as dispassionate observers. If I needed any direct evidence of the syndrome, that you're not even the first person to feel the need to seek out my Talk Page for a confrontation over a generic comment says plenty. Ravenswing 18:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Cleveland Barons

Your comments are sought at Talk:Cleveland Barons (1937-1972). Thanks. Flibirigit 21:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• More questions (same talk page) regarding Jacksonville Barons. Thanks. Flibirigit 19:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

A bunch of AHL teams

Is there any connection between the current Manchester Monarchs franchise, and the defunct Carolina Monarchs/Beast of New Haven franchise. The Beast article made a mention of it. I contacted the Manchester Monarch's office manager, Kathy Sullivan by e-mail. She says there is no connection. What information do you have? Did the Beast of New Haven simply fold up? 19:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Beats me, off the top of my head, but I suspect that the Monarchs' front office is at least as reliable a source as I am. Besides which, New Haven was the affiliate of the Whalers/Hurricanes, while Manchester's been a Kings' affiliate throughout, yes? Ravenswing 19:45, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't know many details. But I know the Manchester Monarchs are affiliated with the Los Angeles Kings. I've just started researching the AHL. Flibirigit 20:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

One excellent source I have is a complete set of AHL Media Guides between the 1990 and the 2000 seasons. Feel free to bend my ear for any tidbit that might be found therein. Ravenswing 20:15, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Sure thing. What happened to the Beast of New Haven? If you look at the timeline of teams at American Hockey League, they would be the only team to fold up completely, since the Utica Devils and Moncton Hawks in the early 1990s. I tend to think franchises are slightly more stable now, and less likely to fold up, than then. Flibirigit 20:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

theahl.com used to have a pretty good press release archive, but it looks like they scrapped it with the last redesign. ccwaters 20:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm fairly certain that the Adirondack and New Haven franchises actually dissolved that year. ccwaters 21:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I was just gonna ask about the Adirondack Red Wings, LOL. Flibirigit 21:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I know that the Virginia Wings were a Detroit Red Wings affiliate that folded in 1975. Maybe its possible the franchise was resurrected in Glens Falls in 1979? Flibirigit 22:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

WWE Global Warning Tour

I fully accept your point, however other events of this nature are not on are they? I don't remember it being talked about - it was just a special show in Australia (the same with the other nominees but in different countries). I have nominated WWE Tribute to the Troops for a very similar reason. If you didn't know mainly only WWE Pay-Per-View's are listed on Wikipedia, this is a encylopedia, not a website dedicated to wrestling. I believe you should rethink your point. Many thanks. Davnel03 20:54, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I refer you to the blurb on top of this page; thank you. Ravenswing 21:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

AHL overtime loss

Your comments are sought at this talk page. Talk:American_Hockey_League#Overtime_Loss. Thanks! !!!! Flibirigit 18:28, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

NHL 1966-67 season

The information I have been uploading for the 1966-67 season have NOT been copyrighted and as such are not to be taken down. Only the first time I uploaded it was it copyrighted. Yet, even when I use my own words---which makes it NOT copyrighted ---you continue to take it down anyway. This is to cease IMMEDIATELY. It is to be left up INTACT! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Corey Bryant (talk • contribs) 20:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC).

copyvio fixed

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Islamic Bill of Rights for Women in the Mosque again, copyvio has been fixed. — coelacan talk — 16:42, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

User:209.226.172.69

Please take a look at User talk:209.226.172.69. Thanks. 22:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Congradulations

Hello, RG. we and countless others on Wikipedia & the Internet overall, were chosen Time magazine's 2006 Person of the Year. Congradulations. GoodDay 21:55, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Yep, so we were. Congratulations to you too! Ravenswing 21:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Los Angeles Kings Hall of Fame

Honestly, the reason I reverted that back was because I was unable to locate the policy which he was trying to direct me to. I understand that was an error on my part to not be able to find it, and because I couldn't find it, I, for some reason, thought that it was alright to include Fuhr in the Kings Hall of Fame. After reading what you said as a part of that policy, I understand why he does not belong in that list. I apologize for this. Ksy92003 00:59, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, quite alright. In general, we don't include HHOFers on teams for which they've played fewer than two or three impact seasons. Fuhr's a frequent flyer in this regard, where people try to put him on the HHOF list for Buffalo, Toronto, LA and even Calgary, for none of which he played all that long, all that well, or had a winning record. He's on the Edmonton (obviously) and St. Louis lists. Ravenswing 02:43, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Eddie Giacomin

Corey Bryant 21:17, 22 December 2006 (UTC)How about reading my recent submission on the Eddie Giacomin talk page.

