Hello, Spatms, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- WikHead (talk) 08:09, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mitch Rodrigue until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. - MrX02:30, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Cindy(need help?)06:40, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Works for me. It is known as the New Basin Canal Lighthouse in New Orleans, but for wikipedia purposes if its supposed to be a light then its a light. spatms (talk) 22:40, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A page you started (University Medical Center New Orleans) has been reviewed!
I was beginning to think every other Louisiana editor had gone extinct, but I see you making monthly appearances here and there. I've done my best to clean up as much as possible related to LSU football. Hopefully I haven't messed anything up too bad. Lizard (talk) 20:17, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
looks like this draft won't be too eventful for us. A lot of juniors staying for their senior seasons. The only one I can see maybe going in the first round is Deion Jones. Lizard (talk) 02:29, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I trust your judgement, but are LSU and A&M really primary rivals? I was under the impression the 3 primary were Bama, Ole Miss, and Arkansas. I'd even put Auburn and probably Florida over A&M. Lizard (talk) 16:14, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the history of LSU football, yes A&M is a primary rival. Even though A&M didn't join the conference until 2013, they played LSU 49 times before then and many times almost a decade at a time. Most of any school outside the conference. In contrast, LSU played Arkansas 12 less games before joining the conference, but Arkansas joined the conference much sooner in 1992, showing LSU played A&M more often than Arkansas. Also LSU last played Arkansas in 1966 in a bowl game until they played them again starting in 1992. There is also "bad blood" between LSU and A&M due to LSU cancelling the contract with A&M in 1995. LSU tried to restart the rivalry, but A&M was upset about the 1995 decision and declined until joining the conference. Looking at history of rivalries, "bad blood" has greatly contributed to making rivalries more intense.
Bama and Ole Miss are rivals. Florida sort of a rival based on LSU playing Florida every year since 1971, but the school and athletic department don't view them as primary rivals. For the last couple years, LSU has been asking the SEC to remove Florida from their schedule, which is not something you would do for a primary conference rival. LSU playing Auburn is actually a product of 1992 expansion. LSU didnt play Auburn in the 1950s, once in the 1960s, 3x's in both the 1970s and 1980s. Not until 1992, did they play every year. Due to highly contested games from 2004-2008, the LSU-Auburn game took on the appearance of a primary rival for a few years, but has since regressed to match the normal history b/w the schools. You could also say the Arkansas rivalry is somewhat a product of 1992 expansion. The SEC made the schools play each other at end of year to develop a rivalry and then the boot trophy was added when the rivalry didn't measure up to the intensity of the Bama and Ole Miss rivalries in the eyes of many LSU fans, the athletic dept and school officials. The last reason why A&M is considered a primary rival is that the SEC has replaced Arkansas as the end of the year game for LSU. Historically, if an SEC team isn't playing an in-state rival, the last game of the season is against an opponent the schools and SEC view as their main primary rival. Bama-Auburn, Ole Miss-Miss St, Tenn-UK (unless UK playing in-state Louisville), while the other teams play in-state rivals. Arkansas' last game was switched to Missouri when the conference went with LSU vs. A&M for LSU's last game of the season. LSU has 4 primary rivals, but strangely of those 4 primary rivals, it can be argued that (2) Bama and Ole Miss have other main primary rivals and maybe now include Arkansas vs Mizzou in that category as well leaving A&M as LSU's only primary rival without a competing rivalry. User:Spatms (talk) 14:54, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, fair enough on all points. Rivalries are often the toughest things to verify. And they're constantly changing. Tulane is a distant memory, and the Saban effect instantly made Bama public enemy No. 1. I'd venture to say a good percentage of fans would take a 1-11 season if it meant beating Bama. Lizard (talk) 21:40, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, constantly changing. If you asked me 2006, I'd say Auburn was LSU's main rival, but not now. Some younger fans probably don't even know LSU played Tulane at the end of every year until 1992. I also agree with you on all counts about Bama. Saban is public enemy #1 for LSU fans and since it's been 6 games since they beat him, 1-11 probably wouldn't be a total loss. I can hear many LSU fans saying well, at least we beat Bama and Saban. User:Spatms (talk) 16:05, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Lizard. At one point, some of LSU's rivals listed similar awards, so if other FBS schools were listing them, then I added those to LSU. Thanks for your response and working with me. Its appreciated and always a pleasure. User:Spatms (talk) 10:58, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Spatms, thanks for recently creating all those Nicholls State Colonels football season artices. I have a few item to point out regarding formatting and grammar:
In a sentence like "The Colonels were led by second year head coach...", there should be a hyphen between "second" and "year" as "second-year" is a compound adjective.
