User talk:Chrisjnelson/Archive 11

NFL redlinks[edit]

I know you create a lot of football articles. I am working on {{Michigan Wolverines Football}} with User:Cbl62. Many of the articles we are creating have related redlinks. I made a request that I hoped would result in a quick stub with an infobox for such redlinks at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Football_League#Article_requests. Do you know anyone who would want to create articles for redlinks of random NFL players?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 21:06, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I really don't have much interest in creating article for players I don't know of, or former players for that matter.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 23:14, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:CurrentNFLKickers[edit]

I just thought you might like to know I have created a new template, similar to that for NFL quarterbacks, showing current NFL placekickers:

This one should be much easier to police than the QB template. :) Skudrafan1 23:23, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha nice. I'll add it to my watch list.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 23:27, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The template was edited earlier today by a user who added Martin Gramatica in place of Olindo Mare. I thought about it for a moment and decided to let it slide. My reasoning was this: since teams only carry one active placekicker on the roster at a given time, it is *not* the same as the starting quarterbacks template. The header for the kicker template just says "Current placekickers." Gramatica is the current placekicker for the Saints, because Mare was placed on IR and they have no other placekickers. I know this is a slippery slope, because it is dangerous to have one set of rules for one template and another set for another template. However, I think that in this case, we needn't be quite as iron-fisted in keeping "premature" edits squelched. Just my two cents. Skudrafan1 (talk) 20:48, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, I didn't think about it that way. I won't undo that again.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 20:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I undid your undo. :) Skudrafan1 (talk) 20:54, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Runningbacks template[edit]

I just created the Template:NFLStartingRunningbacks, can you check it for accuracy, thanks--Yankees10 19:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to lie; I don't like this template. Templates for quarterbacks and kickers (IMO) are OK because those are stable positions. Running backs come in and out of a game so often that who is the "starter" doesn't hold too much merit. I mean, just looking at stats from yesterday: Kenny Watson may have started for Cincinnati, but Rudi Johnson had almost three times more carries (14 vs. 5). Other places where a "reserve" saw almost as much action as (or more than) the starter include Tennessee (12 carries for LenDale White vs. 11 for Chris Brown), Atlanta (8 carries for Jerious Norwood vs. 10 for Warrick Dunn), Jacksonville (14 carries for Fred Taylor vs. 11 for Maurice Jones-Drew), and Carolina (21 carries for Deshaun Foster vs. 17 for DeAngelo Williams). To sum up, I just don't think that being a starting running back holds as much clout, at least on teams where the rushing duties are split, as being the starting quarterback does. Skudrafan1 20:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah you guys are right--Yankees10 21:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you Skudrafan1, for the exact reasons I expressed on Yankees10's talk page. It seems to be the only positions that are really conducive to this style of template are quarterback, kicker, punter and long snapper.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 21:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't seen that you'd already said basically the same thing I said, long before I said it. Sorry to be redundant, but at least you know you're not the only one who thinks that way! :) Skudrafan1 21:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should get other peoples opinions though before we delete it--Yankees10 21:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, certainly. Perhaps you could take it to WikiProject NFL? Skudrafan1 21:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I did it, but I have to admit I didnt word it very well, you can re-word it if either of you want to--Yankees10 23:29, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reggie Ball[edit]

Your edit to Reggie Ball seems to have broken a few of the references, FYI. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 23:12, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dshibshm[edit]

I'd just like to say that he is really starting to annoy me now with his edits. I keep reverting his edits and only a few ones have been good enough to not revert. --Street20 03:25, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah seriously. He needs to become more familiar with the way things work before he goes and does all that. I only saw one - the Milton Bradley one - I didn't revert because I knew it was true. Although I didn't look into whether it was official or just "agreed upon" as those things are.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 03:41, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He keeps changing the Devil Rays to Rays in the infobox, even though they werenet known as the Rays back when the player played for the team--Rockies17 (talk) 14:58, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way we can get this guy banned or something for vandalism? Because even though we contact him about the things he is doing wrong, he keeps doing them anyways. It's getting to the point that I have to keep checking his contributions so that I can undo them. He should stick to editing on Disney Channel shows. --Rabbethan 05:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Watts (American football)[edit]