American Hockey League

Could you please review the American Hockey League article. I have tried to rerrange the article for encyclopdic tone, but User:Centpacrr keeps reverting to his sports-writerese version. Let me know what sounds better. Flibirigit 19:43, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Colorado Avalanche

Hello, RG. I think I messed up showing anon-user 86.198.206.162 this-Talk:Philadelphia Flyers#Naming Conventions as a consensus against diacritics on NHL team pages. The anon-user argued my example, has continued to add diacritics. I think he may have violated the 3-revert rule? GoodDay 00:47, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

See my suggested 'course of action' on 'Yankee76's talk page. GoodDay 22:46, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Anytown Samplers.GIF

Thanks for uploading Image:Anytown Samplers.GIF. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

James H lyons

If you mean't www.jameshlyons.com that isn't the same person. Unless some how he had a face transplant! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Theno2003 (talk • contribs) 15:31, 28 December 2006 (UTC).

I refer you to the top of my talk page. Thank you for playing. Ravenswing 16:36, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough

Well no i am not inside school i am in the college of the school i.e the sixth form and i know what wiki is. We were told to put projects together about local artist for A level i might add. I found him and he wasn't on wikipedia. He went to the school i am at and he is quite well known where i live. So i thought why not add him to Wiki. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.154.9.35 (talk) 16:50, 28 December 2006 (UTC).

SP & Blakeny manor

• • looks slightly guilty** - I'll admit I have been using odd snippets of web text and the blurb from the back of some of the books as place holders (rather than having an empty page), but rest assured I do intend to rewrite all the plot summaries with my own drivel in time, just haven't got round to some of them yet (these things can take a demmed long time you know)

-)

Boston Braves (AHL)

If the Boston Braves (AHL) franchise eventually became the Moncton Hawks, what happened to the Moncton Golden Flames which appear to have become the Moncton Hawks? Flibirigit 00:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

They folded. It's a common error to presume that the one turned into the other ... the same way it's a common error to presume that the Springfield Indians/Kings were two different franchises or that the Springfield Indians/Falcons aren't, but that's not the case. Ravenswing 09:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Is there any reliable source online that shows what AHL franchises folded/moved etc? The Moncton AHL teams have been written that was on wikipedia for well over a year, before I started following the AHL. Flibirigit 02:32, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Player pages format

Hello, Ravenswing. Seeking your opinon on my compromise proposal (with Diacriticals). Like you, I find diacritics annoying, however the diacritical dispute has been going on for a year now (with no end in sight). I also have a compromise proposal on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Team pages format. GoodDay 21:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello again. Check out Krm500's compromise, at my talk page. I think the compromise is great. GoodDay 23:26, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Both compromises were defeated, by pro-diacritic editors. Yankees76 is correct, these Diacritics disputes are on course for the Arbitration Committee. GoodDay 22:40, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ravenswing/Archive3#Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion.2FHannah_Hobley

Hi

Can you please remove these comments about me as they appear on a Google search on my name.

Thanks

H Hobley Hhobley 14:20, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd be happy to edit out any element of the remarks which were not factual at the time I wrote them. Could you point those out? Thanks. Ravenswing 12:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

HHOF sections of 30 NHL team articles

Hello, RG. I've recommended the 'deletion' of the HHOF section from the 30 Teams at WPH & WPT. Though I like the HHOF section, it continues to invite disputes. Recently '2' editors have procceeded to add ALL HHOFers to ALL the teams. I resisted at first, but then decided against an 'edit war'. GoodDay 20:39, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

WPT & WPTT

As you are a member of WikiProject Ice Hockey, see Ccwaters for my concerns about my actions recently. GoodDay 21:21, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Article: John Gordon Purvis

Since you do not think I am anything on the subject of hockey(which I am), I have taken to the subject of law. I just added two cases to the United States portion of the article Miscarriages of Justice (those of Ron Williamson and Dennis Fritz, wrongfully convicted of the murder of Debra Sue Carter, and John Gordon Purvis, wrongfully convicted of the murder of Susan Hamwi and daughter Shane), and, an article on John Gordon Purvis for your enjoyment---though you always find some stupid reason to edit something. The reason I have been absent from the hockey project is illness. I wrote those things on miscarriage of justice because I felt the two cases needed mentioning because they truly were miscarriages of justice. So now you can say I do not belong on hockey at wikipedia, but LAW. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Corey Bryant (talk • contribs) 23:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC).

