Jump to content

User talk:Ilikeeatingwaffles/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6


Hyde F.C. - Former Players

Hello, you tagged this section on the Hyde F.C. article. Could you help me to define the term and who should be included because I cant think of an inclusion/exclusion criteria, cheers, LiamTaylor 10:10, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Other club articles with notable/famous player sections use things such as a club's 'Hall of Fame', where one exists. If you can't find externally defined in/exclusion criteria then the section is original research and instead should just contain a link to Category:Hyde United F.C. players which will contain all former players with a Wikipedia article. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 10:15, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
I'll do that then, thanks, LiamTaylor 10:25, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

English football "mix-up"?

Hi there WAFFLES, VASCO from Portugal here,

Sorry if i committed any wrongdoings in both Iñigo Calderón and Marcos Alonso Mendoza. About the former: i don't see why we can't write only BRIGHTON ALBION in box (only club in the world named as such i believe), for compression purposes. Also (just saw you reverted it now), don't know why we can't say "played exclusively in the lower leagues of his country" in INTRO when it's 100% true, you did not even rephrase it, you removed it...And dodgy English? I fail to see where, maybe you can point it out to me (always learning).

About the latter: i only reinstated now his preferred side on the pitch (which you removed twice), i guess that does not "hurt" either. I once told User:Struway i was going to stop editing English players (or footballers operating in the country), because my edits would not stand a chance, being immediately and summarily reverted, should have kept that "promise", my "encounter" with you has been a great proof of that.

Again, i apologize for any incovenience, keep up the good work - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 15:09, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

As I say in the summary, no-one calls the club "Brighton Albion", so that terminology should be avoided as it is confusing. The term "played exclusively in the lower leagues of his country" comes across a bit POV, and isn't necessary information. The removal of the side of the pitch on which the player usually plays was probably more of a taste things. Most wide players usually end up playing on the "other" side some of the time anyway. The term "in his country" is poor English as in this particular instance country requires an adjective - one would write, "in his home country" or "in his own country". Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 15:15, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the input mate! Regarding your original message, about WP:LEAD: my approach is two paragraphs because i use one for the present ("a SPA/ENG/FRA footballer who plays for X club, as a defender/midfielder/striker") and one for the past (he played in this country, represented Y national team (when required)), so i never glue those. It's POV to say Alicante and Alavés belong to the lower leagues? No it's not. "Brighton Albion" only in box can be confused with what club? Really baffling but don't worry, i'll NEVER edit Calderón's page again.

Regarding Marcos Alonso: some players change to "the other side some of the time anyway"? I guess that can be debatable and, so far, the Spaniard has ONLY appeared on the left flank. What i said about Calderón's article in the end also applies to Alonso's.

About the all-caps stuff: yes, my summaries come across as a bit of an exaggeration sometimes, but it's something that it's hard to manage with my bipolar condition (newsflash Waffles :)), and that one writes caps does not mean one is insulting (as i have been for reporting vandals!), sometimes i'm just stressing one word in particular, but i admit i must improve significantly in that area.

Again, sorry for any inconvenience - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 16:53, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

That's a decent reason for having two paragraphs, provided that there is sufficient content to merit them being separate. A one-sentence paragraph is not desirable, and anyway a player's current and former employers is not such sufficiently unrelated info that it cannot be contained within the same paragraph. I found the use of the term "exclusively" could imply POV. Regardless, "lower leagues" is not a very accurate term, as it may mean different things to different people - lower than what? Some people may think that "lower leagues" means anything outside the top division, other may think that it means the semi-professional or even amateur leagues. "Brighton Albion" may not be confused with another club, but as I have stated a couple of times now the club is never referred to in such terms and so that should be avoided - either Brighton or Brighton & Hove Albion. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 09:09, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

question

I could use your help at Talk:River Stour, Suffolk. — kwami (talk) 23:17, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Freddy Adu