Can you explain why you removed the stub tags from Daniel Watts (American football)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomas.macmillan (talk • contribs) 23:28, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was a mistake, I meant to delete the one that wasn't working though. If you know the appropriate NFL one you can put it back, I won't delete it.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 23:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Green Bay Packers WikiProject![edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedian! I just wanted to let you know that WikiProject Green Bay Packers is looking for participants who are interested in improving the quality of the articles on America's favorite small-town team, the Green Bay Packers! If you want to help, you can your name to our list of participants, check out our to-do list, and most importantly, improve the articles!

Gonzo fan2007 ^{talk ♦ contribs} 01:11, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Constant IP vandalism of Madden Curse[edit]

Just a heads-up to inform you that you're not alone in questioning the constant premature IP additions of Vince Young to the alleged victims section: Either it's being done by someone acting alone but editing from mutiple IP's or several different people. In any case,I just had to revert 2 consecutive edits because one of those IP edits couldn't be undone... Ranma9617 (talk) 04:23, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First initials in CurrentNFLKickers template[edit]

I guess my argument is that if you put Gramatica's first initial there, just because there has been another kicker in the history of the league named Gramatica, why stop there? I mean, should Andersen become M. Andersen, just to keep the "casual viewer" from thinking about Gary Anderson? Or should Feely become J. Feely, just so there is no confusion from the "casual viewer" about A. J. Feeley? I don't know, maybe I'm grasping at straws for my argument, but I just think that either we use first initials for all players (even non-confusable last names like S. Gostkowski), or we only use them when there are two kickers at the same time with the same last name (K. Brown and J. Brown). We don't make up special rules just because there has been another player in recent NFL history with the same last name as a current player. That being said, I appear to be the only one who feels this way of the three editors who have discussed this issue. :) Skudrafan1 (talk) 20:19, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're reaching with those examples. A trio of college and pro kicking brothers is a rare thing, and I think an exception could be made in this case.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 23:19, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kendyl Jacox[edit]

I just thaught I'd tell you that you created the article on Kendyl Jacox like a year ago and dont have it on your User:Chrisjnelson/Created page--Rockies17 (talk) 05:53, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, thanks.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 05:56, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

oh your welcome, you've created a shit load of articles--Rockies17 (talk) 05:59, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha yeah. I may have missed a few more - the only way I know about them is if they had the word "Created" in the edit summary when I went back to find them. That's why I missed Jacox.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 06:06, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll tell you if I every find any more, keep up the good work, oh yeah sorry about the Jamal Anderson thing your right it is dumb to say 1x for the pro bowl--Rockies17 (talk) 14:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

Yeah, it just seemed pointless to be if there's only one year right next to it. I mean if there are 12, yeah it's handy to have the number there. Plus, the whole "this is the way it's done on other infoboxes" argument meant nothing to me because it was the idea of a banned user anyway.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 15:58, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah thats what I changed my mind, I dont think yankees10 is banned though if thats who you are talking about--Rockies17 (talk) 05:26, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

oh yeah and you know how you have your signature a special way, how the hell do you do that, I've wanted to do it for a while--Rockies17 (talk) 05:27, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just copy the code from someone's sig like mine (what you see when you edit a page I've signed, like here - everything but the date), change the necessary info (my name to yours, etc.) then change the colors to what you want. Go to My Preferences and paste the code into the Signature box.

To clarify, this is what you'd copy of mine:

►'''[[User:Chrisjnelson|Chris Nelson]]'''''[[User talk:Chrisjnelson|Holla!]]''

