Howdy,
This mediation at Wikipedia:Community enforceable mediation/Fangio and Nelson has opened. Hoping everything goes the best. I'll be in touch there, and feel free to ask if you have any questions. Regards, Navou banter 03:12, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Do you think its possible to get the stats in the active NFL infoboxes like the MLB ones? Thanks -- Phbasketball6 03:28, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
It was electric when they showed him on the hi-def screen in center. Amazing night! Steviedpeele 04:11, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
I just had to ask. Raul17 23:51, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
So then why is the template on the Trent Green page? This is what WP:CRYSTAL is about. Krkr12 15:43, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, that's what I figured. Pats1 21:23, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
I just found out the new NFL.com has historical player stats for every player who ever played the game, so maybe we can use this as a link for all of the retired players, for stats. Thanks -- Phbasketball6 01:06, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Per WP:COOL and WP:CIVIL, please avoid stirring the pot with edits like this. THF 22:08, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey there. This is a comment I'm leaving in response to Jmfangio's disruptive behavior on either Talk:Peyton Manning or Talk:Brett Favre. I would appreciate it if you could go to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Disruptive behavior and help solve this situation; whatever assistance you can provide is quite helpful. If you choose not to be a part of this, then that would be perfectly fine, as well. Thank you. Ksy92003 (talk) 17:26, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
For all of our sakes, could I ask that you please just don't revert Jmfangio again? It's not worth getting blocked for. Ksy92003 (talk) 22:18, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
I just thought I'd let you know I think Jmfangio's WP:RFC on you is a little ridiculous. As far as I can tell, there's no reason the RFC should exist. Yes, you've both been a little... shall we say, unrelenting in your debates and arguments, but there's no reason this RFC should even have been made. Wlmaltby3 – talk/ contribs 23:29, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Not ignoring you, just giving someone else perhaps the opportunity to chime in. Please do not hesitate to open a couple of discussions, I will let you know if i'm having a hard time following them. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat 00:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Chris, I'd like to reopen the article to contributions. If the requested arbitration doesn't open I'm contemplating seeking some type of community based sanction on both you and JMfangio to contain the dispute so other editors can participate.
I'm posting to both of your talk pages for input on what would be best. Our options are limited and crude. Your input is welcome. Whatever the solution, it'll apply equally for the two of you:
Durova Charge! 01:37, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
We're good right now I think.► Chris Nelson 03:06, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Now there is something we have in common!► Chris Nelson 03:17, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
See the Jays roster template talk page for a note on my edit that you undid. -- Oeuftete88 21:40, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm trying to keep out of this situation, but I can't any longer... Chrisjnelson, please try to refrain yourself from talking with Jmfangio. The conversation you're having with him isn't helping things out at all; it was the potential to make this incident really ugly, and you're likely to cause more harm than good. Ksy92003 (talk) 06:14, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Is there any point in kicking him on his talk page while he is blocked? I saw the thread on ANI and haven't tried to figure out what the dispute is over someone copying/pasting talk page comments, but WADR your comments on his talk page aren't helpful. -- B 06:15, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Fuck I am so blocked.► Chris Nelson 06:22, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Question for you ... I know nothing whatsoever about baseball ... but I went to a Norfolk Tides game tonight and took a ton of pictures that I am cropping and adding to articles. The Tides are the AAA team for the Baltimore Orioles. Should the bio of a Tides player say that he plays for the Tides or that he plays for the Orioles? Adam Stern, for example, just says that he plays for the Orioles and doesn't even mention the Tides by name (it just says that he was sent down to AAA). Is that correct? Thanks. -- B 03:31, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
God, can you believe Jmfangio did it again? Once again, there was a discussion with him and another user about the RfC I had. I went there to tell the user who was talking to Jmfangio that I had no purpose and the RfC could be removed at will. Jmfangio could've just left it at that, but he had to react by removing my comment, saying "not your decision anyway." I replied, and he removed both of my comments. I know that my opinion didn't matter, but I think it was worth noting to the other user that I didn't have any objections to deletion of the RfC and that I insisted it be removed. I don't get why Jmfangio doesn't understand that sometimes it would just be best to avoid doing anything and agitating me again. I mean this is why he has problems communicating with us. He removes something just because I said it, even though it may've helped out the situation a bit more. He really doesn't understand that the best thing to do is nothing. Ksy92003 (talk) 05:25, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Well, at least you believe me. You're the only one who understands that what I did today, which Jmfangio says isn't allowed, is no different than what he did to you yesterday. And again, I responded to his comment, so I had a reason for bringing it back. Jmfangio brought your comment back just because he wanted to see it. I brought his comment back because my comment was written in response to his, so his comment needed to be visible as I was responding to him. I just really don't understand why nobody but you believes me. Jmfangio would understand if he actually read the comments I left him instead of just vacuuming it up as if it were Spring cleaning. Ksy92003 (talk) 09:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