Hello I understand your concerns at this page however the page is a bit light on club prose and their is no policy on how many goals should be included in the article. Adam4267 (talk) 16:39, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that means that what is effectively a list of goals should be included for the sake of filling some space. You're right that there isn't a policy as such on how many goals should be included, but it seems reasonable to suggest that only ones of particular significance are worth including. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 16:48, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
I understand your point but its not as if their is a large number of goals only four, I think, and their is not a lot of information on his moves away from Benfica. This would add information its not just to fill space. Adam4267 (talk) 18:57, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
Information should only be included if it is worthwhile, not merely because it is verifiable. If there is not much of note to mention, then leave it with little mentioned. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 21:55, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry but your sentiment is just wrong here. If something is verifiable then it can be added. You have removed large amounts of sourced information with no reason other than your personal opinion. With regards to your second set of edits, each team he has been loaned to should have its own section, even if it is under loans away from Benfica. Please be more careful with your editing on this page and others as you did violate the Wikipedia:3RR rule today. Adam4267 (talk) 22:34, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
No, just because something is verifiable is not enough. As it states at WP:NOT, "...merely being true, or even verifiable, does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia." Why should each club have its own section? If there is not a reasonable amount of noteworthy information to sustain a separate section then it should be merged into a larger section. As it states at WP:LAYOUT, "Very short or very long sections and subsections in an article look cluttered and inhibit the flow of the prose." and later continues. "Short paragraphs and single sentences generally do not warrant their own subheading;". Fair play on the 3RR, didn't notice that I'd done that, sorry. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 23:24, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
Don't worry about the 3rr just wouldn't want to see you blocked for this. I still think we have differences but we can resume this discussion later. Adam4267 (talk) 23:29, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Fenerbahçe S.K. (football team)

Thank you for providing a rationale for the use of File:Fenerbahçe.svg on this article. In your reversion to the logo included version of the page, I believe you accidentally restored a non-free gallery to the page in the "Club crest and colours" section. Please be aware that per WP:NFG, the use of non-free items in a gallery like that is discouraged. Also be aware that re-including the images via standard image inclusion as opposed to in a gallery format does not clear the issue, that of failing WP:NFCC #8 policy. If past seals have been discussed via secondary sources, then an inclusion of a given crest may pass policy. Simply including a past seal because it is a past seal is insufficient and would be removed. If you have questions about this, please ask. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 14:14, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh yes, didn't realise I'd put more than just the infobox crest in there. Oops. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 15:10, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Nottingham Forest

i'd just like to apologise for the nottingham forest jersey logo thing. My brother actually did that edit and i saw that he was rather rude to you in the added message regarding the undo so yeah sorry about that. ThaRealDeal1 (talk) 09:00, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

No problem! Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 09:12, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Also just out of curiosity, how come the umbro logos had to be removed? i've seen the adidas logo for some teams like on the swansea page so yeah just curious. 121.210.8.240 (talk) 09:39, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Firstly, it is highly likely that to use a commercial logo without permission in such a way is a copyright infringement. Secondly, because the football kit in the infobox is only supposed to be a schematic of the clubs's kit certain rules for usage are set out at the Template:Football kit. Important ones are "Club badges, sponsor logos, and manufacturer logos should never be included. Every pattern must include a transparent field." Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 09:43, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! so the adidas kit manufacture logos on the swansea page are copyright infringements???? By the way i dont want to make this sound like im arguing, i just want to learn more on all of this and wiki. ThaRealDeal1 (talk) 10:12, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I believe that to be the case. Every use of a copyrighted image or logo has to be individually justified. I think that if it is not totally clear then the policy regarding copyright is to err on the side of caution. Besides that, it just makes what is supposed to be an approximate representation of a club's colours look overly cluttered, if you ask me. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 10:32, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Golden Foot Award