Hopefully I explained this well enough. If not, ask me any questions you have. ►Chris Nelson^Holla! 07:54, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did it thanks for your help--Rockies 17^{Holla at Ya Boy!} 15:08, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pro Bowl year/Season year discussion[edit]

Before you begin to edit other articles concerning Pro Bowl players, couldn't you make a discussion page, where everyone could contribute with their opinion on the subject? Because some NFL-wikipedia-editors uses 2008, and some uses 2007. I think there should be a wikipedia standard, before anyone starts editing all the NFL-profiles. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrdrip (talk • contribs)

More importantly, the NFL uses the year associated with the season, not the actual game. Merry Christmas _{from Sasha} 17:33, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I already know what the standard should be, and that's what I'm implementing. I've been over this discussion before and I've made my point extensively. Look at Peyton Manning's Colts.com bio, Brady's Patriots.com bio, Sean Taylor's Redskins.com bio. All use the season year when referring to Pro Bowl selections because that's how it's done in the NFL. A Pro Bowl selection is a reward for a season's performance, therefore when remembering Tom Brady's Pro Bowl season in 2007, it should be referred to as 2007. This is an open-and-shut case.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 17:33, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think the odds are your new friend is an old friend? --B (talk) 17:34, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha I don't know. I wouldn't assume it, a lot of people just don't know the way it's worded commonly in the NFL.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 17:35, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Might be a good idea to file an WP:RFCU. Merry Christmas _{from Sasha} 17:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I would assume that it should be "Pro Bowl (2008)", is because of all the other Pro Bowl'ers this year, where it's 2008: Jeff Saturday, Ben Roethlisberger, Fast Willie .. the list goes on.

Then the people that did that were wrong.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 17:47, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mrdrip just corrected the Willie Parker page, guess he his just a new editor. And by the way Chris, congrats on the win. I hope they win week 17 too, I want the Pats to have the top pick. McFadden would look good in blue. Merry Christmas _{from Sasha} 17:52, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Dolphins have to win out to even have a chance of losing the first overall pick. And with the 49ers having four wins now, it's impossible for that pick to be the first overall. Right now it's going to be between 5 and 8.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 17:55, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dammit!! Merry Christmas _{from Sasha} 17:58, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha sorry.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 18:00, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry this is about four days late, but I'm happy for you that you finally got to see the Dolphins exit "0-for" land. Although I am happy for the Dolphins and pretty much the whole city of Miami (they've struggled with the Heat this year also, as well as the Marlins), personally I would've liked to see them go 0-16. Not because I want them to do that bad, and go down in history in such a horrible way, but rather because I just think it would've been cool to say to my children or grandchildren that I was alive during that time that the Dolphins went 0-16 and the Patriots went 16-0. I mean to this very day, my dad still tells me of the time that Gordie Howe broke his hockey stick in a pickup game at the Great Western Forum, and he got that stick signed and its still hanging above our fireplace. To say that you were alive during a time like the Pat's perfect season or the Dolphins imperfect season would truly be something. Ksy92003(talk) 14:13, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of speedy deletion tag[edit]

Please post a hangon tag on the page if you wish to deter speedy deletion. Removing the template without contest is bad form. If you believe the article should not be deleted, post a hangon, and use the talk page for the article to defend your position, which, if acceptable, will result in removal of the speedy deletion tag. Thank you, Jacotto (talk) 07:45, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it because I assumed it was added because the page didn't have any content. Now it does and that itself explains why he's notable enough.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 07:51, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Thank you! Jacotto (talk) 17:53, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Tommy Davis (defensive end)[edit]

I have nominated Tommy Davis (defensive end), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tommy Davis (defensive end). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 14:18, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2006 St. Louis Cardinals template[edit]

The template lists Gary Bennett which leads to a dab page. Do you know how I would change it to Gary Bennett (baseball)? --brew crewer (yada, yada) 21:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You just have to change it. I've already done it, but what was the issue?►Chris Nelson^Holla! 21:56, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I just couldn't figure out how to get to this page: Template:2006 St. Louis Cardinals. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 22:10, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's what the v-d-e thing does.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 22:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Plan[edit]

As the season comes to a close (for some) and free agency draws near:

Staffs: I substituted all coaching staff templates that were in the 2007 team season articles, so those won't be a problem.

Rosters: For all the non-playoff teams, I will substitute those after the final weekend of the season. Then do the same as each playoff team is eliminated.