Bully for you. Heaven knows why you think I care enough about your contributions to chase down personally your every edit, no matter the subject, nor why you felt the need to throw down some cybergauntlet on my talk page. If your contributions to legal articles are deemed sound by those who follow such articles, then they'll stand. If you've brought similar irrelevant trivia to that which has marked many (but not all) of your hockey contributions, no doubt they'll be edited out. Not my interest, not my problem. Either way, if a persecution complex is the result, then whatever the reason for your Wikibreak, it wasn't nearly long enough. Hug a cat, drink some tea, whatever it takes. Ravenswing 07:55, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Funny how two people came to my defense on the Purvis article. Evidently, someone still cares in the world. Not only that, someone cares that there are people who are wrongfully imprisoned and need to be freed. Where one does the most good is where one belongs, and right now, apparently, for me, it is law.Corey Bryant 20:27, 12 February 2007 (UTC) P.S.: With you being a paralegal you take no interest whatsoever in people being wrongfully imprisoned? How weird. It would be interesting to see your reaction to that English nanny being convicted for the death of Matthew Eappen some years back---when it was shown by their defense expert on 60 Minutes that it was very possible that his father had beaten him a few days before his death.

Perhaps, then, your new-found interest in law will lead you to abandon straw man arguments such as that whether or not I pay attention to certain obscure Wikipedia articles has so much as a rat's ass to do with my views or interests on any issue whatsoever. That being said, I'm familiar with the Woodward case. My take on their so-called "defense expert" is that they weren't paid to tell the truth, but to advocate the stance for which they were paid, and to come up with anything which will support their side and cast doubt on the other, however far fetched the "theory." Weighing the conflicting claims is the job of jurors who actually pay attention to the case, and not that of viewers watching a biased eleven-minute TV segment devoid of cross examination. It is equally "possible" that Matthew Eappen was injured by sonic rays from alien orbital mind-control devices, on the grounds that the existence of the same cannot be proven not to exist.

And that being said, perhaps you could focus your efforts elsewhere than to continue pointless spamming of my talk page, which in fact constitutes misuse of it. Ravenswing 05:35, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Quebec Bulldogs

Hi. I have been doing a lot of research on the Quebec Bulldogs the last few years and I was wondering if you can add this info to the Bulldogs page. I supplied most of the info to the sportsecyclopedia page (listed at the bottom of the page as a link).

1. The club actually debuted in 1878 NOT 1888. They were one of the oldest organized hockey clubs ever assembled. Only the Montreal McGills predate them (1877).

2. They didn't join the AHA until 1890.

3. They didn't get the "Bulldogs" name until 1908. Up until that point they were simply the Quebec Hockey Club.

4. They were renamed Athletics when they joined the NHL in 1919/20. That one season they played in the NHL was the only time they were called the Athletics.

Here's a rundown of their history

• Quebec HC 1878-1907/08
• Quebec Bulldogs 1908/09-1918/19
• Quebec Athletics 1919/20

• 1878-1882 Various unorganized challenges. Hockey had not gone "mainstream" yet.
• 1883 MONTREAL WINTER CARNIVAL
• 1884-1885 Didn't Play
• 1886 DOMINION CHAMPIONSHIP
• 1887-1889 Didn't play except for various exhibition games
• 1890-1898 AHA
• 1899-1905 CAHL
• 1906-1907/08 ECAHA
• 1908/09 ECHA
• 1909/10 CHA
• 1910/11-1916/17 NHA
• 1917/18-1918/19 Didn't play
• 1919/20 NHL