Thanks for reverting the cut-and-paste move of this article. I renamed it to the the capital "A" version, but after some browsing of the relevant sources decided to move it again to the simpler Golden Foot. That is what it is almost universally referred to as, and it's consistent with for instance Golden Boot. If you disagree, I'll revert and create a WP:RM request to get a full debate. Favonian (talk) 11:40, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

That seems to make sense for consistency. I don't have a strong opinion either way. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 11:46, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

George John

The reason i included it, is because quoted can be included in Wikipedia articles. The fact that he has been in favour of a transfer to another league to further his career may have a bearing on his future. Ie: His relationship with the club, it's fans and the media. Mentioning Blackburn Rovers and his potential move to the club was worthy of mention. So i would appreciate it if you did not remove it as this constitutes Wikipedia tampering. User:RoverTheBendInSussex (talk) 15:45, 31 August 2011 (GMT)

Just because some can possibly be included that does not mean that it definitely should. A footballer playing in a 'lesser' league being interested in the opportunity of playing in a 'better' league is not exactly worth commenting on. It pretty much goes without saying and is not notable. If a striker joined a new club and said something like "I hope to score lots of goals for my new club" would that really be worth including the quote in a encyclopaedia article on the player? Look at articles for footballers that have reached WP:FA standard, such as Thierry Henry or Steve Bruce - they don't include these kind of banalities. Also, what is "Wikipedia tampering"? Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 15:12, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Stop vandalism!!!

Ты вообще кто такой? Тебя сюда (в Википедию) никто не звал. Не трогай статьи про украинский футбол. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.190.26.16 (talk) 12:21, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Please use English on English wikipedia. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 12:24, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
You dont understand russian? Its your problem! If you dont understand russian or ukrainian, why you editing talk page of UKRAINIAN football club????????? STOP IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.190.26.16 (talk) 12:27, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Because this is English Wikipedia. I do notunderstand Ukranian or Russian, so I do not edit Ukranian or Russian Wikipedia. I have been undoing vandalism to Talk:FC Metalist Kharkiv, where there have been repeated incidences of content being deleted, rather than being archived. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 12:30, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
1.I dont edit Ukranian or Russian Wikipedia too!YOU have been DOING vandalism,not undoing.I never vandal pages.PS:why are you doing this??????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.190.26.16 (talk) 12:34, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
2.And there NO IMPORTANT comments on that page! PS:how did you see that this (UNIMPORTANT!!!) comments were removed?
3.Can you answer faster?I havent much time to argue.
4.Where are you from????
5.Why you edit that talk page???
6.Stop it!!!!
7.NEVER edit pages about ukrainian football clubs!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.190.26.16 (talk) 12:49, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Important or not, other people's comments should not be removed from a talk page, except for in exceptional circumstances - please see WP:TPO about this. I will answer in my own time, thank you very much, and it is none of your business where I am from, etc. I suggest that you read WP:CIVIL before posting in such an aggressive fashion again. I should remind you that nobody owns an individual article and hence you, nor anybody else, are in a position to tell editors not to edit article's on any particular subject - please see WP:OWN. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 13:22, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
About comments on page [1]:1st comment is meaningless(???-i am not sure i used correct word); 3rd comment was written by bot about the file, that was uploaded by me(!!!).So this comments MUST be deleted.Alex (talk) 14:48, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Please read WP:TPO, then you'll realise that they must not be deleted. You may archive them, if you wish. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 15:03, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
You didnt answer some questions:1)WHY you edit that talk page????? 2)how did you see for the first time that that comments were removed??? Alex (talk) 15:13, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
I edited it because content had been wrongly removed. The page is on my watchlist. Have you read the relevant policies that I have pointed you towards? Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 15:20, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
1.Why this page is in your watchlist? You are fan of FC Metallist Kharkiv?)))2.I have watched that page.What paragraph you think i should read? I have no time to read (and translate some words) all text. Alex (talk) 15:37, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
It's none of your business why the page is on my watchlist. You have time to repeatably post on my talk page but not to read a few pages? Give me a break. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 16:07, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

