Hello, I'm
Trlovejoy. I noticed that you recently removed some content from
Tiger Bowl, with
this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an
edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
TRL (
talk) 03:37, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
The reason why I did that is because
another user just cut and pasted the content from the
Auburn–LSU football rivalry page to the Tiger Bowl redirect. That's why I deleted it
The
recent edit you made to
Battle for the Golden Boot has been reverted, as it removed all content from the page without explanation. Please do not do this, as it is considered
vandalism; instead, use the
sandbox for testing. If you think the page should be deleted,
see here for what to do. Thank you.
TRL (
talk) 03:48, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
It is not vandalism, it is correcting how rivalry games with official titles and trophies are correctly labeled. The official title of the Arkansas-LSU game is the Battle for the Golden Boot. The Golden Boot is the trophy. Before the Golden Boot trophy was created in 1996, it was called the Arkansas-LSU rivalry but both schools label the game as the battle for the Golden Boot. See other examples of similar rivalries such as LSU-Ole Miss or LSU-Tulane. Lets dive into LSU-Ole Miss. When the Magnolia trophy was created, the game was no longer known as the LSU-Ole Miss rivalry it officially became the Magnolia Bowl recognized by both schools. When a game is named all info reverts to the new name. I didn't revert back Auburn-LSU rivalry b/c although it is referred to by both fan bases as the Tiger Bowl; there is no trophy and both school officials don't recognize it as the Tiger Bowl. You can also reference rivalries for the Alabama Crimson Tide football and Nicholls State Colonels football for similar examples. If you look at LSU athletic pages you will see I am the #1 or close to #1 contributor and have created many pages for the school. I state this not to brag but to let you know my expertise on the subject. If you keep reverting changes to the LSU-Arkansas rivalry you are allowing inaccurate information to be posted on wikipedia. I need to correct the Arkansas-LSU rivalry and ask that you do not revert back to having inaccurate information displayed. Thanks for your understanding. User:spatms ( talk) 01:36, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you! User:spatms ( talk) 013:01, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi, re your moves of college (football) rivalry articles away from rivalry name to the fallback format, your previous round of edits was extensively discussed here. Talk:Arkansas–LSU_football_rivalry I'm not sure if you were ever made aware of that discussion.
If you are interested in pursuing another round of changes, I'd encourage the use of the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football community which has relevant experience and can assist policy-wise on the two formats. My view of the issue is seen in WP:COMMONNAME.
re your edits to the Rocky Mountain Showdown, I have reverted your changes back to the established article name. There are numerous media and participant references to this being the appropriate article name, including rockymountainshowdown.com, colostate.edu, cubuffs.com, denverpost.com, and stubhub.com.
Please feel free to discuss. UW Dawgs ( talk) 23:56, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello. Why did you remove the "Largest win, Longest win & Current win streak" from the Infobox? I don't see a reason for the removal. AND, there is a thing called a "Summary box" that we have told you about several times as I look on you talk page. It would be nice if you told people the reason behind the removal, or any edits for that matter. Thanks, Corkythehornetfan Talk 04:36, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
I'll tell you why. They have no relevance to the rivalry at all. Can you honestly say that they absolutely need to be part of the article? Also about the edit summary thing, why are you so concerned about me not using it? May I remind you that using it is optional? Also, I have used the edit summary before, but you obviously haven't even bothered to look at all of my contributions. Granted, I don't always use it, but only when I think it is necessary, not you. What do you expect me to do, put aside time just trying to explain every single edit I make? If I did that, my output would slow to a crawl. I try to make edits that are easy to understand without having to set aside time trying to conjure up an excuse for every edit I make. If I did, I believe it would also make me look incompetent. God forbid I try to avoid that, apparently. Don't tell me how to edit and I won't tell you how to edit. Thank you. AL2896 ( talk) 05:25, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
I forgot to add that the longest winning streak for each team (10 games) is already in the article. I just removed said info from the infobox. AL2896 ( talk) 05:28, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
- Then why would the template have it in there? If the users who created the template didn't think it needed to be in there, then they wouldn't have put it in there. Also, on the summary box, just summarize it with 5 or less words... it's not that hard to do and doesn't slow you down. I'm not telling you how to edit, but it is frustrating when someone removes your edits and they don't explain why. That's why I'm complaining about the summary box. Corkythehornetfan Talk 05:47, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
I wouldn't know why it is in the template to begin with. Ask them, not me. The only thing I do know is that it contributes next-to-nothing to any article that its a part of. AL2896 ( talk) 05:58, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to start a discussion regarding your edits to many of the rivalry articles that you have been editing for the past year. I have noticed that many of your edits involve in removing information from infoboxes that have been added by other users. I would like to point towards the Manual of Style/Infoboxes in that the purpose of infoboxes are to summarize key facts within the article for the reader benefit. What is considered important is determined though consensus. The fact that some of these fields exist in the template is likely because there is consensus between users that it is important for the readers to be able to access quickly. I have noticed that many of your edits end up with deleting these fields because it is your opinion that they "contribute next-to-nothing" in some of these articles. I'm not trying to tell you how to edit, only saying that additions to the article that does not compromise the accuracy of the article should be retained if it has any chance of making it easier for the reader.
