Home	Talk (1 · 2 · 3) (4 · 5 · 6)	To do (Main · seasons)	Interests	Awards	Contribs
WELCOME TO THE HORNETS NEST! Please know that I do not edit as much as I used to.

File:John Fitzgerald Kennedy (cropped).png

Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. – John F. Kennedy

This user is in college. This user is taking a wikibreak and may be away or inactive for varying periods of time. Although he may occasionally be able to do some editing, messages left for him may not be replied to for a while. He will be back on Wikipedia when college is over.

---

Chad Johnson is playing in Liga de Fútbol Americano Profesional for Monterrey Fundidores. Could you work your magic and find their colors? Lizard (talk) 21:11, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Lizard the Wizard: I'll see what I can find. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 21:43, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank goodness Google Translate! lol I'm not finding a color guide anywhere, so I'm going to just go ahead and contact them and see if they can provide me with the information. I know they're black and gold, but not totally sure of the codes just quite yet... I'm going along the lines of  #231F20  and  #FFC73B , or close to that, after extracting it from the website... Let's see if they respond. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 22:15, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Since it's a new league (this is its second season) and players don't normally play in leagues other than the NFL, CFL, and Arena, I'm not surprised this never came up before. I'm not even sure Infobox NFL biography is meant for foreign American football leagues. Lizard (talk) 22:32, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Lizard the Wizard: I'm sure it isn't. We can get it to where it is, though. I haven't received an email back and I still haven't been able to find some sort of a brand guide. The colors listed above are pretty close. They are the ones I've extracted from the website itself and the program I used is pretty accurate... testing it and emailing other organizations in the past to verify. I can go ahead and add the above colors to the NFL colors module if you want? Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 23:10, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it. I doubt we'll ever use it again anyway. Lizard (talk) 01:17, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, that JFK quote always gets Cult of Personality stuck in my head. Lizard (talk) 01:24, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do it this weekend. Should it not be there by Monday, notify me. As for the song you've listed, I haven't heard it before. lol after listening to it, there's probably a good reason I haven't listened to it... wrong genre! lol Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 15:32, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Lizard the Wizard: The colors have been added. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 19:48, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from the East, Brother...at least East Independence, Kansas! Your several recent edits of the military academy article infoboxes I believe are in error. The military rank of the officers deleted by your edits are not honorifics in my estimation. They have been earned and denote the authority that that person has a superintendent of the various academies. WP:HONORIFICS specifically applies to biographies on Wikipedia and no where in the guidance did I see a military rank used as an example of an honorific. I have not changed any of your edits, but you could get some blowback from other military academy page patrollers. Those who have served in the military are justifiably proud of their ranks earned. They were not awarded, they were earned. In a related note; I, as a fellow ESU alumni have followed your edits of many articles and congratulate you on your many fine edits that have helped the Wikipedia reader better understand the material at hand. Cuprum17 (talk) 19:06, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Cuprum17: Thank you for your concern! I'm prepared for the battle and I am always open to solutions, or if a consensus can/has be/been reached somewhere, I will gladly re-add them to the infobox... but there are simply way too many titles for the guidelines to list on the page. The main reason I'm against including the titles in the infobox is: though in different ways, the military officers – like you said – "earn" their rank just like those in the academia and other field. It's not just given to them, they have to earn it. Professors have to earn their titles as well, something in which they are proud of too. As far as I was told... at least by Nyttend... WP:HONORIFICS applies to the infoboxes as well, not just biography articles themselves. As far as the last portion of your comment... I appreciate the kind words. I don't see you around much... just once in a blue moon! As always, I appreciate your feedback! Thanks, Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 19:49, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I have seen you cross paths with Nyttend over infoboxes related to your school posts and I don't agree with him on the issue, but he is one of those editors that always seems to have to have it his way. My advice: keep an open mind. I have kind of semi-retired from Wikipedia but do visit my list of page patrol pages at least once a day, but I don't tilt windmills with other editors like I might have in the past over issues that seem minor in the whole scheme of things about life. I do correct outright vandalism and statements added to an article with no referencing. I have spent the last couple of years doing a restoration of a 1946 Willys CJ-2A Jeep that I acquired shortly before moving to Emporia to finish college. I graduated in December 1972, so that gives you some idea of how long I have owned the critter. I am now in the final stages of completing the restoration and I should have it up and running in a week or so, just in time for my 70th birthday. I used to drive the Jeep to classes from where I lived in a trailer court five miles north of Emporia on K-99 when the weather was reasonably nice. It will be nice to get it back on the road again. Take care, Brother... Cuprum17 (talk) 20:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a good birthday present! Happy early birthday! Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 03:40, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that that's dependent on the context. How is it being used? Is it important to the context that the officer's rank be mentioned? For example, it would be more appropriate to include a rank with "Commanding officer" than it would be with "Prominent professors". It's basically like "Professor" — saying "This statement is supported by Professor John Smith in his book..." would be an HONORIFIC problem, but it's actively helpful when it contributes to the discussion, e.g. "Assistant Professor Smith was initially going to be awarded the endowed chair of mathematics, but members of administration objected that a non-tenured faculty member shouldn't be given the appointment, and instead it went to Associate Professor Jones." Nyttend (talk) 20:14, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nyttend, it's being used in the infobox "CAPT. John Doe", just like "Dr. Jane Doe". I'm not sure if they have it listed in body, but the infobox is the main concern right now. Honestly, I don't think it's important enough. No disrespect to the military members (I have a few family members that have served), but the infobox is not the place for a rank. They've got "Commandant" or "Superintendent", etc. at the right as their title; their rank can be inserted in the article itself, just not the infobox. As I've said before, I'm open to adding them back to the infobox, as long as there is a consensus among a WikiProject (preferably WikiProject Universities or at the article for WP:HONORFICS). If consensus shows in favor, then I won't have a problem. