User talk:MarkMysoe/2012

Hello Ghanaba

Just wanted to checkup on you. Hope all is well. How is the issue with the Ghana reverts. I am kind of free now so feel free to talk to me. God bless. CrossTempleJay → talk 11:08, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nigel Quashie

Hello. Re the category you added: being born in Britain of a British mother automatically makes him a British person, but was just wondering if having a Ghanaian father was sufficient to automatically make Mr Quashie a Ghanaian person? cheers, Struway2 (talk) 12:50, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:20, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia redirect

If you like you may make something like Template:PartofWPCANADA but I repeat "DO NOT" supplement the link or image of Wikipedia that is on every page to a project page. Thank you.Moxy (talk) 15:26, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello pls see Template:PartofWPGHANA Moxy (talk) 21:33, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Moxy, thank you so much for making a Template:PartofWPGHANA, I will be finding a good use for it. Thanks so much. MarkMysoe 21:38, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

February 2012

No problems, if you need any more help please let me know. Giant Snowman 10:36, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for helping out on Accra Academy

I appreciate your contributions to the Accra Academy article. It's a blessing to have people like you on Wikipedia. God bless you. (Osy 18:51, 28 March 2012 (UTC)) User: Osy

Kintampo (town)

Hi Mark, thanks for starting this article! I took the liberty of moving it from Kintapo to Kintampo (town) to avoid a conflict with Kintampo (archeological site), which I moved from Kintampo, which I made into a disambiguation page. Please feel free to do whatever else with these articles you see fit! Cheers, Melchoir (talk) 04:53, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Just to note that it is still fine to use the logos in their own articles (they have a fair use rationale for that and it is valid per WP:NFCC), just not in the list article. Black Kite (talk) 10:04, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In recognition of your great work.

		The Ghana Barnstar of National Merit
		This is my special award to you for the great work done on the Ghana page. Keep it up and keep going. A friend called CrossTempleJay → talk 16:02, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting Ghanaian nationality law

I thinking Ghanaian nationality law should be split I have provided informaiton regarding the rules of nationality for it to be split. Dwanyewest (talk) 17:02, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Besides I think there is enough information to use for it be split see [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] Dwanyewest (talk) 17:13, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dwayne, yes I think it should be split. Dwayne could you please also make it like the South African nationality law article ?, so when people read it they would be very informed about the Ghanaian nationality law. Thanks for your help. MarkMysoe 17:23, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you unsplit the articles so I can add the new sources then please as I not competent enough to do it myself. Dwanyewest (talk) 14:38, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dwanyewest, I am editing the Ghanaian nationality law article right now with the full Ghanaian citizenship law, so when I am finished I will let you know, so that you can add the sources. MarkMysoe 15:55, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a great deal

Thanks Mark for helping out with the logo for the Accra Academy article, your intervention is most truly appreciated. (Osy 11:52, 3 May 2012 (UTC)) User: Osy

Re:GSE_All-Share_Index

Re:GSE_All-Share_Index

Please, see Wikipedia:NFTABLE Bulwersator (talk) 07:49, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Atsu Twasam

Hi there MARK, VASCO from Portugal here,

nice work on this footballer's article, congratulations, finally we "have" a birthplace! However, just two things i would like to point out: 1 - no need to ref everything in the box, better to ref it in the storyline, and sometimes just leave it as a link (his PORTUGUESE LEAGUE profile for example); 2 - he is known at ATSU, period, not CHRISTIAN ATSU, there is this stupid custom in my country of referring to EVERY player by two names - João Moutinho, Hugo Almeida, Adrien Silva, etc, then everybody assumes that's their footballing name. No! It's MOUTINHO, ALMEIDA, SILVA, ATSU, etc.

Have a great weekend, continue the good work - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 14:40, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry (to have apparently) bother(ed) you. I was polite and got no reply, was only trying to help... --Vasco Amaral (talk) 16:50, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'am really sorry Vasco Amaral that I did not reply to you for congratulating me on my work to the Christian Atsu Twasam article, you did not bother me in any way Vasco. Thank you so much for the revision on the Christian Atsu Twasam article. I'am truly sorry that I did not reply to you, please forgive me Vasco. I was just busy on editing articles. My apologies and regards. MarkMysoe 17:49, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please my friend, no apologies needed, no sir :) Continue the good work, as always, i am here to help if you need. --Vasco Amaral (talk) 21:16, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Ghana

Hello Mark The establishment of Wikimedia Ghana is ongoing and we thought of inviting you on board.

