User talk:TreyGeek

Archives

2008 2009 Q1 2009 Q2 2009 Q3 2009 Q4 2010 2011 2012 Q1 2012 Q2 2012 Q3 2012 Q4

Hey, I understand where you're coming from on this but take a sec to read over the post I just made. I'm worried that you'll both probably end up blocked for warring over this which is pretty silly. I'm working on a post to the WP:ANRFC board to ask someone to review things, offer an opinion and suggest next steps. Would you agree to holding off anymore changes until that happens? Stuff like this sucks especially if articles are the WP:WRONGVERSION but no need for more drama around here if it can be avoid. Sound okay? Ravensfire (talk) 18:03, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Message left at ANRFC is here. No idea how long it will take but hopefully not too long. Ravensfire (talk) 18:11, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My plans are not to get blocked. You noticed my message on Dennis' talk page looking for suggestions. My plan was/is that if Willdawg111 edits WP:MMA to put their interpretation of consensus in again, then I would/will file an ANI report about it. I fail to see how attempting to enforce a consensus with a single !vote and comments suggesting different formats is going to hold water. We'll see though. Thanks for stepping in. --TreyGeek (talk) 18:24, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yup - left a message on Dennis' page about the ANRFC too. I think Willdawg111 has a point originally but there's been quite a few people posting recently that I wish they'd step back and reconsider. An outside view will (hopefully) calm things down and get this resolved. Ravensfire (talk) 18:28, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No. I am asking the person to vote. We have also disagreed in the past so I don't feel this is canvassing. He is easily the most informed contributor on this wikiproject, aside from myself of course. And as for paralympiakos, he is the only person i've seen talking at any length about the IFL. these are THE MOST INFORMED MMA WIKIPROJECT MEMBERS. I'm not sure what his prevailing opinions are other than the fact that he would like the IFL added to the list of tiers. The other guy, well as you can see he had valuable input at the Jamie Yager discussion which had previously not been discussed. Rather than other yahoos who just appear at the afd's and say "fails X guideline/user essay" and calls it a day. And you also interrupted my current train of thought. So I will get back to what i was doing before you jumped to conclusions PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 21:42, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey - wonder if you might have a bit of time to glance at something. I decided to experiment with switchingan existing article over to the new event result format using the templates as much as possible. I've got some visual concerns with the end result so I copied it over to a user page. Would you mind taking a look here and see what you think? Did I miss something? Remember that the MMAevent template has a smaller font size so it's going to look smaller than the Bellator article that Udar55 did. I know we can do some padding tricks to get the spacing if needed but I would like someone else to look at it and offer thoughts before I get crazy. Thanks! Ravensfire (talk) 17:24, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick reply while I'm at work. Padding/margins may be the best way to go. That or specifying the width of columns in the table, though that may look odd later. Interestingly I don't recall this being a problem with the {{MMA record start}} template and fighter history tables. Also, the round and times need to be centered on the individual rows. Centering by the column doesn't work for templated headers. I figured this one out a while back with the individual fight history tables. I might have some other ideas later after work, but that's what I have for now. --TreyGeek (talk) 18:39, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha. Alas, the problems of going from JSP/HTML to Wikipedia - an approach that works in one just won't always work in the other. I'll play with things during compiles. Thanks! Ravensfire (talk) 18:42, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like I was half right earlier about column alignment. You can't specify the alignment of a particular column in a table, templated headers or not. Setting the CSS style in the header row only sets the style for that header row (kinda like in HTML I suppose). Would be nifty if the wikimedia markup allowed for column-wide styling. --TreyGeek (talk) 02:29, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a question if anyone knows the answer. There appear to be three templates related to MMA event tables. {{MMAevent card}} appears it will be the primary template for creating the event table headers. {{MMAevent headers}} appears to be a subset of the previous template which has me wondering if it will ever be used or if it should be used. Finally, there is {{MMAevent}} which is included with the first template, but by itself I'm not sure of its value; should it and 'MMAevent card' be rolled into a single template? I think I'll point Kevlar in this direction to see what their thoughts were when they created them. --TreyGeek (talk) 02:29, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From the looks of it, MMAevent would be used to start the result table off - it's just wikicode that starts the table, sets the style, etc. MMAevent card is used one or more times underneath that for each card in the event. UFC seems to like to have some fights that aren't televised but the results are posted on Facebook. Same event but Preliminary Card vs Main Card. I don't know what the MMAevent headers template is used for but I don't think it's used anymore. After working on converting that single page, I'm strongly leaning towards a MMAevent bout template to simplify reporting each result. Ravensfire (talk) 03:22, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Finally, adding up the numbers for each of the years in Category:Years in mixed martial arts there are 607 event articles. There is quite likely more event articles that lack an appropriately related category. Does anyone think that I should look into the possibility of getting MMABot to convert the text version of the event tables into the table/templated version once we sort out the issues with the tables and formatting? It'll be something I'll start developing before all the issues are worked out since it'll take me time to implement and test this functionality (assuming I can reliably do it) and then get the new features approved at the WP:BAG. If there is an interest, I'll start a new version section on MMABot's talk page for it. --TreyGeek (talk) 02:29, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you can make it work, go for it. There's a lot of results out there that needs to be switched over. Even if a bot can take a third and dump the articles that it can't handle into an error report, it would be a nice help. Ravensfire (talk) 03:22, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've got the templates to a fairly usable state that matches the consensus format. There's a couple of parameters used to control layout (one in the card template, one in the end template) that I'm hoping won't be too hard for the bot to work with. Assuming nobody complains, I'm planning on moving the changes from my userspace over to template space. I've got some documention done for the main bout template. Need to fill that in more plus add a template usage section to WP:MMA. Ravensfire (talk) 18:45, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. I didn't get anything done on MMABot this past weekend. A side project came up for me and I figured the weekend better spent earning a couple hundred dollars doing some simple COBOL programming. During the evenings this week I'll at least come up with a set of proposed tasks for MMABot to perform in regards to event pages and possibly start some test code. --TreyGeek (talk) 01:26, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On my comments about handling "problem" pages - sorry, that's the java developer in me. I'm so used to being one of the few people in my department that does actually think about that early on that I can bring it up too often, too early. No worries - it's quite obvious from MMAbot tasks 1 and 2 that you've got this handled pretty well. I haven't seen any objections thus far (other than the obvious who I'm not worrying about) so I'm hoping to get the docs created for all four templates today. If I can, I'm going to start moving the new templates over then change the existing templates. Obviously I'll need to find the articles using the existing templates and fix them immediately after making the changes. I'll post updates on MMA talk as I'm going. Ravensfire (talk) 19:51, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No worries about the "problem pages", it's a good thing to at least put on the list of things to do. Also, I can get you the list of articles already using the MMAevent template and those articles using the table format but not the templates. I wrote up a bit of code in MMABot about that a couple weeks ago to list out the articles for me. Let me know if you want those those lists. Check the notes section of MMABot's talk page for numbers of articles that fit each case. --TreyGeek (talk) 19:57, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and created a page with a list of events categorized based upon event results format. I realized I need a list to quickly find articles for MMABot's sandbox during testing. You can find it at User:MMABot/Event article list --TreyGeek (talk) 01:44, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