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 03:40, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The template has been improved. If you actually take a loot at it, many unrelated colleges are not in there any longer.--Šolon (talk) 23:58, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Šolon: I saw that, but I should not have had to go looking for the reason. The reason should have been given in the edit summary by you. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 00:03, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have no issues with the content of your edit to Xavier Musketeers football, but the edit summary could have been better. I only checked the edit because a change of -589 bytes seemed out of line for a minor edit fixing dashes. If you're going to make a change like that (which seems fine otherwise) a more descriptive edit summary would be a kindness. All the best, Mackensen (talk) 23:12, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Corkythehornetfan, I just thought I'd send you a message about the official colors for the Louisville Cardinals. According to this reference from the University of Louisville, the university's athletic programs are not required to adhere to the brand graphics policy. Therefore, it is my opinion that this reference only represents the University of Louisville, and not its athletic programs. Further, I believe that according to the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) Brand Standards, the official Pantone colors for Louisville are Red (PMS 200 C) and Black. I have searched the Internet for official references for Louisville Athletics, but have so far come up empty. However, I found this reference from Louisville Athletics' website, which says to contact the assistant AD/brand marketing director for any questions regarding Louisville's trademarks. Please help? Thank you. Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 16:01, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Charlesaaronthompson: This website shows PMS 485, which would be somewhere in this neck-of-the-woods. The UofL Alumni Association says that they use the same colors as Athletics (PMS 200 #AD0000). If you want to go by the CMYK colors used on the alumni website, it shows  #F0001F , which in my opinion is closest to the Athletics website... or the RGB codes for the university which show  #E31B23  (what you changed to at the Module). I would contact the Athletics Department and see what they use (I even do this). It's our best shot so we don't argue over it. I'd contact Eakin... I've found that most department heads will forward it to their assistant directors to reply. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 20:33, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I am simply doing what you did with for Minnesota's colors. The website clearly shows a different color, but I've done the same as I've recommended above – contacting the athletics department. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 20:45, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Corkythehornetfan: Could you contact the Louisville Athletic Department and ask about it for me, please? I don't want to argue about it with you either. I'm interested to hear what they will say their colors are. Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 21:43, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be glad to contact them... any particular reason you don't want to? Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 22:12, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Corkythehornetfan: No, not really. I just figured we'd have better luck if you did it. Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 23:03, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Charlesaaronthompson: Well, I had to email both before the assistant director finally email me back. It looks like we're both wrong; they use  #C9001F . Email forwarded to you. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 14:33, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I saw the e-mail you sent me. Thanks for contacting them. One question: when you edited Module:College color/data, why didn't you use the reference provided for in the e-mail? Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 17:42, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe it is for the public; just a "by request only" situation... If we can't find it on the internet and we have to ask for it, there is a good chance it is not public and only given "by request". Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 17:52, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be opposed to using this reference as the reference at Module:College color/data? I just don't like the reference that's currently there, because it only refers to the University of Louisville's academic colors, and not the athletic colors. Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 18:03, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't really give the information, other than the color names. I think the Alumni website represents the best as it shows the correct Pantone number and CMYK codes and it says they use the same colors as the Athletics Dept. (even though they need to update their website)... the only difference is the RGB and HEX codes, but at least it still gives some information correct information on the colors. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 18:21, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, fine. I guess use whatever reference you feel is best. I'm sorry if I offended you by adding the reference in the e-mail to Module:College color/data. Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 18:49, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't offend me, it's just that we need to use common sense. If it can't be found doing an online search, then it is most likely private. Just letting you know, I had this edit deleted so the link would remain private. Also, you don't need to ping me on my talk page; I receive the message anyways. The "(ping me)" is mainly for discussion off of my talk page so I remember to respond. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 19:08, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, corkythehornetfan. I am wondering what justifies a team to go by a wordmark or primary logo for their season threads? I noticed that you changed the logo to the wordmark one for the 2017 San Jose State Spartans football team whereas you put the primary logo for the 2017 San Diego State Aztecs football team. Why does the difference matter too? Thank you, I hope you have a good day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SJSU Moi (talk • contribs)

