User talk:Tewapack/Archive 10

Evian

Thanks for fixing my mistake on the Evian page. I must not have been thinking straight and left out the recent result. It was late when I did that and probably was too sleepy to be thinking straight. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 22:37, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Irish golfers edits

Hi - You made a few changes to the Christy O'Connor Jnr and Eamonn Darcy, changing {{cite web}} to {{cite news}}. Is there a reason for that? CalzGuy (talk) 09:16, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cite news is more appropriate for newspapers. Tewapack (talk) 17:05, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
But these were websites. I'm not sure if they were ever published in print. I certainly never saw the printed copy. Did you? CalzGuy (talk) 10:18, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Cite news is still the template to use, see the first example in the template documentation. Tewapack (talk) 14:47, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Eddie Loos

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Otto Hackbarth

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for fixing that mistake of mine on the St Andrews page. I had done a copy and paste from the women and forgot to modify it for the seniors. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 23:18, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Weir

It looks like you and I are reading the same article about Mikey today! Thanks for updating his details. PKT(alk) 18:09, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Willie Ogg has been nominated for Did You Know

Orville Moody and Deane Beman

I edited out the bit about he and Lee Trevino when Trevino was supposedly in the Marine Corps. The source[1] is wrong. Trevino had left the MC long before 1966. (His article says 1960) He was working at a golf course by then and competed in the 1966 US Open....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 16:39, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

One other thing. I added the category 'People from Bethesda, Maryland' to Deane Beman's article. According to multiple reliable sources, here is just one[2], Beman is from Bethesda, Maryland....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:01, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

George Archer and 94 putts

I put it in a few years back that he took 94 putts and had a reliable source for it. Somebody came along and changed it to 95 though the IC says 94.

I've changed the article again back to 94 and put in a mention of Kenny Knox breaking the record in 1989 with a reference saying just that. The reference is a 1989 news article. So we have a 1980 news article and a 1989 news article saying it was 94. I have a 1988 PGA Tour Media Guide book and a 1994 one that also says 94.

That said the PGA Tour's record book today says Archer's total putts in 1980 was 95 not 94....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 23:18, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Willie Ogg

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted edits

Not sure why you reverted my edits to Tiger Woods and Jordan Niebrugge. Sure, the Masters isn't over, but if they didn't play this year, they didn't play. DragonflyDC (talk) 03:04, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And if they never play again there will be and endless string of DNPs. Tewapack (talk) 03:17, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rocco Mediate

I removed the Sportspeople from Pittsburgh Pennsylvania. He is from a Pittsburgh suburb but that doesn't make him from Pittsburgh. The 'People from Pittsburgh' category was originally added here[3] and its based on his being from a Pittsburgh suburb. People categories aren't categorized that way....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:17, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

PGA match play finishes translating into 3rd, top-5, top-10 finishes

I have noticed that there is inconsistent treatment of how finishes in the PGA Championship during the match play era are counted in players' major summary tables. Winning, obviously, is a 1st place. Losing in the finals, obviously, is a 2nd place. But after that it gets a little tricky.

In some golfers' major summary tables, losing in the semi-finals (SF) is counted as a 3rd-place finish. This makes sense and I think it is probably the best way to go. But this treatment is not uniform. In some golfers' major summary tables, losing in the quarter-finals (QF) is counted as a top-5 finish. This makes sense and I think it is probably the best way to go. But this treatment is not uniform. In many golfers' major summary tables, losing in the round of 16 (R16) is counted as a top-10 finish. This makes sense and I think it is probably the best way to go. As far as I can tell, this treatment is uniform.

For a mix of different treatments, see Sam Snead, Byron Nelson, Claude Harmon, Tommy Bolt, Jackie Burke, Cary Middlecoff, Jerry Barber, et al. I believe 1957, the last match play year, was the only year in which ties were played off in consolation matches. So the questions above pertain to the years prior to 1957.

I would be happy to review all wiki-golfers and apply a consistent treatment on this issue, but before doing so I want to make sure that there is agreement on what the proper treatment is!

Thanks much.