Rosters: Teams usually make "future contracts" signings a few days after the Week 17 games. We'll have to start a new column after the reserve lists for those guys, then add them in once they are officially on the roster, which is either after the Super Bowl or at the start of the league year (early March).

Rosters: Free agents. I'll go through each team and see which guys are free agents per the NFLPA database. For all types (UFA, RFA, ERFA), we can tag them after each team is eliminated, and once free agency starts, the UFAs can be deleted.

Rosters: Guys on reserve lists will be added back to the main roster once teams are eliminated. Pats1 ^T/C 20:02, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with pretty much all this, but I don't see the harm in adding guys with future contracts to the regular roster for teams that have been eliminated. If the Dolphins sign some guys the first week of January, I don't see the harm in adding them.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 20:08, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I was going to ask you about that. It's really just a matter of being technical or not. I'm not even 100% sure when the future contracts actually start. Pats1 ^T/C 21:41, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We're the only dorks that would ever think about that issue anyway. I vote we just throw them in with the rest.

By the way, didn't we have UFAs and RFAs over on the right last year?►Chris Nelson^Holla! 00:19, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe... (Peter Griffin voice...hey, I actually know someone by that name)...

...Sort of. For the first new template, I used footnotes for the Pats, you used a separate column. Then I believe we deleted all free agents the second run. Which way do you want to do it now? Pats1 ^T/C 00:28, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't mind them just being separate over there. I think separating them might be good in general, but it'd also be good for the template. With reserve list and practice squad gone, it'd eliminate the column for the most part. I say we just have all contract guys in the normal three columns, then make lists on the right for UFAs, RFAs and ERFAs. What do you think?

So you don't know of any place that has full FA lists, you're just gonna do it by the NFLPA active player search or what?►Chris Nelson^Holla! 00:52, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've done the AFC East (sans Pats) FAs so far, putting them in the extra column. I used NFLPA and just went position by position, comparing them to my copy of the rosters. All ERFA/RFA/UFA should be 100% correct, as I checked NFL.com, and then double-checked because NFL.com gets a few wrong (like Mruczkowski last year and Eric Alexander and Wallace Wright this year, they seem to count playoff games towards accrued seasons, which isn't correct according to those I've talked to -- they also sometimes to forget to add accrued seasons to players who have been out of football (Bramlet) and those who were on IR but cut/FA after the season (Pass)). I'll keep a lookout on NFLPA for a few players (Kapinos, Ball, Mace, Mayle) who were promoted from PSQs in the last two weeks, as NFLPA seems to be on vacation and still has their PSQ contracts ($79k) and it's possible they got multi-year contracts when promoted. Pats1 ^T/C 19:34, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I'd imagine guys like Bramlet would get two-year deals at least in order to possibly retain them for camp and not have to deal with future contracts.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 19:43, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Dolphins Jersey[edit]

Forgive me for the delay, but it's been a hectic week. Took me a minute to understand what you meant by white-on-white. Forgive me, I'm a baseball fan, and am still a bit of a novice at professional football. I was trying to find a white jersey with white numbers. Anyway, yes, you are correct, there is a pairing of white with white. However, there are many such pairings, a lot of mixing and matching, and including everything would take up much too much space. Therefore, each jersey is represented in the images once, with one set of pants. The variation can be discussed in the team's uniform page. I merely took the pant set included with the jersey in www.sportslogos.net's Dolphins section that was not listed as "alternate" This seems to be the good decision, as the marketing appears to pair the white and colored uniforms thusly more often than not. Of course, I may be wrong. --Silent Wind of Doom (talk) 05:34, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean by draw a list of them. If you mean draw the others, than it is incredibly easy. A simple use of one tool in Microsoft Paint (which is all I use to do all this). I'm wary about adding it to the main image, though. It could be used by itself or paired with the teal on teal in the uniform section. How often is teal-on-teal used versus teal-on-white? I'm a fan, but the NY area doesn't get many games. We don't even get them when they play the Bills in the same state. Was able to see the win, though, after the other two games on at the moment ended. --Silent Wind of Doom (talk) 05:47, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm... There's another major issue. If teal-on-white is the hugely favored combination, and there is no orange-on-teal, then the white-on-teal is the only place where the teal pants will be shown, and they should make the template as they are a major uniform component. Yes, I know how nitpicky this must sound, but it is important to showing the uniform. Of course, if you feel so strongly, I could merely make the pants white and add teal pants versions of the white and teal to the uniforms section as I mentioned doing with the white-on-white and teal-on-teal. I still think the teal pants should make the main image, though. Oh, I'm going to bed. LOL Not because of this, but because I've put it off too long. I'll respond to your response quickly as I can, though. --Silent Wind of Doom (talk) 06:02, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - There we go. I created an image of everything, and put it in the uniforms section. Perhaps this precedent will be followed in all team articles. We'll have to see how it goes. --Silent Wind of Doom (talk) 18:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invite[edit]

