User talk:Nurmsook/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Nurmsook. 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.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Thanks for fixing that stuff on Hippique Canada/Equine Canada. Montanabw^(talk) 21:11, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for helping out on updating 2008–09 Vancouver Canucks season :) It's good to know that people have the time to work on contributing to it. I look forward to being a part of that. Cheers and best wishes, ~ Troy (talk) 18:53, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, you think Kyle Wellwood could pull of a Pavol Demitra kind of play? If they were both there, then that would be even better. Wellwood actually looks substantially better suddenly, huh? Strange, but convenient. ~ Troy (talk) 20:02, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

The article was deleted, moving a fork to that location isn't any better. ThuranX (talk) 14:15, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Apologies, didn't realize there were two hockey players of same name and nationality; the speed of the replacement threw me. This looks fine after all. ThuranX (talk) 01:41, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Kyle Moir, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Smashville^talk 04:29, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Noticed yours too, It's such a great field! Sorry If my reply came off as rude. It's probably a bad habit on my part but one of my pet peeves is people voicing opinions on afds without knowledge of the topic. I did see after, that your comment was correct talking about season articles. Bhockey10 (talk) 04:45, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

You are right that Wikipedia is like the British judicial system - it's completely screwed up with the stupidest verdicts and the most narrow-minded members. 68.238.118.160 (talk) 21:42, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

That was me, I wasn't logged in. Savvy10 (talk) 02:29, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

To be truly intelligent is to be broad-minded. Narrow minded is the opposite of intelligent, it is instead stubborn, idiotic, and corrupt. Savvy10 (talk) 13:26, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Even if Ted Ruth failed some notability, he was still traded for one of the best players of his era, Sergei Fedorov. That would earn some subjective notability, which isn't measured by Wikipedia's notability standards. Take Jericho Scott for instance. He fails WP:ATHLETE, which is objective notability, because he hasn't played professionally or at the highest level of amateur competition. However, the fact that he wasn't allowed to play because he was too good is a sort of subjective, unwritten notability on Wikipedia that still keeps Jericho Scott and some other articles on Wikipedia. Either Ted Ruth is okay or these other articles aren't. Which is it? Savvy10 (talk) 17:09, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Ted Ruth did get some write-ups in notable newspapers after being traded for Fedorov. This seems to be the only thing that keeps Jericho Scott on Wikipedia, according to what you said on my talk. There have been scores of other kids that have been banned from playing because they were too good and they haven't gotten national write-ups. Somehow this makes them less notable than Scott and less deserving of an article. In addition, I found an article on Athan Maroulis. He doesn't seem notable at all and seems to fail WP:MUSICBIO, but his brother, Constantine Maroulis, was a finalist on American Idol. This seems like the same sort of association to a famous person. I'm not trying to seem pushy or nagging, but if Wikipedia is to be at the highest possible standard, then either all of these type of articles should be okay or none of them should. Savvy10 (talk) 22:28, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

You might want to read WP:WAX and WP:ALLORNOTHING. -Djsasso (talk) 19:14, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Those two apply to AfD discussions. This is just a user talk page. It's not the same, Djsasso.

Are you going to answer, Nurmsook?Savvy10 (talk) 20:59, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry Nurmsook, but there is no way to question a deletion. Just a bunch of narrow-minded people that won't see any other opinion. Wikipedia will suck forever. Savvy10 (talk) 22:04, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello! I was just wondering why you reverted an edit on that article by Shea DM. I noticed that he has been spamming some articles, but I believe at least half of the edit (Tantallon instead of Tantallion) is correct.

Just checking, Andrew⁶⁴⁷ 18:42, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I actually looked at some of the things he's done, and wow... BTW, I'm removing "Lower Tantallon" altogether, ref: . The town name is just "Tantallon". It's not even on the map on that route (south-west of Halifax if you want to check).

