Talk to me:

Hello, Rybkovich. You have new messages at Grolltech's talk page.
Message added 17:23, 28 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Choba B CCCP, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Transcription (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:07, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Pappy Waldorf Sculpture.jpeg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 08:05, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited California Golden Bears football, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Big Game. 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) 11:04, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Pappy Waldorf Sculpture.jpeg, which you've attributed to Douglas Van Howd. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for 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-en@wikimedia.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 take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

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-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

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 created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:12, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sfan00, Douglas Van Howd is the creator of the sculpture not the picture. The author of the picture is Franco Folini. The picture is obtained from his Flickr account. There is a creative commons tag in my summary - cc 2.0 There is also the link to the original picture under the |source. In that link the creative commons license is displayed. This was my first upload. Can you please tell me how I can make this a valid upload under the above circumstances? PS here's the flickr link again https://www.flickr.com/photos/livenature/2645262306/in/photolist-52KEjN Rybkovich (talk) 21:34, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

• On the Andy Smith (American football) page, your edit caused an archiveurl error (help). ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man - good to meet you at Wikipedia's 15th. I'm still planning to work out another event, but it could take a bit. Don't be shy if you want a second opinion! II | (t - c) 06:49, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cool man(?). Good to meet you. Are you from Nebraska?:) I'm trying to connect the handles to the people I met. I see you are member of the agriculture project. Rybkovich (talk) 16:38, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@ImperfectlyInformed Did I get it wrong? You are someone else? Rybkovich (talk) 20:06, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well done. Let's fill out the legacy section, if there be any seriousness to the scholarship on who invented what in american football. Cake (talk) 19:58, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

By legacy do you mean a brief sentence next to each name/reference on the warner page? I can do that. Re "who invented what" is a little over my head (mostly, not everything) because I am still a newbie to football strategies in general and in their history. I just found a brief description of some strategies that Warner contributed during his Pitt years, can you please put in anything useful from it? I don't mean just into the pop warner section but useful in other articles also. I took and put up photos of the two section https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B08K24OTlaU4X09mc1ctYmJxclU https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B08K24OTlaU4XzB4dGdYQ0FhRDA Rybkovich (talk) 20:59, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also on a different topic I have a problem with how to do book references. When I use the took through the new editor, the first citation is fine. But when I go back to the same book and change the page then the page changes on all of the previous references as well. I looked at source code and I still cannot figure it out. Thanks for all the help. Rybkovich (talk) 21:14, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I meant both the innovations and the coaching tree. Not even sure if I use the "new editor." I will take a closer look at that and your sources more in the evening - looks like a solid source on the coaching tree. One thing I remember from my studies, it seems many claim Amos Stagg invented the reverse, but that he invented the end-around, and Warner gets credited with the "naked" reverse. Cake (talk) 14:15, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you are copying and pasting the superscript in visual editor, and then changing the pages, then that would make sense. Is that what you mean? Cake (talk) 19:23, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When I use visual editor and click on cite and then the previously used source and then change the page, then the pages on previous uses of the source also switch to the new page. I will use your format in the source edits. What's the name of the format and how do I look it up via search? I want to look it up so I can see all the options. Thanks man Rybkovich (talk) 19:41, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ok then. Yeah, you don't want to merely copy-paste them, which I believe is what "re-use" does. When you do that, you are making or moving a <ref name> tag. I do seem to recall a way to use it for different pages, but my lack of use of it recently has me forget. If I can recall I will head back to this page. As to the last point, I suppose you are looking for Template:Cite book? Cake (talk) 19:51, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure whether you want to expand the Temple or return to Cornell sections, but the rest is such that once you are done I would send it to the Guild of copy editors to get it looking really nice. You did well to include the innovative plays, formations, and such in the article prose. Sometimes that is most difficult. Cake (talk) 19:03, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to put in a quick Temple section and some Pop Warner org info. Lets plan on me finishing be end of next week or sooner or later :) Rybkovich (talk) 05:01, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Any mention of the Guyons in your Warner studies? I just got 1917 Georgia Tech to GA. "Wahoo" is something of an enigma, and Joe was the greatest Indian this side of Thorpe. Cake (talk) 13:09, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I also cleaned up Andy Smith. Try not to reference blogs. I have done it myself in the past, and some are better than others, but legitimately or not it comes off as sourcing a wordpress, and even if it were to speak the truth it would be like an encyclopedia sourcing another encyclopedia. I did my best to find sources for all the claims referenced. Owsley Manier is a great figure in southern lore; so do tell if you ever happen upon more about Manier and Smith crossing paths on that 1908 team. Cheers. Cake (talk) 02:01, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree/disagree with you re blogs. Did you take out important info cited to the http://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/2011/7/5/2206105/cals-greatest-football-coaches-1-andy-smith that blog had an list of book references below? The "encyclopedia citing another encyclopedia" can be a complex issue, especially if the cited work has hard to find otherwise details. An author's publishing in a "blog" does not necessarily take away the validity of his/her work. But yeah its complex. Im sure there has been a long discussion of this in the wiki community. The californiagoldenblogs piece was very well done one could see that allot of work was put into it, not just something posted overnight. So I may have an issue if something really informative that relied on that post that but was deleted. Rybkovich (talk) 17:53, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to find other sources for each claim you got from it. I don't think I missed anything. I once tried to source Patrick Garbin's blogs, which has some of the same information in his books, but not behind a paywall, and was told to stop that. Not trying to take a stance on the issue; just that you are less likely to butt heads with wikipedia editors if you can find where some blog got it from. Cake (talk) 02:44, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry on the Temple section, earlier I said that it would probably be ready by this time. I got sucked into doing other stuff on wikimedia commons and will switch to Pop as soon as I am done there. I absolutely know that your not taking stances. As always thanks for the tutoring. Rybkovich (talk) 22:40, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Take your time. Looks like Kansas State has a rich football history with Bachman, McMillin, and Waldorf. Feel free to add your Warner wisdom to any of his linked inventions - many pages on the game as such are lacking. Cake (talk) 19:33, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Im done with my Warner input sorry about all the edits coming your way. Also this link is to two Powers' book pages where important stuff is over my head - 5 yard rule and center passing https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B08K24OTlaU4UDBRU3ZXekEwUkU&usp=sharing

