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.
Thanks for uploading File:Big-ten-m-bball-tourney-11-hdr cropped.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 03:47, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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) 11:08, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Check your email
Hello, TonyTheTiger. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hello! Your submission of Susie Cusack at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! (Article looks fine, just awaiting AfD result) - Regards, Lord Roem (talk) 21:19, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Re: Categories
Well, glad to know somebody reads my articles :D You mean the ordering of the categories on the page? I find alphabetical more aesthetically pleasing, but have never bothered to actually sort them, almost certainly because I do a lot of my edits in section view. Does that clarify? - Jarry1250[Deliberationneeded] 11:27, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
Yes, that's a correct summary of my view; basically I never edit deliberately to change just that, and always forget to package it with other changes. The problem with the bot request is that it is currently probihited under bot policy, which states that making edits that do not affect the visual appearance on the page - i.e. what readers see rather than what editors see - is not allowed. Hence, to clarify, BAG members would be obliged to reject any BRFA to have a bot perform solely the task you mention - our hands are tied by the policy. Thus, should you wish to alphabetise categories, you would either need to begin a discussion about changing bot policy, or find another bot that edited pages to fix some other error, and get it to alphabetise the categories in the same edit (although this may itself be controversial if it leads to convoluted diffs, but that's a community matter IIRC). Hope that helps, - Jarry1250[Deliberationneeded] 15:29, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
Er, actually, since the order of categories transfers to the reader, RJW is right to suggest there is no technical breach of bot policy (although you would still need to show a strong community consensus).
To answer your other question, the community has deemed IW to be useful to the reader (rightly or wrongly). I can't really speak for that consensus, but it does to my knowledge exist. - Jarry1250[Deliberationneeded] 15:41, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
In a way, Gandhi will now get a chance to be improved now that you took a lot of effort to point out its shortcomings. So its very constructive indeed. AshLin (talk) 14:07, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Tony, I noticed that you started adding conference templates to bowl game articles such as 2009 International Bowl and 2010 PapaJohns.com Bowl. I don't think they should be included; they seem too tangential to the article subject and increase navbox clutter. I started a discussion at WT:CFB so we can reach consensus on what templates should be included in bowl game articles; I would appreciate your input. –Grondemar 04:07, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi - I previous asked you for your interest in serving as an online ambassador for my wikipedia students. I'm very frustrated, as I've been unable to make any progress figuring out exactly how to go about requesting help! Any further help / guidance you can offer would be appreciated. Mjtagler (talk) 21:56, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Ambassador - I'm resigning to give up.
It looks to me like the Sross individual you directed me to hasn't been on wikipedia for over a month? I'm giving this idea up...after too much frustration of contacting people on here. I know it's not your fault, so thanks for your help anyway. You were one of the few to even reply. Mjtagler (talk) 22:26, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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) 11:06, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
"Here We Go Again" FAC
Hi Tony. I've got to apologise for my incorrect removal of commas from your article. It shows I have a lot to learn when contributing to the FAC process, and, touch wood, I won't make this mistake again (and definitely not in the bold manner I have done here). I'll strike the comments that I believe have been addressed and the ones you've given an explanation for. I know I seem a bit nitpicky, but I'm just trying to be thorough in my review. I'm close to support. Have you asked your co-nominators about the catalog numbers yet? Thanks Kitchen Roll (Exchange words) 22:29, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
G'day TonyTheTiger. I've removed PRODs/endorsementss of your's from a couple of school articles. Per WP:OUTCOMES#Schools, nonnotable primary/elementary schools aren't generally deleted, but, rather, merged into their respective localities and then redirected. If you'd like to do this boldly, then please feel free to go ahead. If someone objects, then the issue can be brough to WP:AFD.