For independent teams, there's no need to denote non-conference games in the schedule table, as every game the could possibly play is by definition a non-conference game.
Similarly, for independent teams, the Conference field of the infobox should be populated simply with "Independent" and the ConfRecord field should be left empty.
In the schedule tables, and wherever else relevant in the article, it's best to make use of Template:Cfb link when wikilinking to articles about opponents in all cases where the article for that specific opponent team season does not yet exist.
Wikipedia editor Abishe just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Hello Spatms: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Abishe (talk) 18:30, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
Got a source on the SIAA investigation, or should I start looking in the newspapers? Also, FYI, the 1896 team was commended by Harper's Weekly for how clean the season was. No ineligible players, etc. Cake (talk) 09:45, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Cake, If you'd like to look for additional references that's cool with me. I used the reference already provided, which said the SIAA cleared LSU of any wrongdoing. The article doesn't specify investigation, but an investigation is what you do to find out about something, so I used that term. I guess you could use inquiry or another term, but the article says LSU was cleared of wrongdoing and that was what I was trying to clarify. I'm not sure why LSU doesn't claim the 1908 title since it's recognized by credible outside sources, especially when you compare it to other teams that claim a natl championship in a given year. Good to know about the 1896 team. User:Spatms (talk) 09:20, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. I see your point. I suppose I was worried with the claim not having a superscript linking to a source following it, but that has been remedied. LSU probably should claim 1908 as a conference title. tl;dr explanation on national titles:
As for claiming it as a national title, I would oppose that unless it was to rub Alabama's nose in its silly title claims like 1941 - how many national champions can say they lost to Vandy (post McGugin)? Football was a 'regional sport' in 1908. For the most part, southern teams played southern teams, and played an inferior brand of ball to the midwest and eastern powers. Even a power like 1908 LSU would have been big underdogs against an average Ivy League team, say 1908 Princeton, let alone the champions Harvard or Penn. A tie with say Penn would have been treated as a victory for LSU - we're just as good as Penn! while a tie would have been treated like a loss Penn - we can't beat LSU? Cf. 1910 Vandy vs. Yale or 1922 Vandy vs. Michigan. I doubt strongly there is a single contemporary source such as a newspaper which calls LSU national champions for 1908. The claim has more to do with retroactive computer methods and such. Just two years prior, the south had its first win over the north when Vandy beat Carlisle. It is absurd, frankly, to claim any national champions in the south before 1917 Georgia Tech. 1908 LSU, 1913 Auburn, and 1916 Tech, while all very strong teams, ruining opponents enough to fool a computer, at the time were never considered national champions, just southern champions. Even as strong as 1917 Georgia Tech was, Tech got wrecked by Pittsburgh 32–0 in 1918, and all of this about the inferiority of southern football seemed confirmed. Thus, it is equally absurd to claim any national champions between 1917 Georgia Tech and 1925 Alabama, the first southern team to win a Rose Bowl, such as 1922 Vandy. However, the NCAA recognizes polls which give these early southern teams national titles, and we have no criterion by which to rule them out which doesn't seem to go against wikipedia's prohibition on original research. Cake (talk) 05:13, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's a good question to ask. Lafreniere Park is the home course for the Loyola New Orleans men's and women's cross country teams. When the university hosts a cross country meet they host it in Lareniere Park. Another example, when UNO hosts a cross country meet it's held at Lake Oaks Park in the Lake Terrace/Lake Oaks neighborhood. I know on the template it doesn't seem to fit properly b/c you don't associate Lafreniere Park w/ Loyola, but it is Loyola's home course. I would think Audubon Park or City Park would be a better fit, but the teams use Lafreniere Park. College cross country is different than other sports. The large majority of the home courses are in off-campus parks similar to the set-up Loyola uses. I think it should remain on the template b/c it is an official Loyola sports venue.Spatms (talk) 18:55, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please help me with... moving page Audubon Park, New Orleans to Audubon Park (New Orleans). Audubon Park (New Orleans) is currently a redirect page and I want to make Audubon Park, New Orleans the redirect page to match the current naming format for parks.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Bradv02:47, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Appreciated! I tried to move it, but I was unable. I've asked this question before, but didnt get a complete answer.... What template should I put on the page to request a move that's similar to this scenario? One where the page you're trying to move to has already been created and you're unable to move it. spatms (talk) 06:56, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The Los Angeles Angels players category is for players that appeared in games for the teams in the 60's when they were originally known as the Los Angeles Angels. Stop changing current players to that category please.--Yankees1000:38, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That is incorrect. The team is now named the Los Angles Angels since 2016 and once again fit that category. spatms00:42, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I realize that. But it says right on the page that it's for "Players who appeared for the Los Angeles Angels, the original name of the American League franchise, from its inaugural season (1961) through its name change to the California Angels on September 2, 1965".