User talk:TreyGeek/Archives/2010

Winner

Andre Winner does not represent Britian he reps. Grenada

did you watch UFC 105 on the tale of the tape it had Grenada flag not a Union Jack flag

this user

heps out alot —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.49.98.72 (talk) 00:29, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Titles

Changed 3 or 4, I think, not all. Didn't realise it would have that effect, nor do I know what exactly to do with regards the redirecting. Could do with some advice on that one Paralympiakos (talk) 18:48, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

?

What exactly did I not cite? Every time I edit, I make sure to add a source. You need to open your eyes and quit whining about everything. 24.107.210.161 (talk) 06:29, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

could you work on this page?

some people have tryed to add unconfirmed fighters and somebody put the name "dick nipples" on there just to be a pest. I would watch it myself but i don't know wiki enough. thanks 174.44.51.68 (talk) 07:21, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UFC_Undisputed_2010

TUF 7

is there any way that we can change the TUF 7 bracket to the TUF 10 bracket or something?Mollica93 (talk) 23:32, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Why? Is there something wrong with the brackets on the TUF 7 page? --TreyGeek (talk) 00:12, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Ginásio da Portuguesa

It is not necessary to be an admin to remove a speedy tag. Anyone other than the article's creator may do so. I have added some references to Ginásio da Portuguesa to try to establish notability. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:27, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Record Removal

I have been removing records from MMA articles but there is two people that keep adding them back. I need your help to keep the records off the Wiki articles. RapidSpin33 (talk) 00:37, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Just going to write it here also, there is no need for record removal. It's a useful thing to have and also, it's part of the page of WP:MMA and so is the standard for MMA pages. Paralympiakos (talk) 01:25, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

How is it a useful thing to have on there? I would really like to know, give me one good reason it should be included. TreyGeek told me awhile back to start removing them because they were redundant and irrelevant. 01:59, 23 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by RapidSpin33 (talk • contribs)

(EC)This is another one of those off-and-on discussions in the MMA WikiProject that goes back two years. Some people feel not all of the information being placed in the record boxes belong there. Some people want more information. I personally believe that a record column is redundant (and have stated so in the various discussions I've been part of). I also, believe, the use of flags goes overboard (and also is borderline not following the WP:MOS). Here are links to the previous discussions (oldest to newest mostly): [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]

Unfortunately, this is another one of those issues I believe is an uphill battle to fight against though. If someone(s) wants to try and spearhead a(nother) discussion at the WikiProject on the content of record boxes, I'll chip in with my thoughts. I may even attempt to help enforce whatever the consensus is. But without a current consensus, I might keep my dog out of this fight (again). --TreyGeek (talk) 02:03, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

About to upload an image

Alright Trey, before I upload this image, I wanted to make sure this was okay. On Facebook I asked the person who owns the photo if I may use it for Wikipedia, he gave me permission, I just don't know if that is okay and how to upload it stating that he did say okay. RapidSpin33 (talk) 19:47, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

You'll want to read up on Wikipedia policies on copyright issues, particularly "Granting us permission to copy material already online". In a nutshell, only the owner must give Wikipedia permission to use the photograph. Either they can upload it themselves, and add the appropriate License, or they have to send an e-mail to Wikipedia giving permission to use the image. --TreyGeek (talk) 03:08, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

...Or you could actually read the warning message that Moonriddengirl (talk · contribs) put on your talk page about the image which explained the procedure. --TreyGeek (talk) 03:13, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Also, I have the poster for Bellator 14 and I every time I try and upload an MMA event poster, they get deleted. How does one do this? RapidSpin33 (talk) 03:26, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline would be of use for you to read. I would also attempt to imitate what was done with other event posters (such as File:Ufc101poster.jpg). --TreyGeek (talk) 03:30, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Ryuichi Murata

The sources establish notability, considering there is an interview and other news sources in there. Please do not just remove all sources without discussing it first in the AfD. Silverseren^C 03:44, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Tournoi International

"SPIRIT MC 16 REVIEW & PHOTOS: CLASH OF PRIDE" - MMA Weekly

"Lim Retains Middleweight Title at Spirit MC 17" - Sherdog

"Ring Ready to Move Forward After Successful Return" - Full Contest Fighter

I can understand why you got rid of the extra stat links, but why did you also get rid of these links when they have information specifically about his fights? At the very least, they should serve as links in the right spots. Silverseren^C 18:44, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

