User talk:WikiOriginal-9

Your good article nomination of the article Trevor Knight (Canadian football) has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of BeanieFan11 -- BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:48, 30 June 2026 (UTC) Reply

Thought you might enjoy a laugh. Someone scrubbed Claire Cory's article of any mention of her DUI. Apparently, she was only charged with reckless driving for a reported flat tire. JTtheOG (talk) 19:53, 30 June 2026 (UTC) Reply

lol lol. I hate it when people do that. AP All-Pro Chris Hovan threatened to sue me once. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 20:09, 30 June 2026 (UTC) Reply

lmao. I would simply not leave the scene of a crash without providing information, but maybe that's just me. JTtheOG (talk) 20:21, 30 June 2026 (UTC) Reply

It's so hard. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 20:24, 30 June 2026 (UTC) Reply

~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:02, 1 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Tillie Voss's gloriously long infobox lol. 12 entries for football teams and 13 for basketball. This has been fun to write, although I still have quite a lot still to go. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:23, 1 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Wow, that's going to be EPIC when it's done. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 20:25, 1 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I didn't know he played basketball too. That's crazy. He played for 8 ABL teams in addition to an NFL record 10 teams? Most pro sports teams ever? ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 20:30, 1 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

He also had the greatest reaction to a toothache ever, allegedly: 1 I think it was only seven ABL teams (Fort Wayne Caseys weren't ABL at the time when he played for them) but still a crazy number of teams. I wonder if he does have a record for total top-level pro teams... BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:01, 2 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

So Voss (with Frank Hanny) is credited ("And a few years later, on Nov. 23, 1924, the rivalry deepened when the first ever NFL ejection occurred. The Bears' end Frank Hanny and Packers' tackle Tillie Voss were both ejected from the game when punches were thrown") as the first player in NFL history to get ejected... but doesn't this / this from three years earlier sound a lot like an ejection? Regarding Lane Bridgford, "Bridgeford was banished in the fourth quarter for his attack on Stackstader" / "Bridgeford was banished from the game for roughing Sacksteder". BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:58, 6 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

That does sound like an ejection.... What do the contemporary sources say about Voss's ejection? ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 19:07, 6 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Here's (lol it describes the passing game as "basketball football") sources from when Voss was ejected. "Voss, Hanny Banished: Towards the close of the first half, Hanny paid Tilly Voss a verbal barrage and Voss came back. The result was that hostilities broke and both players were chased to the sidelines. This was a bad break for the Bays as it crimped the air drive as Voss was a great receiver" / "Hanny and Voss were ban[ish]ed from the game ... after they had started slugging each other". I'm doubting it was the first in NFL history. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:17, 6 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

You're probably right, sounds like Bridgeford was earlier since he was "banished" too. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 19:26, 6 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

@BeanieFan11: You could leave a note about how some sources credit Voss as the first player ejected although contemporary sources show otherwise. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 19:29, 6 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

That's what I plan to do once I get to the 1924 season in writing his article. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:00, 6 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Did you know ... that Frank Lone Star died in 1915 and played in the NFL in 1920? (article has looked like that since 2011) BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:26, 7 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

That's pretty weird. Any idea what's going on there? ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 11:51, 7 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

This article says that maybe it was Lone Star Dietz. Apparently he wasn't actually a Native American. "The Bureau found he had taken on the identity of James One Star, an Oglala man of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation 12 years his senior who had disappeared in Cuba in 1894." "For the rest of his life, Dietz continued to promote himself as Lone Star Dietz". He was already Washington State head coach in 1915, so perhaps he took Frank Lone Star's name to play in those NFL games for whatever reason. Maybe it was for publicity. "See fans, we have a real full-blooded Indian named Frank Lone Star, basically straight off the reservation." If people knew he was already Washington State head coach, that wouldn't make him sound like an uncultured "savage". Heck if I know. ̄\_(ツ)_/ ̄ ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 12:14, 7 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I did come across that article as well. I don't really know though, lol. I just thought it was funny that the article listed him as dead in 1915 and in the NFL in 1920. BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:54, 10 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

