This is an archive of past discussions with User:Eagles247. 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.
Nice work there, with some copyediting and reference adding I think it's bringing it to WP:GAN would make sense. If you'd be willing to collaborate on it, I'd be willing to help you with adding references and such.--Giants27(c|s) 01:36, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
Varies massively. Sometimes it takes a few hours for someone to sign up to review it and sometimes it takes a month. So it varies a lot.--Giants27(c|s) 17:27, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
This user has signed my guestbook and been presented with a barnstar, so sign my guestbook now if you have not yet, NOW!!!--Ezekiel 7:19Le†'s Go Buffalo! (sign)
Chaz Ramirez died 15 years ago, of course you didn't find anything about him in a news update search. Read anything about Social Distortion, the Casbah recording studio, or basically anything related to the 1980s LA punk scene and you'll see this was a legitimate article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MortyForty (talk • contribs) 00:06, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
We won didn't we? Steinbrenner's just willing to spend money, unlike everybody else. Plus, you'd be kidding yourself if you said you wished the Phillies didn't get Sabathia/Burnett/Teixeria.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 19:45, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Eh, I guess so but you guys are bragging to the wrong guy. I only saw the first three games of the World Series this year, due to my vacation, so I couldn't really see Philly's meltdown. Eagles24/7(C)20:16, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
I was going to do what you told that guy who was changing the Cowboys template, and create a 2004 Philly Eagles Super Bowl roster and I edited the wrong page. Sorry Eagles24/7(C)01:07, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Check out the talk page...I'm chatting with the creator now about notability and reliable sources...they seem to want to create a good article. Frmatt (talk) 05:40, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
There can't be 9 players on the practice squad, he (Keith Grennan) is on the IR list unless you can prove otherwise. You cannot base it simply on "team websites are normally wrong".—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.228.183.91 (talk • contribs) 16:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
I'll stop as soon as I see a link with proof. Stick to editing your Eagles.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.228.183.91 (talk • contribs) 15 November 2009
The way you do things here is based on no proof? This does not make sense. I sent you a link showing you that I am correct, if you cannot show me any sort of proof that your argument is correct and mine is false I stand by mine being correct. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.228.183.91 (talk • contribs) 17:33, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Keith Grennan was placed on the Practice Squad/Injured list. The designation (Injured) after his name can be found in the key of List of current NFL team rosters as meaning Practice Squad/Injured. It is important to note that the Practice Squad/Injured list is not the same thing as reserve/injured ("IR"). Therefore, ClevelandBrowns.com's placement of him under there is inaccurate, and your repeated reverting to list Grennan as IR is also inaccurate. Grennan is under a practice squad contract and therefore inherently is not treated the same way as a player under a normal contract (in which case he would go on reserve/injured). Proof for Grennan's placement on PS/I can be found here, which is the only official transaction wire on the internet. Pats1T/C22:43, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
As for there being 9 players on the practice squad (your only comment on Eagles247's talk page), Grennan does not count against the 8-man limit. Sure, we could change the designation on the template to say "8 PS, 1 inactive PS," but that would be confusing. Again, the designation (Injured) does not simply mean Grennan is injured, it means he is on the Practice Squad/Injured list. Pats1T/C22:45, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Great, that's all I wanted was proof. Not sure why it took so long for you to simply show the links.
Hello Eagles247. You've just speedy deleted 2 pages I set up (and it was speedy - within 10 mins!)
The pages were Maternity Worldwide and timmo999/Maternity Worldwide. Maternity Worldwide is a charity that I work for and I was going to start building up a page of info on them. In the Maternity Worldwide page I put a link to the timmo999 page where I'm going to build the page and then transfer it to the main page (so if someone else had the same idea they would know that someone was working on this). In fact, you so speedily deleted my timmo page that I didn't have a chance to put more than the heading titles that I was going to add text to. Am I going about this wrong then? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timmo999 (talk • contribs) 00:42, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Now I'm getting confused - my log now says it was PMDrive1061 who deleted the pages - but if I try to leave a comment on his talk page it says that I can't because it's semi protected and I need to be a registered user! Please help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timmo999 (talk • contribs) 01:00, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
You actually started the article on the wrong page if you wanted to put it on your userspace to work on it without the risk of it being deleted. Try creating the article at User:Timmo999/Maternity Worldwide. Previously, you forgot to include "User:" at the beginning of the page header.
I did not actually delete your article, I just nominated it for speedy deletion (which you can read about here). User:PMDrive1061 is an administrator and therefore has the right to delete articles on Wikipedia. He saw my speedy deletion nomination and agreed that your article was eligible for speedy deletion and deleted it. User:PMDrive1061's talk page has been vandalized so much that another administrator had to protect it. I'll send him a message for you directing him to this thread. Eagles24/7(C)01:05, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, that's the problem with being an admin..someone is always out to clobber your talk page and mine is the frequent target of attacks coordinated offsite. Anyway, Eagles247 pretty much summed up what I was going to say. Sorry about the talk page inconvenience, by the way. PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:12, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
I have declined your speedy deletion tag of Kalapos. Remember, A7 has a narrow scope: individuals, animals, groups/organizations/bands, and web content. It does not apply to articles about names. If you still believe it meets Wikipedia's deletion policies, consider PROD or AfD (I would probably pick AfD since we routinely keep articles about common names - see WP:Anthroponymy). Singularity42 (talk) 05:18, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
I have a feeling this guy is making the info on that page up since it's his last name, but I'll go with AfD on this one. but I won't go any further with it. Eagles24/7(C)21:17, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I know, but I don't think any of those players are notable enough yet. I just want to have a copy in case they get deleted and become notable later. Eagles24/7(C)20:43, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Why did you remove the Prod tags off of Michael Moore (wide receiver) and Ladi Ajiboye. They are not notable enough to have articles and arent top prospects for the draft. Moore is the 59th ranked receiver according to NFLDraftscout.com and is expected to go undrafted[1] and Ladi Ajiboye is only projected to be a late round pick.[2] Not all draft prospects deserve articles yet, just projected first, second, or third rounders. If they improve their stock later on than yeah they deserve articles but not now. I saw you copied them to User:Eagles247/Michael Moore and User:Eagles247/Ladi Ajiboye, you can always just remake them.--Yankees1021:40, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Is there a reason you're reverting my adding the *, which is appropriate given the key below, or are you all just blinding reverting me because you're all pissed off? Grsz1101:56, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
The reason is that typically we don't add the asterisk until they are no longer on that team in case they get added to the active roster at some point during their tenure. And don't be so quick to assume I am "pissed off" at you, because I am not. Thanks, Eagles24/7(C)01:58, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
WP:CRYSTAL. Currently, he isn't on an active roster. If he is added in the next five or six weeks then it certainly can be removed, but right now it is blatantly inaccurate and misleading. Grsz1102:01, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
If stating legitimate issues pisses you off, than that's your problem. I understand if it's "standard procedure" even if I think it's wrong. I'm not pushing the issue. Grsz1102:52, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
You know, he does pass WP:N. The fact he had no pro career is irrelevant, because he was a well-documented and (at times) successful ACC college quarterback who was once projected as a potential NFL first-round pick. All that makes him notable regardless of how his pro career turned out.►Chris NelsonHolla!20:32, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Eagles247. 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.