Please be aware that there is a little bit of controversy in this general area at the moment caused by attempts at mass deletion. Please stay tuned. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 14:43, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Hello, TonyTheTiger. You have new messages at Danjel's talk page. Message added 15:02, 10 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
see WP:HLIST, explicit bullets have wp:accessibility issues. Navboxes are being converted to use "class=hlist", which adds the bullets using CSS, rather than explicitly. I believe there was even an article about in the Signpost. Frietjes (talk) 00:54, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Martell Bailey
Hey man, sorry to say but there is little to nothing on Martell Bailey. According to Eurobasket, I don't think he has had a career in basketball after college. DaHuzyBru (talk) 00:39, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Congratulations
You asked, and so shall it be! I started handing out these Awards in April 2011 at the behest of Editor Wiel be Checkers (?). I hope it doesnt come too late...like Santo's Hall of Fame vote.
100000 Edits
Congratulations on exceeding 100000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that very few editors have been able to accomplish. The Wikipedia Community thanks you for your substantial efforts. Keep up the good work!
Hi Tony. I have responded to you concerns at Talk:2011 Alabama Crimson Tide football team/GA1 and am not quite sure why it was quick-failed. Any additional thought would be nice as I will renominate this again in a couple of weeks. Thanks. Patriarca12 (talk) 13:32, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
I'm smiling, don't worry
But could you explain those quotation marks on Cross of Gold speech? I do just want an explanation because I have another speech article.
Happy to throw a GA your project's way. If when rummaging through a Chicago archive, you come across a defensible PD image connected to the article, remember me.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:28, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Kim Cloutier
Hi, Tony. Kim Cloutier, an article which you originally created, was deleted after an AFD but then recreated by another user, at which point you marked it for speedy deletion per G4. I just wanted to drop you a note that I don't believe this qualifies for G4 and am contesting the speedy, per Talk:Kim Cloutier, because I believe the subject is notable and that the article should not be deleted. The G4 speedy deletion criteria is for deletion of articles that are substantially identical to the original article, whereas this article was rewritten from scratch by different editors and is considerably longer. Also, the original AFD decision was a bad close; a slim 5:4 majority is not a consensus, and the AFD should have been closed as "no consensus" rather than as "delete". Considering that you were the original creator of the article and that you voted to keep on that AFD, perhaps you could explain on Talk:Kim Cloutier why you thought the article was worthy of creation, or why you have changed your mind (if indeed you have changed your mind; I don't know if you G4ed the article for merely procedural reasons---because it was a previously AFDed article---or if you have actually changed your mind about the notability of the article). Thanks. —Lowellian (reply) 22:00, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Can you be more specific? Cbl62 (talk) 15:36, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Was it the scoring defense stats? If so, I changed it to reflect the final (post-bowl) figures from the NCAA site. Cbl62 (talk) 15:53, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
The rushing defense stats were already there, not added by me. That one and the stat about leading the conference in preventing third down conversions don't strike me as sufficiently impressive to merit inclusion in the lead, but it's a gray area, and so I left them in deference to the editor who included them in the prior version. Cbl62 (talk) 16:08, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
The rushing defense stat was added by you at this diff. If not accurate, I suggest we remove. Cbl62 (talk) 16:18, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
All good. Thanks. Cbl62 (talk) 16:29, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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) 10:59, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Masterpiece (Madonna song)
Hello! Your submission of Masterpiece (Madonna song) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Rcej (Robert) – talk 10:07, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Masterpiece; Grammys
Masterpiece cannot be eligible this year as the 2012 grammys only cover releases up to September 2011. Its also unclear what it means to be a 'release' for this category (In general Grammy nominations are based on albums released in the US) - I assume it means the song must be released on a soundtrack album?? Other than that, the only specific requirement for this category is that the song must be written specifically for the movie. I guess we'll have to wait until 2013 to find out. JKW111 (talk) 10:18, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
For example: Confessions on a Dance Floor was released in late 2005, yet it won "Best Electronic/Dance Album" at 2007 Grammy ceremony. And, there's no reliable souces confirm whether the song is late or ineligible. Bluesatellite (talk) 16:51, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Just letting you know, I think I'm about done with expansion. Thanks for taking the time to review! – GorillaWarfare(talk) 02:59, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
You can nominate it for DYK, since it was newly craeted on 16th Jan and hasn't been five days from that. Good work. — Legolas(talk2me) 05:50, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Haha, that's wonderful. I must have missed it for some reason. Thanks Tony. — Legolas(talk2me) 05:56, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
The third method would be to do basically what I did in the first method, but house the content in Template:OlivierAward Musical, and have the 25 year decade templates call those say as {{OlivierAward Musical|1976–2000}} and this parameter would let the main template know that it should only show the 25 year span requested.