The 3RR board is for adjudicating on 3RR violations and is not part of the dispute resolution process. It is not a place for discussion and your outside comments are disruptive. Neither of your comments to me have been particularly civil and I would go as far as to say that your interjections serve no purpose other then to poor petrol on the flames of a dispute that I'm shutting down. General editing problems with other users can be brought to the admin noticeboards but I'm not, rpt not, going to block an editor for trying to disengage from a dispute - especially as its his own comment he is removing, its outside main space and its a talk page. You are flogging a dead horse here. Spartaz Humbug! 09:59, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Ok my bad i also did it with Paul Smith (football player) of the Broncos But i removed it when you told me about the D.D Lewis article. Taylor21 07:38, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey Thanks for the pointers Taylor21 07:52, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
This is in response to your comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Power pitcher: "It's like a wrong convention in here." Who are you to say that our opinions are wrong? Look, I know I've supported you in the past, but just because you have one opinion doesn't mean everybody else is wrong because they share a different opinion, okay? Ksy92003 (talk) 04:53, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
I've seen your edit you've made to this article, adding the undrafted year in the infobox. It seems like it works perfectly, and I don't see how it would cause any problems. Ksy92003 (talk) 22:17, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Well he knows what it looks like and how it works, he's still opposed to it.► Chris Nelson 23:28, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
At WP:ANI another user has pointed out your continued incivility. Please note that according to Wikipedia's block policy, "persistent gross incivility" is possible grounds for a block. Thank you, David Fuchs ( talk) 23:35, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
FYI: See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball#Template roster change X96lee15 02:40, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
If you look at wiki itself, under NFL MVP awards, you will note that there are or were at least 4 or 5 different awards. the only "true" NFL MVP award was awarded by the NFL itself from 1937-1946. Of the other awards, some are no longer awarded, but (for example) the PFWA NFL MVP award was awarded during the years in question.
Since the career highlights box to the right on the Favre page shows the breakdown of awards (AP, Bert Bell, UPI, etc) It's only proper to qualify the awards in the text of the article also.
Otherwise the article conveys the mistaken impression that the NFL itself awarded favre three awards.
I assume it's you that keeps undoing my changing of the Favre page to reflect that the MVP awards received were from the Associated Press.
I read at User talk:B that Jmfangio believes that you and I are meatpuppets... what are meatpuppets? Well, whatever they are, I haven't done anything against Wiki-policy, so I don't see why I'm being accused of anything. Do you know what meatpuppets are? Because I haven't a clue. Ksy92003 (talk) 06:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I made these screenshots myself. I didn't get them from a website. I recorded the program with TiVo and uploaded it to my computer, and took screens of the program. I understand if they'll be deleted, but to be honest, I don't think they harm the program or HBO in any way. But hey, whatever. I hate the whole picture uploading stuff anyways because it's almost impossible for me to find ones that fall into the category of Wiki pictures. Conman33 20:18, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
I replied to you at my talk page. Regards, Skybunny 23:49, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
You might want to review WP:NPA before someone decides to ban you.-- SarekOfVulcan 01:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Community_sanction_noticeboard#Jmfangio.C2.A0.28talk.C2.A0.C2.B7_contribs.29_and_Chrisjnelson.C2.A0.28talk.C2.A0.C2.B7_contribs.29:_proposed_topic_ban - you may wish to comment. Durova Charge! 01:02, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
With regard to this edit, very nicely done. I applaud you. -- But| seriously| folks 04:09, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
You posted on my discussion board a while back. You were right - I actually asked my English professor and he said it was an example of irony (he's a huge wiki fan, probably the only professor at my uni that would allow you to cite it in a pic). BUT, I do take issue with you implying that the song "Irony" by Alanis Morissette is not ironic. On the contrary, it is extremely ironic, as the song is called Irony, yet contains no actual bits of irony in the song lyrics, only poetic justice. There's something to think about! kstingily 6:24, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jmfangio-Chrisjnelson. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jmfangio-Chrisjnelson/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jmfangio-Chrisjnelson/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel 00:19, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
I like your template. I think every Championship team should have them. I hope there are no objections to the template idea. How difficult is it to find the info to create them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyTheTiger ( talk • contribs) 17:35, August 24, 2007 (UTC)
I want to convert the Roger Clemens team colors like Barry Bonds has team colors in his team column. Do you know a quick way to get the exact colors?-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:57, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
There was no opposition. If you don't want to do the 61 & 62 Yankee Templates, I will get to them this week, but how do you get the Jersey numbers? Do you use The Baseball almanac?-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
You reverted an edit, which now reads that he made his debut with the Miami Dolphins in 2006. However, the same box says that he played for the San Diego Chargers in 2003. Therefore, he made his debut with the Chargers in 2003. PhiEaglesfan712 20:51, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Wiki policy: "Be respectful to others and their points of view. This means primarily: Do not simply revert changes in a dispute. When someone makes an edit you consider biased or inaccurate, improve the edit, rather than reverting it. Provide a good edit summary when making significant changes that other users might object to. The revision you would prefer will not be established by reverting, and repeated reverting is forbidden; discuss disputed changes on the talk page. If you encounter rude or inappropriate behavior, resist the temptation to respond unkindly, and do not make personal attacks."
