User talk:Gman124/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on [[User talk:{{{1}}}|my talk page]]. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here!--Edchilvers 18:01, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

About X-Men: Animated Series. Mistake?

I noticed that in the episode listing of Cold Comfort, the year for the airdate is "1997". Is this a mistake? If it is you are welcome to change it yourself. I also added a plot for Cold Comfort, so I also put "1997" in the infobox. You are also welcome to change that too. :] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wengistein (talk • contribs) 01:02, 24 December 2006 (UTC).

Marvel Comics characters

Please stop adding this to articles. If you look, you will find that they are already categorized in the appropriate Superhero or Villain cats already, which are subcats of Characters. CovenantD 14:49, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Edit summaries

I have noted that you often edit without an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This is considered an important guideline in Wikipedia. Even a short summary is better than no summary. An edit summary is even more important if you delete any text; otherwise, people may think you're being sneaky. Also, mentioning one change but not another one can be misleading to someone who finds the other one more important; add "and misc." to cover the other change(s). Thanks! --Ppntori 22:37, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Carnage

If you're going to delete it then you better add the new picture in the episode guide.--CyberGhostface 01:38, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas, and May the Edit be with you, always. T-borg ^{(drop me a line)} 19:46, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

X-Men episodes list

Hi, I have conditionally supported the FLC. If you need help give me shout or feel free to look at other lists for ideas. --GunnarRene 02:15, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Hulk Image

is there any particular reason that instead of uploading your may 2007 cover under a new file name, you felt it necessary to replace the existing image? that sort of stealth imge changing is generally frowned upon. ThuranX 23:51, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Joe Quimby

Where did it say that Mary Bailey preceded Joe Quimby? --Jnelson09 22:59, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Spider-Man

Just wanted to compliment you on your recent work on Spider-Man. Your careful use of precise language and insistence on verifiable citations is high-quality editing. My compliments and kudos!--Tenebrae 17:16, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Absorbing Man

I agree that this[1] is a much better image for the SHB, but it needs more information, such as who the artist is and what comic book it is from (or promo status, if that's what it is). CovenantD 20:42, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

i found the image at mavel.com and they didn't have the artist or the comic book listedGman124 20:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tagging of Justice league episodes

I see you have tagged many redirects from titles of Justice League episodes with the deletion reason "Just because it's the name of a Justice League episode should not mean that it should redirect there". This does not appear to reflect any of the speedy deletion criteria. Please don't use speedy deletion tags for things you simply think are bad. If you really think these should all be deleted, you may list them at WP:RFD, but I should mention it is common to keep redirects like these to help people find the closest-related article currently available. Thanks. —dgies^t_c 05:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

X-Men list

You'll want to make your arguments at Wikipedia_talk:Featured_list_criteria#Fair_Use_images. - Peregrine Fisher 00:07, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Go read the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Featured_list_criteria#Fair_Use_images. That should make it clear. Basically, people are discussing whether episode lists should be able to be featured if they have screenshots. - 00:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

WP:3RR Violation

You may view the filed report here, and supply your defense if necessary. However, it seems to be a blatant violation, with over 8 reverts to the same edition. —Floria L 19:08, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

You reverted the other guy's edits, it wasn't the other way around. Floria L 20:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Template syntax

The {{no copyright holder}} template expects the "month" parameter to be the spelled-out name of the month, as in {{no copyright holder|month=April|day=10|year=2007}}. Using the month number leaves the image in a non-existant category, so admins won't delete it. --Carnildo 06:48, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

for cleaning up the mess I accidentally left at List of Jackie Chan Adventures episodes. (ESkog)^(Talk) 02:39, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

your welcome. Gman124 14:58, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the Draft link, one question the Pro-Bowler colors are for players who made it as a rookie or who made it in their careers? (respond on my talk page please) Trevor GH5 03:00, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again. Trevor GH5 04:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

You're Welcome. Gman124 00:24, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikilinks in NFL Drafts