Let me know if you want me to mock up either of the second two methods. Frietjes (talk) 16:47, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
The second method is probably the least complicated, since it would require no additional parserfunctions, so I am sort of leaning toward that method right now. Frietjes (talk) 16:50, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
I responded on my talk page. Frietjes (talk) 18:01, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
19 S. LaSalle
hey Tony, hope your holidays were good and that things are going well for you. I stopped by to ask if you get downtown much. I just created an article for 19 South LaSalle Street that could use an image. I can get the image myself but I was hoping to nominate it for DYK and am not sure I will be heading downtown in time to get the photo for the DYK nom, I'll nominate it anyway but I thought an image would be nice, maybe get it into the lead space. Anyway, let me know. Thanks. IvoShandor (talk) 03:28, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks man, let me know how the movie is, I was thinking of seeing it too. Peruse the article, it should give you an idea of what to look for as far as photographs go. Greatly appreciated Tony. Take care. IvoShandor (talk) 03:59, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
That would be great. I'm kinda broke right now so I would totally take you up on your offer to treat. Thank you. I will plan on it, I am going to email you my number so you have it, if you could do the same that would be cool, that way in case I miss you at 600 N Michigan I can catch you around there or whatever. Thanks so much man, I look forward to finally meeting you in person! IvoShandor (talk) 05:36, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello, TonyTheTiger. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Aye, mate! IvoShandor (talk) 05:39, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry man, something came up. I'll have to take a raincheck, but I really do appreciate the offer and am sorry I will have to miss it, let me know how you like the movie. IvoShandor (talk) 11:28, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
That's OK. I can always get some or if you have something passable, you could ul it. Either way is fine. IvoShandor (talk) 07:35, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
I didn't understand your last comment at the template. --Soman (talk) 07:51, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
I've answered again now. --Soman (talk) 21:30, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Here We Go Again
Hi. I haven't forgotten about the FAC. My issue with the catalog numbers still remains. Has it been discussed yet? When this is resolved I'll give my support. Thanks Kitchen Roll (Exchange words) 19:51, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for all the trouble. I'll keep working on the article. Hopefully, you'll be there for the next round, which I believe should be a peer review. Aditya(talk • contribs) 10:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
For the brilliant idea of transcluding the entries in the template Template:Academy Award Best Sound (and other Academy Award templates). Superb! Lugnuts (talk) 08:10, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
The Firm
I didn't forget to do a template for the credits -- see my note on the DYK talk page saying I didn't do it yet. There's a strange new arrangement for DYKmake templates covering multiple articles, and I'm not sure how to do it. Anyway, since the article title has a slash in it, we'll probably end up having to do your credits manually, since slashes break the templates... --Orlady (talk) 16:58, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Hey. I'm considering bringing this up at FAC. If I do, I was wondering if you would be able to provide a review; I'm pre-emptively asking people due to the current backlog there. I ask you since he played for the Chicago White Sox for most of his career, ergo is part of the Chicago project. WizardmanOperation Big Bear 17:57, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
I've left a brief reply. I haven't read the rest of the article, but based on what you've done, I think the first sections look like solid GA material. I'm afraid limited time and prior commitments mean I won't be able to review the rest of the article at the moment. None of the issues on which we may disagree in the review would be enough to stop me passing the article were I the GA reviewer, FWIW. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:17, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Susie Cusack at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! (Article looks fine, just awaiting AfD result) - Regards, Lord Roem (talk) 21:19, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Template:1973 All-Pro Team has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Bulwersator (talk) 22:43, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