The 5-yard rule does look like it requires some further reading (there were a lot of odd passing rules in those old days). The pass from center is interesting. It seems to say he preferred an end-over-end snap from center when one was in the (in today's parlance) shotgun. Germany Schulz is said to invent the spiral snap from center, and Pa Corbin gives a great description of how one used to snap the football without even using his hands. Cake (talk) 05:04, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@MisterCake: Long time no talk edit, did you get a chance to send it to the editor's guild? Rybkovich (talk) 05:48, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, it's in queue. Cake (talk) 13:31, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, I'm looking forward to the result. Rybkovich (talk) 01:52, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It should be at the top of the list soon. Did Reynolds Tichenor get any mention in your study of Pop at Georgia? Cake (talk) 13:18, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I looked over everything and it seems like both Tichenor transfered to Georgia and Gammon's death happened in 1897 the year after Warner was at Georgia. If this is correct Tichenor did not play under Warner. Also if this is true, I think that I should edit Warner's Georgia section to make it clearer that Gammon died when Warner was no longer coaching Georgia. What's your take on this? Rybkovich (talk) 19:30, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The last point seems a good idea. Also, you're right, Tichenor never played under Warner. However, he played for Auburn both years Georgia had Warner, and played against him. The Auburn-Georgia game is known as the "Deep South's Oldest Rivalry" and Tichenor was a big figure in the south. Thought there might be a story there. Gammon died while on defense against Virginia in 1897, when Tichenor was Georgia's quarterback, and it rocked southern football. The year before, Gammon was the quarterback leading Warner's Dawgs to their first SIAA title. That's why I felt he needed mention somewhere in the article. Cake (talk) 07:10, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pop's article could use some mention of his time at Pitt from 1920 to 1923. Cake (talk) 23:38, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK will look at it tomorrow and will also do the changes we discussed above. Rybkovich (talk) 00:37, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Other little things to consider are a mention of Tom Davies in the article's body, and sourcing something from Danzig so it need not have an (IMO) superfluous "further reading" section. Cake (talk) 10:01, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well done on the Georgia additions. Aside from breaking our hearts in 1918 (we'll pretend that didn't happen), it's Warner's contribution to southern football. Do you tend not to use definite articles because your name betrays a Roosky? Cake (talk) 03:24, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I took some stuff from THE Pittsburgh Panthers football article :) Will finish it up by trying to find a source for the Stanford transition facts. And also re Andy Kerr being the transfer coach. I think I put in the the when I speak but not as often when I type (but maybe not i may be missing the the just as much when I talk). I left when the CCCP collapsed and was around 10. Classical music wise I would rather be a german https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1zsSaLiD7Q Rybkovich (talk) 22:33, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For my taste Beethoven is higher than even Tchaikovsky or Wagner, with nobody left above him. I hope I did not add too many pictures of Pop. I wish I could feel confident about the date of him in stripes and crouching. Getty says 1900 but that's hard to buy with his aged face. One could imagine the stripes in Stanford red. Cake (talk) 00:10, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Its looking good :) Do you think it is good enough for an A status? If not, how do you think we can improve it? If it gets an A who do we ask to get it featured? Rybkovich (talk) 21:47, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just put it in the "Good Article" queue. I am not sure how to get it above that level yet, but I agree it looks good. Just recently finished some work on 1920 Georgia Tech, one of Warner's underrated victories. Cake (talk) 23:02, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thats great. Have been taking a break, hopefully will get the will to get back into it. I do have a duty to finish Pappy Waldorf.Rybkovich (talk) 18:04, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Check out McCracken. Cake (talk) 23:41, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@MisterCake: Cool. Just looked him up, in 1926 he led Lafayette to be without a loss and be crowned as a national champion by Parke H. Davis same years as Pop's Stanford was also undefeated and also crowned as a national champion. That may be big enough to put it the main text or put it into a cited note somewhere in the 1926 paragraph or in a 1918 paragraph (when Mccracken was at pittsburgh). Whats your take? I'd say put it in main text of Standford's 1926 paragraph. Rybkovich (talk) 00:37, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good point. Worth the main text to me. Herb was also there in 1920. I wish I knew more about Charley Moran's connection to Warner. IMO the college hall of fame's biggest oversight. Cake (talk) 00:59, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You might find this of interest too. Cake (talk) 01:10, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@MisterCake: PS an FYI re McCracken http://library.la84.org/SportsLibrary/CFHSN/CFHSNv09/CFHSNv09n2g.pdf gonna put some of that info into his article right now Rybkovich (talk) 01:14, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@MisterCake: [1] states that he was there when Thorpe was there, which is inconsistent with his time in texas right? Plus the encyclopedia also states that when at carlisle he started playing baseball in 1903. I see your problem. Rybkovich (talk) 02:45, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, he was Carlisle's trainer in 1915. Warner and Thorpe, however, would suggest 1908 or something. He used Warner's system and had Tiny Thornhill as his assistant at Centre. Cake (talk) 03:27, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know about Warner's ancestors or his ethnicity? Cake (talk) 18:29, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@MisterCake: No, will try to remember to look into it tomorrow. You want to add it to the article? Rybkovich (talk) 06:27, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly. The treatment of his childhood/etc is awfully short, though I was just curious. Cake (talk) 08:55, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@MisterCake: just found this, see the childhood section Pop Warner: A Life on the Gridiron Rybkovich (talk) 22:05, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant find. He sure looks like his mother. Cake (talk) 22:25, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Eye brow ridge and chin? Rybkovich (talk) 00:20, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, even the eyes and ears. Danzig's book also covers his childhood. Would be nice to compare with Miller if there was an open access version. Cake (talk) 06:08, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My advice is to check your library, if not there you also have a chance to requested from another. Thats what I did with some books for my earlier contributions. Rybkovich (talk) 19:35, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I considered interlibrary loan and also used it much more often for my earlier edits. I think all it adds is that he was English, to combat the charge he was an Indian for being so associated with Carlisle. What I can see with snippet view is "...the idea got about that Warner was an Indian. He came from New England stock. His father, William H. Warner, a Civil War veteran, was of English ancestry. On his mother's side, the Scobeys came from...". Must say I cannot remember a GA review taking so long, but it's at the top of the queue. Cake (talk) 20:30, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So, are there paintings out there done by Pop? Cake (talk) 05:00, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We would need to find copies of his paintings (like photos in an art book) that were published either before 1923 or between 1923 and 1977 but not copyright noticed. They would be in the public domain and we would be able to insert them into an article without a copyright violation. PS from the stanfurd daily Rybkovich (talk) 05:54, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I am gonna try and upload this one or this one or find a better one and argue that this qualifies for a wikipedia fair use exception WP:FUC Will be fun! Rybkovich (talk) 06:33, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you have info on it, can you write a section on him also being known as a painter when he was a coach? People knew and talked about it and he had multiple exhibitions. This would make a better argument for there being a need to include one of the paintings in the article. Rybkovich (talk) 06:47, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As shown from the sources (Pope mentions it during his coaching years, not as a child) I had confusion over where to include it. I will think further about what to do. We might need a whole 'personal' type of section. My next reply should be a list of things (possibly) needing citations aside from football season records. Enamored with the source with Zuppke. He was considered the artsy type (compare his quote to Yost about Red Grange). Boxing too might need to be included for Warner. Most sorely lacking perhaps is an elaboration about the 'body block'. Cake (talk) 11:17, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Again, nice work. The blemishes

Things begging for a citation:

• "the famous track coaches of that time. "  Done added sources, removed one coach from the list. I should write something on the grader article re my changes?
• "defeated Harvard 18 to 15, with Thorpe scoring all of Carlisle's points. "  Done
• "one of the most controversial matches in Pitt's history." Now I see a source
• "was an east-coast transplant."  Done Took out re Adam Smith, added cited re Howard Jones
• "beating Sutherland 7 to 6." Now I see a source

Style/clarity

• "they relied upon speed and agility rather than size and physical force." Has no citation. I assume the next sentence refers to it. If so, might that one be more clearly phrased by starting something like, "In this" or "Due to this"?  Done confident re speed and agility was taken from the same source as next sentence, it was at the beginning of the Carlisle chapter.
• If it can be done without WP:OR, it would be nice to tease out the different roles in the history of the "spiral pass" for Hauser and Mount Pleasant. I see you fixed it, looks great
• Is "robbed by officials" encyclopedic? Honestly posing the question.
• I struggle with how to handle the rivalry with Jones, and whether to include it in a note or in the body. You've done fine but might be worth some copyediting.
• Same for the Palo Alto trip and Kerr.

Content

• One might argue anything included in the list of innovations ought to have mention in the article. That argument certainly holds water for the infobox.
• The double wing seems the biggest one. Wish for a sentence more on that.

That's it for what I come across. All your help is appreciated. Cake (talk) 12:03, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

PS and lastly, I've trouble with the paragraph including Tichenor and Gammon. Hard to see where the line is for WP:Cruft with all of Warner's connections. Tichenor uses the hidden ball trick on Vandy, but still loses the first game in the South decided by a field goal. Then beats Georgia with Pop, shows him the trick, and loses to Pop and Gammon at his best season at UGA. Then Pop leaves, Tichenor transfers to UGA and Gammon dies. How to say all that without including details irrelevant to Warner, yet still manage to say anything at all? I would feel terribly amiss not to mention those 2 QBs. Cake (talk) 12:09, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@MisterCake: Re above.

• Famous track coaches - replace famous with a more objective sounding words? "well recognized and respected" or "influential" or something like that. We should definitely take famous out.

• "Defeated Harvard 18 to 15 - you are right not sure why there is no citation, would make sense if it was from the Powers book.

• "considered to be one" - we can change it to "considered by some to be" or something like that. Conveys info without a being a requirement for a citation.

• " east coast transplant" must be a powers book statement. There should have been a cite at least after the last re trojans statement.

• "beating southerland" there must be an easy to find rose bowl score source. Haven't looked for it right now.
• "speed and agility" Yeah there is an issue there. is the statement based on the fact they relied on speed and agility, or because warner thought that they relied on.. ? I have a feeling that the author of the source meant the first but did not justify it. We would need to check.

• "spiral pass" is there a history of football article/section re this?

• "robbed by official" is something that Warner said, we don't need to justify his statement only cite it. Powers citation for "refused to acknowledge" is re the "robbed by officials" chain of thought, so the "refused to" citation should be enough. We should just bring the powers citation out of the footnote that it is in now.

• I think the palo alto goes in the main text because of the stanford connection and jones goes in main text because of east coast coaches moving west connection.

• My first thought is that a footnote reference to the inventions section is enough. And more info can be provided in that section. We don't want to make the main article too technical right?

Haven't looked at the PS will do so later.

My PS - I think there is a big problem re book citations in our and or other articles. When one clicks on first powers citation of the article one gets only to last name Powers with a page reference right? No info re source. To find that one has to go below and find powers in the books section. It should be that the first citation click goes to a full title, or the full title should be in the first citation. Rybkovich (talk) 17:27, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If harvard citation works it's good - not to say I always get it working. We have a GA review, so I hope you can reply there and keep me from having two bookmarks. A less POV term than "famous" is a good idea, but whatever it is, it seems to beg for a cite, as with the rest. Cake (talk) 17:50, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On Hauser and the spiral. No, not that I see on wikipedia. Looks like you have to pick one of two different passes. The 40-yard pass to Exendine was against Chicago in 1907, but the pass to Gardner against Penn got more press. Cake (talk) 18:22, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@MisterCake: sorry only now did I get whats going on re us being graded :) I will try to make the corrections/comments asap. Rybkovich (talk) 01:13, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Made a few myself off your comments re: e. g. Powers where they are still worth checking up on. Agreed it shouldn't be too technical, but there's nothing about body blocking contra shoulder blocking despite mentioning it under innovations and in the article's body. Adding that and clarifying Hauser would make it nice. Also, the double wing seems his proudest invention, so I thought it might be worth another sentence. Cake (talk) 12:42, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@MisterCake: Its October 4, 10:17 pm pacific, i see you are making edits, after you are done can you please list the issues that you addressed so we are on the same page. Also, I have addressed and green/read marked some of the listed issues in your issue post. Rybkovich (talk) 17:20, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for addressing some of the concerns - looks good. I've been mostly adding citations where they seem needed and trying to clean up the history around Hauser and the Penn game (think I'm finally done with it). My last comment is hoping you will check the Powers book to see if I've got the page numbers right on some of the "Now I see a source" ones. In 1907, Mount Pleasant ran a long TD against Harvard, and Hauser threw a TD pass in both the Penn and Chicago games. I believe to Gardner and Exendine, respectively. In 1910, Hauser was carried off the field by Penn students. Pretty happy with Pop's article at the moment. You might check out Edwin Pope's book as one more source echoing some of the things in e. g. Powers or Miller. Cake (talk) 17:28, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Crazy thing is that I was looking at the same sources and was about to make the same edits re Hauser's chicago pass. Change "robbed" to "thought" to avoid the problem of stating that "robbed" was an exact word that Warner used? I don't see a problem with the "thought" also applying to the reporters. Rybkovich (talk) 17:47, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Robbed works given the "Warner said". Cake (talk) 18:00, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well done! Give you credit for seeing the Miller and Powers biographies were enough for a decent article. If you would like my help in doing a "DYK", I am willing, though am far from an expert. If you wish to branch out at all from this might I suggest the 1916 Pitt and 1907 Carlisle teams, respectively, seem his greatest. and both (especially Pitt) could use work. Cake (talk) 21:01, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also FYI, at least laid a foundation for John Heisman. Cake (talk) 20:34, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The college hall of fame makes it seem like the trap run is something worth looking into for Pop. Cake (talk) 03:04, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@MisterCake: Re trap run - the American football strategy side of it is all you man, over my head (I will totally assist in looking up/finding info if directed). My next move is finishing up Pappy which should be relatively (one never knows) quick. Then a deep deep dive into Paul Broca(I was a cognitive science major). Heisman expansion is a requirement, so I solemnly swear to also dive in to that one following or when talking a break from Broca.Rybkovich (talk) 04:10, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