There was a 25-year-old Frank Lone Star arrested in 1923. I guess that's someone different. He was too young. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 12:19, 7 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Oh that's interesting that there was another Frank Lone Star who was actually alive at the time. Perhaps it was that Frank Lone Star in the NFL? Although there's not really any way of knowing... BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:54, 10 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Check out former Saints QB Aaron Brooks on PFR. What an interesting career. More than serviceable yardage wise and fairly average in the middle. Kind of would take patience regarding the interceptions but kind of strange he called it a day so young. Red Director (talk) 02:21, 2 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I know. I remember him on Madden. He always reminds me of David Garrard and Byron Leftwich from the same era. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 11:59, 2 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I expanded his article with more details from the NYT. He might have been the first Colin Kaepernick, lol. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 12:20, 2 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I can't find anything that says he ever retired. This 2025 Professional Football Researchers Association (PRFA) bio by Matthew Keddie says Brooks retired in 2007 but the source it's citing just says he "left the game in 2007". Note that his Wikipedia article said "Following his retirement from pro football in 2007" until I removed it just now so it could have been a case of citogenesis. The source in the Wikipedia article doesn't even say he retired in 2007. I assume some random person just came along one day and added it. The PRFA article also cites prosportstransactions.com multiple times. It's funny when we do better research than actual researchers. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 12:25, 2 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

@WikiOriginal-9 Great work! You are definitely a great editor all-around. I fear Wikipedia has poisoned real journalism due to laziness. It is not Wikipedia's fault either. In general, people will look for short cuts and if they think the average reader will not care, why not pull from Wikipedia? Also, some maybe get in deadline crunches and Wikipedia can throw them a bone on some quick information. It is apparent when their news article lists information oddly in the same order as the Wikipedia article. Red Director (talk) 17:41, 2 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

"Wikipedia has poisoned real journalism due to laziness" Don't forget AI too. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 18:49, 2 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

The image at Journeyman quarterback says that Josh Johnson played for 14 teams, and that Shayne Graham played for 15. I assume the discrepancies with the list you created is whether multiple separate stints with the same team are counted separately or not. It might be worth clarifying or explaining in-text to avoid confusing readers who navigate between the related pages. Otherwise, they might think one of them is "wrong". Left guide (talk) 17:40, 2 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

The Josh Johnson 14 teams stuff is counting teams he didn't play in real games for. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 17:45, 2 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Ah I see, thanks. I was conflating "played for" and "member of" which have different meanings. Left guide (talk) 17:51, 2 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Your good article nomination of the article Tom Beck (American football, born 1974) has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of BeanieFan11 -- BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:27, 2 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

what's the record for the longest NFL bio without a footnote? Scott Jackson (American football) is a decent start. —Bagumba (talk) 05:04, 3 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I added a reference to his page to get him started. Red Director (talk) 16:41, 4 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Their possible record run ended at 3624 bytes. —Bagumba (talk) 17:23, 4 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Lol. Not even any PFR link in the infobox. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 12:28, 6 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Nevermind, it looks like there's a reason for that. He never played in a real NFL game. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 13:34, 6 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Next time you're not here ... I'm not thanking you at all, lol!! Thanks again x, whatever!! P.S. Hope you had a great 4th of July. Regards, John. Bringingthewood (talk) 20:58, 6 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

lol ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 11:48, 7 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hi there! Just wanted to make sure I wasn't seeing things. These are no longer for the infobox?: PFWA All-Rookie Team I only saw Roethlisberger show up on my watchlist, but there are tons of players who still show it. I'm not touching them .. too big of a can of worms, lol. Bringingthewood (talk) 20:16, 8 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

