en User talk:Canuckian89 Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Canuckian89. 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

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 8

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Thanks for the help at Reps by Age

Hope I didn't pre-empt something you'd prepared already. I thought the big lists that hadn't been done yet were a good place to lose myself for awhile. 75.202.14.114 (talk) 23:24, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: median taking office

Sorry, colossal stupidity on my part, which I realized after changing it again, which I then reverted. I had checked governors, gone to senators and calculated between 25 & 26, not 50 & 51. Sorry for the inconvenience. 75.203.205.194 (talk) 18:44, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

When do Senate terms end?

Hello! I see that you have gone through a number of articles on US Senators and changed the dates on which they are reoprted to have left office. I first saw the change made to Robert Latham Owen, an article I have worked quite a lot on, and questioned it at the Discussion Page for Owen.

Now, however, I see that he is not alone -- I chose at random another Senator who left office in 1925 and saw that you had made the same change to his article. In both cases your change runs counter to the information provided in the Biographical Dictionary of the US Senate for the Senator in question (and in Owen's case to the date given by the chronicler of his Senate career).

I am assuming good faith here on your part, but would respectfully request an explanation -- and sources -- for these changes, which as noted run against some of the established sources. Thank you! Nandt1 (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

So, now you have got me interested in this topic. I found a paper published by the Senate, entitled "The Term of a Senator, When Does It Begin and End?" which certainly seems to indicate that terms prior to 1934 both began and ended on March 4th. So I accept your point, in spite of my sources, and will change Owen back to your date! Nandt1 (talk) 01:23, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

NHL rules

The league and their rules, are getting goofier each season it seems. GoodDay (talk) 02:40, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Stanley Cup Playoffs

I agree with you the NHL.com has home on the right BUT the wikipedia format has home team on the left. Just look at the 2010 Stanley Cup playoffs. It's debated every year but every year the top seed is team 1.One95 (talk) 02:08, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

2011 Stanley Cup playoffs

Since the IP won't heed the warnings, I've turned him in for edit-warring, and proposed that semi-protecting the page might be the better option. Obviously, the number 1 seed's position in the next round is at the top of the bracket as wikipedians have laid it out. I don't know if the IP doesn't realize that, or is just fooling around. Either way, it has to stop. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:08, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

The IP has been put on ice (so to speak) for the next 31 hours. If this kind of stuff continues, go to WP:RFPP and ask for short-term semi-protection of the article. That will fend off most of the riff-raff. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:21, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

OK, thanks, good to know. User:Canuck_{My page}^{89 (talk)}, 07:33, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

So are you a Vancouver Canuckian? Or are you one of them die-very-hard Leafs fans? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:00, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm from BC, so yes, I'm a Vancouver fan. Other Canadian teams I can deal with, except the Habs, cause I'm not much a fan of those Quebecers. User:Canuck_{My page}^{89 (talk)}, 08:06, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Funny you should use that term "BC", since that's approximately the last time the Chicago Cubs won a World Series. :( The IP is asking to be unblocked. We'll see how that goes. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:11, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Stanley Cup

Well, your Canucks advanced, but not before the defending Cup champion Blackhawks put a scare into them. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:53, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, Toews's goal at the end there nearly gave me a heart attack User:Canuck_{My page}^{89 (talk)}, 08:10, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Don't get heart trouble now, or you'll never make it to the Cup Finals. Just take it one game at a time. And have your nitroglycerine handy. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:13, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Lifetime template

I was interested to see that in the article for Henry Leach you had deleted the categories for DEFAULTSORT and for years of birth and death, and replaced them by Template:Lifetime.

Reading the documentation for the latter I see that it says: "{{Lifetime}} is a shortcut to generate birth and death categories and DEFAULTSORT. Automatic bots regularly replace it with the expanded form, but editors can still use lifetime to save on typing." and also: "It should not be used to replace existing DEFAULTSORT and/or category tags."

I hadn't come across the template before, so I'd be grateful if you could explain to me the reason for replacing the existing categories by the template.

David Biddulph (talk) 09:16, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I had just discovered it myself today too, and I was just testing it out to see how it worked. User:Canuck_{My page}^{89 (talk)}, 09:18, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I see that the bot has already changed it back again, so that didn't take long. - David Biddulph (talk) 10:00, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Stanley Cup

If current trends continue, we might have an all-Sun Belt finals, in the month of June, concluding the season of this "winter" sport. What's wrong with this picture? :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:38, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Urgh, I know. Carolina vs. Edmonton; Tampa vs Calgary; Anaheim vs Ottawa. It always seems to be the southern, Sun-Belt teams beating the Canadian teams. Perhaps we're in for a Tampa vs Vancouver Finals as a continuation of that trend? Canuck_{My page}^{89 (talk)}, 10:04, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Could be! I think it was Sports Illustrated that said Washington had finally not flopped in the first round. Yeh, this year they kicked it up a notch, so they're going to flop in the second round. Vancouver needs to get their series over with soon. Those 7-game series can take their toll. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:34, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, those 7 games series can be tiring, yet look at the Red Wings. After sweeping Phoenix, they lost 2 in a row to San Jose! But, sometimes, that's just the way it goes. However, I'm really, really hoping that this is finally Vancouver's year. Maybe the Canucks this year can do what they couldn't in 1994. Canuck_{My page}^{89 (talk)}, 10:45, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