I'm from Nova Scotia, that's why I even cared in the first place, haha. Take care, Andrew⁶⁴⁷ 18:53, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

As a user who responded to the straw poll regarding non-free images in sports, your further input is requested with regards to the Straw poll summary and proposed guidelines on image use — BQZip01 — ^talk 00:43, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

As a contributor to the discussion regarding sports team logos, I am soliciting feedback as to the latest version of that guideline. Your support/opposition/feedback would be appreciated. — BQZip01 — ^talk 21:57, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Would you object to including provisions that allow for a single non-free image as a last resort if no free images exist? I think this will help bring some of those who object to the support side of the house. At the same time, it also gives a little more ammunition because it indicates it is a last resort; if a free image exists, then those images can't be used. My efforts show that almost all college football teams (which seems to be the general genre of those who oppose), if not all, have a valid free image available. In the interests of not cluttering up the talk page any further, please just respond here. — BQZip01 — ^talk 02:19, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't see any problems with that... – Nurmsook! ^talk... 02:23, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

The latest version incorporates that. — BQZip01 — ^talk 18:15, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I have no problem with returning the first paragraph. I think there is too much about expansion, ownership of club, etc. though. In fact I am looking at the Bruins article and started working the lead to match that somewhat. I am working on reducing the size of the summary too. Alaney2k (talk) 17:15, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I responded earlier today on my talk page. DMighton (talk) 04:39, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I never really noticed that. I actually haven't linked that many, so there isn't a lot to change or anything. I'll start doing that now (linking to playoffs and regular season instead of NHL). RandySavageFTW (talk) 02:23, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

~~Hi, I've never opened an AfD before and after about a week it's pretty clear the article can be deleted. How do I close the AfD and finish the deletion process?~~ nvmd mins after writing this, the article was deleted... lol

Since I saw your addition to this article, I was wondering if you would also like to nominate this article with me and Scorpion0422. If you'll gladly accept, I'll do the FL nomination process. Thanks. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 23:37, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

LOL, kind of funny. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 23:38, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

The first thing I noticed was that your "About me" section was way too big. The sub-section, "Why Sport Canada?", sounds like an advertising. Both those are (kind of) violating WP:UP. I suggest you read Wikipedia:User page, and see what you shouldn't do on a user page. Hope you take this as a notice, not a threat or anything else. Thanks and happy editing! -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 00:00, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/NHL Foundation Player Award, just in case. :D -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 00:46, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the friendly reminder. I just want to say that "I want more consistency" isn't that WP:OWNish. It's kind of like saying, "I want more grammar" or "I want more material". As you may know, consistency is a good thing, so like I said, I don't think it's that ownish. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 06:37, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Again, thanks for reminding me about that. Just to tell you, IMO, I think that you're explanation didn't really make sense if you read it yourself, as I don't think that the community will reject consistency with related articles. I still got the message. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 06:51, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

All of your comments should have been addressed. If you can, please return there and cap off the resolved comments. Thanks, iMatthew // talk // 23:35, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I was wondering if you could copy-edit this before I put it on the future article. Thanks in advance. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 21:45, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:RMU logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:14, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I am aware of what you are saying, and I will try my best to resist updating the stats until the end of the reason (Proabably my editcountitis). -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 06:05, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Just to note that I am very bad at suggesting things to people (since most people never agree with me). Let's just keep this simple. 1) Anything you want, as long as it is related to the article (find more information about the championship). 2) My hint to you is that I always put the records from the column, like what you said while replying on my talk page (most champions by coach, by team, most finals, most championship in stadium, etc). Just remember the first one. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 06:24, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for all the updates to the college hockey articles, especially the conference and NCAA tournaments. It looks great! Gopherbone (talk) 00:18, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

As one of the major editors of college hockey articles, it would be great to have you as part of the new College Hockey task force. --Bhockey10 (talk) 05:00, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

yeah that sounds good with the sub categories, thanks for the advice. --Bhockey10 (talk) 05:59, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

		The Running Man Barnstar
		For all the dedication to ice hockey related articles. You have helped many fellow wikipedians, created, edited, organized and restored many articles. Thanks Bhockey10 (talk) 07:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I saw you marked the WCHA playoff series as a non-conference game in 2008–09 Wisconsin Badgers men's ice hockey season and was wondering if this was a mistake or if its standard to mark playoff games as non-conference for these articles? I don't want to be presumptuous and just change it, but to me it seems a bit confusing. Thanks for any response in advance. Daniel J Simanek (talk) 02:16, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks for the quick response! I was just checking. Daniel J Simanek (talk) 02:59, 10 March 2009 (UTC)