So, now you're blanket undoing a load of my recent edits, labeling them all as vandalism. Grow up. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 20:16, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

I dont agree with some of your edits. Alex (talk) 20:47, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
I think we should stop undoing revisions of each other.Are you agree with me? Alex (talk) 21:24, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Oh my god, you have completely ignored WP:TPO and deleted other people's comments from Talk:FC Metalist Kharkiv again. Why would I agree not to undo that? Interesting that you have changed your tone after the warning from User:Yunshui.Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 21:38, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
I am tired of it! I dont want to argue any more! So i changed my tone. And PLEASE dont edit page about Metalist Kharkiv.OK? PS:i was in bad mood before.Alex (talk) 21:48, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Looks like you didn't read WP:OWN either. I think you should. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 22:18, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Are you agree to remove this discussion?Alex (talk) 13:27, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
I have created archive:[2].Alex (talk) 13:50, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ilikeeatingwaffles. In the interests of a quiet life, I've let Alex's inappropriate archiving stand, and rather than revert him I've posted an archive template on the much-abused talkpage. WP:AGF and all that. Hopefully we can put this to bed now. Yunshui (talk) 14:02, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Cheers. I am in the process of restoring other deleted talk pages related to Ukrainian football. Just done Talk:FC Arsenal Kyiv and Talk:FC Dynamo Kyiv. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 14:05, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Sweet purple pumpkins, I hadn't realised he'd blanked that many pages! I'll let you get on with sorting out the mess to avoid edit clashes, and I'll slap a warning template on him. Best of luck. Yunshui (talk) 14:10, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar time

The Hard Worker's Barnstar
For performing the otherwise-thankless task of fixing up all those talkpages. Yunshui (talk) 14:19, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Advice

Before jumping to conclusions in future and confusing lack of content with lacking notability, try looking in google books, that should tell you whether or not multiple reliable sources are available..♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:14, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

No notability was shown, so tagging was an entirely justified action. It is down to the article creator to prove notability in the first place. I suggest that you should refrain from using such a patronising tone when leaving messages on people's talk pages. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 13:33, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Zenit

Hello Ilikeeatingwaffles! First of all, thank you for your edits to FC Zenit Saint Petersburg, these Russian clubs pages are mostly edited by IPs so it's very nice to see an experienced editor making a change or two. Since I've lost touch with Wiki a bit, could you please enlighten me, what's the current consensus regarding notable players' lists, they are discouraged in any form, aren't they? Also I would appreciate it if you take a look at Alessandro Rosina, I've expanded it a bit over time but my English is really terrible and my knowledge of rules is currently also far from ideal. Any contributions from someone like you would be very much welcome. Cheers! Barocci (talk) 01:53, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Glad to be of help. When it comes to notable/famous/etc players lists there has to be an externally defined definition as to who is notable otherwise the list becomes original research. I always try and look for comparable articles that have reached featured article status to get a good guide. The Manchester City F.C. article lists players who have been included in the club's 'Hall of Fame' which is a good example of the kind of list that would be useful. The Arsenal F.C. article dispenses with a list - presumably there's no Arsenal equivalent - and so just links to List of Arsenal F.C. players. Does that help? Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 14:25, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Problem user indeed

Hi there WAFFLES, VASCO here,

regarding this report you filed (please see here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=452878243&oldid=452877582), and the fact that the user therein referred has already been blocked once, and refuses to engage in any discussion, i really don't know what can be done with him...

In Luis Enrique Martínez García, for the SECOND TIME, he removed second youth club and Sporting de Gijón B entry in box, what gives?

