User talk:Pawnkingthree/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bashos not held

Sorry about that. I noticed some at the top and some that didn't have the note, and I never thought to look if some had the message at the bottom. The preferred note I think is "The Osaka basho resumed in 1953. Kyushu began in 57 etc.. That is the most succinct explanation. I'll fix em up. It isn't as much fun to rv my work, but I asked for it. Hope you like the "not held" additions. FourTildes (talk) 10:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

I am glad you like it. As they are a lot of design changes, I should've checked first about what we thought about them. When I was first put in the "not helds" and making more clear notes, I realized that I was merely starting to repeat the same inconsistencies for basho time and locations that caused the questions and rvs to the old tables in the first place. So I decided I should start using the other tourney templates I had made the effort to make a few weeks before.
Ah, you caught that I shortened the tables of those guys eh? Good eyes! I honestly thought no one would notice. I did that out of pure laziness. If I only put in their makuuchi or sekitori records, their tables would then not go far back enough that I would have to format another table for previous schedule systems. [embarrassed emoticon here] However, it really is quite easy to put the formatting in, and since you asked about that I'll do it. More than anything, I am glad someone is taking the time to notice, so I will gladly put them back. By the way, did you notice that I made new sections for wrestlers whose schedules ran between 1956 and 1958? It is not the best choice, but if you don't do that, the last two basho for post-1958 tables get shortened and it doesn't look balanced. FourTildes (talk) 23:25, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
If you want to see what it looks like with no section break between 1956-1958, I will leave Wakakoma like that for a short while. If those last two tourneys didn't look squeezed like that it would be fine. FourTildes (talk) 23:38, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
I don't know about good eyes, I just have every sumo article on my watchlist and saw your edit summary :) I see what you mean about Wakakoma; it doesn't look good with the last two columns squashed like that. I had a look at Wakanohana Kanji I as an example of the other approach and I don't see a problem with having a break for pre-modern and modern eras. The shift to six tournaments a year is a natural starting point for the "modern era" and is used as such by the JSA frequently in their banzuke topics so I think there's nothing wrong with drawing attention to it.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:57, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

My modifications continue, as I am redoing the way draws and holds are shown as they become more prominent in older tourneys. The need for more table types kept increasing because as I got further back as there are less and less wrestlers and you can burn through table types pretty quickly. But now it has settled to just two more types I think, as the 2 basho system (spring summer and spring winter) prevailed for centuries before 1926. I have decided to go to the names the kyokai (or the public?) gave the bashos, regardless of the month they were held. I changed the older championship tables to match this (need to do that on juryo champs too come to think.) FourTildes (talk) 20:42, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I see you have found some things that I gummed up going through the tables. Sometimes I copy and paste more than it looks like I did and I don't see it all. I appreciate it. I have left about three wrestlers who have Osaka sumo tables. I am considering making an Osaka template with a First and Second basho form (they were often pretty irregular) to recognize these greats. Or I may just continue on through. Don't know what's come over me. FourTildes (talk) 07:42, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Indeed

That is where I put it, Musashigawa stable (2013) just as in the link you gave above. It got a speedy delete tag and I went to contest it, which was ignored by a keen administrator, and it was gone almost before I knew it. I pointed out that in his keenness to delete my article he left a redirect (Musashigawa stable) to the now deleted article, so he deleted that too. As I had lost what I wrote, including my "do not delete" defense, I asked him to give me access to the material in the article again, which he did. He put it here User:FourTildes/sandbox 6. Though I can see the reasoning, I was not happy with the ultra-quick deletion, and I am pretty convinced he didn't read my contesting of it, which is now here User_talk:FourTildes/sandbox_6. Anyway, he claims more good references would've saved it, so I guess I can do that. FourTildes (talk) 03:54, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Musashigawa stable

I also created a new Musashigawa stable page, and already [RHaworth] wishes to delete it. If he does I suggest we make an official complaint about him or whoever deletes the page. I think is RHaworth is dedicated to getting his own way. So I have decided to reported him, but before doing so I think it best to get a 3rd opinion. And that is you Pawnkingthree, what do you think? Should the Musashigawa stable stay or go.

Also we need to talk about the content of the page. In the Japanese version of [Musashigawa stable], they have made Musashimaru the 15th Musashigawa. So really, we should bring back the original page and edit it with an explaination of what happened between 2010 and 2013.