It's just redundant if someone already has ROTY in their infobox per WP:NFLNOTEVERYAWARD. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 20:23, 8 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Ahh, that's why I asked first. I wasn't removing Watt's link without a good MOS: to go to, lol. A year ago I would have removed 500 of them and received 100 death threats. That's a good MOS: to use when they list AP, SN, PFWA DPOY etc. etc. Learning all the time. Thanks for the info. Bringingthewood (talk) 20:38, 8 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

For the love of God, if I didn't read this .. 'it shouldn't matter how they are formatted unless we wanna be consistent' ... I wouldn't have f'in believed it. Thanks for being the better man, lol. Have a nice weekend! John. Bringingthewood (talk) 01:01, 18 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

LOL. I know right? That makes about no sense at all. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 12:23, 20 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I may have just double-thanked you, while you deserve it, I lost my edit statistics page again. At one time I thought they wouldn't let a second thank you for the same edit go through. Oh well. Btw, if you ever need to feed the mos:overlink fetish, I can't believe the amount of Cuban, Venezuelan and Dominican baseball players out there that have their nationality linked. If you have the big 'easy' button in your holster .. have fun with it! See you later. Bringingthewood (talk) 23:22, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

"If you have the big 'easy' button in your holster" Okay, I might do that. Thanks. Also, yes, it is possible to thank someone multiple times for the same edit. I guess after a certain amount of time the button comes back. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 12:29, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Fantastic, and one day at least one thing will be uniformed, lol. Figures, there goes dementia as an excuse. Well, thanks for the thanks! Catch up with you soon. Bringingthewood (talk) 00:09, 23 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

It just dawned on me, whether you do overlink or geolink for Latin American sports figures .. you'll reach one million edits by Christmas, lol. Enjoy the rest of your Sunday! Bringingthewood (talk) 21:33, 26 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Seems to be quite a few players like Aaron Brown (linebacker, born 1956). "Football" is piped from gridiron football in the lead sentence, but only NFL teams in the first sentence, with CFL mentioned later in the lead, if at all. Maybe the NFL is more important for an American player, but he was a CFL All-Star too. Oh well, it's not really on my radar to improve those parts of the lead, and not really sure what's the most NPOV anyways. —Bagumba (talk) 18:42, 7 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

CFL should be somewhere in his lead at least. What's more pressing is the strange stats table that's combining NFL and CFL stats: Aaron_Brown_(linebacker,_born_1956)#Career_stats. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 18:49, 7 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Also, he didn't have 0 career tackles. They just weren't recorded back then, lol. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 20:08, 7 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

You missed a spot ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:49, 17 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Your good article nomination of the article Gil Mains has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of BeanieFan11 -- BeanieFan11 (talk) 03:03, 8 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

What's up, gang. I found a problem with Hayden Gray. His BBR profile lists his birthplace as San Diego (where he went to HS aka his "hometown"), while his college bio says he was born in Napa Valley, over 500 miles away (nvm the fact that that's not even a city name). I have a conspiracy theory that some reputable sites pull birthplaces from Wikipedia. Seeing as the Wiki article listed his birthplace as San Diego from July 11, 2025, to June 29, 2026, I wanna think that BBR relying on Wikipedia might be the reason for this discrepancy, since the WP article was posted several weeks prior to his BBR profile going live. Either way, I'm curious what you think. I'm just confusing myself more the more I think about the timeslines and possibilites. Should we add a hatnote or something? JTtheOG (talk) 23:16, 13 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

eurobasket.com says Solana Beach, California, lol. Perhaps you could put his birthplace as "California, U.S." and have a note with the discrepancies. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 12:32, 14 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Quick random question: If on Saturday the 10th, it's reported that someone "died last Monday", do you think it'd be safe to assume they were referring to Monday the 5th instead of the previous Monday, which would fall in late December? JTtheOG (talk) 03:02, 29 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Honestly, I'm not sure. That's a good question. I tried looking it up but it's just people debating. If I was talking to someone in real life on a Wednesday and they said they did something "last Monday", I would think they meant the week before. That Saturday newspaper report is far enough away from Monday that "last Monday" might mean the same week in that case though... ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 13:30, 29 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