It is important to remember that Wikipedia is all about collaboration between users. A user spent time creating that field for the template and that another user decided to utilize that field for the article. I would like to kindly ask that you reconsider mass deleting the field because as it may be beneficial to the reader. You may want to consider discussing the fields that you have concerns about on the WikiProjects page for the sport, such as WikiProject College football in regards to how these fields should be treated within an article.
On an unrelated note, I have also noticed that some of your edits have removed some of the links within the article that are also shown in the infobox. I would like to ask that you consider the Manual of Style/Linking in which repeated links in between the infobox and the article is considered acceptable if it ultimately helpful for the reader in quickly locating information.
Thank you for your time! Spitfire8520 ( talk) 19:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Vjmlhds. I noticed that you recently removed some content from
Illibuck Trophy without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate
edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks! Vjmlhds 03:17, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
The reason why I removed the content is because you're trying to force a completely biased POV (the Illinois–Ohio State football rivalry wouldn't matter without the Illibuck). And just to drive my point home, the article doesn't exclusively focus on the trophy. AL2896 ( talk) 03:55, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at
Illibuck Trophy, you may be
blocked from editing. Thank you. Vjmlhds 03:59, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm the one being disruptive? Please. Who's the one insisting on changing the name of this article by force? AL2896 ( talk) 04:04, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, you are being disruptive by removing sourced material, violating WP:3RR, and seemingly edit warring. I see this isn't the first time someone has told you to stop removing the rivalry names from these type of articles. The nicknames for these trophy games are acceptable as per WP:Commonname. Vjmlhds (talk) 04:12, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
To quote you, "The nicknames for these trophy games are acceptable as per WP:Commonname." If so, then why have similarly-named articles been moved away from the trophy names? Don't even start with this Common name nonsense. I'll repeat this because you apparently choose to ignore my argument. The Illinois–Ohio State football rivalry page does not set up the Illibuck as the centerpiece of the rivalry. It mentions a peace pipe and the fact that the two teams are no longer in the same division. AL2896 ( talk) 04:34, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
- I've declined the move, as we only delete reverts if it is uncontroversial- meaning that there is nobody else arguing against the page move. It'd be best to open up a move request on the article's talk page. Although I do want to say that User:Vjmlhds should have done this first before moving the page in the first place since obviously AL2896 objects to your page move. I'm also going to bring this move discussion up at Wikipedia:WikiProject College football, so there are more people coming in to discuss what the page's name should be. Even if I moved it back to the original title, it appears that there would still be an argument over what to name it (and result in further edit warring) so I think that right now the best thing to do would be to have a formal discussion. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:58, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
- I've opened up a formal debate at Talk:Illibuck_Trophy#Article_move.2Fname_debate and I've asked people at the college football WP to give their input. I think I'll also post at third opinion as well, just to ensure that we have a lot of eyes on this. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:14, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 17:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Zamaster4536. I noticed that you made a change to an article,
NBA regular season records, but you didn't provide a
reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to
include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the
referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thank you.
Zamaster4536 (
talk) 11:52, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, AL2896. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
If you want to revert, please use your god damn edit summary. Otherwise, leave it the hell alone. No one has complained about it but you, and it is simply saving space in the templates for the upcoming years. They are becoming too large. I will revert your edit one last time. Please discuss before you continue to revert. Corkythe hornetfan (ping me) 00:36, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits while logged out. Making edits while logged out reveals your
IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. Wikipedia's
policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. Corkythe
hornetfan (ping me) 02:39, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello, AL2896. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Nomination of Columbia–Harvard football rivalry for deletion - No citations
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Columbia–Harvard football rivalry is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Columbia–Harvard football rivalry until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Note, there are currently ZERO citations in this article which you created. [1] UW Dawgs ( talk) 23:56, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- There seem to be many more Ivy League football rivalry articles which are weakly sourced or unsourced. Are you interested in improving these? UW Dawgs ( talk) 01:02, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello, AL2896. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, AL2896. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All
eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All
eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All
eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Trlovejoy. I noticed that you recently removed some content from
Tiger Bowl, with
this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an
edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
TRL (
talk) 03:37, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
The reason why I did that is because
another user just cut and pasted the content from the
Auburn–LSU football rivalry page to the Tiger Bowl redirect. That's why I deleted it
The
recent edit you made to
Battle for the Golden Boot has been reverted, as it removed all content from the page without explanation. Please do not do this, as it is considered
vandalism; instead, use the
sandbox for testing. If you think the page should be deleted,
see here for what to do. Thank you.