Leveni. 19 Aug 2013 —Preceding undated comment added 11:52, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the feed back. I can only agree that the new incarnation of the Musashigawa Beya should be treated as a new entity, if that is the convention everybody agrees with. In regards to RHaworth, I just thought what he did to FourTildes was wrong. I admit Wikipedia needs RHaworth and other admins like him, but the way FourTildes' original Musashigawa(2013) page was deleted is unacceptable from my point of view. When it comes to subject matter like Sumo, that brings in about half a million hits per year, administrators should let 'experts' in on the decision making, or pass the decision making onto such experts. Leveni--Leveni (talk) 05:44, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Little Red Rooster

Are you still interested in this? Comments/suggestions. Perhaps a GA? —Ojorojo (talk) 20:04, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

more records

Even though I have told others who were possibly interested in putting up a new record table on the records page that the page is already pretty full, I just put three together anyway. Here User:FourTildes/sandbox_6#More_records. It is Sekiwake and Komusubi tournament records separately (as opposed to the combined list that is already on the page) as well as a list of records of rikishi who had the most tournaments in makuuchi without ever achieving san'yaku. I realize it is likely overkill. It was actually the third list I was more interested in, but I made the other two as a comparison. Another idea I had was to put them in the makuuchi article in their respective san'yaku sections. Or I could just be happy to have them in my Sandbox where I can always see them. FourTildes (talk) 23:29, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

As you may have noticed, I ended up trying them out in the makuuchi article. I don't think they look too intrusive there. My own indulgence is the way I have done the Maegashira table, it would be a more linear comparison is I actually listed wrestlers who simply have the most maegashira appearances regardless of whether they went on to san'yaku at some point. If it is done this way you get a completely different list of wrestlers (Kotonowaka is number 1 for example), but I just find the list the way I did it more interesting. It is a persistence watch of sorts and I find that interesting the same way I suspect you find the longest rise list interesting. Obviously banzuke topics on the NSK site follows such info and it is a perennial thread on the forum, so why not?
Oh right, the wrestlers of yore issue. I think it is rather interesting that older wrestlers pop up here and there. I realize a true comparison is impossible, and I know the criteria for sekiwake and komusubi were different (if there were any real criteria at all beyond a decent performance and being liked by the crowd, especially with wrestlers from waaay back). But anybody who managed to be at komusubi or sekiwake regularly, especially when there were only around 2 bashos a year, deserves to be on such an imperfect list maybe? I am not adamant about it, but I do like how it highlights that sumo has been around a really long time with records to show it, which makes it something different. FourTildes (talk) 22:33, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 20 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:30, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

updates to rikishi articles

You usually keep a pretty good eye out, but I thought I'd reiterate: When you add any new information to a wrestler's article could you also add an update date (month and date as well) to the infobox as well? This will help us keep better track of which rikishi articles haven't seen much attention in a while. Just using it for the infobox is not nearly as useful because for many bread and butter rikishi their tables change very rarely even as their bios etc. slowly get information added. FourTildes (talk) 22:20, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

sidebar

At least sometimes, my screen is too narrow, and, for example, the record holders table gets all squished together. So I went and found code someone made to hide the wiki sidebar. You can toggle it on and off with the "More" drop down menu. User:PleaseStand/Hide Vector sidebar
FourTildes (talk) 23:38, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Nishonoseki

It was a DAB page, made by me, until whoever that is came in, not really knowing what was what and assumed I had made a controversial edit destroying data that had been in the original Nishonoseki article, which he did not realize I had moved to Nishonoseki 1935. I decided to compromise with what there is now, with Nishonoseki as the redirect to the current stable. If you want, please feel free to go back into the history of the redirect Nishonoseki article and restore it as a DAB page and the guy who came in will see that this is not just my opinion. ~ ~ ~ ~ (talk) 10:37, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

"the information from the old Nishonoseki stable article was cut and pasted into a new article, Nishonseki (1935) and Matsugane stable became Nishonseki (2014), and then the old Nishonoseki stable page was changed to a redirect." Yes, that's it exactly. FourTildes (talk) 20:38, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

You may have got sidetracked, but I assume you plan to do more right? At a glance you have it about where the well meaning editor left it, I think. After my initial edits, and before he/she came in I had the original Nishonoseki stable as a dab page for the 1935 and 2014 incarnations, which both had their own so named articles. We are agreed on that right? FourTildes (talk) 21:39, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

I see. I thought about reverting as you did, instead of just switching things around like I did, but I wasn't in the mood for the formality and having to settle a dispute; but it certainly is the most legit way to go about it, and if we continue the trend of putting a year after heyas established with the same oyakata name as previous ones it will likely come up again in the future. I will put a word in if/when it is necessary. FourTildes (talk) 07:12, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

I am not sure if I am supposed to chime in on that discussion, but the opinion of the User/Admin who posted seemed valid, that one is the primary article with no DAB page. That is what I settled for anyway as a compromise; though the original "fixer" still didn't know what was going on and made the wrong article the "main" article. I think this is the way to go; and if we are to follow protocol Tagonoura and any others should be treated the same way. If ever 3 incarnations get articles we can use a DAB page. I still think you handled it the proper way; and now we know how to handle it. Funny that you come in when you do. I go without any conflicts for quite some time, but when something comes up like this or the Musashigawa 2013 stable issue, you always seem to be there. :) FourTildes (talk) 07:35, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Updates

Hi. I think I requested this before, but when you update rikishi articles could you also update the infobox date? The infobox changes much more slowly than the general article, so I thought it best to use that date as a marker for any updates to the article in general so it is easy to get an idea how up to date an article is. FourTildes (talk) 13:44, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

No worries. You are one of the most conscientious and thorough wikipedians I know, so I figured it had just slipped your mind. It was a bit of an executive decision on my part to start using the update date that way, but it seemed a lot more useful that way.FourTildes (talk) 23:08, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Kakuryu kyujo