This was my exact thought process lol. Doesn’t help that I couldn’t find any other paper mentioning it. JTtheOG (talk) 18:07, 29 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:10, 16 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

LOL.—Bagumba (talk) 21:04, 17 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Facepalm Facepalm ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 12:18, 20 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Don't anyone forget Airplane!. —Bagumba (talk) 00:14, 4 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hi there. I just came across this edit you made to Wikipedia:Notability (sports). While I agree with your rationale, please be careful while making manual reverts not to also revert intermediate edits, such as mine, which was fixing a disambiguation link. Thank you. MSport1005 (talk) 22:05, 17 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Your good article nomination of the article Jules LaDuron is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Morogris -- Morogris (talk) 14:44, 20 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Your good article nomination of the article Jules LaDuron has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Morogris -- Morogris (talk) 18:04, 20 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Your good article nomination of the article Jules LaDuron has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Morogris -- Morogris (talk) 19:24, 20 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Noticed you reverted my content update to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teague_Moore.

All of the content was researched and authored by me; AI was used only for proofreading/copyediting to ensure neutral tone.

Happy to address any sourcing or policy concerns you may have. ~2026-40064-42 (talk) 20:41, 20 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

WP:NOLLM - Don't use AI writing tools such as large language models to generate or rewrite article content. You clearly didn't just use it for a few typo corrections. New accounts don't make articles that good. It's really obvious on James Aiono. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 12:11, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Thank you for the review! ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 12:45, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Speaking of Red Director, their source addition at Darius Durham led me to Phil Smith, a 4th rd pick who semi-curiously had a 96-yd TD KR, yet still only averaged 20.3 yds/ret that season. —Bagumba (talk) 15:52, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

In the past several years I've been back, I still find myself surprised who doesn't have an article. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 15:57, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

That was even pre-WP:NGRIDIRON TNT. —Bagumba (talk) 16:08, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I wonder why no one ever stubbed out all the NFL players? They had no problem doing all of the 100K Olympians and cricketers and stuff. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:14, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Anti-American exceptionalism lol —Bagumba (talk) 16:18, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

And they always acted like NFL, MLB, NBA, and NHL were the problem with NSPORT (not the Ukrainian third league) ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:40, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Why did NSPORT list so many "fully professional leagues" for the US? Eastern Professional Soccer League (1928–29)? It's like an alphabet soup of leagues that no one has ever heard of. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:49, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

The flaw with many sports editors is equating "fully professional" or "top level" with the existence of reliable independent secondary coverage. And now, if it's on the internet (or growingly AI), it must be reliable (esp. if it's in a foreign language you're not even literate in) —Bagumba (talk) 15:41, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I always thought professional meant you could make a living by only playing that sport. Was Eastern Professional Soccer League (1928–29) really someone's only job? I'm sure they had to have offseason jobs too. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:00, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Well, even in the 80s, NFL players were working part-time jobs in the offseason (e.g Charlie Joiner). It's only recently that the Big 3 leagues have the insane contracts and you're expected to train year around. WNBAers have to play overseas in offseason (though there's more domestic opportunities forming). —Bagumba (talk) 16:14, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

A lot of NFL players had offseason jobs during the 60s too. But they didn't have to take those jobs. They still made enough to get by on just their NFL contracts. Some people just want more money or have higher standards for what "living" is, lol. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:20, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

"have to" is relative. The average player's career is what, just 2-3 yrs. There was probably more need to start planning for your "real job" back then. Fred Dean has some quote in the 80s when he was holding out that his brother-in-law made more as a truck driver. —Bagumba (talk) 16:39, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