Giantdevilfish 18:58, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

New York Rangers

Hello, Ravenswing. I've checked up on the HHOF website and I'm afraid Payne2thamax, has got the jump on us. As he & other editors are using the HHOF as their source, the HHOF does recognize Hull as a Ranger. You were so right (in everyway) about placing a restriction on the HHOF sections. If I had to do it all over again, I never would have called for a consensus vote. I'm more determined now, then ever, to pull the plug on the 'Honoured Members/HHOF sections'. GoodDay 00:25, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Yep, that's why I pushed for those restrictions in the first place, and now the HHOF sections are, as they were before, indiscriminate garbage. Ravenswing 02:54, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Sports clubs established in YYYY

Ravenswing, could you check the NHL Record book on the following teams which are currently categorized in a year later than they were formed to see which year the NHL officially recognizes each team: Colorado - Formed 1972, on Wiki as 1995 Phoenix - Formed 1972, on Wiki as 1996. and Vancouver - Formed in 1946, on Wiki as 1970. These are the only 3 that I can find that I believe are inaccurate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pparazorback (talk • contribs) 17:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC).

Thanks for AfD info

Thanks for the heads up on the AfD. This is part of a cyber stalking issue I've been having. See User_talk:Alabamaboy#Cyber_stalking_and_harassment for more info. Best, --Alabamaboy 20:10, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment on the AfD. This whole situation has been frustrating but the support I've received from people has been great. Best, --Alabamaboy 20:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Eddie shore - banners.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Eddie shore - banners.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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. 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 specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 88.160.247.46 15:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar!

You deserve this, methinks. =^^=

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For your commentary on the Barbara Schwarz AfD in first half of March 2007, explaining the concept of WP:OR and WP:RS Dennisthe2 21:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, that is extremely kind of you! Thank you very much! Ravenswing 04:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Investiture Chapters

Hello my venerable wikipedian, Ravenswing. I have now realized that Quarl has irrationally deleted my Investiture of the God chapter articles. Luckily however, I already saved these articles and will be implementing them within Wikibooks. I noticed your past logic and have concluded that putting the chapters on Wikibooks seems to be the only true way -- for these articles need to be in existence in some way if wikipedia's standards are to be justified. My question to you, however, is if currently existing articles can be linked from Wikipedia to Wikibooks; for this is an example of what I plan to do for each character from Investiture of the Gods (which can only happen if the chapter articles exist):

---

Su Daji Su Daji is a major character featured within Investiture of the Gods who has contributed greatly to the Shang Dynasty's fall. Throughout Daji's many torture devices, the Bronze Toaster (6) would be her first creation. The Snake Pit, and the Meat Forest (17) would be her additional creations throughout the course of the novel.

---

Thank you for your time, Traynor. User:Tathagata Buddha March 14 07 (EST)

Almost certainly not; the whole point of that AfD is that those pages do not belong on Wikipedia in any form whatsoever. I am ignorant of how Wikibooks operates, mind you, and uploading that content there in its entirety may be possible for all I know. Ravenswing 19:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

AFD complete, result was no consensus

I closed it as no consensus, because 7-3 is not a clear consensus. As for some of the editors being sockpuppets, that's a suspicion, not a guarantee. As the "keeps" were ahead anyway, no consensus has the same result: the article stays. ⇒ SWATJester ^{On Belay!} 19:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I would say that 70%, where the nom and one of the two other Delete votes were users whose only Wikipedia activities were the AfD in question, is pretty overwhelming. Ravenswing 20:43, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

70% doesn't pass at RFA. Besides, the end reult is the same. no consensus means the article stays. consensus to keep means the article stays. Same end result. ⇒ SWATJester ^{On Belay!} 18:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Errr ... this wasn't an RfA ... but if it had been, odds are extremely high those one-time-only users would not have their votes counted. (scratches his head in confusion) Ravenswing 19:25, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I understand it's not. But RFA is not a vote, and neither is AFD. 70% isn't necessarily a consensus anywhere on wikipedia. ⇒ SWATJester ^{On Belay!} 21:30, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Pretty circular argument you have going there, but short of RfA and RfB, there's nowhere on Wikipedia where 70% isn't a consensus. Ravenswing 13:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Congradulations