Century Tower

As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject University of Florida, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of University of Florida. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks!

Tyler Palko[edit]

Stop putting your personal opinion on the page. It was correct for months until you messed with it tonight. KellyAna (talk) 04:57, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My personal opinion? You're flat-out wrong, so I'll continue to undo what you're doing for that reason. You don't know what you're talking about, so my advice is to just drop it.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 05:00, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, I am right and the article has been fine for months until your childish behaviour tonight reverting for no reason. I am not "flat out wrong" since the beginning of the season no one has given a damn about this article until tonight so why the hell do you care now? KellyAna (talk) 05:04, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many users, myself included, have worked very hard on this template and have been instituting it for months. There are standards for this template that you are undoing. My edits were to keep them with standard practices. The reason they were wrong before I got there was because the template was initially implemented a long time ago.

For example, the full college name is never used. We use the comment name, like the ones used on official NFL websites and NFL.com. The debut section is specifically for regular season only - the preseason does not count. It goes on and on. These are the standard practices for this template, and every infobox on every player article should be consistent. My edits on Tyler Palko's infobox worked toward that consistency - you're going backward. Trust me, this is not an argument you will win.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 05:07, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

UNDOING??????????????????????????????????? Um, hello, I'm reverting the changes that someone made today that have stood for months as standard. Seriously...the page was great for months and only a couple of us cared so where were you on this page? Just whatever, you are so not worth it, but Tyler is. I'm patient. It will be fine.KellyAna (talk) 05:17, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I already explained to you about the standard practices of the template. The way it was before was not "standard" - it was simply incorrect because it was implemented a long time ago while the template was still being developed. Whenever I come across an NFL player that's infobox has things that aren't standard, I fix them. That's what I did today on Palko's page.

As I've said before, this is not an argument you will win. You don't know what you're talking about because you aren't a main NFL content editor; you're some ~~little girl~~ old chick that has a crush on Tyler Palko. Those of us that have worked on the template and have been implementing it and tweaking it for months can see you don't know what you're doing. So what you need to do is either a) drop it; or b) familiarize yourself with the standards of the template.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 05:21, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So you're challenging me? I've cared about his article since August and you're getting involved now just because? The level of incivility is off the charts. You keep crying template, template, template. I'm talking about the entire article. Your accusations are unfounded and so off base you need to reel it back. My association with Tyler is far from crush and your accusations are childish. There is no rule that says I have to contribute to all the NFL articles to watch one article. Your behavior needs to be reported, which it will. Thank you for this behaviour and the accusations. You can't treat other editors this way, including the comments in the edit summary. Did you ever think I might be a former teacher, principal, sister, aunt, cousin, friend, mother of Tyler verses "some old chick with a crush"? You cry "worked on" but you've never touched Tyler's article. You are just being unreasonable. KellyAna (talk) 05:31, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter whether I've previously worked on the article or not. Your edits are not consistent with the rest of the infoboxes in place, and therefore it should be changed. Just because you aren't familiar with the practices doesn't mean you should undo them. I don't care if you're Tyler's personal ball washer (if so, I'm jealous!). All that matters is that you recognize how things are done with that template and leave them be.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 05:33, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your personal attacks are noted. KellyAna (talk) 05:37, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, envy isn't a personal attack. I'd love to wash Tyler Palko's balls. Plus it was hypothetical envy - I never said you were his personal ball washer; I said I didn't care if you were.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 05:39, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