What's your personal definition of semi-pro? ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:51, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I was going to say I don't have one, but apparently I used it at Continental Basketball Association (1969–1974) without citing it. —Bagumba (talk) 19:33, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Now sourced. Wasn't pulled out of my ass after all. —Bagumba (talk) 19:47, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

@Bagumba: Template:Professional sports leagues in the United States and Canada always looks silly to me. "Other top-flight leagues" National Ringette League. If my backyard underwater basket weaving league is the only one in the country, then that is "top-flight" too according to that template. Why are there 3 men's rugby leagues listed. "Indoor Football League" is top-flight? LOL ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:15, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I gave up on navs a while ago, esp. team's culture and lore cruft. Where's Lingerie Football League lol. —Bagumba (talk) 16:19, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

The lingerie league is on hiatus I guess: X League (women's football). It has the "top-flight" navbox on its article, lol. Someone must have removed it from the template though since it's on hiatus. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:26, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

National Ringette League is top-flight and the "premier" ringette league in the United States and Canada but the second paragraph of its lead literally says it's semi-pro. Shouldn't Indoor Football League be semi-pro too? ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:32, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Too much academic research for me lol. What I know is that minor league baseball players often have a sponsor that gives them a room to stay in their house because they get paid crap (or maybe podunk town has no rentals). In exchange, Ma and Pa Kettle get to live with a "celeb". —Bagumba (talk) 16:46, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

@WikiOriginal-9 I have a theory on this that is hopefully not the case. Those 100K Olympians, cricketers, etc., jobs are a ticket to a high number of repetitive edits that in turn result in a boost to edit count, whether or not that is their intention. Red Director (talk) 17:14, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I think Lugnuts was more concerned with "creation" stats rather than edit count. He created 93K articles. He could have just done AWB stuff if he strictly wanted edits. I am guilty of admiring my creation and edit stats too sometimes. We're allowed to have fun around here, right? Wikipedia:Have fun. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 17:23, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Of course. I am much guilty of admiring my stats around here. However, I am sure that in least MY opinion, that the edits I make have a purpose and try to be an improvement. Red Director (talk) 17:25, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

"the edits I make have a purpose and try to be an improvement." Right, unlike some people. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 17:29, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Oh man! That is disgusting lol. Not only does the month update do nothing to the references, but uppercasing the reflist, which I normally default to the lowercase when missing. That is just a waste of page history and bandwidth IMO. However, to each their own and not my call. Red Director (talk) 17:32, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

The automatic space removal also did not even remove any space. The page is literally the exact same before as it was after. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 17:35, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

@WikiOriginal-9 Makes you wonder if donation requests for server use and webpage storage are so prevelant for having to house page histories like that. There is a dark side and/or cheese to some high edit counts on here. It is a badge of honor maybe that some have achieved such high totals without losing editing priveleges. However, not all are lucky. I think at least three of the top 12 are blocked. Not saying the editor in question needs to be, but some care by the editor would be nice to be considered on using official edits in such a capacity when nothing fundamentially but source text code is altered. Red Director (talk) 17:41, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

He's most certainly breaking WP:COSMETICBOT. It applies to human editors too. It's been brought up on his talk page a million times but he keeps getting away with it. I don't really care though. It's just interesting. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 17:50, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

@WikiOriginal-9 I have been accused on breaking that too before I have to pinpoint the actual improvement I make hidden in some of the ProveIt tidying. I sometimes will combo a ProveIt ref style edit with a true improvement when I deem a change is not worth its own edit. It also frustrates me when there are more than one accepted Manual of Style around here, when one way is deemed correct and thus a lot of changes need to be made. When I make a lot of those changes, some uninformed editors have the need to blast me on here. I then have to give them the link to the discussion and suddenly I am not so bad lol. Red Director (talk) 17:56, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

What cosmetic edits did you make? I don't really remember you making any? When you do ProveIt edits, that at least visually changes the appearance of the references. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 17:59, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

