WhisperToMe (talk | contribs) |
→Wikipedia:Requests for Arbitration: new section |
||
Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
== TMI == |
== TMI == |
||
Hmm... TMI is usually used when people discover "gross" details. Anyway, how would Matsui's alias be "insignificant" ? Since he did use this alias when checking into a hotel (even though Matsui is not a criminal), I say that it should be mentioned in the article. [[User:WhisperToMe|WhisperToMe]] 22:53, 7 October 2007 (UTC) |
Hmm... TMI is usually used when people discover "gross" details. Anyway, how would Matsui's alias be "insignificant" ? Since he did use this alias when checking into a hotel (even though Matsui is not a criminal), I say that it should be mentioned in the article. [[User:WhisperToMe|WhisperToMe]] 22:53, 7 October 2007 (UTC) |
||
== [[Wikipedia:Requests for Arbitration]] == |
|||
Dear {{pagename}}, you have been listed as a party in an [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Alkivar|arbitration request]]. Please click [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Alkivar|here for the request]]. Regards, [[user:Nat|'''nat''']]<sup>[[user talk:Nat|'''t''']][[Special:Contributions/Nat|a]][[Special:Emailuser/Nat|'''n''']]<span class="plainlinks">[http://tools.wikimedia.de/~interiot/cgi-bin/Tool1/wannabe_kate?username=Nat&site=en.wikipedia.org g]</span></sup> 21:37, 9 October 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:37, 9 October 2007
You know? If the 1903 World Series image is on Commons, why isn't the image I uploaded not there? I mean, I could upload it there (I have a Commons account, but rarely use it), but I disagree with Betacommand's "invalid fair use" argument. SoxrockTalk/Edits 12:37, 30 September 2007 (EDT) 00:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, good point. Having their logo on it is just a cheap way, I assume, to give credit back to the site whenever the pic is used. If you see this pic of Nig Clarke, you see a pic taken between 1905 and 1911, and therefore being in the public domain. Why should some image taken between a similar time period (1901-1911, the final year the Sox played at Huntington Grounds) be considered "fair use?" Again, if your 1903 WS pic is on Commons, I see no objection to that pic being on Commons. SoxrockTalk/Edits 01:41, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- Also, hitting Nig Clarke, do you know much about this guy? I originally started this article in May (to my vast surprise, this guy is a Texas League legend) to describe his 8 homer game from 06/15/1902. Since then, I have found out a lot about this fellow SoxrockTalk/Edits 01:43, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- That needs clarification. I'm a Buccaneers fan, and as such, I decided to follow my friend Ksy92003's lead and made my comment box red. I'd love to do Yankee colors, but that just won't work. Can't read black on navy blue, right? (Just for the record, I am actually rooting for Boston over Anaheim, creates a better chance for NY when they make the ALCS, yes, I did say when). And thanks for removing that bogus tag, just look at this and you'll see the crap I get from that friggin bot. Honestly, I don't care about images anymore because of that bot, since, if fair use can be contested, it'll be up for deletion. Things are getting pathetic here when it comes to fair use, sadly SoxrockTalk/Edits 01:52, 2 October 2007 (UTC) (yes, I keep tweaking my sig)
- I like your images, personally. I find no harm in them. I just wish the fair use editors (for lack of better term) would stop trying to find any little problem with a pic and try to dispose of it. It's annoying and it only serves to distance ourselves from providing good images. Why spend hours downloading and uploading pics so some bot can try to delete them? SoxrockTalk/Edits 02:15, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- Ah yes, I remember a discussion a few months back regarding "team of destiny", which is what the 2003 Marlins were, the team that beat my beloved Yankees. Now, I personally don't mind the "thank Jesus" stuff, but it can be a bit nonsensical. But I'm a regular church-goer, I am not about to say negative things about Jesus.