Attentively, from Portugal, have a great weekend - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 14:20, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it's difficult to know what to do. The editor makes both positive and negative contributions, but refuses to engage in discussion, and Administrator noticeboards have just completely ignored. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 14:56, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to help at Ely article improvements

As a previous editor of Ely, Cambridgeshire, you are cordially invited to assist in improving the Ely article at Ely article improvements --Senra (Talk) 15:12, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Royston Drenthe

I can not agree more with your summary in this player's article - saw this pattern of inserting EVERY game played first at Pedro Rodríguez Ledesma, then at Míchel Salgado and Ruben Rochina, did not find it one bit amusing, those kids... - however, please note that games where player assists and/or scores are notable, if they are ref'd no problem adding those, Drenthe just happens to be having a fiery start, i'm sure things will "tone down" from now on.

You are correct, that thing of him assisting Velios in a loss - especially when it was not his debut or anything - has no business being in his article, but an anon "user" does not agree, has reinserted it again, i have re-reverted.

Attentively, happy week - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 14:38, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

  • So a goal and two assists is NOT notable (even though i repeat i understand and back your point of view 100%)? It should be there instead of the Neville assist but that's OK, not going into an edit war over this, i'll leave article as it is. --Vasco Amaral (talk) 16:09, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Adding Ely based stuff to the world of Wikipedia

There is a discussion initiated by Loandbehold90 (talk · contribs) on my talk page that you might be interested in. Feel free to join in or not :) --Senra (Talk) 12:24, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Ely, Cambridgeshire

Please respect my attempts at collaboration that I had set out in Talk:Ely, Cambridgeshire#Article improvements, rather than reverting (here and here). I was in the middle of notified changes via a {{under construction}} hat in the notable buildings section. I had previously informed you of my intentions and given you an opportunity to collaborate, which to date, you seem to have ignored. Your silent reversions of my edits are not in the spirit of collaboration and neither of us own the article. With all due respect my friend, please talk and explain your actions on my talk page or on the article talk page. --Senra (Talk) 13:32, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I object to your accusation of contravening WP:OWN. As you wrote on the Ely talk page "feel free to help with this process". I saw something I thought to be unencyclopedic, changed it, and explained myself in the edit summary - no silence there! As it was a small point I felt that discussion on the talk page was not necessary. Just because I have not 'signed up' to collaborate on this page should make no difference to the relevance of any of my edits, and dismissing because of this goes against the spirit of collaboration. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 13:38, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
I disagree. Your actions are silent except in cryptic ec's. Feel free to add content, yes or else feel free to comment on your actions on the article talk page. Reverting an edit two minutes after it was inserted is not, IMHO, AGF. I accept that some buildings may turn out to be not notable enough although I contend (at this moment anyway) that the 12th century St John the Baptist hospital is notable and encyclopaedic. I also contend that the present cited use of these old buildings should be recorded. Please refrain from snap judgements, at least until you have seen more content added (er, please?) --Senra (Talk) 13:49, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Ely, Cambridgeshire peer review

I am in the final stages of helping to prepare the Ely article for peer review by removing the remaining tags and some final brief ce—see also of course Talk:Ely article improvements. Would you like to nominate the article or are you happy for me to do it? I am more than willing to assist your nomination and would more than welcome your assistance if you prefer me to do the nomination --Senra (Talk) 17:02, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

User:Aciyokrocky

Hi there WAFFLES, VASCO here,

at a complete loss, this "user" has been warned, he talks to NO ONE (i certainly will not engage in interaction with such a person) and, for the THIRD TIME (at least), goes and removes the infobox info in Luis Enrique Martínez García. Any suggestions?

