However, both the logo and uniforms were radically altered in 1996. The primary Kelly green color was changed to a darker shade, officially described as "midnight green"; silver was practically abandoned, as uniform pants moved to either white or the aforementioned midnight green; and the traditional helmet wings were changed to a primarily white color, with silver and black accents. The team's logo combination—the stylized eagle and club name lettering—also changed in 1996, with the eagle itself limited to a white (bald eagle) head, drawn in a less realistic, more cartoon-based style, and the lettering changing from calligraphic to block letters.
Considering that the Eagles have an all green jersey and an all black jersey and silver is only an accent color, black, not silver should take precedence in their navbox. Commandr Cody (talk) 01:14, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree, and I think you'll find most will too. The black jerseys are alternates and are never found with a heavy dose of green. That's why your color scheme looked so bad.►Chris NelsonHolla!01:16, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've already been through this with someone else. Yes, I NOT the best at writing summaries. It just seems like everyone after me when I write these articles. What is wrong with telling people how the scores came to be? It's like my articles gives everyone the middle finger just for existing!
--Alakazam
Chrisjnelson, are you still having issues with Alakazam? Because I am. He keeps writing game summaries for several 2009 NFL teams which are subpar. They lack an encyclopedic tone, contain slang, and have duplicate wikilinks. On top of that, most of his summaries contain the exact same idiomatic phrases from other summaries. I don't mind if you do or not, but I've started yet another section on his talk page about his lack of respect for writing guidelines, if you want to chime in.
Thanks for uploading File:Geoff Pope.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --aktsu(t / c)01:05, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, sorry for templateing but I assumed you wasn't aware of the above since none of you images have evidence of permission. Another thing that could be a problem here is that is's not enough that "[person] has given me permission to upload to Wikipedia". The copyright holder needs to explicitly agree to license the image under one of our acceptable free-licenses, not just agree to it being uploaded here. Cheers, --aktsu(t / c)01:10, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've asked Moonriddengirl to chime in to make sure, but to my understanding we need a statement from the copyright holder or a notice on the website where the images appear or similar to be able to use them. Sorry :/ --aktsu(t / c)02:34, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is correct. I'm afraid that verbal permission or facebook chats directed to you are not sufficient. We need a legally usable licensing statement from the copyright holder either at the source of original publication or an e-mail from a clearly associated address to the Wikimedia Foundation. Steps for requesting these, including a link to a boilerplate release form, can be found at Wikipedia:Permission. --Moonriddengirl(talk)19:13, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tagging
Just to let you know, I've tagged the images that I've found that are a concern. If you can't get verification before the usual time passes, please don't worry about it too much. The images are likely to be deleted, but will be restored when the verification process completes. That said, I'm a bit concerned about File:Travis Williams.jpg. Unless Travis Williams was using a tripod, he seems unlikely to be the photographer, and the copyright ownership is almost always with the photographer, not the subject. This is true of a number of images below.
For your convenience, images tagged as needing verification of permission include:
I agree with the decision to tag because ignoringWP:AGF because of copyright concerns is the correct move IMO. And Chris, why can't you just have them e-mail OTRS. If I have it correct, the e-mail is: info-en@wikimedia.org --Giants27(c|s) 19:30, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But I do want to add that it's not so much about ignoring AGF. It's just the procedure. I'm a member of the team that answers those letters, and I would have to go through the process, too, if permission was given to me. :) But while the e-mail address is above is correct for many contact situation, contact for permissions is permissions-en@wikimedia.org. You should read over WP:Permission still, though, because if the permission is not properly worded, it still won't be accepted, and it can be a total pain going back and forth until the wording is right. --Moonriddengirl(talk)19:36, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Akili Smith
Do you have a source for his retirement or are you just assuming since he hasn't played in two years and probably never will again?--Giants27(c|s) 12:59, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So what do you think of Cobbs being out for the year with a torn ACL? Big blow to the all mighty Dolphins or will Lex Hilliard follow through?
Stealthninja545 (talk) 05:46, 15 October 2009 (UTC)Stealthninja545[reply]
I don't think it's a big blow at all. He's likable because he's versatile and a hard worker, but he's not a huge contributor on offense. He's carried the ball six times and caught three passes so far this year. The offense runs without him. The real loss is on special teams, but that unit's never really been good anyway.►Chris NelsonHolla!13:32, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ryan Baker's number is number 90 not 79.
Chris,
Ryan Baker wears #90 during practice, and indeed this is his number. I confirmed with Ryan himself that this is his current number.