I didn't find a use for them in the prose of the article. I personally dislike article that include excessive fight commentary or descriptions. I also felt there was talking too much about a third place tournament finish and while there was zero coverage his first place finishes. Wikipedia is a group effort. If you feel information should be added back in you are welcome to do so. Just be sure that it is well written and doesn't include commentary or opinion statements (ie "strongarm his way into a victory", "he won handily", "a simple victory"). --TreyGeek (talk) 18:57, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

I can understand why you rewrote it. What I meant was, you can easily add the appropriate ones on as references after the line "Murata went on to fight on a number of cards with the Deep and Spirit MC MMA promotions." If you want, i'll go do it. Silverseren^C 19:02, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Nominate an Article for Deletion

I think the Jules Bruchez page needs to be nominated for deletion. Being on the show does not give notability nor does a minute long UFC fight in which he lost. RapidSpin33 (talk) 15:14, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Then nominate it for deletion. --TreyGeek (talk) 15:22, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Which deletion do I pick? RapidSpin33 (talk) 23:16, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

WP:AFD Nothing to really choose. Just follow the procedure outlined for nomination. --TreyGeek (talk) 03:33, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm thinking that I'm finally getting the hang of it. Here is one I just nominated, I'd really like your input towards it. Article RapidSpin33 (talk) 16:09, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Yup, that works. The only suggestion would be to also add the AfD to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Martial arts, but that's optional. Adding it to the sorting list makes it easier for some people to notice it. --TreyGeek (talk) 03:28, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Input needed

Your input is always welcome in discussions for deletion of articles. Here are two I have nominated. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Henle and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clayton McKinney. RapidSpin33 (talk) 22:24, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Not canvassing, are we? Paralympiakos (talk) 22:25, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Nice spot

No one noticed the dong bar for a while. Anyways I don't do unconstructive things like vandalism anymore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KEWLONION (talk • contribs) 01:43, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

You are

You're for all intents useless.

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 17:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

About Seth Baczynski

"Close to being stopped" Who says? Source needed"

You said that but The reason I put that in was because Seth almost finished the fight and in an interview on ufc.com Brad Tavares even said it. Also, the fight was not a close fight. Brad dominated the whole time. UFC.com even agrees with me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Falcons8455 (talk • contribs) 21:32, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

That's fine. But it needs to have a reliable source cited. --TreyGeek (talk) 21:34, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

There is a video on the homepage of ufc.com that says Brad Tavares dominates Seth Baczynski at TUF Finale. If I refer to the page it will just go to the ufc.com homepage.Falcons8455 (talk) 21:37, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

About Chris Camozzi

Someone keeps saying that the fights are close and they werent. So I am trying to replace that with something else. Why don't you ask the person who said it was a close fight to source it? Because they are the wrong ones. Falcons8455 (talk) 21:49, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Fixed --TreyGeek (talk) 23:02, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Dave Herman

What weightclass does Sherdog say he's in ? because they say his weight is 239 pounds (Heavyweight) in the link from his Wikipedia page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hexenjagd (talk • contribs)

Yes, he is 239. However, you put 265. --TreyGeek (talk) 14:41, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

His WEIGHT is 239 The Heavyweight WEIGHTCLASS is 206 to 265 pounds see here Heavyweight (MMA) so he fights in the Heavyweight Weightclass. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hexenjagd (talk • contribs) 19:13, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

You keep listing his weight in the article as 265 which is incorrect. --TreyGeek (talk) 19:31, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I never meant that his weight was 265 pounds it was a link to the 265 pound Division now i put Heavyweight (MMA) there instead but my Wiki-Stalker removed it anyways i cant revert it back because my stalker will get me banned again for no reason so i guess we wont be arguing about this anymore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hexenjagd (talk • contribs) 20:02, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

He doesn't compete in the "265" weight class, he competes in the "Heavyweight" weight class. As for your edits being reverted, learn how to WP:CITE reliable sources and you won't have any worries about that. You've been blocked from editing once, as a result, people's level of tolerance with you is going to be reduced. Do everything correctly, you won't have problems. Do things incorrectly, well, you've already seen the results of that. --TreyGeek (talk) 20:16, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Bobcat Stadium