PS Pop's featured article discussion will be simultaneous on the talk page and here - WP:FAC. Rybkovich (talk) 04:14, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Here is one example - they mention the trap run first. Very neat about Broca - being criticized by Gould only makes me think what he had to say is worth while. Need to read a lot more Wittgenstein, but it is the kind of thing I have an academic interest in even if I don't quite get what e. g. Chomsky is on about. In short, the philosopher of language as well as the cognitive scientist are both mystified by how one acquires knowledge of meaning, instead of feeling like his parents are just shouting nonsense at him. Most days I find the Chinese room argument pretty convincing. Cake (talk) 16:25, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

• On the Sex verification in sports page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Corkythehornetfan. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to User talk:Corkythehornetfan has been undone because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please do not vandalize my talk page again. I will not respond to your request. Corkythehornetfan 23:47, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I concur in dropping the word "desperately" but not the word "extraordinarily". If you read Grodin's book (which is cited in the article on the California Constitution) he explains how it was ridiculously long by 1960 and the California Constitution Revision Commission was created to spend the next decade trying to clean up the thing. --Coolcaesar (talk) 08:29, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Coolcaesar: Great re desperately. Re extraordinarily how about -"though this was later transferred to statutory law during the shortening of the state's constitution that had become extraordinarily long compared to other state's constitutions by the 1960's" Or a better rewrite. Extraordinary is a relative term, thats why I thought there was an issue. Rybkovich (talk) 17:16, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rybkovich, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to University of California has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 00:39, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Draft:UC Santa Cruz Banana Slugs requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://collegestudentforlife.blogspot.ca/2015/03/university-of-california-santa-cruz.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Diannaa (talk) 00:45, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa: Hi, I am moving the entry from the main university section to the athletics page that I am creating. So the info was there before me, and I did not know that it was infringing. I intend to go through it and filter out or rewrite all of the infringing info. When will it be deleted under the speedy deletion protocol? Thank you for letting me know re this issue.Rybkovich (talk) 07:57, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The web page the bot picked up as being a possible source is dated March 2015, and further checking shows that they copied the content from us rather than the other way around. So it's okay from that point of view and won't have to be deleted. Sorry for the false alarm. However, when copying within Wikipedia, you need to say in your edit summary at the new article where you got the material. This is required under the terms of the CC-by-SA license and also would have let me know right away that the bot was wrong in this instance. If the copying is extensive you should also add a {{Copied}} template to the talk page of the source and destination articles. Here is a recent example of how to use the template. The edit summary is the most important thing though. — Diannaa (talk) 12:10, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just logged on to find this edit at the top of the bot report as a copyright violation (copied from here). You cannot add copyright content to this wiki, not even temporarily in draft space. Please save such material online in a text editor, or do your amendments before you hit save. Please re-read the above material "Wikipedia and copyright" and let me know if you have any questions. — Diannaa (talk) 21:01, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa: Thank you. I am ready to resubmit the draft. There already is a reference for the title of the article UC Santa Cruz Banana Slugs it takes one to the athletics section of the universities article University of California, Santa Cruz#Athletics. Should I disconnect that reference before upload or do that after? Also can you please point me to the article that will instruct me on that disconnection. Rybkovich (talk) 03:41, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What we need to do is move the draft into mainspace using the move function. Since the target page already exists, an admin has to do that task, so I have gone ahead and moved it to UC Santa Cruz Banana Slugs after doing one more check for copy vio. For more information on moving pages, please see Wikipedia:Moving a page. I have made some corrections to the {{Copied}} template as you left some incorrect information in there from the sample I gave you, and I placed a copy of that template on the talk page of the source article. I have added a hatnote to the athletics section of the main article and removed most of the athletics content from there. So I think we are done. — Diannaa (talk) 12:38, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa: Hi thanks for all the help. I did some more work, one thing that I cannot figure out is my mistakes in the {{Copied}} template, right now it looks the same as when I wrote it in the draft. Can you please tell what was the problem? Rybkovich (talk) 22:14, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This version still shows " History of St. Augustine, Florida ", copied from my example template. — Diannaa (talk) 22:16, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

• On the Russia at the 2016 Summer Olympics page, your edit caused an unsupported parameter error (help) and an archiveurl error (help). ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

• On the Russia at the 2016 Summer Olympics page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help) and an archiveurl error (help). ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - yes, I tried to use some of the edits that you'd put in; but as you say it seems to make sense. We had already discussed at Talk:Independent Olympic Athletes at the 2016 Summer Olympics that if Kilishina were to not participated, or participate as a Russian, that we'd merge it to the general page. Cheers for the work though! Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 18:49, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

• On the Animal rights page, your edit caused an archiveurl error (help). ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On 15 October 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pop Warner, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that American football coach Pop Warner's only experience with the game in his youth was using an inflated cow's bladder? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pop Warner. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Pop Warner), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you have unintentionally changed someone else's comments in that edit. You should probably turn off your "Drumpfinator" software when editing Wikipedia. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:39, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@WhatamIdoing: . Hi, I undid this unintentional edit immediately after it occurred:

(cur | prev) 09:12, 19 October 2016‎ Rybkovich (talk | contribs)‎ . . (57,483 bytes) (+674)‎ . . (→‎Articles in a series appear to be deleted: new section) :::(undo)

(cur | prev) 09:12, 19 October 2016‎ Rybkovich (talk | contribs)‎ . . (56,809 bytes) (-674)‎ . . (Undid revision 745159834 by Rybkovich (talk) post in wrong section) (undo)

I get the drumpfinator joke but I don't think its that funny. You should probably turn off your drumpfinator jokes postings when editing my talk page. :) Rybkovich (talk) 19:05, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot tell whether you really think WhatamIdoing was joking. She wasn't. Your edit changed "Donald Trump" to "Donald Drumpf", probably unintentionally because Drumpfinator is installed in your browser. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:35, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, how can that occur? I did not make any edits to Donald Drumpf. There are no Rybkovich edits on the Donald Drumpf article. Also how would you know what is installed on some one else's browser? Rybkovich (talk) 19:44, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We are referring to the edit linked on unintentionally changed. View the diff below the "Line 230:" heading. Such edits are usually made by users with Drumpfinator installed. It may happen when you edit any page where Donald Trump is mentioned. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:50, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It also happened in three of your edits to this section. I have tried to protect my posts against your Drumpfinator to reduce confusion. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:55, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Will uninstall it. Rybkovich (talk) 19:58, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rybkovich. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Rybkovich. FAC is quite a bit different from GAN, where you apparently have some experience from your work on this article. Here, a decision on whether or not to promote is not made by a single editor's call; instead, you'll need a consensus of editors that favors promotion, and one of the FAC coordinators (listed in the FAC instructions) will close the FAC. Three editors supporting is frequently the minimum that an article needs, but it can vary depending on whether there are opposers or outstanding issues. Also, the FAC can be archived as unsuccessful if there aren't enough reviews to gauge what the consensus is; since the article has no support right now, it may well be in that territory. Don't panic, though.