Regarding players, teams, positions, colleges, within the table data I believe it has been discussed several times to link all table data not just the first instance. While remaining to the usual link only first instance within the written article. If im mistaken on this one I'll cease to edit them completely. Also note often times player positions while they may appear to be the same are not and piped to specific positions. Slysplace | ^talk 01:36, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

There are so many archives of the discussions on the NFL Project page related to the draft page series of lists, Who can keep up. I've fixed so many redirects and disambiqs while editing those pages that it is certainly much more than a simple revert, more likely I'll be re-editing the entire series if it comes up that they should be cleaned up. Also there are other group / project discussions related to "Lists" whih I may have miss interpreted that suggested the full linking in table data. This will take some time to sort out. Slysplace | ^talk 12:30, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

A quick review of what I've completed in the possibly unacceptable format 1936 - 1976 and some of 1978 using mostly an external editor with find and replace scripts, shows if the Article format is to be susatained I'll have to entirely un-wikilink every article and then manually find the first instance, could prove to be a whole lot of previously wasted effort and even more work to clean up ... I think I need a jury Slysplace | ^talk 15:08, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking to do the same, I've added my self defense statement to your question but I think the obvious answer will be manually reverted (or worse revert entirely) to single instance wikilinks to continue the featured article hopes of the project and the hard core wikipedians. Thank's for yoru input, concern, and support no matter the outcome. Slysplace | ^talk 02:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Finally got back to cleaning up some of the draft tables. The early era pages are the easiest with only 1 round in most of them. I must say though they just look incomplete in the link once article format. I suppose I could have just left them as I last edited but that's counter productive to the NFL Project goal. Slysplace | ^talk 01:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I made several sortable at one time but reverted after I received e-mail that it was un-acceptable. I suppose I was just easily intimidated. I Like sortable, But then again I also felt full links were cleaner and more direct for the final user.

we (and others) will get the quality up to par no doubt. Keep up the good work Slysplace | ^talk 01:48, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

2007 NFL Draft

Your comment on adding a link to the Division I-AA receiving TD awards has been added. can you please close the 'comment' and provide your view for the 2007 NFL Draft FLC. Thanks. Kalyan 17:36, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Voted for support now. Gman124 19:23, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

sortable Draft

I think I got the 2 or 3 you missed (or beat you to it), now if we can get rid of the abbreviations and get some volunteers to work on rounds 2 + the series will be in good shape! Slysplace | ^talk 02:27, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

As tedious as this is cleaning up the draft articles, I happened to glance at some of the history and diffs of the articles were both working on. If memory serves me you pointed out I had "Over Wikilinked" the entire series, And called attention to it in the NFL Project discussion group. Imagine my concern, I cant help but notice in the areas of HOF & Noteable players specifically in regards to the AFL your doing the same thing. This does seem a little counter productive to me as I've been cleaning up those links repeatedly. Are we working towards the same goal? Linked only once per article,

to quote the discussion in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Football League#NFL_Draft

 Basically first time only for each link. Every single one was linked originally in pretty much every draft, 
 but there's really no reason for that. The other 60-odd drafts are gonna have to have that fixed.--Wizardman 02:44, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Slysplace | ^talk 02:14, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

It does appear we were both editing some articles at the same time, and it is monotonous, but there were a few with the AFL links repeatedly linked during and after the sortable update. I've triple checked everything from 1936 through 1969 for dupe links, disamibqs, and redirects and compacted some data and white space. 1936 - 1969 should be complete (with exception of needing expansion and opening paragraphs). I'll continue through the 70's & 80's next, an extra set of eyes would not hurt the process. Slysplace | ^talk 11:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

SIlver Surfer

Regarding the Marvel animated universe article, are you really so sure that Silver Surfer is part of that continuity? We're not just talking about a plot hole here and there, like Red Skull having inconsistent combat abilities - every single time something on that series happens that could be related to another one, it goes a different way, so the only reasonable conclusion seems to be that they're separate universes. Caswin 20:05, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

yes, I believe that Silver Surfer (TV series) is a part of the Marvel animated universe. Gman124 01:34, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

How do I delete my user talk page(s)?