Attentively, from Portugal - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 02:34, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Peer review of Ely, Cambridgeshire

Ilikeeatingwaffles. I am notifying you of this peer review as you have recently edited the article.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

--Senra (Talk) 01:03, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Re your recent edit(s). So sorry if I come across as tetchy by changing your date formats and prose (slightly). I apologise. There is definitely no malice intended on my part. I am simply responding to the peer review recommendations whilst also trying to maintain the article in a form suitable for a WP:GAN submission --Senra (Talk) 15:23, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Date format was automatically done by ProveIt. If that isn't acceptable for peer review then that needs to be changed. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 16:35, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Prove-it works for me. I just checked the documentation and could not see anything relevant, so I suspect prove-it uses our own Wikipedia-user-->My preferences-->Date & time-->date format which are
  • No preference
  • 16:57, November 22, 2011
  • 16:57, 22 November 2011
  • 16:57, 2011 November 22
  • 2011-11-22T16:57:01
My own current settings are shown above in bold. I am not in any way suggesting you change your preferred settings. What the WP:MOS and our reviewer Rodw (talk · contribs) both say is we should maintain consistency. The Ely, Cambridgeshire article is written using British English. In that language, the preferred date format is either dd/mm/yy or the expanded form (as currently in the article) dd MMM yyyy, with a non-breaking space between the day and the month --Senra (Talk) 18:46, 22 November 2011 (UTC)


A barnstar for you!

The Editor's Barnstar
Thank you for helping to raise Ely, Cambridgeshire to GA status -- Senra (Talk) 01:17, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Gary Ablett

Re this revert. I'm not a copyright expert, but isn't fair use acceptable now that Ablett has died? -- John of Reading (talk) 09:58, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I did have to think again after doing that revert, actually. The rules set out at WP:NFCI state that an exemption from excluding non-free images includes "Pictures of deceased persons, in articles about that person, provided that ever obtaining a free close substitute is not reasonably likely." I guess the question is, is it reasonably likely that free content is (or will be within a reasonable time frame) available? I dunno really. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 10:14, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Nor I. One for WP:MCQ perhaps. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:32, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Real Madrid CF.

A couple of things: - Which reference did you think was a personal blog? There are none that I cited. All are legit sources. - Also, being one year is not outdated. If you can find a recent source that says real madrid are not the most successful in europe, I will be happy to consider it!Seaboy123 (talk) 05:31, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

The reference that was out of date was from before Barcelona's most recent trophy wins. The blog reference was the first one removed [3]. nickbrammer.com is basically a blog, and clearly not a reliable source. I really wish that all the Barca and Real Madrid fans would stop all of this childish insistence that their team is the 'most successful'. In order to maintain POV both articles should simply state how many trophies each has won, and where any of these totals are records. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 08:18, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Re: Cambridge

Hi, thanks for your response to my comment on the Cambridge article. Why not be bold? Recent experience with relatively high profile articles in which other editors feel that they have a vested interest due to their previous contributions to the article has proven to be....unpleasant. I've had no input into the Cambridge article thus far so I'm happy to point out areas in which I think it could be improved but I'm reluctant to make the changes myself. I hope that my input will give other more invested editors ideas to improve their article. Thanks again. danno 02:11, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Just have a go - can't do any harm, can it? Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 12:47, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Done. Probably worth a lookover as my knowledge of Cambridge is largely garnered from the article and so some factual errors or more likely weight errors may have crept in. I think that the expansion balances up the silicon fen part better anyway. danno 21:41, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Definitely an improvement. I just made a little correction, which was probably needed due to your confessed lack of knowledge of the city. Good job! Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 11:03, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Cheers. Funnily enough that error must have pre-existed and I didn't spot it as I didn't touch that section, just added bits around it! danno 19:05, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

unfair removal of edit

hi I would like to know why i got this message and i had a edit removed today, the edit is factual and can easily checked, it can no-way be classed as an non- neutral point as it is history and factual if this did not happen then I understand it being removed but this is censorship of true facts. below is the message i got, Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Nottingham Forest F.C. appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this. Thank you. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 16:43, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Calling a defeat 'embarrassing' without providing a link to a reliable source saying this is not adhering to a neutral point of view. This is a very important pillar of how Wikipedia works. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 17:03, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

then the whole page is in a non neutral point of view — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlosfandango68 (talk • contribs) 17:09, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