@SJSU Moi: San Diego State's primary is a Public Domain image which allows it to be used in any article. San José's primary mark is a non-free image allowing it to only be used in the San José State Spartans article. If the primary logo is in the public domain (usually found on Wikimedia Commons), then it's best to use that logo as it better identifies the school. If the primary logo is a non-free image, then it best to use the wordmark in the sub-articles like for San José State. Also, I would strongly recommend you change the licensing and source for the San Diego State wordmark you added. If you're not the original artist on the image, you need to provide the source you received it from and a license like ((PD-textlogo)). Hope this helps! Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 23:04, 16 April 2017 (UTC):@Corkythehornetfan: Thank you![reply]

The 1974 NCAA Division I Baseball Tournament article did not include Louisiana Tech's 5-4 win vs. Texas before Texas' two wins vs. Louisiana Tech. I added Tech's win but had trouble with the code to list all three games in the series. I got the final game to show as a 12-2 Texas win, but it's displaying as a bolded aggregate score instead of a single game. Would you be able to fix it so the 2 isn't bolded and the spacing is the same as the first two games instead of wider. Thank you! AllisonFoley (talk) 23:13, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at it tomorrow (April 18). Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 02:29, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@AllisonFoley: Please see the page now. I moved the template to Template:4AllianceBracket-FIRSTko... I'm hoping this is what you're wanting? If you would, please see this page for a different option. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 18:31, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! AllisonFoley (talk) 19:56, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen you have added Stanford University logo/emblem. I have been doing terrible with logos and have received many warnings so I will not take any further risks. Please add my university's logo to its page. University's wikipedia page is Information Technology University and it's website is listed on that page. Can you please download its logo and upload to wikipedia page with appropriate licenses. Thanks so much Toafzaal Talk Me 09:13, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I added the logo as well as cleaned up the article. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 18:49, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Corkythehornetfan (talk), I was curious as to how I can become a template editor? Specifically, I want to be able to edit Template:NFLPrimaryColor and Template:NFLTertiaryColorRaw. Could you put in a good word for me? Thanks. Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 03:21, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Charlesaaronthompson: see WP:TPEGRANT for the criteria to become a template editor. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 15:41, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, can you post the coding that you're requesting at Template talk:NFLPrimaryColor#Template-protected edit request on 21 April 2017 on my talk page? I'll insert it in there, but not entirely sure on the whole thing. Don't worry about how it will show when you hit 'save', I'll be able to see it when I hit reply. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 17:36, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Corky,