Please stop reverting my editing. All I did was put factual statements up that Portis made. They were controversial and got a lot of media attention. They belong on his page. Just like Keither Hernandez's controversial comments about women in baseball are in his page. I will have to bring a case against you if you keep violating Wiki policy. If you want to change how the statement is presented that's fine but the bottom line is the statement itself belongs on his page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.143.68.157 ( talk) 21:48, August 28, 2007 (UTC)
Thx for the message Chris. I would've stayed on thru that 3-week period that I was autoblocked. Hey, I was exonerated, but I was dying to get back. To help kill the time I lost, I just went elsewhere online (I would've just played games, but my video game system is jacked up now, sort of eliminated the easiest choice). I appreciate the kind words, and, just to let you know, I'm always glad to help you out also, just let me know. And good luck to the Braves and Dolphins. Soxrock 01:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
You've been blocked for 3 hours for continued incivility on the Incidents noticeboard. Feel free to return with a cool head after your block expires. Maxim (talk) 01:43, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Again, your comments add fuel to the fire. Calling me a "nazi" isn't going to help your cause at all. You claim that you're not making any personal attacks, and in doing so, make even more. Calling me a "nazi" is yet another attack on me. Ksy92003 (talk) 01:51, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Chris, you've been lucky today: another sysop gave you a three hour block before I returned. So I'll ask you a few questions.
You pledged to avoid all but two football-related articles, and voluntarily offered that this restriction apply only to yourself. I closed a topic ban discussion as a gesture of good faith in response to that pledge, yet you violated the pledge almost immediately. I warned you of the consequences that could follow that decision, yet when another editor petitioned me to intervene you wrote that you expected no consequence for your decision and stated that you didn't think you deserved to be held to your pledge. You also admitted that you were lying in an edit summary tonight, which suggests you lie about other things too.
How does that all square up? I'll tell you what it looks like:
I'm willing to keep an open mind. If these conclusions are mistaken then please demonstrate why. Specific diffs will help because I'm preparing an arbitration statement. I nearly put you on the bench for a week over gross violations of WP:POINT. Durova Charge! 03:36, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
First, I'll address the edit summary issue. "Lie" was a poor choice of words. It was not meant to deceive anyone, although obviously everyone misconstrued its meaning so it was a poor choice on my part. I've recently taken exception to some of Jmfangio's edit summaries when he makes accusations about me violating policy that don't apply. He did that yesterday on Michael Vick, saying I was edit warring. The specifics aren't really important. My point is, my edit summary on my talk page was just a little joke of mine in that it was supposed to make absolutely no sense or have any connection to my actual edit. Obviously, it was a stupid joke, a very unclear one and an offensive one. The "Nazi" aspect had absolutely nothing to do with Ksy92003 - I was making no connection there. So I'm sorry about that whole thing. A very poor decision on my part, but hopefully you'll believe me when I say its meaning was not nearly as severe as people have mistaken it to be.
As for the whole thing about a topic ban, my pledge and all that. Whether you believe me or not, I was being sincere when I first made the pledge and at the time I fully expected to stand by it. I simply broke it because I genuinely enjoy editing related articles and I felt I did a lot of good. I mean I'm not stupid - I knew if I made the edits it would be known and documented. I was always aware of the possibility (or inevitability) of having a topic ban discussion re-opened. It was simply a risk I was willing to take, and still am. I feel I do a lot of good on NFL-related articles and I have a lot to offer. For that reason, I have gone back on my pledge and will not make one again. I suppose if I am banned from the topic (which would pretty much ban me entirely since that's almost all I'm interested in editing) there will be nothing I can do. But I'm willing to defend myself and my place in the NFL community because I feel I do far more good than harm.
So as for your numbered points, which I partially have answered already.