The Blackhawks won it last year for the first time in 49 years, so anything's possible. Just imagine being a Leafs fan at this point - basically the Cleveland Indians of the NHL. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:52, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Or possibly even worse. The Canucks could become like the Cubs. Over 100 years without a championship? That would be horrible. Hopefully, however, since this is the 40th year of operation for the Canucks, it would be a nice, even year to finally win. Canuck_{My page}^{89 (talk)}, 10:59, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that's what we thought in 2008. :) But no. :( In any case, there's no risk of the Leafs winning it this year. With the Blackhawks out, I have no particular rooting interest, so I'll root for your Canucks (unless you think that would be the kiss of death). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:10, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the support. I know I'll be watching Vancouver play in Nashville tonight; I wonder how many times its going to be mentioned that Carrie Underwood is at the game? Canuck_{My page}^{89 (talk)}, 11:17, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

NHL playoffs

An "old school" feel to this one, with the Bruins getting there along with the long-suffering Canucks. You're in the finals now. Can you feel it? :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:31, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes. Since 1970, it's been a long time. Although, I suppose Boston has been waiting since 1972, so at least one of those droughts is going to be over. Canuck_{My page}^{89 (talk)}, 05:06, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Wow. 1-0, the goal coming in the final 20 seconds of regulation. Looks like a 7-gamer in the works! ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:58, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Ya. I expected as much, Luongo and Thomas both going for the Vezina Trophy. It's like trying to get the puck by a brick wall! Canuck_{My page}^{89 (talk)}, 06:08, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

In the finals, you want high-quality play, so this is great. (Nothing against the Bruins as such, but I'm rooting for your Canucks.) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:11, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

"In Game 3, to give Boston a sporting chance, Vancouver chose to play without a goaltender." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:58, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Ugly game. Canuck_{My page}^{89 (talk)},

There seems to be a discernible home ice advantage in this series. So, you're up 3-2. One more win. Can you feel it? Can you taste it? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:03, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Ugh. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:00, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm glad I don't live in Vancouver. Huge, huge riots. Canuck_{My page}^{89 (talk)}, 06:55, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Templates in lead section

You recently edited Bill Clements, where you replaced  – with {{ndash}} in the lead section. Templates are suppressed in tool tip previews of articles, so using templates such as {{ndash}} and {{convert}} leaves a puzzling blank space in the text, essentially "breaking" the preview function. I suggest using  – or  – instead. The {{ndash}} template is OK to use further down in articles. —Quicksilver^{T @} 17:34, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Final vs. Finals

I saw that editor's attempt to change "Finals" to "Final" and your reversion of it. I went to NHL.com, and was fairly startled to see that the NHL itself calls it the "Final". That strikes me as being unconventional. However, if the official name of the final series is "Final" rather than "Finals", don't you run into an "original research" issue, by calling it the "Finals"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:09, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I know, I was just going by the notice on Talk:2011 Stanley Cup Finals about the dicussion a few years ago about the article title, where consenus was that we should use Finals, as the common name, despite the NHL using Final. Canuck_{My page}^{89 (talk)}, 20:27, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Has the NHL always called it the "Final"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:29, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure. Canuck_{My page}^{89 (talk)}, 20:31, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I think something needs to be said in the article itself, to both explain and pre-empt, and I've made an attempt. It could be better, though. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:41, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Ya, seems OK. The Finals vs Final discussion was at Talk:2008 Stanley Cup Finals, which happened a year before I set up my account. Canuck_{My page}^{89 (talk)}, 20:43, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm fairly sure that "Final" would be short for "Final Series" or "Final Round", just like in the NBA except they call it the "Finals", which is more conventional. Then there's the matter of the Major League Baseball "playoffs", which are not called "playoffs" at all by MLB, but everyone else calls them that, so that's what they are. "World Series" was originally "World's Championship Series", later shortened to "World's Series", and finally to just "World Series" since it's hard to enunciate 2 consecutive "esses". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:52, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit summaries

No big deal but ... Regarding, for example, [1] and [2] - It makes like easier for others when you use the edit summary field. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk)

En dash changed to en dash template

Hi, I noticed you did this here. I wonder why the en dash alone was unsatisfactory, and request that you consider not using the template at all, especially where it becomes asymmetrical with a real space on the right and none on the left. The spacing around the template is something of a problem. It's easy to click on the en dash button under the edit box, or to install the dash script (buzz me if you want it). Thanks. Tony (talk) 11:56, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Martin Staszko

Hello, I see that you wrote Pius Heinz. Could you please add poker data to Martin Staszko? I don't really know much about the game. Thank you. Cimmerian praetor (talk) 10:22, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.