My advice is to go out and do a review or two if there's an article at FAC that grabs your interest; the other editor(s) may be more likely to offer you a review in return. If that doesn't work, try asking a regular reviewer for a look; just make sure you don't make it sound like you're asking for support because that comes off as canvassing. WT:FAC has a new thread on the busiest reviewers last month; it can't hurt to ask one of them for a look. Some regular FAC contributors are listed at the FAC mentoring page, where first-time nominators can ask an experienced editor for help in preparing nominations. If this FAC doesn't end in promotion, I'd strongly recommend seeking out a mentor to assist you before a second run at FAC. Many of the editors listed there are great FAC writers, and a newcomer like you is exactly the person that this mentoring program is aimed at. I know this is a lot, but hopefully it helps. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:22, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Giants2008: Thanks so very much it definitely helps. Ill keep you updated on the status of this article. Rybkovich (talk) 20:48, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rybkovich, found your username over at the WP:JSTOR list, where you mentioned you had interest in history-articles and legal-articles. If you have the time and inclination, can you help myself and the WP:AfC reviewer with getting an article into mainspace? The title is at --

• Draft:Goldfinger v. Feintuch

Currently we are able to get a skeleton written with the Time Magazine content, only of 2014 albeit, but don't have access to the full JSTOR and HeinOnline materials which scholar.google.com point to as probably being helpful. If you can give the paywall sources a look-see, and do a couple searches for "goldfinger AND feintuch" in the databases you have access to, then get the article up to stub-class that would be appreciated. If you are otherwise occupied, no worries, please just let me know and I will see if another person with access can assist. Thanks 47.222.203.135 (talk) 19:56, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, is one of your problems that you cannot get to the case that are in your references? Or it is other cases that you cannot get to? Send me the cases that you want to read (or other sources on JSTOR) I'll get them and then send you links to my online storage. Or is that not what you are looking for? Rybkovich (talk) 20:52, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My main problem is lack of true interest in the topic-area. Or possibly it is that I am incorrigibly lazy  ;-)

The reviewer at AfC was asking for somebody to read the refs, which neither they nor I have access to, and give some inline-citations sentence by sentence for the entire stub article, which is a dozen sentences at the moment. Personally, I would rather just get it into mainspace immediately (drafts left untouched in AfC draftspace for six months are usually just deleted outright), where someday a person that has some interest in 1930s union picketing cases will eventually drop in and expand the thing. Are you that person, per chance? If so, please mainspace the draft-article, after verifying that the refs satisfy WP:GOLDENRULE, and then improve at your leisure.

If much like myself, you are ALSO not that person (or perhaps are that sort of person but lack the time right now), that is also okay, I will just trim the article down to a couple of sentences that demonstrate plausible notability -- the TimeMagazine piece specifically says "this NYS supreme court case was notable nationwide" or something very similar, which is almost the ideal soundbite for such an approach. But rather than do that, I was hoping to find a steward for the article, whom wanted to shepherd the content out of AfC and into the start-class category, as opposed to stub-class which is all the motivation I can personally muster. Let me know what your pleasure is, and I'll do what I can from this end to make it happen, or just WP:BEBOLD and start hammering away if you like, that is also fine of course  :-) 47.222.203.135 (talk) 06:33, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would definitely agree with you that its best to be done, but can't make a commitment. Ill sandbox it and you trim it down. I will get back to it when I can. That works? Rybkovich (talk) 19:21, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me. However, rather than trim your sandbox3 version, I just went ahead and trimmed the AfC draft, and then resubmitted. If it gets accepted this time around, perhaps it will attract some interested folks once mainspaced. If it does not, then you have a backup copy in sandbox, so even if the AfC copy withers on the vine, perhaps your sandbox will bloom as time allows. I'll let you know if the draft is moved and/or AfD'd, and appreciate your assistance with this one. 1937 seems like long ago now, but I expect if wikipedia does not manage to mainspace the court-case during 2017, we will probably get to it by 2027  :-) Best, 47.222.203.135 (talk) 00:57, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deal. Another day, another one of my contributions to the community. Lets trade stars for this :) Rybkovich (talk) 07:31, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Heh heh! well my apologies but I don't give out barnstars, I am one of those grumpy old-school WP:DTA types which for me includes even wikilove... although once I *ate* the cookies left by another wikipedian on some unsuspecting newbie-wikipedian's usertalkpage, nothing is so delicious as fresh warm cookied purloined from an unsuspecting beginner..., but I digress. Rybkovich, for thy service to the 'pedia, and that for which it stands, I hereby award you my personal 47.222-approved gold star award. Use your power only for Good!

And, in particular, if you would please help continue to fix the mainspace version of Goldfinger v. Feintuch, that would be much appreciated. I have a user-talkstalker, it would seem, as you can see from the message below. But although the refs are now much improved, they stop at 1953 or something like that (not counting the puff-piece by time.com in 2014 which started this ball rolling). I added a 1980 piece where Goldfinger gets mentioned in a footnote... there has been significant development of the legal and judicial balance betwixt 'freedom of (political) speech' as a guarantee of the right to peaceful secondary boycott, and the slippery slope towards infringing upon 'liberty in (economic) action' when the boycott is found to have coercive intent despite prima facie being peaceful. If you have time to help us amateurs, that might just get you ANOTHER gold star  ;-) 47.222.203.135 (talk) 23:37, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Hiya! The article got trimmed and mainspaced. I have detrimmed it and commenced giving it a good shaking and adding at least the JSTORs as fully identified body references. However, I am most emphatically not a lawyer, so it's likely I'll phrase something badly. Please feel free to take over and/or clobber my wording. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:01, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Sure, I can be a critic!  ;-)
• It^{[which?][Ukor? Blumenthal? Goldfinger?]} was the only producer of kosher meat sold in the city that was not unionized. Members of the Butchers Union, which was whom were? citation needed on that being the intent of the picketers though... awkward either way attempting to unionize the company,^{[which?][Ukor? Blumenthal? Goldfinger?]} picketed Goldfinger's retail store and others selling Ukor's wholesale meat. As besides Goldfinger himself the retail deli had no employees... [Goldfinger is an 'employee' in the self-employed sense so the unqualified phrasing sounds awkward to my ears... also needs pointing out that the union bosses and/or the union members could not possibly have been trying to unionize *the retail deli* since it was so small... they were picking it precisely because it was so small, so as to make an example which would get the other retail-establishments to fall in line, WP:OR strongly suggests... or possibly planning to get the legal precedent set all along? Though that is just guessing obviously and not fit for mainspace, or really for talkspace, so feel free to nix it Rybkovich  :-]
• I would fix some of the changes I complain about above myself... but also am not a specialist and thus would probably screw it up further in a butchered attempt to improve, the uh, article about the butcher... hmmm.... 47.222.203.135 (talk) 23:37, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Damn! This is a legit article with legit sources. Ill read over it again and read the case to see if there are some key things to add. Rybkovich (talk) 03:23, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You mentioned wishing to help with Heisman before. Would say we've got most of the football career covered. If, say, you could add to his acting career and I could gather a sentence or two more about his baseball and basketball exploits, I think we'd have a GA. Cake (talk) 06:33, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Have been out for over a month so still have a que just starting to get back. By next Wed. would work? Rybkovich (talk) 20:00, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Take your time, and thank you. Great additions. The jump shift started in 1905 or 1906 according to Fuzzy Woodruff. I wonder what the zen master had in store at Clemson and Auburn. Cake (talk) 04:38, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like he did not have a kid? Did you read anything re that? Rybkovich (talk) 05:30, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, looks like Carlisle Cox was the closest thing he had to a kid. In Heisman: The Man Behind the Trophy, Carlisle said he was an only child who hated the new dad taking his mom away until he met him . Cake (talk) 11:08, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Should we do a disambiguation page? If so I will do it (never done one before). Rybkovich (talk) 20:52, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I put a link to John Heisman from the Heisman Trophy page. I put it up top below title you can probably put it in better words. Could you translate my english please. Rybkovich (talk) 03:23, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine. Would love to know from what part of Germany the parents came. No Germany until 1871 of course. Cake (talk) 09:58, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Found it in 'behind the trophy - they were Bavarian and protestants apparently. Cake (talk) 10:10, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich: Got Heisman to GA. Would appreciate if you ever go over it some time. Cake (talk) 20:39, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MisterCake: Looks great. Are there specific topics that you think should be looked into? Rybkovich (talk) 21:10, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I had to temper what I said about the postponement of the 1917 Tech-Pitt game to 1918. Couldn't find a source that said Heisman challenged Warner and Warner declined. Woodruff didn't say that, but there must be some reason Tech is usually champion, rather than Pitt (unless you take the view that the 1918 game was the 1917 national championship game). Anything to make the 1906 to 1914 period in Tech football more interesting is probably worth it. I also don't have much to say about Buchtel or Clemson baseball, or Tech baseball for that matter. Also not sure when Heisman stops being affiliated with the Atlanta Crackers. Also, what he was doing in Texas farming tomatoes before Auburn hired him is considered a very difficult part of his history. I could also just use another set of eyes to catch any errors in clarity. Which things to make notes and which to put in the body are always troublesome for me. Cake (talk) 22:12, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"When hired Heisman was raising tomatoes in Texas". LOL You are a poet. You are right that if we going to change this we have to think it through. We can put in a sentence re context (economic depression?). Also he had his own indoor garden or working for someone else? Rybkovich (talk) 06:11, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Prose and poetry were never my strong suit. It is hard to find more than "Riggs found Heisman in Texas raising tomatoes." It was outside, in the heat, and was losing money, so Heisman took the Auburn job. What is the story of how he went out to Texas to raise tomatoes I have not the foggiest. The story of his parents is also bizarre, hence I used "ostensibly" in my characterization of it. His father descended from "Baron von Bogart" who disowned him when he married a half-Alsatian girl named Lehr, and for some reason that made him take the name Heisman. Her grandfather was "the Mater of Knauge". Also, thanks for the help, I much prefer how the Oberlin section looks now. Cake (talk) 18:44, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see that in "Southern football" quote Southern is capitalised. But why capitalise southern outside the quote. It is something specific?