Congrats on your rare example of a good use of the word "yikes." -- Jreferee 14:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Heh, thanks. I'm an old fashioned fellow, I confess ... Ravenswing 14:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Please do not add unhelpful and unconstructive information to Wikipedia, as you did to Brad Park. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. GDon4t0 (talk to me...) 20:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Double revert. Good Faith. You can ignore the above. GDon4t0 (talk to me...) 20:20, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Umm, I would hope so. For my part, I can't think of any circumstance conceivable where changing a name from bold to quotation marks (or the other way around, for that matter) should provoke use of the Vandalism 2 template. I'd take it easy on that myself, whether you've gone on to slap it on the fellow whose edit I reverted or otherwise. Ravenswing 20:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Box office bomb

I think you are right. At this point when an argument is lost then the topic is changed. I feel like we are going in circles here. --FateClub 18:50, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#Regarding notability of Football (soccer) players

Hi, seeing you have been involved in previous Afd debates on the subject I invite you to contribute to this discussion to clarify certain issues about football player notability. I think clearer guidelines are needed to avoid repeated inappropriate nominations for deletion and time consuming discussions. Cheers! StephP 20:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

ATT poll

I think you may have intended your !vote for the "Neutral/conditional/compromise" section. The "Support" section is for ATT superceding V/NOR/RS. Just FYI.  :-) — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 06:36, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Vote!

Following your contribution to the discussion on football player notability you might be interested in voting on this. Rgds, StephP 10:25, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Dissident Sound System Article

Ravenswing,

Please can you tell me why my article has been deleted without allowing me any chance to alter it to conform with the rules? How am I supposed to add links to references for Jungletek Movement (as specified in the discussion of that page) without having the article to edit? I am appalled that an ambassador for one of the worlds largest (and most impartial) repository of information would remove information so readily without allowing the poster to comment/edit/feedback on your OPINIONS (and so I'm told, opinions are against the wikipedia rules). Your thoughts, while they may be in keeping with the rules of Wikipedia, are completely false, and I deserve a chance to prove myself as correct.

If the article still exists somewhere, please can you tell me how to access it so I can make the necessary changes? Surely you dont expect me to write the whole article from scratch? If you do not respond, I will have to take this up with more senior Wikipedia staff.

I am sickened at your lack of respect for my article, my thoughts and the facts that I know to be true. How can you possibly comment on this without knowledge of the subject, and then remove it (almost) without warning? Give me a chance!

Yours,

Appalled, Bristol (Selwyn Leeke) Toad 13:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

RG didn't delete your article, nor did he nominate it for deletion. He merely commented about it and subsequently got attacked by you. You had 6 full days to state your case here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dissident Sound System, you had apt warning. If you think it was deleted against Wikipedia:Deletion policy, bring it up at Wikipedia:Deletion review. ccwaters 13:24, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

You had a chance - several days, in fact, never mind from when the article was created in the first place - to provide the sourcing to reliable, independent, published sources that WP:ATT requires, and to produce evidence that the subject met the criteria of WP:BAND. You failed to do so; all we saw from you were personal attacks and insults. You can understand, I hope, that since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia we cannot just take someone's naked, unsupported word for anything, and it is up to every editor - you, me, everyone - to produce those sources as a necessary condition for any article to remain.

As far as the AfD process went, Delete for failure to meet Wikipedia's standards was the unanimous consensus of every other editor but yourself. We do not fall, I'm afraid, into the currently popular misconception of equating "respect" with "letting you do or say whatever you want" (although it would help your desire to be respected if you chose to respect others), but in any event, adherence to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines is the only avenue we can take.

I am given to understand that administrators have access to the old copy of deleted articles; I would contact them if you wished the text. Contrary to your apparent perception, I am not myself an administrator, and have no power to provide you with that text. I do caution you that recreating the article without the required sourcing is an egregious violation of Wikipedia policy and will not only lead to a Speedy Deletion but would put you at risk for being blocked. I strongly urge you to read WP:ATT, WP:BAND, WP:MUSIC and WP:NN, and ensure any music-related articles you write conform to those standards. Ravenswing 13:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

thankyou for your message

I will definitely read the articles you suggest on wikipedia rules. Unfortunately, though, this may not happen very soon, as I work and do not have time to sit and read Wikipedia all day long. It is for this reason that I do not consider "several days" sufficient time to make the necessary changes to my articles and was concerned at the speedy deletion of the article in question.