TRL (
talk) 03:48, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
It is not vandalism, it is correcting how rivalry games with official titles and trophies are correctly labeled. The official title of the Arkansas-LSU game is the Battle for the Golden Boot. The Golden Boot is the trophy. Before the Golden Boot trophy was created in 1996, it was called the Arkansas-LSU rivalry but both schools label the game as the battle for the Golden Boot. See other examples of similar rivalries such as LSU-Ole Miss or LSU-Tulane. Lets dive into LSU-Ole Miss. When the Magnolia trophy was created, the game was no longer known as the LSU-Ole Miss rivalry it officially became the Magnolia Bowl recognized by both schools. When a game is named all info reverts to the new name. I didn't revert back Auburn-LSU rivalry b/c although it is referred to by both fan bases as the Tiger Bowl; there is no trophy and both school officials don't recognize it as the Tiger Bowl. You can also reference rivalries for the Alabama Crimson Tide football and Nicholls State Colonels football for similar examples. If you look at LSU athletic pages you will see I am the #1 or close to #1 contributor and have created many pages for the school. I state this not to brag but to let you know my expertise on the subject. If you keep reverting changes to the LSU-Arkansas rivalry you are allowing inaccurate information to be posted on wikipedia. I need to correct the Arkansas-LSU rivalry and ask that you do not revert back to having inaccurate information displayed. Thanks for your understanding. User:spatms ( talk) 01:36, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you! User:spatms ( talk) 013:01, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi, re your moves of college (football) rivalry articles away from rivalry name to the fallback format, your previous round of edits was extensively discussed here. Talk:Arkansas–LSU_football_rivalry I'm not sure if you were ever made aware of that discussion.
If you are interested in pursuing another round of changes, I'd encourage the use of the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football community which has relevant experience and can assist policy-wise on the two formats. My view of the issue is seen in WP:COMMONNAME.
re your edits to the Rocky Mountain Showdown, I have reverted your changes back to the established article name. There are numerous media and participant references to this being the appropriate article name, including rockymountainshowdown.com, colostate.edu, cubuffs.com, denverpost.com, and stubhub.com.
Please feel free to discuss. UW Dawgs ( talk) 23:56, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello. Why did you remove the "Largest win, Longest win & Current win streak" from the Infobox? I don't see a reason for the removal. AND, there is a thing called a "Summary box" that we have told you about several times as I look on you talk page. It would be nice if you told people the reason behind the removal, or any edits for that matter. Thanks, Corkythehornetfan Talk 04:36, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
I'll tell you why. They have no relevance to the rivalry at all. Can you honestly say that they absolutely need to be part of the article? Also about the edit summary thing, why are you so concerned about me not using it? May I remind you that using it is optional? Also, I have used the edit summary before, but you obviously haven't even bothered to look at all of my contributions. Granted, I don't always use it, but only when I think it is necessary, not you. What do you expect me to do, put aside time just trying to explain every single edit I make? If I did that, my output would slow to a crawl. I try to make edits that are easy to understand without having to set aside time trying to conjure up an excuse for every edit I make. If I did, I believe it would also make me look incompetent. God forbid I try to avoid that, apparently. Don't tell me how to edit and I won't tell you how to edit. Thank you. AL2896 ( talk) 05:25, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
I forgot to add that the longest winning streak for each team (10 games) is already in the article. I just removed said info from the infobox. AL2896 ( talk) 05:28, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
- Then why would the template have it in there? If the users who created the template didn't think it needed to be in there, then they wouldn't have put it in there. Also, on the summary box, just summarize it with 5 or less words... it's not that hard to do and doesn't slow you down. I'm not telling you how to edit, but it is frustrating when someone removes your edits and they don't explain why. That's why I'm complaining about the summary box. Corkythehornetfan Talk 05:47, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
I wouldn't know why it is in the template to begin with. Ask them, not me. The only thing I do know is that it contributes next-to-nothing to any article that its a part of. AL2896 ( talk) 05:58, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to start a discussion regarding your edits to many of the rivalry articles that you have been editing for the past year. I have noticed that many of your edits involve in removing information from infoboxes that have been added by other users. I would like to point towards the Manual of Style/Infoboxes in that the purpose of infoboxes are to summarize key facts within the article for the reader benefit. What is considered important is determined though consensus. The fact that some of these fields exist in the template is likely because there is consensus between users that it is important for the readers to be able to access quickly. I have noticed that many of your edits end up with deleting these fields because it is your opinion that they "contribute next-to-nothing" in some of these articles. I'm not trying to tell you how to edit, only saying that additions to the article that does not compromise the accuracy of the article should be retained if it has any chance of making it easier for the reader.