ProveIt used to have a tool where it would change ref fields that had outdated parameters. I had a lot of those a long time ago where I would deem that worthy of an edit. Like "accessdate to access-date" and "first1/last1 to first/last if only one author" kind of things. That is about as far as I would go on just cosmetic. The things that really grinded my gears were birth and death years in the short description not having uniform consistency (a lot of the major players have the year) and the external player link databases having different opinions causing some inconsistency. Red Director (talk) 18:08, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Speak of the devil. This junk literally just popped up on my watchlist. He's been doing this same edit for years. Why not update the dmy dates template every month? Then you can get like 5 million edits a month. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 18:08, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

@WikiOriginal-9 You could maybe make the argument that the audit is at least updated if someone comes across it and they will know not to try the tool, but you could honestly give that to a bot that does a hidden edit or whatnot. Red Director (talk) 18:26, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Why do people need to go around auditing that anyway? If someone's actually reading the article and notice an incorrectly formatted date, then just fix it. It's not something that needs to be kept track of. It's a net negative on editor time. Nothing bad is going to happen if a reader sees an incorrectly formatted date. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 18:30, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

It goes back to the thought of it being cheese to boost the edit count but I will not guess an editor's intent. Red Director (talk) 18:31, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I think cheese is a safe bet in this case, lol. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 18:33, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

@WikiOriginal-9 It is like NFL QB completion percentage being boosted with check-downs and very safe throws lol Red Director (talk) 18:40, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Reminds me of Alex Smith, lol. 67.1% in 2016 but only 15 touchdowns. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 18:43, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

@WikiOriginal-9 In a cruel twist of fate, Reding's editing career looks like it is over when he is sacked by JJ Watt and he makes a big recovery only to be sacked by Aaron Donald for his career to end in Washington. Red Director (talk) 18:46, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Is there anyway to hide this "Use American English" stuff from my watchlist? I don't think anyone's using anything else... ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 14:50, 27 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I only add that if like also piping "American football" to "football". I hate these template additions when there was no corresponding fix in the prose. Editcountitis. —Bagumba (talk) 16:01, 27 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Uh oh, it says "{Use American English|date=July 2026}" That means years from now someone will go through and update the dates again... just like the dmy template... lol Facepalm Facepalm ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:06, 27 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Only years and not months? —Bagumba (talk) 16:11, 27 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Why can't a bot add the American English templates? At least I would be able to hide these edits. The watchlist can only hold up to 1,000 changes at a time so I wasn't even able to see everything on mine at first.... Until I hid bot edits temporarily, then that got me under the limit. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:45, 27 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Make a feature request to filter AWB edits, or better yet, customize any tag to filter. —Bagumba (talk) 18:21, 27 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I don't necessarily want to filter all AWB edits, just specific people at certain times lol. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 18:33, 27 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

My watchlist is so dead it's not even funny. I'm sure vandalism is getting missed because "Staryu" appears on my watchlist 833 times as the most recent edit (I have it filtered to show only most recent). ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 17:31, 28 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

They seem to be on basketball players now. My watchlist isn't that big, so I just ignore. —Bagumba (talk) 20:25, 30 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

@WikiOriginal-9 I read your original mention. I think on Huesman, all I added was a Baylor alumni category. Red Director (talk) 15:59, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I was just talking in general. Like you, I always like to have a reference at the end of each sentence (even if it's the same ref as the prior sentence). However, there are a portion of editors on here who think those refs aren't "necessary". I don't agree with their interpretation of WP:CONSECUTIVECITE (it doesn't actually say what they think it says). ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:04, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

@Red Director: Just curious, what spurred you to add the source to Durham's page? —Bagumba (talk) 16:11, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Because it looks like there was no source. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:13, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

@Bagumba and @WikiOriginal-9 Yes. There was no source there so I added it. For older draft verification, the PFR listing is a safe and reliable one. Red Director (talk) 17:05, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