The university website doesn't update their information so its not possible to reference them, but my figure is right. The suites and club seats added 300 and 450 seats, respectably. Bringing the capacity up to 15,968. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tenaciousd80 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Information added to Wikiepedia should cite a reliable source. Without doing so, your edit can be reverted. --TreyGeek (talk) 19:00, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Michael McDonald (fighter)

Hello TreyGeek. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Michael McDonald (fighter), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Professional sportsman is enough for A7. PROD or take to AfD if required. Thank you. GedUK  09:52, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Linking to non-existent articles

Hey there, Trey. I'm not sure why you felt my contributions to the TUF 8 page were unnecessary as all I did was add links for the fighters who were eliminated prior to joining the house. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.80.207.238 (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

There is no need to needlessly link to articles for fighters that do not exist and may never exist. In addition, some of the links you created did not go to an MMA fighter of that name. --TreyGeek (talk) 01:43, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

What about the other red-linked name on the page? Like Don House? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.80.207.238 (talk) 01:59, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

User: Paralympiakos

Hello. As I noted that you have previously commented on the talk page of Paralympiakos, I would like to request your assistance before taking this matter to a mediator or administrator. The other day, I made a cleanup edit to the bio page for Aisling Daly to correct a typo, grammar errors, a clear violation of WP:Flags and centred the subject's record table, as has been done with other recent mixed martial artist pages to provide a cleaner look. Paralympiakos has since reverted all edits, despite my attempts at compromise, and seems to be more concerned with wielding power than providing the most accurate and user-friendly article that meets Wikipedia's guidelines. Please provide your opinion on the matter before I take this to mediation. As noted, I attempted to compromise, to no avail. FemaleMMAFan (talk) 01:20, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Wachowskis and a question

I didn't add the information to begin with but I restored when the IP removed it because I mistakenly thought that Lana/Larry had actually publicly come out (I have no idea where I got that from). However, when I double checked the Wachowski brothers' page, I realized that so far, all that is known is that he is cross dressing and going by the name Lana. But that brings me to my question; I noticed in this process that the Rolling Stone link we have as one of the sources for the speculation, an article titled "The Mysteries of Larry Wachowski", is now a dead link. I did some digging to see if I could find an archived version and had no luck. So what should I do with it on the article page? I've seen some people have written "dead link" in the refs on other similar instances but I wasn't sure that was right. Suggestions?

For the record I just think it's nicer to just drop a note on the page of the regulars as opposed to the template, especially when and editor has a decent history. That's always been my interpretation of not templating the regulars, anyway. It's not like I got snotty about it or restored the info after you reverted my revert. But it's all good and I did totally get your point, regardless. Millahnna (mouse)talk 03:46, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I make it no secret that I distrust any IP's edits. In addition, I warn just about anyone the first time for a bad edit, especially people I have no experience with and edits that seems to have no backing such as Larry Wachowski calling himself as "Lana". You ask for a suggestion; mine would be to verify seemingly inaccurate, uncited, and potentially bad (to the extent of a BLP violation) information before reverting to it. As for getting a warning for a bad edit, if your edits are usually good then there are no worries. I do not delete any messages I get, even the bad ones (though I will archive them over time as you can see on my talk page) and do not get offended over receiving a templated warning. I recognize it is quicker/easier for an editor to slap a template on a talk page than to spend time writing an individual message, particularly when doing vandalism checks. --TreyGeek (talk) 04:42, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Good point regarding the templates. It certainly makes it speedy.