Finally regarding Ksy92003's name. It truly was a mistake, even the time I, like an idiot, used it again in apologizing. Ksy92003 and I have conversed extensively through email in recent weeks and his real name shows up as the sender, so that's how I knew it. It never even occurred to me that it was something that I should make a point of not posting. I just wrote it subconsciously because that's how I had come to think of him because of the email conversations. Ksy92003 can vouch that we have conversed through email and I do hope you believe me on this. I never meant to cause any hard, it truly was an honest mistake and I'd never do anything like that on purpose.► Chris Nelson 04:22, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
(outdent) Chris, You made a pledge and then broke it almost immediately. And you don't regret that or acknowledge any basis for the pledge - even though you say you believed it at the time. What exactly did you believe then? Whatever it was, I advise you to explain it to the arbitration committee in fuller detail than here, and to explain to them with diffs why so many people are mistaken when they see problems and come to you with concerns.
Since I wrote the above you edited football templates and articles five more times [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] and left this interesting comment for another editor. [6] You also admit to being a single purpose account, which is the kind of statement that tends to get weighed at arbitration. Regarding your pledge to refrain from posting another editor's real name, I take that exactly as seriously as your pledge to avoid the topic of football - which means the next time you cause disruption at football I'll block you for a week and the next time you post another editor's real name I'll indef you. It's as simple as that.
If you want to turn things around, I strongly suggest mentorship and some serious effort at reform. Durova Charge! 14:10, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I do not wish to converse directly with you anymore. You are wrong about everything and I see there is no convincing you. Do what you want, but I find you rude, condescending, insulting, paranoid and you're finding problems that aren't there. I've made a lot of mistakes here, I'll be the first to admit it. But you're trying to get me for things that don't even exist. For that reason, I want not further direct contact with you. Have a good life.► Chris Nelson 04:09, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi! I noticed your involvement on U.S. South-related articles, categories and WikiProjects, and I wanted to let you know about a bid we're formulating to get next year's Wikimania held in Atlanta! If you would like to help, be sure to sign your name to the "In Atlanta" section of the Southeast team portion of the bid if you're in town, or to the "Outside Atlanta" section if you still want to help but don't live in the city or the suburbs. If you would like to contribute more, please write on my talk page, the talk page of the bid, or join us at the #wikimania-atlanta IRC chat on freenode.org. Have a great day!
P.S. While this is a template for maximum efficiency, I would appreciate a note on my talk page so I know you got the message, and what you think. This is time-sensitive, so your urgent cooperation is appreciated. :) Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 09:13, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I thought you understood what I meant on my talkpage, what Durova, what Seraphim, and what the previous block meant. I apologize, but you have got to stop this sort of behaviour. It's not helping. Feel free to return in 24 hours with a cool head. Thank you. Maxim (talk) 17:02, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
So what you're saying is, I can come to Wikipedia, look up bullshit, learn about the word and its meaning, but I can't actually use it on my own? That's pretty illogical. In my opinion your personal attack, based on the definition I read HERE, is bullshit. That's my interpretation. I deserve to be blocked for THAT? That's weak and you know it.► Chris Nelson 17:30, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Chrisjnelson ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I consider it wrong that I was blocked by an admin that personally attacked me yesterday. He called me a troll, which I took offense to and still do, and I called his personal attack B.S. (though spelling it out). However, considering the isolated incident began with a personal attack by an admin, I feel this is wrong and a conflict of interests. The evidence is located in the link provided above.