PS Wow Sewanee main page needs to be expanded. I have never heard of this university and it has quite a history. Rybkovich (talk) 23:56, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Consistency is why I capitalized Southern throughout. Also seems like a place name. Sewanee was a powerhouse from 1898 to 1900. Lots of football characters. Diddy Seibels and Henry D. Phillips and Frank Juhan. For the history buffs, Edmund Kirby-Smith and William Stewart Simkins. McGee Field is one of the oldest in the South. Cake (talk) 03:28, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I looked it up and you are correct. We are to capitalize when we use it as a name like for a region, and do not capitalise when we use it as a relation. Rybkovich (talk) 06:27, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, I have to read more Charles Sanders Peirce to see when it would be a relation but not in reference to a region. Glad that it works out though; it looks better all capitalized even though sources are mixed with whether they capitalize it. Wish I knew when the Heisman regime ended for the Atlanta Crackers. Cake (talk) 18:10, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re Fuzzy - does he think J.H. is a pioneer or that he doesn't do anything different from other rivals.Rybkovich (talk) 06:43, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, the latter was talking in response to critics of his ways of attaining success. This shows my frustration in answering what was so other-worldly about Heisman's time at Clemson. Cake (talk) 06:58, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The clemson/GT/TN paragraph is a bit confusing. What is the relationship between the GT and TN games. Also are we also using the TN game to illustrate His ingenuity?Rybkovich (talk) 05:48, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah the bit on the 1902 clemson team might need a revision for the reasons you stated. The relationship is that GT and UT were both victories, and no Douglas's punt against him isn't part of Heisman's ingenuity. Cake (talk) 07:41, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Let's replace one of the portraits with this pic for the play http://www.thewareaglereader.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Screen-shot-2013-05-30-at-12.58.40-PM.png. Also I think we should make the entries less like like a log, dont really see a good reason to have an entry of the 1898 season. Rybkovich (talk) 20:55, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll input the poster into wikimedia.Rybkovich (talk) 21:26, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Should the bit about performing David Garrick go into the 1897 season to fit with the chronology, or go into a separate acting section? Only in the lead has there been any reference to his acting so far if we bring it up in the Auburn section, though I've considered the move several times. The 1898 UNC team seems notable enough and perhaps the only thing to say about the 1898 season in particular. The program for the play is a very neat photo indeed, but I wouldn't want to give up Heisman at Auburn for it. Maybe it can be put as an external link, or in a "gallery" section or if the acting section can be made long enough. Cake (talk) 21:45, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should keep the one sentence in the Auburn section, and bring back the acting section with more detail re play. Since there is info like this: "That professional actor was Heisman, who had been involved with Manhattan’s celebrated Herald Square Theater before coming to Auburn. The play was “David Garrick,” a popular nineteenth-century comedy based on the real life of an eighteenth-century theater maven (who happened to be pals with “Deserted Village” author Oliver Goldsmith). Heisman produced and directed it, as well as starred in the lead role… to rave reviews from the press and from Auburn street name royalty..... Heisman’s thespian tendencies aren’t a secret. Most bio blurbs typically mention his being a Shakespearean-trained actor. He actually left Auburn (with tears in his eyes, voice, and even his “trembling hand”) ostensibly to once again pursue acting full time, but rather quickly traded the stage for the gridiron after Clemson threw a bunch of money at him (he still landed occasional roles in productions across the south). But thanks to Draughon, we now know just how hard he channeled the Bard while on the Plains. Regarding the Shakespearean monologues he regularly gave to Auburn’s literati, the Columbus Enquirer wrote, “As an elocutionist he has few superiors, and he shows… a thorough understanding of Shakespeare and an appreciation of the… beauties of the poet’s writings.” Do you have any sources to confirm this info and the reason he left for Clemson. Rybkovich (talk) 22:18, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The George Tech trick can be tied to him being an actor. We don't need to tie that explicitly but a reader might make such a connection. Rybkovich (talk) 22:20, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also if you (or I) put back in the theater section we can move the poster down there. Or not. A reason for would be that there is no other pic re his acting. We can rename the section theater since he founded the aburn theater group and his acting is theatrical. Rybkovich (talk) 22:27, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's true, one can tie Heisman being a master at the fake with his being an actor. Some good stuff there to revive an actor section, which he probably deserves. One can imagine wishing to get back into acting after playing the Iron Men, but I didn't know about that. "The Man Behind the Trophy" says he started the Heisman Dramatic Stock Company while at Clemson in 1903, which spent much of the summer performing at Riverside Park in Asheville, North Carolina. Cake (talk) 22:37, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Let's keep the Theater work section. He started the Auburt theater club: the details of the fundraiser is TMI for the Auburn football section, but important objectively. Next year he put on "“A Scrap of Paper.” (from that Auburn theater link) also important. Coalescing his theater work in one section is best. Since it was a very significant part of his life (at least to him) and people may be looking for theater info in particular. PS I just ordered the Alabama Heritage Spring 2013 journal that will tell us re his acting career and details on how he actually left Auburn to be an actor not to Clemson :) Rybkovich (talk) 07:05, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's terrific. Woodruff seems to say "I don't know but they offered a lot of money" for why Heisman went to Clemson with his resources in 1928. Glad it is not wholly up to me to recount Heisman's attachment to Shakespeare. I will struggle beyond Othello and Julius Caesar. I didn't even make the connection between Heisman-as-actor and Heisman-as-strategist in the idea of a trick play, or any football "fakes". The War Eagle Reader has some great information but seems like citing a blog as a source. Can't seem to find somewhere else with the full quote of Heisman recalling the 1899 team. Still laughing that Heisman could act as if he were drunk, and was doing an English accent at practice. Cake (talk) 20:17, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re I formation - "if needed the center would snap the ball to one of the other backs" not clear, one of the three backs that would normally shift? Rybkovich (talk) 22:51, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re Heisman Shift I take it, the I formation was just an analogy to get that the backs were lined up vertically. Yeah, apparently the center could snap it to one of the backs which (whom?) had shifted. Using the diagram, the snap did not have to go to the left halfback. Cake (talk) 22:59, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry wrote this up but forgot to press publish changes before I deleted the quote. I am not PC police but the quote re Fetters and lowest class may be inconsiderate. The quote is from a newspaper in the south, reference to leg cuffs is "With respect to humans, shackles are typically used on prisoners and slaves." the pic on that page is of african americans. "Lowest class" is likely a reference to african americans, when used in Atlanta. Rybkovich (talk) 23:15, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re his argument for forward pass being safer. What was his argument? Could be a good quote. Rybkovich (talk) 23:32, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, that might be a concern but I didn't even consider it. I didn't take talk of fetters to necessarily reference the Confederacy from fifty years before, though I wouldn't say that itself means it needs removal either. I took it as just some literary flourish in describing how bad Tech football was before Heisman that need not reference any race in particular, like Rousseau's "Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains". I don't think any blacks played for Tech from 1894 to 1903, when they were stuck in the fetters of the lowest class of football, and don't think any blacks were still in fetters for that to be the analogy, though I suppose it could be.

Yeah, there's no proof. Actually leaving it in there may be good a good FYI for the wiki reader, meaning thats what was said, what do you think it meant?

He had been pushing for the pass for several years, so it may be possible to quote him. Though I don't think the argument was that complex. Catching a ball is less dangerous than running through a gauntlet. There was an attempt from several people to reduce "mass play". I think the pass article covers some of it. Cake (talk) 23:50, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll come up with a quick description. there is one in the belitnikoff link. Rybkovich (talk) 00:04, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Guess I was thinking of the shackles of say Plato's Cave rather than of a runaway slave, but "lowest class" and 1904 Atlanta probably means you are right. Cake (talk) 00:56, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, it wasn't the SIAA rules committee, but the national rules committee. The one headed by Walter Camp. Cake (talk) 21:50, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the FYI, I was looking at a later article from 1910. Re faculty stepping in to stop from playing pittsburg. Is there an explanation in the book? Rybkovich (talk) 23:14, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No. "But faculties stepped in and the issue was never drawn." Cake (talk) 00:47, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re John Bell on the rules committee - needs to be identified somehow, there's a john a. bell football coach reference, but it's a different guy. With such a name it would be hard for reader to google and find him. In 1910 JH was on the rules committee, is the rule change the same as this article re Southern rules committee? Also "no goal kicking"? There are new crazy point rules also. If its what I think it is, there must have been another meeting to cancel some of the changes. http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9C04E2DC1139E333A25755C1A9679C946196D6CF Rybkovich (talk) 20:03, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it would be nice to know about Bell. I'll look around. That article seems like the SIAA approving or whatever the changes from the national rules committee. Like an SEC committee following an NCAA committee today. No goal kicking sounds like no extra points, but Bob Blake kicked extra points for the 1906 Vanderbilt team. I'm with you that perhaps there was another SIAA meeting that year. Cake (talk) 20:55, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If his early years get long enough, it would be cool to stick in the picture of Heisman doing 'the Heisman'. Cake (talk) 16:47, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. What's "the Heisman" Is it PG-13? Rybkovich (talk) 18:39, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, I mean striking the "stiff arm" pose like the Heisman Trophy. It should probably have a megaphone instead. Cake (talk) 20:07, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