@Red Director: Got it. FWIW, it was already in the LA Times source in the next sentence. —Bagumba (talk) 18:16, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

But on the other hand, it might not be in that LA Times ref. So then you just wasted time by clicking on it. At least if the LA Times source was cited at end of the draft sentence, you'd know it was in there. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 18:21, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Of course it's there. I wrote the article lol. —Bagumba (talk) 18:53, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I didn't notice that, lol. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 18:57, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

@Bagumba Thanks for the clarity. Feel free to revert me if deemed fit. The draft listing at least gives the reader access to a easy-to-read list of other picks if they so desire is part of my rationale. I see you enough on the circuit here to where I respect and accept your decisions. Red Director (talk) 18:23, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

They can just click the draft article for that. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 18:26, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

@WikiOriginal-9, also true. I try to not to replace reliable media outlets that verify the draft pick if it already is there. Now, I put that there because the sentence lacked a ref is why. Also, if the draft verfication is an old database that needs an archive to view, I may replace. If that is wrong, please let me know. Red Director (talk) 18:27, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

No, I agree with all that. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 18:31, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I was just trying to understand your rationale. One could also argue that Newspapers.com only provides limited access. —Bagumba (talk) 18:52, 21 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hope I didn't cause any edit conflicts. I got caught up in the research. Cbl62 (talk) 17:03, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

No, no conflicts. Thank you for your help! ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 17:10, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Thanks for the lookout. Will always adhere to your descretion. Red Director (talk) 19:51, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Thanks Red. Did you know there was an NFL player named Red Heater? "Red Director" vibes. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 19:55, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

My name actually came from a miniboss in a Super Mario RPG game lol. Red Director (talk) 20:05, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I think you might have mentioned that before but I didn't remember... Nice. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 20:10, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Unfortunately, my username literally means nothing. It's just something random I picked. I didn't plan on being a long-term Wikipedia editor. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 20:18, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I want to MAKE IT CLEAR that I was not named after this: red directors. Lol I feel like the universe was trolling me when I found out about that page. Red Director (talk) 20:24, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

@WikiOriginal-9 Check out my recent contributions and maybe you will get a chuckle. I can't believe I had not claimed those yet. Red Director (talk) 20:31, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:03, 24 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:30, 25 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I had "allegedly" in there since the beginning and family members (I'm assuming) still don't like it: lol ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 17:56, 28 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Larry Steele (American football), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters contains an invalid URL. Please edit the article to fix the URL. (Fix | Ask for help). Below are the references causing this error:
  • [Rambo cut by Broncos "https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-montana-standard/202546229/"]. The Montana Standard . Associated Press. August 9, 1977. p.7. Retrieved 27 July 2026.{{cite news}}: Check |url= value (help); External link in |title= (help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can Larry_Steele_(American_football)&preloadparams%5b%5d=1366393743"}]]}">report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 19:55, 27 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hi — Just went through your profile and I am quite impressed with your experience on Wikipedia! Looking for some help. I was the nominator on the Michael LeBlanc AfD. Not contesting the close, just want to understand the right process for next time: I have a disclosed COI on a name-colliding article (Mike LeBlanc) and came across the athlete's page through that overlap, then had a genuine notability concern I hadn't seen addressed elsewhere. Given the COI, what would've been the better way to raise that — flag it to a WikiProject, ask another editor to review and possibly nominate, something else? Want to make sure I handle this differently going forward. Thanks for your time.Waves1234 (talk) 00:07, 30 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hi, did you use a large language model like ChatGPT in your preparation of the nomination at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael LeBlanc? If so, please disclose your use and share a link to the chat. Thanks, Suriname0 (talk) 16:48, 30 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hi Suriname0 — yes, I used an AI assistant (Claude) in preparing that nomination. To be specific about what it did and didn't do: I reviewed the sources myself and reached the notability conclusions independently. I then used the AI to help rephrase my argument for concision and to identify the specific Wikipedia policy shorthand relevant to what I'd found, since I'm not yet familiar with WP guideline conventions. I also used it for procedural questions — how to correctly format and file a nomination.