Decline reason:
Your block has been discussed on WP:AN/I, and the general consensus was that the block was warranted and that the duration was, if anything, lenient. I would suggest considering a change of approach. — MastCell Talk 18:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Correction to the above: the AN/I discussion was about your previous 3-hour block, not this one. However, given that the issues raised still seem to be in play, I'm not going to unblock. It's a 24-hour block - I'm going to recommend that you sit it out and take steps to de-escalate conflict when you come back. MastCell Talk 18:44, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I've unprotected so that Chris can respond to my questions. Chris, keep it clean. I don't want to extend this block but I will if you step out of bounds. Durova Charge! 00:21, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Because you seem to be misunderstanding my deleting of your comments, I will clarify my reasons. It has nothing to do with not wanting Maxim or anyone else to read anything - I don't care what you to say to anyone else. But I personally do not want you to speak to me again, in part because I feel you have a personal problem with me and in part because I'm a little worried about the indirect threats you made to Jmfangio in email with me. I do not wish to converse with anyone that has express homicidal urges. That is all.► Chris Nelson 17:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
That's interesting. We'll have to see what happens tomorrow. Pats1 20:09, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Howdy,
This mediation at Wikipedia:Community enforceable mediation/Fangio and Nelson has opened. Hoping everything goes the best. I'll be in touch there, and feel free to ask if you have any questions. Regards, Navou banter 03:12, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Do you think its possible to get the stats in the active NFL infoboxes like the MLB ones? Thanks -- Phbasketball6 03:28, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
It was electric when they showed him on the hi-def screen in center. Amazing night! Steviedpeele 04:11, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
I just had to ask. Raul17 23:51, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
So then why is the template on the Trent Green page? This is what WP:CRYSTAL is about. Krkr12 15:43, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, that's what I figured. Pats1 21:23, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
I just found out the new NFL.com has historical player stats for every player who ever played the game, so maybe we can use this as a link for all of the retired players, for stats. Thanks -- Phbasketball6 01:06, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Per WP:COOL and WP:CIVIL, please avoid stirring the pot with edits like this. THF 22:08, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey there. This is a comment I'm leaving in response to Jmfangio's disruptive behavior on either Talk:Peyton Manning or Talk:Brett Favre. I would appreciate it if you could go to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Disruptive behavior and help solve this situation; whatever assistance you can provide is quite helpful. If you choose not to be a part of this, then that would be perfectly fine, as well. Thank you. Ksy92003 (talk) 17:26, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
For all of our sakes, could I ask that you please just don't revert Jmfangio again? It's not worth getting blocked for. Ksy92003 (talk) 22:18, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
I just thought I'd let you know I think Jmfangio's WP:RFC on you is a little ridiculous. As far as I can tell, there's no reason the RFC should exist. Yes, you've both been a little... shall we say, unrelenting in your debates and arguments, but there's no reason this RFC should even have been made. Wlmaltby3 – talk/ contribs 23:29, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Not ignoring you, just giving someone else perhaps the opportunity to chime in. Please do not hesitate to open a couple of discussions, I will let you know if i'm having a hard time following them. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat 00:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Chris, I'd like to reopen the article to contributions. If the requested arbitration doesn't open I'm contemplating seeking some type of community based sanction on both you and JMfangio to contain the dispute so other editors can participate.
I'm posting to both of your talk pages for input on what would be best. Our options are limited and crude. Your input is welcome. Whatever the solution, it'll apply equally for the two of you:
Durova Charge! 01:37, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
We're good right now I think.► Chris Nelson 03:06, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Now there is something we have in common!► Chris Nelson 03:17, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
See the Jays roster template talk page for a note on my edit that you undid. -- Oeuftete88 21:40, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm trying to keep out of this situation, but I can't any longer... Chrisjnelson, please try to refrain yourself from talking with Jmfangio. The conversation you're having with him isn't helping things out at all; it was the potential to make this incident really ugly, and you're likely to cause more harm than good. Ksy92003 (talk) 06:14, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Is there any point in kicking him on his talk page while he is blocked? I saw the thread on ANI and haven't tried to figure out what the dispute is over someone copying/pasting talk page comments, but WADR your comments on his talk page aren't helpful. -- B 06:15, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Fuck I am so blocked.► Chris Nelson 06:22, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Question for you ... I know nothing whatsoever about baseball ... but I went to a Norfolk Tides game tonight and took a ton of pictures that I am cropping and adding to articles. The Tides are the AAA team for the Baltimore Orioles. Should the bio of a Tides player say that he plays for the Tides or that he plays for the Orioles? Adam Stern, for example, just says that he plays for the Orioles and doesn't even mention the Tides by name (it just says that he was sent down to AAA). Is that correct? Thanks. -- B 03:31, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
God, can you believe Jmfangio did it again? Once again, there was a discussion with him and another user about the RfC I had. I went there to tell the user who was talking to Jmfangio that I had no purpose and the RfC could be removed at will. Jmfangio could've just left it at that, but he had to react by removing my comment, saying "not your decision anyway." I replied, and he removed both of my comments. I know that my opinion didn't matter, but I think it was worth noting to the other user that I didn't have any objections to deletion of the RfC and that I insisted it be removed. I don't get why Jmfangio doesn't understand that sometimes it would just be best to avoid doing anything and agitating me again. I mean this is why he has problems communicating with us. He removes something just because I said it, even though it may've helped out the situation a bit more. He really doesn't understand that the best thing to do is nothing. Ksy92003 (talk) 05:25, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Well, at least you believe me. You're the only one who understands that what I did today, which Jmfangio says isn't allowed, is no different than what he did to you yesterday. And again, I responded to his comment, so I had a reason for bringing it back. Jmfangio brought your comment back just because he wanted to see it. I brought his comment back because my comment was written in response to his, so his comment needed to be visible as I was responding to him. I just really don't understand why nobody but you believes me. Jmfangio would understand if he actually read the comments I left him instead of just vacuuming it up as if it were Spring cleaning. Ksy92003 (talk) 09:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