Yeah, but we don't know that. Seems like you might be a family member. We need some sort of source to make your allegation true. So tell us one and if it is true, then you can change his number. Ositadinma05:57, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on Ryan Durand, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, image description page, image talk page, mediawiki page, mediawiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.
If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your reasoning on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Eagles24/7(C)00:54, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Jairus Byrd
Hi, I'm here to ask you if you can help me improve Jairus Byrd's wiki. I know he's from a rival of the Dolphins but I think is important due to the impact he is making in the league and more important, in the AFC East. --Octa62 (talk) 17:04, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Then don't revert if you aren't going to check something like that. We're not talking blatant vandalism here. Do you really and edit that has someone moving a DT to IR and moving another DT up from the practice squad doesn't have a chance of being accurate? Not to mention, it's been online for hours now. Either check it online or don't revert it, simple as that.►Chris NelsonHolla!23:36, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dolphins Secondary and Ted Ginn and Ronnie Brown
How much of a problem is the Dolphins secondary in!!! You lose your best CB in Will Allen and now you have to trust two ROOKIE Cornerbacks. The one Ill like to trust is Sean Smith because of his height but it looks like Vontae is starting to play really good. I loved that pick versus the Patriots.
Also, you think the Dolphins should try and select Dez Bryant in next years draft? Because Ginn is not going to cut it. I cant believe they had Dwayne Bowe on the board in 2007 but of course they dont choose him. Man Im one frustrated Dolphin fan but Ill always love them.
I also have a concern about Ronnie Brown's ankle injury he suffered versus the Bucs. Looks like he wont be ready for Carolina on Thursday. Thats a big blow for my fantasy team. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stealthninja545 (talk • contribs) 05:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It hurts losing Allen because he's very good, but I also feel the season is pretty much lost and I like both Smith and Davis as prospects, so I'm excited to see their progression even if they'll have their struggles initially.
It wouldn't surprise me to see a receiver high, but Parcells doesn't typically do that. I'd personally like Alabama ILB Rolando McClain if he comes out early.
Yeah, but your white, and to me when a white person says the N word it sounds racist, wether it was sarcastic or not; it's like a black person calling a white person cracker or opposite a porch monkey, and that type of behavior is unexcusable on WP. Ositadinma14:42, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Look, I'm sorry you're not cool enough with the black community to say 'nigga' freely, but that's just how it is. Maybe if you're really nice to them they'll let you in the club one day. Teach you the handshakes and dance moves and everything. But until then, try not to be so bitter.►Chris NelsonHolla!19:03, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The last thing I wanted. For Ronnie Brown to get hurt and be out the rest of the year but also thats what I said when Pennington went down. This is also good for the kids like Hilliard and Pat White to show what they got to show for. Hell, on his 1st career carry in the NFL, Hilliard made a 3rd and 16 conversion. I was also very, VERY impressed on how Ricky played today. He didnt play like he did in his prime in like 03-04 but, Wow he did great! Back to the topic. Is the Wildcat dead? I think its alive but on life support with out Ronnie in the mix.Stealthninja545 (talk) 08:48, 20 November 2009 (UTC)Stealthninja545[reply]
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Pat Murray. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pat Murray. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:07, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't waste anybody's time, nobody is obligated to respond. He's a non-notable player who hasn't played in a game and fails WP:ATHLETE. Sure, it's open to interpretation as to whether simply sitting on the bench in sweatpants makes one "notable", but there is nothing I did in reading WP:ATHLETE that is somehow inaccurate. Grsz1103:02, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
CSD G4 says the article is the same, which it isn't because if you look at the previous version of deletion it had barely any refs. Since then I've added 3 or so and college career section.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 13:41, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tell me how frustrated you are on how the Dolphins played. I just cant believe how they just let Buffalo (of all teams) just run all over them in the 2nd half. Hmm...this sounds familiar. Week 7 all over again??Stealthninja545 (talk) 03:30, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
think we edit conflicted once or twice there, oops. Regardless - think it's right now. Thanks for adding in stats :) StarM21:14, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Some website list it as a birth place. Does that necessarily mean it's his birth place? No, not really, because a lot of websites take "hometowns" and make them birth places and the facts get lost along the way, but it's verifiable and it's better than nothing.►Chris NelsonHolla!03:32, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why did you revert my changes on those Alternative Color Templates for NFL teams? I made those to actually have alternative colors for those teams, because right now, the actual and the alternative colors are the same for a number of teams. --bender235 (talk) 20:24, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Template:NFLAltPrimaryColor. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. --bender235 (talk) 20:35, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But some teams look good with the alternates (Bills, Dolphins, Patriots, etc.). The Saints looks weird with Black on gold and then gold on white. It's not very consistent.►Chris NelsonHolla!03:13, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