Re: Larry; there's plenty of confirmation that he's going by Lana and dressing in the lady clothes (just no official "I'm trans" type of thing) at least some of the time. There's enough refs for that and the Wachowski Brothers article is doing a great job of being neutral on the issue. I'm just wondering what to do about that Rolling Stone ref specifically. It looks like they don't archive their articles online so I can't grab a different link for it. I remember reading the article in the print version so it's a valid reference in the sense that the article really did exist and notes the name/dress change (i.e. it was valid for the sentence it's being used as a ref for). I guess I can just go the "dead link" notation route. I'm usually more of a "does this sentence read ok" editor so I get my head all wound up when I start looking at refs. Millahnna (mouse)talk 04:54, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I would agree that the Wachowski brothers page does a very good job at being neutral on the subject. When you perform Google searches, "Larry Wachowski" results in 280k hits and "Lana Wachowski" results in 125k hits. While a search for "Larry Wachowski Rolling Stone" produces hits it seems to be a hodge-podge of is he or is she type blog articles. IMO, without a definitive WP:RS the name should remain "Larry" and leave the WP:Speculation and rumor out of Wikipedia and not let the anon IPs have their way. --TreyGeek (talk) 05:15, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

do not threaten me

please stop posting threats on my user page. you are no more important than anyone else on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.180.241.183 (talk) 19:02, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Stop making un-constructive, un-sourced, and vandalism type edits and there won't be any problems. --TreyGeek (talk) 19:39, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

im not bud —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.180.241.183 (talk) 08:46, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

You made unsourced edits here, here, and here. You then responded to my warnings by editing my talk page removing the start of the archive box, somewhat breaking my talk page. You did do what I warned about. If you stop doing these things, which at the moment it appears you have, then all is well. Go back to doing it, expect to receive more warnings and a possible block of editing privileges. --TreyGeek (talk) 13:32, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Robinson

I messaged Sherdog (on the External links) about the missed show where Alvin Robinson picked up his most recent win. When they add it will you replace the win or must I. {{subst:Zwarrior2}}

I doubt I will be monitoring Robinson's Sherdog page for updates. As long as you can find a reliable source to verify the match took place you can cite that source rather than wait on Sherdog. Just be sure the source meets WP:RS and WP:V. --TreyGeek (talk) 11:02, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Revert

...and I explained the matter, so it is no longer under consideration... Paralympiakos (talk) 03:51, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Technically, the issue is under consideration until an admin closes the discussion. For example, [9] is a closed discussion and is no longer under consideration. --TreyGeek (talk) 03:52, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm aware of what a closed discussion is, but it's merely a formality. Paralympiakos (talk) 03:59, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's a formality. Just like the template shouldn't be removed until the discussion is closed is a formality. I try to back you up on as much as I can. However, removing templates that you shouldn't be removing because you say it's no longer under consideration isn't going to fly. --TreyGeek (talk) 04:01, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Ignoring the non-involvement preference, there are such things as non-admin closures and given that this is a formality given that I know this isn't a TV screenshot, I did what I did. To also reiterate what I said at the discussion page, if you find a video, it'll likely have an image very close to these. An image taken live is likely to be very similar. Paralympiakos (talk) 04:05, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

So essentially upload the original (e.g. the version that wasn't cropped/slimmed), but then immediately do a revert to its current form? Paralympiakos (talk) 04:24, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

If I've just edit conflicted, then apologies. Anyway, have uploaded the original for the Hardy image. You can see by the file size why I slimmed it down. Paralympiakos (talk) 04:27, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Awesome. I uploaded your cropped version "on top" of your original version. The history now shows both versions, the original with the metadata and the smaller size that is the "current" version and will appear in articles. --TreyGeek (talk) 04:31, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, I thought you could pull up from the history the original file's information. --TreyGeek (talk) 04:33, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I was wondering about that. Can't see it. Any chance you could give this an all-clear though at the necessary area? I'm sure that AGF would apply here given that you're a neutral party and you've seen the metadata. Paralympiakos (talk) 04:34, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

There is more than one way to skin a cat! I took your original picture, made it smaller, keeping the metadata and uploaded that version. So now we have a small size picture with the date and other information from your camera when you took the photo. --TreyGeek (talk) 04:41, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't know if you've ever seen Futurama, but if so, the episode where the characters hold their own universe inside a box, before Fry sits on it, squashing it.....that's this photo! Something looks amusingly strange about it. Good work anyway and thanks very much. Appreciate the help you've given over the last X months. Paralympiakos (talk) 04:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

I try to help out where and when I can. Don't be surprised to see me become somewhat inactive soon. Graduate school likes to suck up my time once the semester gets going. As for now, it's time for bed. --TreyGeek (talk) 04:53, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