The 3RR board is for adjudicating on 3RR violations and is not part of the dispute resolution process. It is not a place for discussion and your outside comments are disruptive. Neither of your comments to me have been particularly civil and I would go as far as to say that your interjections serve no purpose other then to poor petrol on the flames of a dispute that I'm shutting down. General editing problems with other users can be brought to the admin noticeboards but I'm not, rpt not, going to block an editor for trying to disengage from a dispute - especially as its his own comment he is removing, its outside main space and its a talk page. You are flogging a dead horse here. Spartaz Humbug! 09:59, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Ok my bad i also did it with Paul Smith (football player) of the Broncos But i removed it when you told me about the D.D Lewis article. Taylor21 07:38, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey Thanks for the pointers Taylor21 07:52, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
This is in response to your comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Power pitcher: "It's like a wrong convention in here." Who are you to say that our opinions are wrong? Look, I know I've supported you in the past, but just because you have one opinion doesn't mean everybody else is wrong because they share a different opinion, okay? Ksy92003 (talk) 04:53, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
I've seen your edit you've made to this article, adding the undrafted year in the infobox. It seems like it works perfectly, and I don't see how it would cause any problems. Ksy92003 (talk) 22:17, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Well he knows what it looks like and how it works, he's still opposed to it.► Chris Nelson 23:28, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
At WP:ANI another user has pointed out your continued incivility. Please note that according to Wikipedia's block policy, "persistent gross incivility" is possible grounds for a block. Thank you, David Fuchs ( talk) 23:35, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
FYI: See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball#Template roster change X96lee15 02:40, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
If you look at wiki itself, under NFL MVP awards, you will note that there are or were at least 4 or 5 different awards. the only "true" NFL MVP award was awarded by the NFL itself from 1937-1946. Of the other awards, some are no longer awarded, but (for example) the PFWA NFL MVP award was awarded during the years in question.
Since the career highlights box to the right on the Favre page shows the breakdown of awards (AP, Bert Bell, UPI, etc) It's only proper to qualify the awards in the text of the article also.
Otherwise the article conveys the mistaken impression that the NFL itself awarded favre three awards.
I assume it's you that keeps undoing my changing of the Favre page to reflect that the MVP awards received were from the Associated Press.
I read at User talk:B that Jmfangio believes that you and I are meatpuppets... what are meatpuppets? Well, whatever they are, I haven't done anything against Wiki-policy, so I don't see why I'm being accused of anything. Do you know what meatpuppets are? Because I haven't a clue. Ksy92003 (talk) 06:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I made these screenshots myself. I didn't get them from a website. I recorded the program with TiVo and uploaded it to my computer, and took screens of the program. I understand if they'll be deleted, but to be honest, I don't think they harm the program or HBO in any way. But hey, whatever. I hate the whole picture uploading stuff anyways because it's almost impossible for me to find ones that fall into the category of Wiki pictures. Conman33 20:18, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
I replied to you at my talk page. Regards, Skybunny 23:49, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
You might want to review WP:NPA before someone decides to ban you.-- SarekOfVulcan 01:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Community_sanction_noticeboard#Jmfangio.C2.A0.28talk.C2.A0.C2.B7_contribs.29_and_Chrisjnelson.C2.A0.28talk.C2.A0.C2.B7_contribs.29:_proposed_topic_ban - you may wish to comment. Durova Charge! 01:02, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
With regard to this edit, very nicely done. I applaud you. -- But| seriously| folks 04:09, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
You posted on my discussion board a while back. You were right - I actually asked my English professor and he said it was an example of irony (he's a huge wiki fan, probably the only professor at my uni that would allow you to cite it in a pic). BUT, I do take issue with you implying that the song "Irony" by Alanis Morissette is not ironic. On the contrary, it is extremely ironic, as the song is called Irony, yet contains no actual bits of irony in the song lyrics, only poetic justice. There's something to think about! kstingily 6:24, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jmfangio-Chrisjnelson. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jmfangio-Chrisjnelson/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jmfangio-Chrisjnelson/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel 00:19, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
I like your template. I think every Championship team should have them. I hope there are no objections to the template idea. How difficult is it to find the info to create them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyTheTiger ( talk • contribs) 17:35, August 24, 2007 (UTC)
I want to convert the Roger Clemens team colors like Barry Bonds has team colors in his team column. Do you know a quick way to get the exact colors?-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:57, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
There was no opposition. If you don't want to do the 61 & 62 Yankee Templates, I will get to them this week, but how do you get the Jersey numbers? Do you use The Baseball almanac?-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
You reverted an edit, which now reads that he made his debut with the Miami Dolphins in 2006. However, the same box says that he played for the San Diego Chargers in 2003. Therefore, he made his debut with the Chargers in 2003. PhiEaglesfan712 20:51, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Wiki policy: "Be respectful to others and their points of view. This means primarily: Do not simply revert changes in a dispute. When someone makes an edit you consider biased or inaccurate, improve the edit, rather than reverting it. Provide a good edit summary when making significant changes that other users might object to. The revision you would prefer will not be established by reverting, and repeated reverting is forbidden; discuss disputed changes on the talk page. If you encounter rude or inappropriate behavior, resist the temptation to respond unkindly, and do not make personal attacks."