Whosnext23 (talk) 18:35, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Losing in SF is the same as T3, losing in QF is the same as T5, losing in the round of 16 (R16) is the same as T9 - if they aren't being counted that way then they should be. In general, the summary tables were added after the results tables were added, so inaccuracies may be present and need to be corrected. I remember correcting the summary table footers that list consecutive cuts made and consecutive top-10s because the majors weren't always played in the same order as currently. Tewapack (talk) 19:10, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the prompt response. With that information, I will review/modify wiki-golfers on that issue. Whosnext23 (talk) 21:27, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have completed my review of the major summary tables of the significant golfers who played during the match play era of the PGA Championship. A handful of modifications were required in order to be consistent with the treatment you outlined above. During the review a few prior errors were uncovered and fixed as well, including the major summary table for Henry Picard. The tally of the top-25's was off by one -- unless I am completely missing something, it seems as if Picard's finish in the 1960 PGA of a tie for 32nd after the event went to stroke play was counted as a top 25. Maybe I am miscounting.

Could you review Picard one more time in light of the above? Thanks much. Whosnext23 (talk) 05:46, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're correct. I've reverted my edit. Tewapack (talk) 14:56, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Improper revert

You reverted my edit for the Quicken_Loans_National without the courtesy of an explanation. The Masters is in fact one of the PGA Tour invitational tournaments and is recognized as such. I have undone the revert. J M Rice (talk) 04:47, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) The underlying problem here is that the entire paragraph is unsourced and always has been. This paragraph, and virtually identical ones on four other articles, were added six years ago by an IP. So now it's time to look in the Tournament Regulations. The relevant section (page 97) states:
  • I. DEFINITIONS
  • A. "PGA TOUR (Regular TOUR)" tournament means any tournament for which the eligible players are as described in Article III, Section A of these Regulations.
  • B. A "cosponsored" tournament is a golf competition for which PGA TOUR contracts with a cosponsor. The respective responsibilities of PGA TOUR and the cosponsor with respect to such a tournament shall be as set forth in the Tournament Agreement for such tournament.
  • C. An "approved" tournament is a golf competition endorsed by PGA TOUR but for which PGA TOUR has no contract with the tournament’s sponsor (Masters Tournament, U.S. Open, The Open Championship, PGA Championship, The Presidents Cup, Ryder Cup and Olympic Games).
  • D. An "open tournament" is a cosponsored tournament for which all players eligible under these Regulations may apply to enter.
  • E. An "invitation tournament" is a cosponsored tournament whose participants are invited by the cosponsor in accordance with categories set forth in the Tournament Agreement with PGA TOUR.
  • F. A "coordinated" tournament is a PGA TOUR-sanctioned tournament for which a Tournament Agreement exists, but for which (due to field size, time of season or other such special circumstance) the purse is not considered official money, and for which a conflicting event release is not required.
  • G. "Exempt" (e.g., an "exempt player") means automatically eligible to compete in particular tournaments without any additional (i.e., tournament-by-tournament) qualifying, subject to the availability of space in the field and to these Regulations.
So majors are approved tournaments, and thus are neither open tournaments nor invitation tournaments. Now it is definitely wrong to say that there are only five invitation tournaments, as 26 cosponsored events are listed in the "Player Elgibility: Invitation & Special Events" section. In addition to the five mentioned in the article, these include the four WGCs, the four playoff events, the Players Championship, the Tournament of Champions, the CIMB Classic, the CareerBuilder Challenge, the Pebble Beach Pro-Am, and eight tournaments that have open qualifying but have different numbers of sponsor exemptions. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 14:55, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Golf at the Asian Games