UFC main page

Can you please explain why you keep reverting edits to the UFC main page? I understand what you are getting at by saying "unsourced" and "OR", but seriously? You are deleting information about the announce team? About the Octagon girls? Their photos already appear on the page!!! Joe Silva's name and title is in the infobox at the top of the page. Bruce Buffer and Stitch have their own WP pages with essentially the same information. I realize that it would be helpful to have sources for the salary information, but if you go back and look at the edits, all I did was move the majority of that information from elsewhere on the page where it didn't seem to fit (but has gone uncontested). I added the info about bonus checks. Pages for every single event report who earned these bonus checks, so you can't tell me I'm making this up.

What I'm getting at here is that I think your reverts aren't constructive. This is obviously verifiable information. Constructive edits would be to help find sources that benefit the page rather than delete someone else's work. I'm not some IP who is vandalizing the page. I participate in the MMA WikiProject and make hundreds of edits to MMA pages. I know the routine. I'd appreciate if you didn't give me a hard time about this.Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 15:34, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Verifiability. Everything on Wikipedia needs to be sourced. It shouldn't be added simply because it's true, but only if it can be verfied. --TreyGeek (talk) 18:55, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

My reading of the Wikipedia:No original research policy is a little different than yours. The policy is that everything needs to be verifiable (attributable to a reliable published source), but not everything has to show evidence that it has been verified. The policy says: ""Paris is the capital of France" needs no source because no one is likely to object to it, but we know that sources for that sentence exist." Original research is what you call a statement where no sources actually exist. I have a hard time believing that no sources exist for the edits I made. Sources are helpful here, but a lack of sources doesn't make this "original research." Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 20:04, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

As for not getting a hard time about it, do it correctly and there will be no problems. --TreyGeek (talk) 18:58, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Isn't a spirit of collaboration the idea behind Wikipedia? If missing sources are your issue here, why not let the community help me improve the article in this way? There is nothing in my edit is that controversial, inflammatory, or nonconstructive that would warrant an immediate deletion. Why is reverting the edits the only approach you seem to be interested in here? I understand a certain amount of vigilance is necessary to combat vandalism, particularly with a high profile page such as this, but this seem like an instance to me where it would be appropriate to assume good faith and be respectful to someone who has taken the time to dialog with you. Telling me to "do it correctly and there will be no problems" doesn't advance this dialog in a constructive way at all. I appreciate the work you do to maintain this and other MMA pages. Perhaps you could tell me which citations you think would be important to find first and we can work through the changes together as we each find time to do so? Keep in mind that MMA still doesn't get a lot of mainstream news coverage, so citations are often drawn from other online news sources. I'd be happy to look for articles to cite from your preferred MMA news site if you wished to share that information. Does this seem like a reasonable approach to you? Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 19:50, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

I would agree that "Paris is the capitol of France" is common knowledge and needs no cited source. However, there are statements in the text you were adding that is not common knowledge or could be debateable. These statements are:

• • • "Jacob 'Stitch' Duran is one of the best known cutman working for the organization". Why couldn't it be said that Don House is also a well known or best known cutman?
    • "Bert Watson is the production manager for all UFC events". Is this really common knowledge? I don't know off the top of my head who the production manager is. Speaking of which, what does a production manager do? Why is it notable?
    • "Weigh-ins and other public events held before fights have frequently drawn large crowds of fans and reporters." Do they really? Starting when? What constitutes a large crowd?
    • "They are paid per fight, anywhere from $2,000 to $500,000". This statement really needs a source; has this always been the case?
    • " The fighter's coach generally makes 15%-20% of the winnings". Again, is this common knowledge?

See my point? I'm not saying that these aren't valid things to put into the article. I'm not saying that they may not be true. However, we should always provide sources for those things which are not something everyone knows (or is likely to know). I also recognize that it takes time to write up articles or sections of articles correctly.

From a non-MMA article point of view, someone created articles for IBM zEnterprise System and IBM z196 (microprocessor); they cited practically no sources (I think maybe one). I spent a significant amount of my limited free time to work on these two articles in a WP:Sandbox citing sources and reformatting the articles. When I had the articles to a good state I then put them into mainspace. This may be something you may want to do if you feel strongly about putting that information into the UFC article: work on the section in a sandbox adding sources when you have time and when it is in good condition move it to the article.