Please stop reverting my editing. All I did was put factual statements up that Portis made. They were controversial and got a lot of media attention. They belong on his page. Just like Keither Hernandez's controversial comments about women in baseball are in his page. I will have to bring a case against you if you keep violating Wiki policy. If you want to change how the statement is presented that's fine but the bottom line is the statement itself belongs on his page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.143.68.157 ( talk) 21:48, August 28, 2007 (UTC)
Thx for the message Chris. I would've stayed on thru that 3-week period that I was autoblocked. Hey, I was exonerated, but I was dying to get back. To help kill the time I lost, I just went elsewhere online (I would've just played games, but my video game system is jacked up now, sort of eliminated the easiest choice). I appreciate the kind words, and, just to let you know, I'm always glad to help you out also, just let me know. And good luck to the Braves and Dolphins. Soxrock 01:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
You've been blocked for 3 hours for continued incivility on the Incidents noticeboard. Feel free to return with a cool head after your block expires. Maxim (talk) 01:43, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Again, your comments add fuel to the fire. Calling me a "nazi" isn't going to help your cause at all. You claim that you're not making any personal attacks, and in doing so, make even more. Calling me a "nazi" is yet another attack on me. Ksy92003 (talk) 01:51, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Chris, you've been lucky today: another sysop gave you a three hour block before I returned. So I'll ask you a few questions.
You pledged to avoid all but two football-related articles, and voluntarily offered that this restriction apply only to yourself. I closed a topic ban discussion as a gesture of good faith in response to that pledge, yet you violated the pledge almost immediately. I warned you of the consequences that could follow that decision, yet when another editor petitioned me to intervene you wrote that you expected no consequence for your decision and stated that you didn't think you deserved to be held to your pledge. You also admitted that you were lying in an edit summary tonight, which suggests you lie about other things too.
How does that all square up? I'll tell you what it looks like:
I'm willing to keep an open mind. If these conclusions are mistaken then please demonstrate why. Specific diffs will help because I'm preparing an arbitration statement. I nearly put you on the bench for a week over gross violations of WP:POINT. Durova Charge! 03:36, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
First, I'll address the edit summary issue. "Lie" was a poor choice of words. It was not meant to deceive anyone, although obviously everyone misconstrued its meaning so it was a poor choice on my part. I've recently taken exception to some of Jmfangio's edit summaries when he makes accusations about me violating policy that don't apply. He did that yesterday on Michael Vick, saying I was edit warring. The specifics aren't really important. My point is, my edit summary on my talk page was just a little joke of mine in that it was supposed to make absolutely no sense or have any connection to my actual edit. Obviously, it was a stupid joke, a very unclear one and an offensive one. The "Nazi" aspect had absolutely nothing to do with Ksy92003 - I was making no connection there. So I'm sorry about that whole thing. A very poor decision on my part, but hopefully you'll believe me when I say its meaning was not nearly as severe as people have mistaken it to be.
As for the whole thing about a topic ban, my pledge and all that. Whether you believe me or not, I was being sincere when I first made the pledge and at the time I fully expected to stand by it. I simply broke it because I genuinely enjoy editing related articles and I felt I did a lot of good. I mean I'm not stupid - I knew if I made the edits it would be known and documented. I was always aware of the possibility (or inevitability) of having a topic ban discussion re-opened. It was simply a risk I was willing to take, and still am. I feel I do a lot of good on NFL-related articles and I have a lot to offer. For that reason, I have gone back on my pledge and will not make one again. I suppose if I am banned from the topic (which would pretty much ban me entirely since that's almost all I'm interested in editing) there will be nothing I can do. But I'm willing to defend myself and my place in the NFL community because I feel I do far more good than harm.
So as for your numbered points, which I partially have answered already.