UTC)

oh, look, another display of incivility and personal attacks. KellyAna (talk) 05:42, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Calling something a personal attack doesn't make it so. If I say I'm a Puerto Rican, it doesn't mean it's right.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 05:44, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your analogy indicates you don't even understand what a personal attack is. KellyAna (talk) 05:50, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment indicates you didn't understand the analogy. Now stop posting here. Any future comments will be deleted.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 05:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR[edit]

You've reverted me three times. Your last edit stands but you're being reported. KellyAna (talk) 05:08, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, three reverts is acceptable - it's MORE than three reverts that's against the rule. So good job knowing that. Secondly, you've violated 3RR too buddy. I'll point that out on the noticeboard when you report me. So have fun.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 05:09, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be condescending. I'm not your freakin buddy. I'm a girl and I haven't reverted three times. I counted. It's only three by one person. Or are you saying you are more than one person? KellyAna (talk) 05:11, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't talk reasonably to children.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 05:12, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Children? I'm likely old enough to be your mother. I'm old enough to be Tylers. KellyAna (talk) 05:17, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could've fooled me with your behavior.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 05:22, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really, seems to me you're the one being incivil and violating all sorts of rules. KellyAna (talk) 05:32, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked per Arbcom enforcement[edit]

Chrisjnelson, I've read the recent sections above regarding KellyAna (talk · contribs). You are still under arbitration-ruled restrictions which limit you to 1RR, perfect civility and no personal attacks. You've broken all three of those in my opinion:

3RR on Tyler Palko (initial, revert 1, revert 2, revert 3).
Personal attack (calling another editor "a little girl" and an "old chick").
Incivility (most of the conversation above including the ball-washer crack).

Combining them all has bought you another one-week block. Feel free to post an {{unblock}} request here if you feel the block or its length are unfair. —Wknight94 (talk) 13:50, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah forgot about the 1RR thing.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 15:16, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't suppose there's any chance I can get this block ended a day early, lol. The 1RR thing was an honest mistake, it'd been so long since I thought of the arb-com thing and I totally forgot.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 20:45, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year! If you want to, you can use the {{unblock}} template to ask for an uninvolved admin to consider it or you can email Wknight94 using Special:Emailuser/Wknight94 but based on your previous block history, I don't know that anyone is going to reduce the block. Are you watching football today? This has been a thrilling day of bowl games. --B (talk) 21:01, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, just thought I'd ask. I emailed him, but it's not a big deal.

Yeah, definitely some good games. I'm just glad Auburn pulled it out yesterday. And I hope Hawaii kills UGA.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 21:04, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Wisconsin interception right at the end cost me the office bowl pool - I would have been in the driver's seat if not for that, but I'm mathematically eliminated now. I enjoyed the Auburn game - that one and the BYU game have probably been the best two of the season. They really do a professional job with the CFA Bowl - we had a lot of fun down there last year. --B (talk) 21:08, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tuberville going for it on fourth and inches down by three in OT was about as ballsy a thing as I've ever seen.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 21:09, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're good to go now. I don't think you'll be bothered by an autoblock but if you are, use {{unblock-auto}}. (The autoblock finding tool is dead so it's hard to tell). And try to ease up on the hostility, okay? None of us like blocking good established editors but you make it hard not to with the way you carry on sometimes. —Wknight94 (talk) 22:56, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox CollegeFootballPlayer[edit]

Great job on the Template:Infobox CollegeFootballPlayer, it looks good, I just thaught I'd tell you that--Rockies 17^{Holla at Ya Boy!} 00:24, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm sure it needs some tweaks, so if you have any suggestions be my guest.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 00:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ill be sure to do that--Rockies 17^{Holla at Ya Boy!} 03:47, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]