|
User talk:Tewapack/Archive 2
J.B. Holmes undoWhat are u doing with the J.B. y did u change that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.128.57.8 (talk) 05:39, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Happy 2008 from Fgf2007 || About AccentureOriginally, I wasn't thinking about a separate records section on the Accenture Match Play page. Many thanks for correcting that particular oversight. Thanx-A-Lot, Frank Fgf2007 (talk) 02:43, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Field Size in Golf Tournament Infobox?I have a friend who just got reshuffled on the Nationwide Tour/Q-School list where he'll most likely only have a chance to get into 156 player fields. I wanted to see the field sizes for the remaining events this year, but am having a very hard time finding this information. Even the tournament home pages seem to lack this. The only place to date I've found this info is on USA Today's fantasy golf tournament articles they publish for each event, such as this one about the Buick: http://fantasygolf.usatoday.com/content/column.asp?sport=GOL&column=195&articleid=29858 Can we add this field to the Golf Tournament Infobox? I think their location is nice, below the purse. P.S. I was referred to you for this question, I assume you have domain over this infobox. I'd be happy to help and populate this field in each tournament page (I believe there are 48 tournaments on the PGA Tour in 2008). Since I'm having a hard time finding this info, I may just do this one tournament at a time when the fantasy golf article is published for each event. Then, by the end of 2008 all tournaments will have this information. --Kentino (talk) 20:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC) Quail Hollow ClubHow did you do that? Where can find more options like that for references? IT'S OVER NINE THOUSAND!!!!! (talk) 02:09, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
T for ties in majors for golfI was thinking it looked better not to put the T's in the round updates for the 2004 PGA Championship because all the other majors on Wikipedia don't have them. Also when you look at most leaderboards in golf it doesn't put the T's on them. I wanted to ask you before changing it back. Thanks Frank ThomasFirst, I don't think there is a need for all-time rosters. The categories have all the players in them. If the only difference is that the all-time rosters have managers in them, then I think that the all-time rosters should be deleted and managers added to the team categories. Second, I think all living people not just baseball players should have the place of birth in the parenthesis. Once a person dies then I can understand incorporating the place of birth and place of death into the article and the deletion of them in the parenthesis. Also, I would rather the baseball player articles be consistent over adhering to some stupid wikipedia policy. There is no way that the thousands and thousands of baseball player articles will all be changed removing the place of birth and adding it into the article; that will take more time than any person or group is willing to commit to it. Jackal4 (talk) 22:41, 23 April 2008 (UTC) Capitalization et al.The Manual of Style is about Wikipedia style, and I do not dispute that in the article's textual discussion of something (e.g., The Tour Championship), it ought to be rendered in normal capitalization. It is very ambiguous whether the Manual of Style entry you mention applies to our table here per se. Even a casual inspection of the Manual of Style entry makes it plain that it was written with the textual discussions of topics in the encyclopedia in mind; its emphasis is on not unduly calling attention to any one thing (but in the context of a table that's a list of tournament names, some of which are even bolded to emphasize their particular importance, this is not an issue) and avoiding ambiguity in sentence design/construction (which, again, isn't the issue here because of the presentation of the information). I am not content to accept a reference to the MOS in this context as such; it ought to be specifically discussed and addressed in this particular context. MrArticleOne (talk) 05:03, 2 May 2008 (UTC) 2008 US Open PurseDo we have a source that the purse is 7,500,000 and the winning share is 1,350,000? Thanks. Supertigerman (talk) 21:23, 16 June 2008 (UTC) Why no flag?Golf is about competitors from all different countries. All we heard about at the Masters this year was the South African connection between Immelman and Gary Player. --BurpTheBaby (Talk) 21:59, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
HeyThanks for you help on the 2004 Masters Tournament page. Always good to have a copy-editor! Even though I'm a Tiger fan, the 2004 Masters was one of my favorites. So much fun it was. Also, can you let me know if there are any projects or what not that I can help out with. Or anything else. Thanks again! --FourteenClowns (talk) 21:16, 17 June 2008 (UTC) FlagsDoesn't make sense to have golfers play under flags that were not in existence during their playing days. Why would you have golfers who solely played under the Union of South Africa Flags playing under the new south african flag? Makes no sense to me. The question has obviously come up before, so perhaps you can refer me to the consensus ruling. Benkenobi18 (talk) 23:40, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Mark NicholsThank you for cleaning up the article i made on my dad, and putting another link in it. It really makes it look more professional. I can now make it much bigger and detailed about his career and life. Thank you! Jack667788 (talk) Golfer InfoboxHey Tewapack, using Tiger Woods's as an example here, i'm thinking of changing the professional wins section (and the gridlines had been removed by another editor, which i like).