I never touched the kyujo part of the template as far as I remember. Regardless, it came up that way because you put absent=0 on the end of the, which will make the absences show up as zero. I took that off and it was fine.  :) FourTildes (talk) 10:13, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Motown Gold

The article Motown Gold has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non-notable albumn - Standard searches do not reveal enough significant coverage in independent, reliable sources

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 08:04, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 16:28, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 4 February

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

"new" images

Love all the "new" pics for the rikishi articles. Had they relatively recently become public domain or? I wonder if there is one of Wajima that is old enough? He is the only yokozuna without any kind of pic now (that "helpful" guy from a few months ago tagged that pic and got it deleted as well). FourTildes (talk) 04:11, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

I spotted them on the Commons (via a ja wiki article) and most of them seem to be scanned from a June 1961 issue of "Sumo" magazine a few months ago. I think 50 years after publication is public domain. 1961 is too early for Wajima of course but I will keep looking.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:26, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Actually, Taiho was imageless too, shockingly - just rectified that situation :)--Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:13, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Shimotori

Thanks for the correction; I changed the redirect category to {{R from former name}}. Cheers, 58.176.246.42 (talk) 13:20, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 9 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sakaizawa Kenichi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Matta. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:56, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Pawnkingthree. 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)

Jeffrey Dean Morgan Article

The New York Daily News is NOT a "tabloid newspaper". It is a reputable news source AND a reliable, accepted Wikipedia source. Just because you do not like a fact is not a good reason to delete it or falsely claim that the source is a "tabloid". The fact remains that Sherrie Rose DID name Morgan as the father of her child, it is relevant to his personal life, and it is cited as fact in literally hundreds of articles and sources about him. I clearly stated that it is a CLAIM because he hasn't commented on it, but anyone who has read any article on him knows that the media has reported him as the father of Rose's child for seven years now. Including it in his bio is correct. Please stop deleting facts because you don't like them.

So first you said you deleted a fact from the article because you claimed the New York Daily News is a "tabloid newspaper". Now you agree that it is not, but say its entertainment section is not reliable. Ooooookaaaaaay, how about UPI? And Entertainment Weekly? And the Chicago Tribune? Are they reputable enough for you? Because I cited all three of them this time.
Take note that nowhere have I posted that JDM is the father of Sherrie Rose's child (even though hundreds of news sources do say that) - ONLY that she CLAIMS he is. That is a fact. It is a fact that is cited by every article written about JDM in saying how many children he has. It is relevant to his personal life. You may not like that fact, but that doesn't change it. So stop deleting it already.

The articles do not say "a source" said that JDM is the father of Sherrie Rose's child, they say that SHERRIE ROSE says that. Stop obfuscating. You don't like the fact and are blatantly using falsehoods to justify deleting it. Hundreds of articles about JDM state as fact that he has a son with Sherrie Rose. I have put in the actual fact that although Sherrie Rose says she has a child with him, he has not commented on it and suggested otherwise with his response to Jimmy Kimmel. It is relevant to JDM and anyone seeking correct information on him, since there are a great many articles out there that state he's the father of Sherrie Rose's child. The purpose of an encyclopedia is to give correct information on a subject for those seeking it. There was no reason to refuse the Daily News source with a lie calling it a "tabloid newspaper" and there's no reason to refuse sources that are widely accepted all over Wikipedia like UPI and Entertainment Weekly. You are being ridiculous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.209.84.229 (talk) 12:35, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Just as a follow up to this little back-and-forth: Sherrie Rose herself removed the offending material, calling it "false and defamatory", and then went to the BLP noticeboard. This is why we have to be so careful with WP:BLP articles.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 21:02, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Exile on Main St#Requested move 19 December 2016

You contributed to Exile on Main St. I invite you to the RM discussion. --George Ho (talk) 08:05, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Re: limitation on named children (Infobox)

I did not find the "requires article" restriction in the General Biographical Infobox article, and in fact there are numerous examples where children listees are not linked, e.g. Arabella Kennedy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacqueline_Kennedy_Onassis If this restriction is promulgated separately elsewhere, I should observe it rather than the basic Mentioned in article requirement. Perhaps you could point me to it. Thanks. Dfoofnik (talk) 21:18, 22 January 2017 (UTC) I just thought that not listing the one child by another mother was making a value judgment - she is certainly less liked, but even Linda catches flak here! I wasn't going to push the issue, just that it might answer a question for someone not reading all the sections. 2600:8807:480A:1900:8C53:9FBE:83:C65F (talk) 05:24, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Asahiyama stable

Yep, wrong sign. I must've been in a hurry. That means there are no pics for Asahiyama. It is actually (relatively) close to my work, I'll have to remedy this. Thanks for the heads up. I did see the rm, but hadn't got(ten), or had forgot(ten) to check it out. FourTildes (talk) 01:06, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Tokitenkū Yoshiaki

On 2 February 2017, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Tokitenkū Yoshiaki, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 02:42, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nikolay Minev, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Grandmaster. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:05, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pawnkingthree/Archive_7&oldid=803690127"