TreyGeek, Willdawg111 (talk · contribs · count) is changing result tables against consensus again. Could you report him at ANI? Here are some diffs: [1] [2] Thanks in advance. --LlamaAl (talk) 17:29, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice has been started. --TreyGeek (talk) 18:15, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good. --LlamaAl (talk) 19:12, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Great work. LlamaAl (talk) 01:55, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, thanks. It's easy when I can have a program sift through 600+ articles in a couple minutes and sort them for me. If you or anyone else sees the "other" list of articles at the end have some kind of table or special formatting other than the usual textual results let me know. It may be something to have MMABot look for and pull similar articles out as well as another style that needs formatting. --TreyGeek (talk) 02:06, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Singingdaisies is now complete. Thank you for your assistance in the evaluation of this CCI.

--Wizardman 03:54, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Mixed Martial Arts for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 21:52, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A perfect example of two people with different opinions about MMA on Wikipedia coming together for a common goal. Thank you very much. Luchuslu (talk) 03:18, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Mug shot publishing industry at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Mgrē@sŏn 13:38, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've addressed the concerns with the nomination prior to this message on my talk page. As I explained there, the criteria for new articles states that an article which was moved from user space to main space (as this article was) is considered to be new once it reaches main space. --TreyGeek (talk) 16:47, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't intend to hijack your article. I just wanted to resolve some issues to permit the DYK to pass. Please review and make any changes you see fit. Mgrē@sŏn 17:13, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. No one owns any one article. I see some good additions to what you added. I have some thoughts on edits to it, but nothing major. I'll probably look into it more tomorrow. I appreciate the help. --TreyGeek (talk) 02:57, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 29 April 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mug shot publishing industry, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the mug shot publishing industry has expanded with 60 new sites in the last two years and multiple state legislatures are seeking to regulate it? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mug shot publishing industry. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Civility Barnstar
	As I said on the page owe you an apology and thank you for helping clean up the Dong Jin Kim article Emery80 (talk) 23:38, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Treygeek,

please stop undoing all my edits. You say that the Selena's picture does not help the Mexican American page, because it's not constructive, but you're wrong. Selena was a very famous Mexican American Tejano singer. Therefore she should be included on the page. The page is about Mexican Americans, and Selena was Mexican American. She was the QUEEN OF TEJANO MUSIC, she is an important celebrity in the Mexican American community. So she should be included on the MEXICAN AMERICAN page. Please leave her picture on the page.