stiff arm? lol. yeah, thats awesome that there is a pic of him doing it. Rybkovich (talk) 21:10, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great re-write of the GT national championship paragraph! 20% worth, "20% of the teams worth" sounds too literal too me, trying to think of a better way. "humorously considered twenty percent of the team's worth"? Ehh. 1917 team has two all-americans but then there is for the first time Camp's all american. Confusing, but explaining may be TMI. So maybe just leave it in there. Also not directly related, all-american players table? I'm sure you thought about it, what's your take on that? Rybkovich (talk) 19:41, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. An All-American table would seem a bit dull as it would only cover 1916 to 1918. In 1917, Camp selected an "All Military Service" team for the war, rather than a traditional All-America team. Menke selected Carpenter, and Menke and Purman selected Strupper. Cake (talk) 22:04, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Now I get it re Dora. Is there any reason why the nickname is there? Seems like TMI unless someone is into theater. Either way. I will take the author's name out of the parenthesis. Right now it is inconsistent with the name of the next plays author, which is not in parenthesis. Rybkovich (talk) 23:56, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It looks better now. Re why the nickname: "Then again, most of the versions made in English from Sardou's plays have been so freely " adapted " as to depart widely from the original. " Dora," for example, was turned into " Diplomacy " . Cake (talk) 00:13, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I put in info re after sewanee his and refs' dissings on each other. That story needs acting context so I will try and move the story into the acting section. Rybkovich (talk) 21:47, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Moved it, right now, the starting the API club sentence is in both Auburn and Theater. Maybe it could be detailed in Acting and leave a little for that seasons context in Auburn. Changed Acting subsections name, because his weird ego personality is connected to his acting. The way the section is now it contains both re acting and ego. Will think of even a better name, the one I have now is not quite right. Rybkovich (talk) 23:55, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I scanned the theater article, will send it to you, is there a private way for you to give me an email address I can use? Rybkovich (talk) 00:07, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Very neat. Gotta find out which Georgia game had the straps and which Sewanee game had the ref who didn't like actors. My email is connected to my profile somehow - never tried emailing myself. Hope this helps. Cake (talk) 11:06, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re harpers photo. I looked through the issue and there is not text to go along with the pic, https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=pst.000020241117;view=1up;seq=58 the pic is on p65 in both harpers and the database Rybkovich (talk) 20:50, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Page 65 has the photo, and seems to be talking about golf, but pages 21 and 22 cover Southern football. It doesn't say a whole lot more about Auburn than page 65 though. On page 22 Auburn is mentioned for coming in second place to Georgia. A neat image of the Georgia team too on 21. Cake (talk) 04:40, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The theater section looks great, it's going to be a great FYI for a lot of people. Before you started writing this, did you know him being a drama guy that took himself super seriously? Rybkovich (talk) 19:32, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Starting to get difficult to push it into the 1910s. I had seen before that he was an actor in the offseason, though I'd have guessed more Shakespeare. I had no clue he acted in so many places, e. g. on Broadway, to Mississippi and Florida, nor did I ever make the connection between Heisman's football strategy, e. g. using trick plays, and his being an actor. Cake (talk) 06:50, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That scholarship dispute is interesting are you rewriting it? Re pajama parade, copyrighted buy interesting https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=auburn%20pajama%20parade Rybkovich (talk) 06:18, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thought it was TMI, but I added back since you seem to disagree. Hope covering every year from 1892-1919 isn't an eyesore. It seemed necessary to do for 1895-1899, 1900-1903, and 1915-1919, and then why not the years in between? Cake (talk) 13:49, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think the Georgia incident is important, as if it happened Heisman is likely to have been involved. I think splitting everything up is sorta an eyesore. I think entry for every year is not required. My approach is more of a story tellish. Here's how I would have it and we can meet somewhere in the middle. I don't like the breaking down little ideas into separate paragraphs, because I think it stops the read flow for someone that is just reading not doing research. Below is how I would re write the 1904-14 years. Let me know how you feel and I will edit it in or you can make the agreed with changes yourself. Next four years can keep the years' titles as each gets several paragraphs on its own.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rybkovich/sandbox2 Rybkovich (talk) 21:30, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I like it on the whole. Can tell I like to "wikify" an article with headlines, and I do prefer the "storytelling" way, though I think a big wall of text is also an eyesore. Somewhere in the middle, e. g. a "1912-1914" headline, might be best, but then passing over 1909 in silence is a bit irritating. I would keep Alf McDonald being all-southern as the main thing to say about the 1912 season, and I would keep the mention of McWhorter. Heisman lost four games against Georgia - all the ones McWhorter played in. Cake (talk) 09:46, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"100 Things Auburn Fans Should Know and Do Before They Die" calls Heisman's nemesis umpire William P. Taylor, and says he called him a "failure". Cake (talk) 19:01, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Did Taylor do Heisman's games when H was at GT. Exactly what did he say. Whas this quoted out of their newspaper opinions session during the Georgia fiasco? What did he mean? Seems like you have a research project :) You should contact who wrote the list, Im curious if the have a source for the quote. Also is there anything re Heismans leaving the GT speech to the team? If google search doesn't "spit" anything out, it would be interesting to do a newspaper search, which would not be that hard if there is a general date of when he left. Rybkovich (talk) 19:53, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was noting that one source calls W. L. Taylor "W. P. Taylor". No, he was not a referee while Heisman was at Tech, as far as I know. The only news I found about Heisman leaving Tech was that Buck Flowers heard it first. Where to find out about Heisman acting in the 1910s, I wonder. Cake (talk) 21:14, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear $user, there is an $article you may or may not be interested in.

• Draft:Fazaga_v._FBI

The material in this $draft may not reflect an appropriately cabal-approved point-of-view.

This $talkpage notification is not an official $wikipedia message, and does not reflect the opinion of the $wmf, $arbcom, or the $community.

If you are not the intended $recipient of this begging and pleading for $expert help, please disregard ;-) 47.222.203.135 (talk) 13:16, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cool to see your interest in Bertrand Russell. Most philosophy articles are already beyond my scope, but I did add his former Meinongianism to the article on his philosophical views (Cite 13). Cake (talk) 10:33, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nice, my friend was the one who shared the article and I thought it was amusing and added it to the page. Taking time off wiking trying to read more fiction. But definetly contact me re support it would be good for me to add without taking on big projects. Here's the app/site that my friend developed he is a nuclear weapons historian. https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/ Rybkovich (talk) 17:19, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rybkovich. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for my impatience and tone!!! Schissel | Sound the Note! 18:22, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Schissel: I can totally understand how you felt also, must be like solving a rubick's cube, trying to make it flow and understandable while also making sure that the essence of an editor's contribution is retained. If its OK I would like to be able to notify you to look over the changes in my sandbox prior to adding them to the article. Thanks for the help Rybkovich (talk) 18:50, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rybkovich. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Thanks for co-creating the Wikipedia page "National Drinks" with me Rybkovich! BrieDeChevre (talk) 20:14, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is partially a test of the talk feature: You misspelled "a lot" as "allot" on your userpage. BrieDeChevre (talk) 02:01, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for correcting it (Im assuming) Rybkovich (talk) 06:07, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't allowed to edit your page, hence I wasn't able to make the correction. BrieDeChevre (talk) 23:50, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Got it thank you. Rybkovich (talk) 03:48, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rybkovich. There is already a "National_drink" page which redirects to the "List_of_national_liquors" page. How do we deal with this when we want our own page to be the "National_drink" page. Maybe we can call our page "National_drinks". I think this is a better title, anyhow. BrieDeChevre (talk) 20:44, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is a way to redirect National Drink to our future page. I will do it later, but if you have time check out these How to create a page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_create_a_page and Your first article it may say something about a page or a reference already existing to a page you want to make. One plan would be to create National_drinks and then find out how to delete the National_drink reference/slot. Rybkovich (talk) 21:10, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded the content of your sandbox as a draft and the draft can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:National_drinks. BrieDeChevre (talk) 19:59, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

After I submitted our draft to be an article, I got the reply that we need to justify our article given that there's already a "List of national liquors" page. So the moderator started a discussion: Talk:National_dish#Splitting_National_drink_from_List_of_national_liquors. What the next steps are, I don't know. Probably you and I should join the discussion and argue our case. BrieDeChevre (talk) 20:05, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

History of California Golden Bears football, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the .
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

CNMall41 (talk) 19:36, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nice job. You may wish to review Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia (or Template:Uw-copying) as was noted within the original discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#Length tagging of 11-year Tedford section on Cal Bears football. I've added an edit summary to the new article which mentions the relationship between the two articles. By no means diminishing your effort, but it's good for other editors to know that some of the content and editor attribution can be located within the California Golden Bears football article's revision history. Cheers, UW Dawgs (talk) 20:28, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to reword a lot of the info in the original there straight copy and pastes, do we have a strict requirement that every sentence be changed? Or is it "best" that most should be rewritten if copying? Also what's the best way to see which sentences are identical? Most of the exact sentences are gonna be original to me so in theory there would not be a copyright issue, but I can understand that we should still follow the principle even if that's the case. Thanks for the summary, it just came back to me that a comment box did pop up when I clicked publish. Rybkovich (talk) 20:38, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:University of California Banana Slugs sports logo mascot.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:32, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I voted "Keep" and I think I agree with most or all that you've said in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lothlorien Hall (2nd nomination). But hey, let others speak and let it be sorted out. I find it a tad irritating when one or more editors comment/reply about every edit. I'm not perfect, myself, do sometimes feel compelled to comment a lot, but here you should just let it ride, IMHO.  :) --Doncram (talk) 03:44, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Here it's not a me being right issue, its the hours and hours that I have put into this that are threatened to be nulled out. The discussion has been helpful though, as in valid criticisms were made, and in turn addressed, resulting in a better article. But, yeah I get your point.Rybkovich (talk) 04:30, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, well, I don't know what to say then. I do recall being pretty traumatized when a very early list-article by me was put up for AFD. And I am actually for some kind of AFD exception for articles which represent a high percentage of an editor's work, to allow at least an automatic one year extension.