That statement makes no sense at all. Regarding your edits, they are clearly an attempt to inject non-neutral content into the article and relate to a single league match which is insignificant in the overall history of the club which the section covers. Forzagaribaldi (talk) 17:43, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

the whole page is obviously edited by forest fans that is why any mention of bad history is removed thus is the meaning to my previous statement, if its only the good history that is allowed to be stated how is this neutral ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlosfandango68 (talk • contribs) 18:35, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

and also how are posts like the 1's below neutral ?? Another Trent End favourite is: "I never felt more like singing the blues, when Forest win, and Derby lose", sung to the tune of Singing the Blues (Guy Mitchell). To the tune of The Animals Went In Two By Two – Hurrah is the chant "When Derby go down again and again, we'll sing, we'll sing". This opening line is repeated before "When Ian Moore scores a goal you can shove your Hector up your hole and we'll all go mad when Derby go down again" This line refers to Ian Storey-Moore a Forest goalscoring favourite of the 1960s, and a similarly prolific Kevin Hector of fierce rivals Derby County. 'The Forest March'('We've Got the Whole World in Our Hands') was released in February 1978 on 7-inch vinyl. This was a joint collaboration between the group Paper Lace and Nottingham Forest Football Club and features the fans singing as well as the team of the time. Changes to the lyrics included "We're the best team, in the land / We're the best damn team, in the land" amongst others. An older anthem from the City Ground terraces is the fans' adaptation of Lee Marvin's 1970 number one hit Wand'rin' Star, with such lyrics as: "I was bo-rn, under a Trent End goal" and also slight changes in the verses where Marvin describes what wheels and mules were made for, to how certain implements were made for inflicting injuries on fans of fierce rivals Derby County. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlosfandango68 (talk • contribs) 19:25, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Setting aside your obvious trolling by this point, there is nothing biased about stating which are popular songs at the City Ground (no matter what their content is). You are quite probably correct that the article is mainly maintained by Forest fans but it is still a factual article that states the up and downs of the club and the current situation. Your 'contributions' are plainly a tedious attempt to wind up Forest fans for your own amusement rather than understanding and furthering the aims of Wikipedia. I suggest you return to Sickipedia where I see you have managed a couple of Forest jokes in amongst the disgusting racist filth you seemingly find amusing. And apologies to Ilikeeatingwaffles for your talk page being filled up with this pointless nonsense. Forzagaribaldi (talk) 22:50, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

the last song condones violence that surely is non-neutral or is this ok on wikipedia ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlosfandango68 (talk • contribs) 22:56, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

The last song condones violence. The Wikipedia article doesn't. Nothing to see here. Forzagaribaldi (talk) 23:00, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

so you ignore entries like this "and also slight changes in the verses where Marvin describes what wheels and mules were made for, to how certain implements were made for inflicting injuries on fans of fierce rivals Derby County." this condones violence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlosfandango68 (talk • contribs) 23:32, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm done with this troll. Forzagaribaldi (talk) 23:56, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Dear Carlosfandango68, if you have a problem with the Forest article discuss it at Talk:Nottingham Forest F.C., not here. Now go away. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 08:36, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Ilikeeatingwaffles, This is Timmy 96 telling you why would remove my editing I have just done on Diniyar Bilyaletdinov. It's because of weird conspiracy grumblings, not very encyclopaedic and it's something else. It's a fact you know. Just you want to know this is my first talk on wikipedia. (talk) contribs)18:10, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Ilikeeatingwaffles, I just wanted to inform you that the images used on the Ghana national team jersey gallery have been licensed under Template:Non-free promotional since 28 November 2011, therefore they do not infringe copyrights to be used in the Ghana national football team article. Otherwise if they did, the images would not have been on Wikipedia for 31/2 monthes (28 November 2011 to Present) and they would have otherwise been deleted from Wikipedia a very long time ago if they infringed copyrights as in your opinion. -- Regards, MarkMysoe (talk) 16:48, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