Just saw your edit here (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northern_Illinois_Huskies_men%27s_soccer&oldid=777006255), and I agree that we should be consistent but we also need to be CORRECT. And plainly, the current entries in Wikipedia are incorrect.

Northern Illinois University (three words, by the way) is properly and correctly, abbreviated as NIU and never as Northern Illinois. Subsequently, the University's athletic teams are known, and correctly referred to, as the NIU Huskies not Northern Illinois Huskies, as currently listed in Wikipedia.

You should really undo your recent changes and the CORRECT changes to make is to change all the team pages to reflect the correct nomenclature of NIU Huskies.

Please work with me on correcting this.

I ask that you make these CORRECTIONS, as I would make these changes myself but I'm unfamiliar on just how to do so. If you want to teach me how to make the changes, I would gladly do the work myself and not bother you with it.

To reiterate, I agree that we need to be consistent but also, and more importantly, we need to be CONSISTENT and CORRECT.

Thank you. Let's discuss. AnneMorgan88 (talk)

@AnneMorgan88: By me saying "consistent", I mean keeping the same name format as the other NIU articles. If you want to change the naming format for all NIU athletic articles, you need to request a move. Right now, Northern Illinois is the WP:COMMONNAME which is why we are using that format. We don't brand the way the school wants to be branded; we brand the way reliable source brand the school. If you want to be a smart-ass ("three words, by the way"), then I will not discuss any further. If you didn't intend for it to be read that way, then you might want to reconsider how you word things. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 19:04, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that NIU is not the WP:COMMONNAME. NIU is the commonly used abbreviation. There is no simpler way to state this fact. Wikipedia is wrong. Thank you for the "request move" link, and I will try to use it but it's not making a lot of sense to me at the moment. I'm sure I'll figure it out. AnneMorgan88 (talk)

Then when you request the move, you can provide the third party sources that are reliable to establish the common name. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 19:41, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@AnneMorgan88: You need to provide sources to prove that "NIU" is the common name. Not just state your 'opinion'. News articles, National news, etc... something to show it is the common name. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 19:59, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Logos

What are you doing changing the CORRECT logos, that you by the way introduced?

I want to work with you on this but stop screwing up the pages. AnneMorgan88 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@AnneMorgan88: Yes, I originally introduced the wordmarks. However, I've recently been dealing with logos for NCAA teams, and it is acceptable to use the primary logo if the school lists the sport along with the logo. Those sport-specific logos can only be used in the primary sport-related article, whereas the wordmarks need to be used in the sub-articles (season articles). I'm not "screwing up the pages", so please quit being an ass. I'll be glad to work with you as long as you can tone it down a bit and be nice, not rude. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 19:04, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why would team pages not qualify as "sub-articles" and be appropriate for the wordmarks? I guess I just cannot see the distinction being made. The main or "parent" article would be the "NIU Huskies" (and that has/had the combo NIU/Huskie head logo) page with sub-articles being team pages (as sub-articles, these had the appropriate wordmark. I think it was correct as you had it originally with the wordmarks on the team pages). AnneMorgan88 (talk)

They are sub-articles, but as I said above, if the athletic programs have a sports-specific logo meaning they use the athletic program's main logo but with the sport name list under it, it is acceptable to use on wikipedia. Please see this discussion for more information. If we can't find a sport-specific logo for a athletic team, we use the wordmark. In this case, the NIU Style Guide lists sports-specific logos and therefore they can be used only in the sports main article. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 19:41, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You actually went through the trouble of (wrongfully) renaming .png files from "NIU football" "NIU basketball" etc., to the wrong abbreviation. Still a clown.