I really hate to allow unsourced information into the article because it will encourage IPs and unexperienced editors to do the same. The end result is a mess of an article full of unsourced, possibly dubious information. If we do it correctly, the article will be maintained as a good example for others to follow. And I think for the most part the UFC article is a good, well sourced article. I don't want to see it not become that. --TreyGeek (talk) 00:46, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

It sounds like you are admitting to having reverted information in my edits that wasn't controversial because you took issue with other parts of it. That seems both rash and unconstructive to me. All of my edits described the current events staff. Don House does not have a WP page yet, so he hardly seemed worth mentioning. The production manager is the person who produces all live events (like a stage manager during a theater production) and has interactions with all of the fighters, both during weigh-ins and on fight nights. He is a notable member of the organization and can be verified. It seems like deleting the word "large" would satisfy your complaint about weigh-ins since "crowds" would still certainly be accurate. The last two points about fighter salaries weren't my additions. I simply moved these statements from elsewhere in the page to a place where they made more sense, so please don't hold these additions against me. Wholesale reverts of other people's edits discourages constructive editors from participating, but does noting to discourage IPs and unexperienced editors. I still question your judgment here with regard to the collaborative spirit of this encyclopedia. Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 05:57, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello, per handling many of your RFPP requests, and realizing you know what you're doing, I've granted you Rollback rights! Just remember:

• Rollback gives you access to certain scripts, including Huggle and Igloo, some of which can be very powerful, so exercise caution
• Rollback is only for blatant vandalism
• Having Rollback rights does not give you any special status or authority
• Misuse of Rollback can lead to its removal by any administrator
• Please read Help:Reverting and Wikipedia:Rollback feature to get to know the workings of the feature
• You can test Rollback at Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback
• You may wish to display the {{User wikipedia/rollback}} userbox and/or the {{Rollback}} top icon on your user page

If you have any questions, or would rather not have the button, do let me know. Courcelles 04:58, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Sherdog

Dude, I work for sherdog. it's the history of the site. I know it off the top of my head. Put back everything I put up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RKing85 (talk • contribs)

I'd like to draw your attention to WP:Original Research, WP:Verifiability, and WP:Conflict of Interest. --TreyGeek (talk) 03:45, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Brock Lesnar

Please replace the edits to this article. The article is misleading without them. Randomly citing vandalism is not justification for your revert.Furrybarry (talk) 03:32, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

The Ultimate Fighter

I am currently doing a GA review on The Ultimate Fighter. Your revert did not help improve the article, and your edit summary was not accurate. Three large paragraphs does not amount to a "wall of text" and GA and FA layout structure favors larger paragraphs over smaller ones. This is, in fact, the encyclopedic style. I would appreciate it if you refrain from any reverts until the review is complete. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 03:37, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

IMO, cramming 12 seasons of information into a couple of paragraphs did nothing to improve the article. It's all a matter of personal point of view. At least I didn't put up a vandalism warning. --TreyGeek (talk) 03:41, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

It's not personal opinion, it is best practice. First of all, we don't use 12 subsection headers to split up small paragraphs. It's just not done, so your revert was wrong from the beginning. Second of all, small paragraphs are often grouped into larger ones, and most FA articles use this encyclopedic layout. Third of all, paragraph breaks can help readability, and I've added a few more per your concerns. However, this content is still undergoing edits, so I would encourage you to either contribute to the outstanding concerns on the review page, or wait until the review is complete. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 03:44, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

z196 Optical Links

Hi TreyGeek. I see you removed one of my edits on the IBM z196 Microprocessor regarding optical links. The z196 does not use optical links in its on-MCM interchip communication (it is of course used in communication to I/O devices). I was one of the architects for the IBM z196 during its design and I know this definitively. Furthermore, the article you quote is from IBM research and it never states that the technology you described is used in the z196. It even talks about 40 Gbits/sec transfer rate. The z196 uses multiple wire buses to achieve 40Gbytes/sec in this inter-chip communication. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Torquer (talk • contribs) 15:44, 12 December 2010 (UTC)