I see you mention Communities (magazine), which i have read in the past. Ugh, the article about it is ugly, it needs an issue cover at least. You assert there are 6 mentions, including one being a full article, about Lothlorien Hall. Your link to your Proquest search results don't work for me, of course. But can you possibly get that article in PDF and send it to me ("email-to-me" at my Talk page is enabled)? If you do I would make a quick effort to develop using it. Which would be far more convincing than assertion that Communities is respectable + there is good stuff there.

I can't guess how the AFD will end, either "redirect/merge" or "keep". If redirected, your work will still be available in the edit history of the redirect. Any which way, i hope this works out okay for you, that you're not too discouraged. I wonder if you have interest more generally in developing about intentional communities, cohousing projects and persons, etc.; I would be willing to undertake some kind of cooperative editing campaign if you were. Just 2 or 3 people can have a big effect in a sustained campaign. And you might find that places more clearly notable to others are lacking articles and it would be satisfying to develop them, and come back to Berkeley coops later. Just wondering. Do send that article if you can? --Doncram (talk) 06:00, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What's an email I can use to send you the pdf? Re my project: I'm upgrading the Berkeley Student Cooperative collection of articles. The BSC page as it is now, includes descriptions of all the houses which makes it pretty unnavigable as a whole. I'm about to replace the section with info about the houses, with a table I created using the info from the section as it is now. Here's the table User:Rybkovich/sandbox3. Right now some of the house description include architectural descriptions, they don't fit into the table and it would be wrong to delete them, so I created a historical buildings section which I will put before the table User:Rybkovich/sandbox4. Rybkovich (talk) 06:25, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Re particular houses. Casa Zimbabwe here's what it looked like before I started working on it - CZ. Notability is not an issue with it based on its history - it is the first co-ed housing in the nation, and architecturally it was designed with that in mind.

• Kingman Hall I took out the redirect and started working on the article based on the info from its subsection. There's no notability issue because the building is a Berkeley landmark. There are other buildings, that have longer subsection descriptions in the BSC page, but they would not pass the notability test, so I'm not going to be taking out their redirects and instead get all the info out through the historic buildings and house table sections. Rybkovich (talk) 06:47, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Doncram: Hey Doncram, just wanted to FYI you that I will be appealing the decision. I'm making significant changes to the article. See User:Rybkovich/sandbox Rybkovich (talk) 01:28, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, yes, I saw that it was closed "Redirect" (which does preserve the last version and all other edit history, at least). I am sorry i was not able to consider and use the articles you sent upon my request to try to improve the article myself. But, right now, if you are significantly improving the article, the way forward is NOT to appeal the decision, because that would just cause a discussion about whether the closer was justified in their decision based on the AFD discussion article as it was then. It would be like a review of the administrator(?), not really a review of the new version of article, and it would almost certainly conclude that the decision taken was reasonable, was within bounds. If you (and maybe I) can further develop a version that is significantly improved in our view, then we can simply place it into mainspace. An AFD decision to delete or redirect does not preclude that. With assertion given by us at its Talk page that this new version is considerably improved. That could well lead to someone else opening a new AFD about the new version, and if it is not very much improved and if the new placement is rather soon, that AFD would likely be closed relatively quickly with "too soon / not different enough, so redirect again and "salt" (prevent re-creation of the article at that location).

So, all that said, how about you develop some in your Userspace or wherever, and you get me to do what I had intended, and then go for placing the new version into mainspace? Not in too much of a rush to do this, either. --Doncram (talk) 01:47, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Doncram I feel that I have made the correct alterations, from what I understood to be an option for me to consider (thank you), I can delete paste in my draft, delete the redirect and see what happens from there. This is my draft. Rybkovich (talk) 18:58, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Lothlorien logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:33, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, fair-use stuff gets deleted fast if not appearing in an article. It might succeed if you did put it into the new version in Userspace or Draftspace, and explain it is being prepared to go back into Mainspace. But probably it will still be deleted and you would have to re-upload it later, after the article is surviving in mainspace. --Doncram (talk) 01:51, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Or can it be used in its row in the Berkeley Coops list-article, for the moment? It looks like you can put it in, then delete/conclude the discussion. Although it would be quite likely the person or bot could come back again, but still. --Doncram (talk) 01:54, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I had it in my sandbox and it got deleted automatically. Re row I will put in the public domain pic I found of how one of the houses was built. Turns out that architecturally the story is pretty interesting - it was designed by a known architect and the first owner is a historic figure (this is already in my sandbox draft), so I can add a Lothlorian subsection to the Architectural history category I put into the BSC and put in design/history related things re houses in there. Rybkovich (talk)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere, unless it explicitly and verifiably has been released to the world under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license or into the public domain and is written in an acceptable tone—this includes material that you own the copyright to. You should attribute the content of a draft to outside sources, using citations, but copying and pasting or closely paraphrasing sources is not acceptable. The entire draft should be written using your own words and structure. Note to reviewers: do not leave copyright violations sitting in the page history. Please follow the instructions here.

You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

• Draft:One World Family Commune may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the or on the . or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AntanO 03:31, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rybkovich! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! AntanO 03:31, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere, unless it explicitly and verifiably has been released to the world under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license or into the public domain and is written in an acceptable tone—this includes material that you own the copyright to. You should attribute the content of a draft to outside sources, using citations, but copying and pasting or closely paraphrasing sources is not acceptable. The entire draft should be written using your own words and structure. Note to reviewers: do not leave copyright violations sitting in the page history. Please follow the instructions here.

You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

• Draft:One World Family Commune may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the or on the . or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Tame (talk) 14:55, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Clarityfiend was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Only one source covers him; the rest are passing mentions, so WP:GNG isn't satisfied.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:George Hebard Maxwell and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:George Hebard Maxwell, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the , on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Clarityfiend (talk) 07:30, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rybkovich. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Tame (talk) 09:34, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamingimpala: ? Rybkovich (talk) 19:15, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Timtrent was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Turminia's book is a collection of essays and not WP:RS, yet it is one of the main references.

Michael/Noonan's own work is used as another main reference.

We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to allow this article to remain. Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.

Why is there a huge section on Noonan?

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:One World Family Commune and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:One World Family Commune, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit. Noonan is the cult leader, the cult is primarily based around him. I don't see the issue there. Finally, calling
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the , on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 07:03, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Timtrent, Your point re using subjects own writing is legitimate in general, however, here it is used to describe his personal experiences/motivations and cult policies, not objective facts re history of the cult or other events. From what comes to mind at least 3 newspaper articles specifically examining the cult. And more where the cult is used as an illustration of related issues. I may have not used several of them as it was not necessary, but can insert for show of notability. The rest are cited here, but are behind a paywall. I can send them to you. Calling Turina's book a collection of essay's is wrong, but even if it's not wrong, there should not be an issue as she interviews members of various cults and describes their history/motivations. Regardless, it is not a collection of essays, it is academic work published by Syracuse University Press. She is a professor emeritus at Sacramento State University teaching classes about the subject. Her index for the book is 20 pages long. Are there any other issues of concern aside from there being to much info re Noonan, use of his work, lacking of specific articles about the cult and reliability of the book? Thank you, Rybkovich (talk) 22:20, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, Hey as you might have noticed, I have added some inline sources to the draft along with some books in the bibliography section, and made some subtle adjustments. And I've noticed the draft has gone dormant in the last couple of days. Aren't you still planning to publish the article. Let me know what's your plans are about this promising draft.

-- Tame (talk) 10:02, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Tame! Thanks a lot. "Mugshots who's who in the new world" looks awesome, good find. I'm gonna add a couple of more sources and submit tomorrow or Friday - I'm addicted to a pic ID contest where every week, you have to figure out the window from which the pic was taken. This week I know its in Portugal, and that it's not in one of its two big cities. So I may need to do a big Google earth fly around session tomorrow, before finishing up on the draft. Rybkovich (talk) 07:03, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tame I added and edited some sources and submitted. Rybkovich (talk) 00:28, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

One World Family Commune, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as B-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a fantastic rating for a new article, and places it among the top 3% of accepted submissions — major kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Tame (talk) 08:55, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, I hope you will stick around and keep continuing your contribution. Anyway, I looked up for pics on the the commune, but found none of eligible license, all are copyrighted. Try if you could find somewhere, see, to me, an article without at least a single pic is a Californian pizza without a shrimp/ smoked salmon on the topping (not sure if you're into that lol. What about burger without cheese?). Tame (talk) 09:23, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Totally, Can't we use one of Nonnan under fair use? Rybkovich (talk) 14:24, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think under EU and USA copyright laws we would be able to, but nevertheless we would be overflooded with with lawsuits. So that makes sense that it wouldn't pass our narrow standards Rybkovich (talk) 15:15, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, I noticed you never ping me, so I don't get notification. Anyway, the best option could have been if there were any pics on sites like flickr. If I'm not mistaken you're an experienced contributor of the commons project, so you know better than me about copyrights and licensing of media files.