I would also like to comment on your point: "all we saw from you were personal attacks and insults". I did not make any comments at all on the page, let alone personal insults. As I said before, I did not have time to review the page before it was deleted. Upon reviewing the page today, I saw this comment, which was made independently from myself by someone who is obviously involved in the soundsystem and felt strongly about its deletion. I am not in the business of making enemies, and I am sure you aren't either.

I will be applying to the administrators for the text of the article (if you could advise me how to do this, it would be most appreciated) and I will make the changes suggested to meet the wikipedia guidelines. I hope this message will clear up some of the misunderstandings between us and lead to an amicable relationship between the two of us where we do not need to resort to deleting each other's articles. If you have any comments or questions, please address them to me directly. I will do my best to reply in a timely fasion...

-Selwyn Leeke —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Toaduk (talk • contribs) 14:31, 4 April 2007 (UTC).

Missing something

I cannot help but think we are missing something in regards to the International Services Trade Information Agency article - the rather desperate strongarm attempts at the AFD are all out of proportion with the importance of a wikipedia article. --Fredrick day 14:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Well ... all out of proportion from our perspective, that is. Wikipedia is hugely popular - heck, how often does the Wiki article wind up as the lead Google hit on a subject? - and a lot of companies view it as free, ungoverned advertising. That aside, plainly this Jenn Powell is a scrapper who really, really hates to lose, is taking this AfD as a personal affront, and perhaps (understandably) had no idea that a canvassing campaign was very much against Wikipedia culture.  Ravenswing  14:33, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Question about documentation

I notice from your user page that documentation and research are important to you. I am curious about the proper way to document. Coming from an academic background I am all about footnotes/endnotes. however it seems most folks are happy to just leave a link or reference at the bottom of an article. In searching through WP:CITE I can't find any community-wide standard. Are you aware of anything? Am I ask too much? Thanks! JodyB 02:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Oberon Middle School

You are correct, I've amended the closure. Please feel free to complete the merge at any time as you see fit. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 15:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Igor Jancevski

I would like to see your opinion, following your contributions on the talkpage of WP:BIO. If international player does not mean notability, then I am wondering why this article will be kept. User:KRBN 20:19, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Hershey Bears

Have a look out on the Hershey Bears article, and the copyvio from Coco the Bear article as well. Flibirigit 06:05, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Your point at Montreal Canadiens

I don't mean to be argumentative, but perhaps you misread my point. I was not suggesting that the source needed to be from the internet. In fact, I was encouraging him to put sources in if he had any, as *I* couldn't find anything on the internet. — Dorvaq (talk) 13:53, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I'd have been more sanguine if the reference I'd put in months ago hadn't already been stripped out of the article.  Ravenswing  13:59, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to hear, but the stripping in question was not my doing. When Blueboy96 removed the statement, I started digging to find something that would refute his claim, but like I mentioned before, all I found agreed with him. — Dorvaq (talk) 14:09, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Which is what Habs management and fans would want, in general. I expect it suits Quebecois amour propre for the franchise to have technically started with Les Canadiens, rather than from some Anglo team in an outback Ontario mining town.  Ravenswing  14:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Well I'm Quebecois and it doesn't suit me if it's not the truth. Either way, verifiable references are always a necessity. — Dorvaq (talk) 14:56, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Indeed so.  Ravenswing  15:11, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Please revisit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gardendale High School

Could you please take another look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gardendale High School? I added some references. --Eastmain 19:11, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bel Air Middle School (3rd nomination)

I appreciate your frustration as to the length of time that the article had been left unimproved. Bel Air Middle School is a wonderful example of an article that could have been expanded to demonstrate notability, yet wasn't until it was on AfD. While AfDs can achieve the desired result, as in this case, the essentially adversarial nature of the AfD process is simply not conducive to identifying an improving articles, or deleting / redirecting those that can't demonstrate notability. Whether one comes in with exclusionist or deletionist leanings, I sincerely hope we can start thinking about better ways to separate the wheat from the chaff. Alansohn 21:48, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

martinez middle scvhool

please return my article on Bob Martinez Middle School. I edited it as requested and am in process with the Administration to update the article.

Good Idea to expand hockey coverage, too bad the bolts lost tonight, eh?

Kurt Weber —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.100.104.72 (talk) 01:54, 21 April 2007 (UTC).