Pros: For the sake of uniformity, it has 2 columns in the pro wins section. Infobox 2
Pros: The wins are centered in their layout. Need your helpI uploaded several US Open and PGA Championship logos for pages that User:FourteenClowns created. I noticed the newest pages like the 2008 US Open for example have logos and those aren't being challenged. User:Stepshep is going to recommend these for deletion if I don't construct fair rationale charts or whatever they are. They obviously should exist as others do. If you can help me out with a few, I'll be able to go from there. Thanks! --BurpTheBaby (Talk) 05:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Lake Macquarie Amateur A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Lake Macquarie Amateur, 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 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. Mattinbgn\talk 04:56, 10 July 2008 (UTC) Just to explain why I changed the table in this article; contrary to your edit comment, there was a reason. The tables are nicely organized so that each year in the decade is immediately above/below each other, except for the first decade. Changing the first decade to show the same alignment improves the readability of the data and makes it easier for readers to understand it. If I could have found a way to put blanks in the first decade for years 1920-1924, I would have done that. That is the way it would most likely appear in a print-only encyclopedia. It appears that wikitable doesn't allow for that, at least not easily. Cheers. Truthanado (talk) 22:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC) Mark Nichols (golfer)Please see WP:CONTEXT#What generally should not be linked and WP:CONTEXT#Dates.
I'd say this would include England.
Wikilinking dates provides a small benefit to a small proportion of readers but is at best useless and at worst a distraction for the vast majority. Colonies Chris (talk) 23:59, 30 July 2008 (UTC) August 2008
Fed Ex Cup PointsGreetings Tewapack .... We are both frustrated, as are many others - we all want to know the points for all 30 places at the Tour Championship, but the folks running PGATOUR.com are going to keep us guessing right up to tournament week. BTW - If I may ask, what was your source for the complete points breakdown used in the first three playoff events? Thanx-A-Lot, Frank Fgf2007 (talk) 02:38, 4 September 2008 (UTC) Sergio :: Tour Championship PointsGreetings Tewapack ... Sergio Garcia First, thank you for correcting me on Sergio Garcia still being in the Fed Ex Cup Race. That one just sort of slipped by me. Tour Championship Points: 110,000 --- UPDATED 9/26/2008 at 8:50 PM EDT Source of Points Information - Watch the figures as Tour Championship scores change. Then do simple deductive reasoning along with the appropriate math. 1st - 12,500 11th - 3,600 21st - 2,600 2nd - 8,500 12th - 3,500 22nd - 2,500 3rd - 6,000 13th - 3,400 23rd - 2,400 4th - 5,000 14th - 3,300 24th - 2,300 5th - 4,500 15th - 3,200 25th - 2,225 6th - 4,200 16th - 3,100 26th - 2,150 7th - 4,050 17th - 3,000 27th - 2,100 8th - 3,900 18th - 2,900 28th - 2,050 9th - 3,800 19th - 2,800 29th - 2,025 10th - 3,700 20th - 2,700 30th - 2,000 And FYOI (For Your Own Info), feel free to read my Actual and Alternative 2008 Fed Ex Cup Scenarios Thanx-A-Lot, Frank Fgf2007 (talk) 16:51, 8 September 2008 (UTC) Ignacio Garrido1997 ryder cup not 1979. don't change again! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.163.252.120 (talk) 07:12, 24 September 2008 (UTC) Exact Tour Championship Points DeterminedGreetings Tewapack -- Check under Sergio::Tour Championship Points, a couple of posts above this one. Thanx-A-Lot, Frank Fgf2007 (talk) 00:59, 27 September 2008 (UTC) table centringHi, sorry yes the tables do look similar, but for some reason on the main article the digitd were aligned to the left, but I agree this is more practical nice work. Oh and you don't need the USA bit before the flag|USA, as it sorts itself anyway NapHit (talk) 03:51, 9 November 2008 (UTC) NapHit (talk) 03:42, 9 November 2008 (UTC) Template:Years in golfHi Tewapack, I noticed you added 2009 to Template:Years in golf. Thanks for doing this. Question: it's showing up on 2009 in golf but it's not showing up on any of the previous year pages (2008 in golf, 2007 in golf, etc.) even though it's in the template. I'm guessing it has something to do with the coding of the template that I don't understand. Can you explain this to me? thanks again. --Crunch (talk) 23:44, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