Finally regarding Ksy92003's name. It truly was a mistake, even the time I, like an idiot, used it again in apologizing. Ksy92003 and I have conversed extensively through email in recent weeks and his real name shows up as the sender, so that's how I knew it. It never even occurred to me that it was something that I should make a point of not posting. I just wrote it subconsciously because that's how I had come to think of him because of the email conversations. Ksy92003 can vouch that we have conversed through email and I do hope you believe me on this. I never meant to cause any hard, it truly was an honest mistake and I'd never do anything like that on purpose.► Chris Nelson 04:22, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
(outdent) Chris, You made a pledge and then broke it almost immediately. And you don't regret that or acknowledge any basis for the pledge - even though you say you believed it at the time. What exactly did you believe then? Whatever it was, I advise you to explain it to the arbitration committee in fuller detail than here, and to explain to them with diffs why so many people are mistaken when they see problems and come to you with concerns.
Since I wrote the above you edited football templates and articles five more times [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] and left this interesting comment for another editor. [6] You also admit to being a single purpose account, which is the kind of statement that tends to get weighed at arbitration. Regarding your pledge to refrain from posting another editor's real name, I take that exactly as seriously as your pledge to avoid the topic of football - which means the next time you cause disruption at football I'll block you for a week and the next time you post another editor's real name I'll indef you. It's as simple as that.
If you want to turn things around, I strongly suggest mentorship and some serious effort at reform. Durova Charge! 14:10, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I do not wish to converse directly with you anymore. You are wrong about everything and I see there is no convincing you. Do what you want, but I find you rude, condescending, insulting, paranoid and you're finding problems that aren't there. I've made a lot of mistakes here, I'll be the first to admit it. But you're trying to get me for things that don't even exist. For that reason, I want not further direct contact with you. Have a good life.► Chris Nelson 04:09, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi! I noticed your involvement on U.S. South-related articles, categories and WikiProjects, and I wanted to let you know about a bid we're formulating to get next year's Wikimania held in Atlanta! If you would like to help, be sure to sign your name to the "In Atlanta" section of the Southeast team portion of the bid if you're in town, or to the "Outside Atlanta" section if you still want to help but don't live in the city or the suburbs. If you would like to contribute more, please write on my talk page, the talk page of the bid, or join us at the #wikimania-atlanta IRC chat on freenode.org. Have a great day!
P.S. While this is a template for maximum efficiency, I would appreciate a note on my talk page so I know you got the message, and what you think. This is time-sensitive, so your urgent cooperation is appreciated. :) Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 09:13, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I thought you understood what I meant on my talkpage, what Durova, what Seraphim, and what the previous block meant. I apologize, but you have got to stop this sort of behaviour. It's not helping. Feel free to return in 24 hours with a cool head. Thank you. Maxim (talk) 17:02, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
So what you're saying is, I can come to Wikipedia, look up bullshit, learn about the word and its meaning, but I can't actually use it on my own? That's pretty illogical. In my opinion your personal attack, based on the definition I read HERE, is bullshit. That's my interpretation. I deserve to be blocked for THAT? That's weak and you know it.► Chris Nelson 17:30, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Chrisjnelson ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I consider it wrong that I was blocked by an admin that personally attacked me yesterday. He called me a troll, which I took offense to and still do, and I called his personal attack B.S. (though spelling it out). However, considering the isolated incident began with a personal attack by an admin, I feel this is wrong and a conflict of interests. The evidence is located in the link provided above.
Decline reason:
Your block has been discussed on WP:AN/I, and the general consensus was that the block was warranted and that the duration was, if anything, lenient. I would suggest considering a change of approach. — MastCell Talk 18:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Correction to the above: the AN/I discussion was about your previous 3-hour block, not this one. However, given that the issues raised still seem to be in play, I'm not going to unblock. It's a 24-hour block - I'm going to recommend that you sit it out and take steps to de-escalate conflict when you come back. MastCell Talk 18:44, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I've unprotected so that Chris can respond to my questions. Chris, keep it clean. I don't want to extend this block but I will if you step out of bounds. Durova Charge! 00:21, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Because you seem to be misunderstanding my deleting of your comments, I will clarify my reasons. It has nothing to do with not wanting Maxim or anyone else to read anything - I don't care what you to say to anyone else. But I personally do not want you to speak to me again, in part because I feel you have a personal problem with me and in part because I'm a little worried about the indirect threats you made to Jmfangio in email with me. I do not wish to converse with anyone that has express homicidal urges. That is all.► Chris Nelson 17:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
That's interesting. We'll have to see what happens tomorrow. Pats1 20:09, 31 August 2007 (UTC)