--Yankees1000:47, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, sounds good. I was going to change the category to reflect the change, but decided to change the players first. I will clarify the categories then change the players. I'm being very careful to place players in multiple categories if needed such as those that played for the Angels of Anaheim (pre-2016) and those that played for the Angels starting in 2016 and beyond. spatms00:54, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Made clarifications to team categories for players. Now adding only players from 2016 season forward to Los Angeles Angels players category starting with 2016. spatms01:29, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I understand and thought about that, but I feel as long as you clarify, it will be fine. It is clearly explained on the category page with links to the other Angels teams. Since it's the exact same franchise it's ok to combine. If it was two separate franchises then I would agree with you 100% that there needs to be two categories. I did do some research before and looked up the Los Angeles Rams. The Rams players category was combined from (1946–1994; 2016–present) in one category. The St. Louis Rams and Cleveland Rams were separate, just like the Angels. There was already a precedence set, so didn't think it would be a problem. spatms01:54, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Does not meet WP:NCOLLATH, as the subject has not won any national awards or established any notable records. No in-depth coverage in reliable sources, does not meet WP:GNG.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
You are removing referenced material and reverting to inaccurate information. You also have a history of threatening other users and bullying if you do not get your way. You are unfamiliar with the topic, so you as you have in the past, you threaten to block editing privledges. Also the comments you leave when you edit are offensive to others. Please learn to get along with other editors or somebody may have you blocked or report you.User:Spatms (talk) 20:57, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever. If you have a complaint about my behavior, take it to ANI or keep it to yourself. You are not exempt from following community standards. Gain consensus for your desired changes. If I wanted advice on how to get along here, I'd ask someone who I know and trust. Your unsolicited opinions of my behavior, an opinion which does not reflect community standards, is entirely irrelevant. John from Idegon (talk) 22:49, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Irrelevant to you alone my friend. Being a wikipedia tough guy isn't cool. It's not about you trusting me. Those you like can do whatever they want? Not how it works. I've been on wikipedia since 2012, have over 50,000 edits and have rarely clashed with anyone. You're once again proving it's all about you and are hiding behind rules that do not apply to the situation. I did follow community standards. To call you out, you certainly didn't reach consensus before you made the changes you wanted to make to referenced material. Now please explain your reasoning.
1. School colors - Why are you changing it? I had a reference that showed schools colors are crimson and white and yet you keep changing it to the incorrect red and white.
2. I didnt add B.W. Cooper and CJ Pete's housing development to the article. They were already there. I added links to pages that already existed. B.W. Cooper and CJ Pete's don't exist in real life. They sound like drinking establishments. You're basically adding back non-existent, non-referenced material.
3. Why are you removing referenced material under athletics? High schools do have athletics information listed on their pages plus it was referenced.
4. There is referenced material that shows the notable alumni didnt come from the current Booker T. Washington school. They came from the original school. Yet you keep erasing that.
I await your response, but basically what we're dealing with here is a situation where you got mad b/c I reverted your non-consensual changes and you're angry that someone had the audacity to challenge your authority even when following the community standards.
I've never gone to an ANI in all my years on wikipedia b/c I dont really believe in doing that. I've also never been blocked. Additionally, I've also never been continually threatened to be blocked while meeting community standards just because some person (and I'm sure his allies soon) want to show me who's boss. User:Spatms (talk) 24:58, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AfD discussion title until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. UW Dawgs (talk) 02:49, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination for deletion of Template:LSU Tigers women's beach volleyball coach navbox
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:24, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. LizRead!Talk!16:29, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:35, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:48, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
In addition, CSS columns are preferred over table columns, col-begin produces table columns and div col produces CSS columns. Inclusion of country in the lead is recommended in the school article advise essay so I've reverted your removal. Gab4gab (talk) 13:00, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. LizRead!Talk!15:40, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. LizRead!Talk!15:16, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Baton Rouge Bombers Logo (Alt).gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. LizRead!Talk!18:34, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/McAlister Field until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. LizRead!Talk!21:27, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. LizRead!Talk!21:28, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. LizRead!Talk!21:28, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
From Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_cropped.jpg)
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Louisiana College Wildcats a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Louisiana College Wildcats and Lady Wildcats. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history. 
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Booker T. Washington High School (New Orleans). Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. 
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Booker T. Washington High School (New Orleans). John from Idegon (talk) 22:53, 10 September 2019 (UTC) 
Template:LSU Tigers women's beach volleyball coach navbox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 23:02, 26 December 2019 (UTC) 
.gif&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.gif){kind=link}