I should have disclosed this at the time of nominating rather than waiting to be asked — that's on me, and I'll disclose upfront going forward.

I'd rather not share the full log, as I used the same conversation thread for some unrelated personal/family matters later on. Happy to answer any specific questions about what the AI contributed versus my own analysis, or summarize the relevant portion if that would help.

Thanks you. Waves1234 (talk) 19:06, 31 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

You shouldn't use it at all. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 19:13, 31 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

To clarify: the argument and policy analysis were mine — I'd read through each source and drawn my own conclusions before using any AI assistance. Where I leaned on it most was formatting/inserting everything into the correct wikitext syntax for the nomination, plus some help tightening the phrasing. Point taken either way, and I'll lead with disclosure going forward regardless of how it's used.Waves1234 (talk) 19:28, 31 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

No, it is not a matter of disclosure. You should not use generative AI when editing, period. See Wikipedia:Editing_policy#Artificial_intelligence_additions.--User:Namiba 19:39, 31 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Just to add: per WP:AITALK, The proposer of a closed discussion may be politely invited to start a new discussion using their own thoughts and words. User:WikiOriginal-9 correctly closed your nomination without discussion because it was AI-generated, which is a waste of everyone's time. You can re-nominate the article in your own words, although I would generally encourage you to participate more on Wikipedia and at AfD to get additional experience first. In this case, I would particularly discourage it, because it seems that you have an apparent – if not actual – conflict of interest. Thanks, Suriname0 (talk) 21:59, 31 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Why do you think Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Justin Mann was AI generated, rather than just malformed by an inexperienced editor? It looks like a valid nomination to me, although it's strange that an IP registered just to nominate this article for deletion. Thanks, Suriname0 (talk) 15:58, 30 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

"Coverage is primarily routine local sports reporting (e.g., Pensacola News Journal) or transactional personnel announcements, which does not satisfy the requirement for significant, independent secondary coverage required for a standalone biography." is 100% AI-generated. People on their first-ever edit don't write like that. They're talking like an experienced AfD participant, complete with "e.g." and correct use of italics. There is also no clause against local coverage but LLMs always think there is. The exact phrase "routine local sports reporting" was used in another AI-generated AfD as well: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iain Wood (sporting director). ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:08, 30 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I don't find this very compelling. The exact phrase "routine local sports reporting" appears in 4 AfDs in 2018 and 2019, including from experienced Wikipedians. Further, there's a reason to think they are a previous IP editor who was confused about the (famously confusing!) nomination process and created a new account before nominating. See the confusing discussion at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Justin Mann. I would consider this to be a bad closure; I would self-revert your closure and instead leave your comment as a Speedy Keep vote arguing that the nomination is AI-generated, and seeing if others agree with you. This kind of immediate no-discussion close should only be used in very obvious cases (WP:LLMTALK), and imo this nomination is short of that bar. Thanks, Suriname0 (talk) 16:19, 30 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

A person experienced enough in AfD processes to write "Coverage is primarily routine local sports reporting (e.g., Pensacola News Journal) or transactional personnel announcements, which does not satisfy the requirement for significant, independent secondary coverage required for a standalone biography." would not then leave a random broken link to Biographical Notability. They spent literally five seconds on that AfD nomination. They don't know anything about notability. I reopened the AfD though. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:25, 30 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I agree this looks like an unlikely-to-succeed nomination and that there are competence concerns around the nomination, but, critically, that's not a valid reason to close the discussion early. To be clear, I am raising a process objection: this is not a valid early closure reason. Being AI-generated is a valid early closure reason, but I don't agree that this is clearly AI generated. (I did start a discussion on the user's talk page asking them to disclose their LLM usage.) Thanks, Suriname0 (talk) 16:33, 30 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:27, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:43, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Reply