- The 2007 Cubs, everything goes back to the beginning of June. Your right, how must Michael Barrett feel? Not only did he get dumped and portrayed as an A-hole, he is not going to the playoffs when, in the 13th inning of the tiebreaker game, the Pad squad had an 8-6 lead. He's not gonna sleep well tonight, for sure. And, hey, I told Ksy before the 13th that this game wasn't over, with Matsui, Tulowitzki, Holliday, and Helton coming up. However, I stayed up very late to see this, and I am glad I did. What a game (much better than that MNF game, right?) SoxrockTalk/Edits 05:15, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, I definitely see your point now on the Jesus take. Kinda like something I read out of Richard Ben Craemer's book on Joe DiMaggio regarding the 1951 Giants ("God must be a Giants fan!"). Also, Chris is not an admin. However, I have talked with Chris and Ksy offline numerous times (especially Ksy, we're good friends, and I'll be glad to add you as a friend on my userpage). SoxrockTalk/Edits 05:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- Hahah, that's a good one. If you think about it, using the logic of the Paper it was in (I forget which NY paper it was, but that's what it said... I think) God must've stuck around for Game 1, when Dave Koslo threw a gem vs. the Yanks in a 5-1 win. He must've stayed thru game 3, when the Giants beat the Yanks 6-2. However, there was a rain postponement on the originally scheduled date of Game 4, and that's when God must've crossed the river and taken residence at the Stadium.
- Yeah, I've also heard the stealing signs rumor, with a person from the Polo Grounds clubhouse stealing signs from the 483 foot away wall in Centerfield. The Giants, allegedly, must've lived by the "If your not cheating, your not trying" slogan back then. SoxrockTalk/Edits 06:04, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not convinced either. Even with a telescope, reading signs, usually in daylight, from nearly 500 feet away is not easy. I believe the Giants were clean. Also, the better team at the time, if I'm interpreting right, means that the Giants had a better chance of victory. They won 37 of 44 to force the playoff with Brooklyn, and 39 of 47 to get to the Series vs the Bombers SoxrockTalk/Edits 06:20, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Chrisjnelson scenario
Baseball Bugs, since it looks like you know some about this, I'd like to know your take on this. You can get back to me on either my talk page, or here. Ksy92003(talk) 05:16, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- I don't believe I made any blatant, offensive name calling, and if I did, then I revoke those statements. I am a very devoted Christian, and it isn't in my belief to degrade other people like that unless there is proof, factual evidence, to support any of my actions. The comment where I said that he appears to me to be an untrustworthy liar was formed on the basis that in the past, he has lied. If I ever do make comments like those, I will always back it up with proof.
- The proof behind why I called him a liar goes back to before the Jmfangio/Tecmobowl sockpuppetry case. Chris was in the RfC, and had said that he was gonna follow a topic ban, preventing him from editing all but two articles. Shortly after making that pledge, he violated it, and this was pointed out by Durova, after which Chris said that he completely intended on following it, and that he wouldn't break it again. Durova pointed out that Chris lied about his intent to keep his pledge by violating it shortly after making it.
- But you do make some good points. It is best to keep a cooler head as much as possible. I haven't ever used vulgarity, and the only times any of my edits have contained vulgar language was when I was quoting somebody else's vulgar language. Ksy92003(talk) 05:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Tried to send you an email
About something I wanted discuss off-Wiki, but you ain't got none. Not terribly important. But if you want to e-mail me, I can respond that way. Or not, no big. :) --Ebyabe 23:12, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Punkin
Well, thanks for clarifying. I thought it was perhaps a typo, but I'm ok with it now. SoxrockTalk/Edits 01:09, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Rosanna
Okay, okay. :) Have you heard about the recent incident with that song between Paich and Steve Lukather? --Bloodzombie 15:10, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
TMI
Hmm... TMI is usually used when people discover "gross" details. Anyway, how would Matsui's alias be "insignificant" ? Since he did use this alias when checking into a hotel (even though Matsui is not a criminal), I say that it should be mentioned in the article. WhisperToMe 22:53, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Dear Baseball Bugs/Snapshot081009, you have been listed as a party in an arbitration request. Please click here for the request. Regards, nattang 21:37, 9 October 2007 (UTC)