Hi, I see you made changes regarding table wide on "Golf at the Asian Games" articles. Even though I understand your reason for that but I hope you don't mind if I add them back to the articles, only because of consistency between all Asian Games pages. Thanks in advance. Mohsen1248 (talk) 17:43, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reason for artificial widths in these tables and no reason that they have to be consistent across the Asian Games articles. Tewapack (talk) 17:46, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Why? I think they look better with that. why not making it a bit wider when we have enough wide for that ? I really worked hard for all those AG articles to look consistent and similar, I won't revert your edits if you are disagree but I hope you let me keep this one similar to others. Mohsen1248 (talk) 17:55, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The added width just takes up extra real estate for no reason. I think they look much worse with the extra width. Tewapack (talk) 17:57, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
How much "extra real estate" it takes seriously ? I doubt you even interested in those pages. Mohsen1248 (talk) 18:27, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It more than doubles the width of the column in articles like Golf at the 1982 Asian Games - all that extra white-space looks terrible. If I wasn't interested in the article, then it wouldn't be on my watch list. Tewapack (talk) 18:37, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Even if they are doubles the width, what's the problem ? it's not like we lack space in that page or others, to me it looks ugly that the "Nation" section has almost the same width as Gold/Silver/Bronze section. There are so many levels of interest, I'm quite sure you are not "very" interested in them as you rarely edited them. Mohsen1248 (talk) 18:59, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, I was waiting for your answer, does "no answer" mean you won't complain if I edit the pages ? Mohsen1248 (talk) 12:16, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've already stated what I feel the problem is - too much white space in the tables makes them look terrible. Maybe it's time to find other's opinion on the topic. Tewapack (talk) 14:36, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder why you are so stubborn in this, even in first place I didn't think this could be an issue. now I see you randomly changed more pages and not even all of them, (4 more pages left in case you enjoy doing this) just shows you don't really care about those Asian Games articles. since I spent so much time on all AG articles (finding results, correcting names etc) I like to keep them similar to each other, there is no rule about having or not having width in sport articles so both ways are correct so I sincerely ask you to let me keeping those pages the way they were. Mohsen1248 (talk) 19:44, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the effort you've put into these articles, but you don't WP:OWN them. I feel that I'm making improvements to the visual presentation of the articles. (BTW I know about the 4 articles I haven't edited yet, I'll get to them.) Tewapack (talk) 02:00, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I never claimed I own any article here, that was a request, OK I will revert all of them back to the way they were whenever I have time for that, if you feel you don't like it you can ask for other's opinion, which I will respect. Mohsen1248 (talk) 09:59, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re Jiménez

I think it makes sense to remove Jiménez from the list of withdrawn players, since he wouldn't qualify anyway. If we're including him, there's also Tim Wilkinson and Andy Sullivan. In the end, wouldn't it make sense just to list players that actually passed up spots? pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 04:42, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think it makes sense to include anyone who withdrew their name from consideration - it gives a fuller picture. Tewapack (talk) 01:14, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

important question

Why was there a red link for "List of ..." on the main Olympic golf page? It had been there for some time, and I filled in the page because I had to assume that someone wanted it made?

User:Sander.v.Ginkel created the link to this article and other similar articles and a template {{Competitors at the 2016 Summer Olympics}}. They may or may not be a good idea - I find few similar articles for previous Olympics. But there is certainly no need to duplicate the qualification article. Tewapack (talk) 21:24, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Tewapack: I created them because I like the lists like List of cyclists at the 2012 Summer Olympics. They may even be expanded with some other info like it's for the person their 1st, 2nd, 3rd Olympics etc. I created a structure for it for the 2016 Olympics, so it's easy for people to start creating articles like this. During the Olympics people are willing to create content, but sometimes don't know what to do. Let's keep the links there for several months. It's always easier to delete content and structures than to create them. Sander.v.Ginkel (Talk) 11:40, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Recent reversion question

Hi Tewapack,

I see that you reverted my recent edit on the Bernd Wiesberger article. Since there was no explanation, for my own edification, could you please share some insight as to why? Was there an obvious cue that I missed? The reference in question does indeed point to a Times of India webpage. I saw no indication of its having been copied or licensed from elsewhere, in which case I would have credited it appropriately. Apart from that, before making the edit, I thought it odd that a reference about an event on the Asian Tour would nonetheless be credited to the European Tour, which inspired me to click on the ref in the first place.