By the way, I was curious to know why did you submit the draft for AFC? I mean you're already authorized to directly publish an article? Tame (talk) 13:40, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tame Here and wikimedia are different entities. I don't think your administrative powers :) would work on commons.wikimedia.org.Rybkovich (talk) 19:54, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, yeah, you're right. BTW, I'm technically not an admin, I have several rights is all. Tame (talk) 20:00, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tame I just checked my wiki commons profile and I'm the same way, I have reject submission powers but not an administrator. For the pic I should be able to find some good creative commons pics of the building/restaurant that they used to run in Berkeley, its pretty peculiar. Now it's a huge music store Amoeba Music. I've spent a good amount of money there both in Berkeley and LA locations. The SF branch is right in the Haight-Ashbury area. Rybkovich (talk) 20:22, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, yeah things change. Maybe our only chance is from online? Like I created this article 2 days ago, and put it on DYK, and an editor recommended that I should find a picture, alas there weren't any of eligible license that I could find, then I emailed some people from the University of which the subject of the article was a professor of, and then one guy agreed to release a pic under CC share alike, and I added it. Tame (talk) 20:31, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tame Nice, I've done that before and its great when people allow it. One the left of OWFC religion's webpage is their logo. https://galacticmessenger.com/ Seems like its fair game. When I have time I will look up our fair use policy re logos. This is a picture of the store with all use allowed by the author as long as its attributed https://www.flickr.com/photos/sharonhahndarlin/20131470381/in/photolist-2bYVNEP-odiyw5-wEX3LV-gMUph-5M1oAK-fFTFV-bqnPY6 Rybkovich (talk) 20:47, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, should we insert this photo and add something in caption, such as, "present day building of the OWFC" (I mean in a more formal way.) But you know it would have been great to use it along with an original photo. Just this ain't a big deal. What u think? Tame (talk) 20:54, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, anyway, how did you came across creating the article in the first place? Did you know about the commune in real life? Tame (talk) 20:55, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tame We can use the religion's logo at top right. And the store pic lower down. I checked The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and Heaven's Gate, their logos are used through fair use.

Re commune, I have definitely been to their house, but only after they left. Although a lot of their practices are maintained. Unfortunately I've never been invited to the "food orgy" :( User:Rybkovich/sandbox I've created the Lothlorien (current resident) article, but after a long battle, it was determined to be not notable, and now there is a redirect to the organization page which I've been updating - Berkeley Student Cooperative. I'm also in the process of putting up a page for the house's original resident Draft:George Hebard Maxwell, it got rejected but I talked to the administrator and there should not be a problem once I put up more citations. After OWFC and Maxell pages are up and I put in more info re murder (it really is an interesting place), I was thinking of go into another epic battle of creating a separate article. But, I don't think I have the patience for it so I will make a subsection in the Berkeley Student Cooperative page. Rybkovich (talk) 21:19, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've lived at this house - Stebbins Hall when I went to berkeley '99-'02. Here's another house that I've updated (or created i don't remember) - Kingman Hall it was also once a cult. Rybkovich (talk) 21:25, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re logos, I think we should do it. And I would be happy to assist with Maxwell draft. Anyway, based on the latter texts, I assume you're at least 50+? (don't mean to pry) Tame (talk) 21:38, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tame Damn... I wish I could do a head shake GIF. I recently turned 42. LOL But, yeah I'll be there soon, that shit starts to fly once you get to your 30s. You still have a solid 20 year period of feeling young. Rybkovich (talk) 01:05, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tame Do you think "The Futurist" works as a book reference? Google books doesn't highlight any text that specifically mentions our commune. Rybkovich (talk) 18:09, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, are you talking about "The Futurist", a publication by the World Future Society? Tame (talk) 18:49, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ Tame yes we use it as one of the cites for them opening a market downtown Berkeley. Rybkovich (talk) 20:31, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, did I insert it or you? Anyway, it's fine. It can be used as a source. Tame (talk) 05:10, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, the magazine was nominated for Utne Independent Press Award for Best Science and Technology Coverage. Tame (talk) 05:12, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tame I don't think its connected to OWFC Rybkovich (talk) 06:40, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, who added it? Tame (talk) 07:49, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, anyway, after reading the snippets, it seems like it was a misinput. I think we should remove it. Tame (talk) 07:50, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ Tame Done. Have you ever listened to Television's Marquee Moon? Rybkovich (talk) 21:18, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, You know my elder brother (cousin) is a huge fan of Television, so I've been listening to em since I was a kid. Tame (talk) 04:48, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, and Marquee Moon is one of my most fav rock album, like ever. Tame (talk) 04:49, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, anyway, are you into post rock? Like GY!BE, Swans? Or what about shoegaze? Tame (talk) 04:51, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tame Hey Tame, this is re Draft:George Hebard Maxwell, It got rejected and I believe I addressed the issues brought up by the editor/administrator, however they have not replied (no problem people have stuff to do in real life) to my update on their talk page - Clarityfiend would you be able to look over the latest version of the draft and let me know if its ready to go for another submission? Thank you Rybkovich (talk) 18:15, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tame I'm into pretty much into everything (in a limited sense) - jazz, opera, trance (not the cheesy pop one, the really psychadelic stuff), all generations of rock, hip hop from around my time when you could sample music, punk (more melodic one from my years), metal from Slayer to Stryper (a glam thrash christian band) hmmm what else.... Will like to go more smaller venue shows here in LA. Have you seen? UGH! its mandatory for aficionados (in a good sense). I'm serious. You need to watch it tonight. But, not on youtube you have to watch it in High Def so maybe torrent it. Re GY!BE, Swans? will go to a used cd store and hopefully they have some - my old lexus has blue tooth for phone calls but not music :( Rybkovich (talk) 16:31, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, you know I couldn't imagine to meet such a music enthusiast like you in Wikipedia. I mean most of the Wikipedians are nerds. Re lexus, lol my dad has one. Re GY!BE, start with Lift Your Skinny Fists Like Antennas To Heaven, or F sharp A Sharp Infinity. You know it will sound cheesy, but GY!BE literally changed my life, they are a part of some of my unforgeable memories and one person who got me to their music, tho the person is gone, gybe is one of the bands whom I'm forever gonna listen to. Tame (talk) 06:43, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tame I listened to Crust its very epic and emotional, i liked it. This is good: In A Silent Way https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yeEZ-bx63c Rybkovich (talk) 00:59, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, this album is great, anyway I love Kind of Blue the most. Anyway, what you think about the contemporary mainstream artists (so called)? Tame (talk) 06:17, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tame I'm too out of touch. From what I understand rock is not nearly as popular as it was in ten or twenty years ago. Are most people your age now into hip hop and R&B? Are there indy rock bands that you can see regularly in Bangladesh were you live? Rybkovich (talk) 01:23, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, I have lived in several diff places, spent my childhood in the US, and Rome. Tho Living in the sub continent for the last 8 years, I'm not really into their culture, its diff than the rest of the world to be fair, I mean totally.

And if you have kids, you might already have a grasp on what they are into these days. like really into hip hop. Well, I'm an introvert in real life, so I don't have much friends here, but my classmates in college like listen to whatever is popular on Billboard charts? Like really garbage songs and artists (I mean good for em). And they think its cool. I really hope its ephemeral, and one day they start to discover the good side of music. You might have heard of bands like One Direction, artists like Justin Bieber, XXXTANTACION, I mean these are most of the kids' fav bands and artists (not really, just for an instance). Oh, BTS!!!!!!! Holy shi*. I literally can't stand weebs and weeboos. You know Tame Impala's Kevin Parker became what he is today because of his father, he always used to listen to the good old shi*, you know like Led Zeppelin. And thus Kevin fell in love with music from his childhood. So, I guess the environment in which you're brought up, also the surrounding people play a big role in terms of your choices/preference. Tame (talk) 08:17, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tame Do your dad/mom work in the embassy? I don't have any kids. Out of my 15 or so friends that I keep in touch with from college 20+ years ago only half have kids. I like some of the videos that the new wave puts out. Do you play music? Rybkovich (talk) 17:44, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rybkovich, you know last year I tried playing drums with an Indian band called "indigo children." And I realized, mmm... maybe sometime later, to be honest I'm interested in filmmaking. And music inspires me to think of stories to work on. and no my parents are not on embassies, they work in an NGO. And btw I run an atheist club here in Bangladesh (completely in discreet, you know it's a third world country, and atheists activist who go public gets even detained or killed, such as Avijit, or the physicist Zafor Iqbal who got stabbed almost to death). As Richard Dawkins said to our club in this video, there are many of us in this country than anyone could realize. We're just not so brave to come out yet, it's detrimental. I also used to ghost write Hemant Mehta's scripts. lol i know i might seem a bit ridiculous or silly like communicating in such a way in Wikipedia's talk page? never mind, anyway, it's really been great having conversations with you. You're one of the most interesting Wikipedians to date that I've come across. -- Tame (talk) 19:48, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tame Respect re Hitchens. He's right re religion and childhood indoctrination. I grew up in the Soviet Union and never had that problem. I emailed you a copyright paper that I thought you may like, most of it is not super legaleese. Rybkovich (talk) 22:35, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

George Hebard Maxwell, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Tame (talk) 06:44, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce links, including references, in actual articles to user pages or sandboxes, as you did at Killing of Roberta 'Bibi' Lee. Since these pages have not been accepted as articles, user pages, sandboxes and drafts are not suitable for linking in articles. and such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been deleted, please do not re-add any such links, thank you - Arjayay (talk) 13:59, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Arjayay I got it. Thank you. Rybkovich (talk) 21:34, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]