As a matter of practice user talk pages are generally not deleted, barring legal threats or other grievous violations that have to be removed for legal reasons; however, exceptions to this can be and are made on occasion for good reason. Please refer to right to vanish). -- Jreferee T/C 17:11, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

FL Main page proposal

You either nominated a WP:FLC or closed such a nomination recently. As such, you are the type of editor whose opinion I am soliciting. We now have over 400 featured lists and seem to be promoting in excess of 30 per month of late (41 in August and 42 in September). When Today's featured article (TFA) started (2004-02-22), they only had about 200 featured articles and were barely promoting 20 new ones per month. I think the quality of featured lists is at least as good as the quality of featured articles was when they started appearing on the main page. Thus, I am ready to open debate on a proposal to institute a List of the Day on the main page with nominations starting November 1, 2007, voting starting December 1, 2007 and main page appearances starting January 1, 2008. For brevity, the proposal page does not discuss the details of eventual main page content, but since the work has already been done, you should consider this proposal assuming the eventual content will resemble the current content at the featured content page. Such output would probably start at the bottom of the main page. The proposal page does not debate whether starting with weekly list main page entries would be better than daily entries. However, I suspect persons in favor of weekly lists are really voicing opinions against lists on the main page since neither TFA nor Picture of the day started as weekly endeavors, to the best of my knowledge. Right now debate seems to be among support for the current selective democratic/consensus based proposal, a selective dictatorial approach like that used at WP:TFA or a non-selective first in line/calendar approach like that used at WP:POTD. See the List of the Day proposal and comment at WP:LOTDP and its talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:29, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Featured List of the Day Experiment

There have been a series of proposals to initiate a Featured List of the Day on the main page. Numerous proposals have been put forth. After the third one failed, I audited all WP:FL's in order to begin an experiment in my own user space that will hopefully get it going. Today, it commences at WP:LOTD. Afterwards I created my experimental page, a new proposal was set forth to do a featured list that is strikingly similar to my own which is to do a user page experimental featured list, but no format has been confirmed and mechanism set in place. I continue to be willing to do the experiment myself and with this posting it commences. Please submit any list that you would like to have considered for list of the day in the month of January 2008 by the end of this month to WP:LOTD and its subpages. You may submit multiple lists for consideration.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 02:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Incredible Hulk is a reboot.

If you read through the article, what you'll find is that the new movie will not directly contradict the entirty of Hulk, and will rely upon the audience now being familiar with the basics of the Hulk's origins and so on. The new movie will tweak and alter those things it needs to to fit the new story, and will not create a brand new origin tale. This makes it at best a 'passive' sequel. However, it's an entirely new cast and production crew with a new vision and direction and new goals, with a different hulk (one that doesn't grow, for one). As such, it was decided that passive reliance upon audience knowledge based on premises given in the first film is not enough to call it a sequel. Further, Ed Norton's quotes in the article make it clear that the older Penn quote is out of date, as Norton said he rewrote sections specifically to distance the new film from the older film. That intent to differentiate is also clear support that it's a reboot. ThuranX (talk) 17:08, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

NFL draft pages

I noticed you put several of them up for FLR. Generally, you should mention concerns on the talk page and then go to FLR if they are not addressed, and your concerns seem easily addressable to me. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

but they have to find references for all drafts and I don't think anyone is going to work on it anytime soon. Gman124 (talk) 02:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- That is quite an assumption, but aside from that, could you notify the nominators (found in the articlehistory), Wikipedia:WikiProject National Football League and possibly Wikipedia:WikiProject College football as a courteous note. Otherwise, they might not find about it. Thanks. Woody (talk) 20:34, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Categories: User talk archives

See also ebooksgratis.com: no banners, no cookies, totally FREE.