Thanks! :)

1980fast (talk) 21:26, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake - I've fixzed the ref and others on the page. Tewapack (talk) 23:14, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Phew! Thanks :) I'm glad to know I didn't miss something. Have a good one! :) 1980fast (talk) 02:12, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Question about the scoreboard grid on the Olympic golf pages

I noticed that the lone scoring grid is set to handle all four days' worth of scores, as opposed to having four separate grids for the four days.
To keep matters from getting complicated when we enter the scores as they come in, do you think it would be a good idea to keep the lines of the grid intact, instead of using the "rowspan" feature? Because, if we were to use that rowspan feature on a grid that large and over a four day span of time, it could get complicated to continuously update the grid with scores if we are constantly changing the rowspan business. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 22:58, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We would still be rearranging the order of the names as the scores come in as we normally would, the only difference being that we wouldn't be using rowspan this time. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 23:13, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Since we're doing the whole field, not just the top-10, using rowspan won't work except for the final score. Tewapack (talk) 23:49, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Height/weight usage

What are you playing at? Following your edit, had a quick scan of edit history on Rory McIlroy's page and noticed it was you (again) who changed his weight and height measurements to cm and kg. and your reasoning: "per ET profile". Yeah, which gives his measurements in feet/inches and stone first, followed by cm and kg in brackets which was then reflected in the page. So you have either deliberately misrepresented the source, or you have misread it. On a side note, no idea where you are from, but living less than 25 miles from Holywood if you asked someone from here to give their measurements in cm and kg you would be met with a blank stare. RyanTQuinn (talk) 17:22, 13 August 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Reversion of edit to Bubba Watson

You recently reverted an edit I made to the infobox on Bubba Watson's page, saying "only link top-10". I was wondering if you could clarify what you mean by that as well as provide a link to the appropriate policy/consensus discussion. Thank You. --FactualCollector7d1 (talk) 22:15, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's the standard in golfer infoboxes because generally only the top-10 finishers are listed in the specific year page. Tewapack (talk) 22:17, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Info box

Did you notice that the info box on the men's and women's 2016 Olympic golf pages has been changed, and that it no longer has links to enable people to easily shift back and forth between the men's and women's tournaments? Johnsmith2116 (talk) 20:38, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it changed, but you just have to click on "Show" to get to men's or women's. Tewapack (talk) 20:40, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Somehow I had missed that. Thanks. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 20:42, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for helping on the Paul Peterson article, I had mistakenly left part of a sentence in the introduction that I didn't mean to leave there. I hope no one else saw that. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 16:59, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism help

Hi again, I cant keep turning back the vandalism on the Rio de Janeiro page. One IP editor even said "Undid revision f*ck 735604950 by Johnsmith2116" to me. Maybe a little help? Johnsmith2116 (talk) 22:00, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That user won't stop. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 22:06, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lee Kyoung-hoon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Choi Jin-ho. 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) 09:37, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 22 September

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox picture

Do you think it makes sense to have a photo of a winner with a trophy in the infobox of a tournament? (see Qatar Masters) pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 23:34, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd move it out of the infobox and into the body of the article. Save the infobox for tourney logo. Tewapack (talk) 00:55, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Northern Trust Open

As Northern Trust is no longer the title sponsor, the page will need to be moved soon. I'm considering requesting a move to Los Angeles Open rather than Genesis Open. Although "Los Angeles" has not been in the tournament name since 1994, it was part of the name for the event's first 68 years; and giving the article an unpsonsored name would render future moves unnecessary. Thoughts? pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 16:28, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd support a move to "Los Angeles Open". Tewapack (talk) 17:53, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Shanshan Feng

I'm not sure what her win tally is supposed to be. Either the previous entry on her page was correct, or an IP user keeps changing it unneededly. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 12:45, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A simple count shows 19 is correct (one co-sanctioned tournament is listed twice). Tewapack (talk) 15:15, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. .. Also, I didn't mean to put the message on the user page, I meant to put it here. I was sleepy when I did it and didn't notice. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 21:53, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I did count the number of wins last night, and I thought it was 19 as well. But, after that IP user kept coming in and changing it, I didn't know whether the tally may have been wrong all along. But, I see now that the IP user has since gone in and changed it back to 19. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 21:58, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Diamond Resorts Invitational

Is the Diamond Resorts Invitational going to be on the Champions Tour, do you know? An editor came along and took it off of the 2017 page. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 03:34, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know its status. It is listed here but may be an unofficial event. Tewapack (talk) 03:44, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I restored it. Not only does the event show on the website, but the editor who took it out has done little on a 10 year account, and nothing related to golf. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 20:47, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]