I'm not vandalising the Mexican American page, I'm only trying to improve it. Please please stop undoing all my edits. Please. Tejanorules (talk)Tejanorules —Preceding undated comment added 02:45, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not that I expect you to review my talk page since you apparently don't review your own. Copyrighted images, such as the one you are attempting to add, must abide by Wikipedia's Fair Use Rationale policy. This particular image does not currently comply with this policy and therefore cannot exist in the Mexican American article. Continuing to add this image, against Wikipedia policy, will only lead to requests for you to be blocked. --TreyGeek (talk) 02:51, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do review my talk page, why would I be on your talk page responding to your comments if I didn't look at my own page. It is okay for me to use that picture of Selena, because I took it from the Selena Wikipedia article. Any picture on Wikipedia is free to use, otherwise, Wikipedia wouldn't have allowed me to use it on the Mexican American page at all. I am tired of having an EDIT WAR with u over this. Just please leave the picture alone. Please. Tejanorules (talk)Tejanorules —Preceding undated comment added 02:45, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've reported you to the edit warring notice board. As I have mentioned above, and on yours and other's talk pages, copyrighted images can only be used on Wikipedia under certain circumstances. You have failed to provide a fair use rationale for the image on this particular page. You have reverted edits in violation of WP:3RR and fail to respond to messages on your talk page. I hope that, as a result, you can take a few moments to research why you have been reported (and possibly blocked) and understand why Wikipedia has the restrictions it does. --TreyGeek (talk) 03:08, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The MMA Barnstar
		I, Dohertyben (talk), hereby award TreyGeek the The MMA Barnstar for his/her valued contributions to WikiProject MMA. Awarded 01:07, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

How did you know I posted on MTKing's page?  Gamezero05  talk  22:15, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Their user and talk page is on my watchlist, just like yours is. Not hard to see. --TreyGeek (talk) 22:22, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stop making changes to my edits dammit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They're true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dontbescaredhomie11 (talk • contribs) 22:38, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your attempts at making Diaz's "Twitter Controversy" its own section has been reverted by two other editors, in addition to myself. My suggestion is that if you truly desire it to be its own section then discuss it on the article's talk page. The prose discussing the controversy has not been removed, rather it is integrated as part of his MMA career. --TreyGeek (talk) 22:40, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How come Matt Mitrione gets his own "Fallon Fox comments" section, and Nate cant have a "homophobic slur incident" section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dontbescaredhomie11 (talk • contribs) 22:45, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't looked at the Matt Mitrione article for quite some time. Looking at it now, I agree, there's no reason why Mitrione's controversy should be in its own section. I've made edits accordingly. --TreyGeek (talk) 22:52, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

THANK YOU FRIEND — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dontbescaredhomie11 (talk • contribs) 00:45, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DEAR PERSON I WORK ON THE PROJECT ON MAKING THR DRAMA TV CHANNEL AND I MADE THE CHANGES BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THOSE SHOWS WILL BE BROAD CAST YOURS KINDLY UKTV — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.195.234 (talk) 15:30, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are removing references from articles[3][4], removing content without explanation[5] and breaking tables[6]. That constitutes vandalism in my book. Also your caps lock key appears to be broke, might want to fix that. --TreyGeek (talk) 15:33, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

as you wish i apologise on behalf of uktv but these will be broadcast i know this as i work at uktv.if you would like to add the shows

they are

new tricks

cranford

Lark Rise to Candleford

auf wierdsien pet

sharpe

and there will be a saturday night movie

yours kindly

simon upton

uktv — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.195.234 (talk • contribs)

Most of those shows are already listed on the page and includes a reference to verify the information is true. If you really do work for the TV station you have a conflict of interest and shouldn't be editing those articles. At the very least you should provide a reliable, independent source to verify your claims. --TreyGeek (talk) 15:46, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Per the quid pro quo, I was wondering if you could take a look at User:Hasteur/Louisiana Fairy Tale. I've been working on it on and off in userspace for a while to try and get it to the DYK level. I'd like an outside opinion about the work. I'm trying to pack wording in and make sure that I'm not doing original research, but at the same time, I don't want to be accused of Refbombing. Thanks, Hasteur (talk) 15:11, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TreyGeek

I'd like the Joseph Henle Wiki page to be brought back. I feel the deletion was a mistake. Yes I understand that sounds like the norm from the guy who's page was deleted but I feel I've done enough to have the wiki page brought back. I fought for a mid major world title and was injured and after was injured again. I am 9-1-1 and feel I will make the transition to the UFC will some luck on my side (hell we all need some luck getting in to the UFC)

What do you think?

Leonidas — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeonidasMMA (talk • contribs) 05:23, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:49, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	thanks Andysbhm (talk) 17:51, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Ultimate Fighter Brazil has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 19:51, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I see you previously voted against the deletion of Antonio McKee's page. The page is one again unfairly nominated for deletion and I would appreciate another vote against the proposed deletion if you have any time at all. Thank you User talk:16derria — Preceding undated comment added 01:05, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello TreyGeek, one or more of your bots are scheduled for deauthorized due to inactivity. Please see Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard#Inactive_bots_May_2017 if you would like to retain your bot's status. Thank you, — xaosflux ^Talk 15:11, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mixed_martial_arts#Discussion_(Support_or_Oppose) Can you take a look at this suggestion if is good? Colton Meltzer (talk) 22:48, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]