I believe that you are incorrect in your usage of Template:Non-free promotional, and that it has slipped under the radar. I've questioned one of these images to see where that gets everyone. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 20:21, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

AFC Wimbledon edits

Hi. In reference to AFC Wimbledon edits I largely just wanted to include the FA Cup and FA Trophy results for the sake of completeness. I don’t see that it matters that they aren’t remarkable in any sense. It just seemed that since the history is laid out in order of each season then placing in all major competitions should just be covered as standard, particularly in reference to the 2009-2010 season say where there is very little said at all. -- Regards, Jodie25 (talk) 15:38, 14 July 2012

If you start covering every single competition for the sake of completeness then after a few seasons the history section because huge and unwieldy, full of details that are of little consequence. Try looking at articles for clubs that have reached featured article status - York City F.C., Margate F.C., Gillingham F.C., etc. - and you'll see that only the important parts of the club's history are included. If a team goes through a few seasons where not much happens then that can be captured in a few sentences. Amongst all the interesting details of the history of AFC Wimbledon an unremarkable cup run sticks out as being non-notable. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 12:01, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Non-league taskforce invite

As a contributor to English non-league football articles within Wikipedia:WikiProject Football, I thought I'd let you know about the English non-league football task force, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of English non-league football. If you would like to participate, join by visiting the task force page and add your username to the participants list. Thanks!

Good luck with the Cambridge United GA review. Del♉sion23 (talk) 21:05, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Ethan Ash

Hi, please can you explain a bit more clearly for me why the Ethan Ash wikipedia page is being considered for deletion? I'm not 100% clear what would need to be done to prevent this from happening and to meet Wikipedia's guidelines?

Additionally, I have deleted most of the edits I made, including references. Please can you review?

Regards Chezmcgee (talk) 16:09, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Sure. It needs to be shown that the person in question is suitably notable to warrant an entry on Wikipedia. The general notability guideline states for inclusion you must show that "a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". The sources provided are not reliable and/or independent of the subject, and for the most part do not cover the subject in any great depth. Hope that helps. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 14:55, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

A belated barnstar

The Special Barnstar
Because a year ago I was on the verge of quitting this project but with a few (likely unwitting) words from you, literally a virtual stranger, I'm still here. Whether that's a good or bad thing is open to debate, but I appreciate it. danno_uk 02:31, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Bala Town FC

Hi Ilikeeatingwaffles,

We are the administrators for the Bala Town Football Club wiki page and are the webmasters of the Bala Town website.

I personally have written the history and content of our website and wikipedia pages so there is no issue regarding copyright.

Can you please restore what was there so we can update it after our recent European matches please.

Thanks!

Bala Town FC

Waterbeach

I added back and corrected some the text you deleted. It certainly doesn't need its own section. But as the only school in the village and the location of the library, etc., they deserve a mention.--Lidos (talk) 08:45, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Jesé - Bits and pieces

Hi there ILEW, AL "here",

Please read this entry i have inserted at WP:FOOTY (see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football#More_Jes.C3.A9_to_go), and please do drop a line there. I feel that several of the stuff you removed can "resist" still.

Let's see what the community has to say, if they say your version looks better and more encyclopedical, of course i'll abide by. Attentively, happy weekend from Portugal --AL (talk) 00:34, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Ghana

feel free to join the discussion at Ghana national football team. Frietjes (talk) 22:15, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 22 February

Everton F.C.

Hi, why have you reverted my changes about Everton F.C.? Towerman86 (talk) 16:02, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Precious

sports and players
Thank you for quality articles such as History of Tottenham Hotspur F.C., Long Melford and David Thomas Broughton, for starts such as Güstrow Cathedral, for welcoming users, moving, redirecting and dealing with articles for deletion in more than 9 years, showing yourself in your contributions alone, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:51, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ilikeeatingwaffles/Archive_6&oldid=1138902616"