It is important to remember that Wikipedia is all about collaboration between users. A user spent time creating that field for the template and that another user decided to utilize that field for the article. I would like to kindly ask that you reconsider mass deleting the field because as it may be beneficial to the reader. You may want to consider discussing the fields that you have concerns about on the WikiProjects page for the sport, such as WikiProject College football in regards to how these fields should be treated within an article.
On an unrelated note, I have also noticed that some of your edits have removed some of the links within the article that are also shown in the infobox. I would like to ask that you consider the Manual of Style/Linking in which repeated links in between the infobox and the article is considered acceptable if it ultimately helpful for the reader in quickly locating information.
Thank you for your time! Spitfire8520 ( talk) 19:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Vjmlhds. I noticed that you recently removed some content from
Illibuck Trophy without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate
edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks! Vjmlhds 03:17, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
The reason why I removed the content is because you're trying to force a completely biased POV (the Illinois–Ohio State football rivalry wouldn't matter without the Illibuck). And just to drive my point home, the article doesn't exclusively focus on the trophy. AL2896 ( talk) 03:55, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at
Illibuck Trophy, you may be
blocked from editing. Thank you. Vjmlhds 03:59, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm the one being disruptive? Please. Who's the one insisting on changing the name of this article by force? AL2896 ( talk) 04:04, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, you are being disruptive by removing sourced material, violating WP:3RR, and seemingly edit warring. I see this isn't the first time someone has told you to stop removing the rivalry names from these type of articles. The nicknames for these trophy games are acceptable as per WP:Commonname. Vjmlhds (talk) 04:12, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
To quote you, "The nicknames for these trophy games are acceptable as per WP:Commonname." If so, then why have similarly-named articles been moved away from the trophy names? Don't even start with this Common name nonsense. I'll repeat this because you apparently choose to ignore my argument. The Illinois–Ohio State football rivalry page does not set up the Illibuck as the centerpiece of the rivalry. It mentions a peace pipe and the fact that the two teams are no longer in the same division. AL2896 ( talk) 04:34, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
- I've declined the move, as we only delete reverts if it is uncontroversial- meaning that there is nobody else arguing against the page move. It'd be best to open up a move request on the article's talk page. Although I do want to say that User:Vjmlhds should have done this first before moving the page in the first place since obviously AL2896 objects to your page move. I'm also going to bring this move discussion up at Wikipedia:WikiProject College football, so there are more people coming in to discuss what the page's name should be. Even if I moved it back to the original title, it appears that there would still be an argument over what to name it (and result in further edit warring) so I think that right now the best thing to do would be to have a formal discussion. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:58, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
- I've opened up a formal debate at Talk:Illibuck_Trophy#Article_move.2Fname_debate and I've asked people at the college football WP to give their input. I think I'll also post at third opinion as well, just to ensure that we have a lot of eyes on this. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:14, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 17:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Zamaster4536. I noticed that you made a change to an article,
NBA regular season records, but you didn't provide a
reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to
include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the
referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thank you.
Zamaster4536 (
talk) 11:52, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, AL2896. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
If you want to revert, please use your god damn edit summary. Otherwise, leave it the hell alone. No one has complained about it but you, and it is simply saving space in the templates for the upcoming years. They are becoming too large. I will revert your edit one last time. Please discuss before you continue to revert. Corkythe hornetfan (ping me) 00:36, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits while logged out. Making edits while logged out reveals your
IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. Wikipedia's
policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. Corkythe
hornetfan (ping me) 02:39, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello, AL2896. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Nomination of Columbia–Harvard football rivalry for deletion - No citations
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Columbia–Harvard football rivalry is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Columbia–Harvard football rivalry until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Note, there are currently ZERO citations in this article which you created. [1] UW Dawgs ( talk) 23:56, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- There seem to be many more Ivy League football rivalry articles which are weakly sourced or unsourced. Are you interested in improving these? UW Dawgs ( talk) 01:02, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello, AL2896. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, AL2896. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All
eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All
eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All
eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)