Our mailing list is wikimedia-gh@lists.wikimedia.org and email is wikimediaghana@gmail.com

Thank you

My name is Rexford

--Nkansahrexford (talk) 00:46, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Owusu

Hello, Mark, and thanks for your work on the Owusu surnames page. I've updated the page with several more people named Owusu, and have put back the nationalities of people as I think this is relevant and helpful to people who use the page. It's normal to include nationality together with basic information in the short summary about each person. I also changed your uppercase letters (e.g. Footballer, Politician, etc) back to lowercase, as is normal convention on English Wikipedia. We just use capitals for nationalities (English, American, etc) as is correct in written English. I just thought I'd drop by to explain so that you don't think I am simply reverting some of your changes. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Best wishes, Hebrides (talk) 09:29, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ghana village stubs

Hi MarkMysoe, and thanks for all the work you're doing on those Ghana village stubs! I had a look at a couple of the recent articles you created, Dago, Ghana, and Pokrom, and I see that you have used this source for both of them. There is a problem with this, though, as neither Dago nor Pokrom are mentioned on that page. Are you aware of another source that you can use that actually verifies the existence of these villages? At the moment, these articles are not verifiable, which is generally a Bad Thing in an encyclopaedia. Let me know if you have any questions about this. Best regards — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 09:51, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Mr. Stradivarius, I have found and used this source for the verification of existence of Dago, Pokrom and the the other villages. MarkMysoe 10:08, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for finding that source! Great, now we have proof that the villages exist, and I think everything in the Pokrom article is now sourced (except for the coordinates). For Dago, sorry to be nit-picky, but do you have a source for the 397 ft elevation statistic that you included? It doesn't seem to be in either of the sources listed there. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 11:32, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have used this source for verification of the 397 ft elevation statistic that I included in the Dago article. MarkMysoe 11:52, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Again, thank you for taking the time to find sources for this - I really appreciate it. I'm afraid I'm going to have to be nit-picky again though, as it doesn't look like that source passes Wikipedia's guidelines on identifying reliable sources. If you look at the "about" page on the website, it says that it is just a personal site. We usually require sites to have an editorial team that will check facts before we can regard them as reliable. In this case I think it would be better to find an official government source for the data, or a geographical survey by respected scientists, etc. Or if you're not aware of any such sources, you can just leave the fact out - that's fine as well. Sorry for the continued nagging, but does this all make sense? Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 12:07, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I had searched for reliable source(s) such as a official government source for the elevation data, geographical survey for the village(s) by a respected scientists and anything that will come close to those, but it proved very difficult and with no results. MarkMysoe 12:36, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If I may be of help, the required information about Dago/Deigo can be found here: http://www.indexmundi.com/zp/gh/3540.htm. Regards EJT (talk) 23:08, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another email would be appreciated

Given that another agent has already raised questions about it, I would like something in the record. Doesn't have to be much, just a statement mentioning both names (which I will not list here). The ideal email would use the standard template at Wikipedia:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries and add a sentence like "NAME A and NAME B are both names I have used, and both are the same person."

Then it will be in the file; otherwise, if someone is auditing, they will wonder why one agent questioned it and another simply accepted it.--SPhilbrick (Talk) 00:57, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kwasi Danquah III

Just to let you know that I have listed this for deletion. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 10:05, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have speedily deleted it. Please note that this does not mean that I have any opinion whatsoever about the title. However, even if the title should be changed, the way you did it, which is called a "cut and paste move" isn't allowed. The problem is that when you do that, we lose the attribution history for everyone who contributed to the original article. That violated the Creative Commons and GFDL licenses that Wikipedia is written under. If the name of an article needs to be changed, you have to use the "Move" command, which appears in the tools menu that is a pull-down next to the search box. Since at this point Richhoncho has said that the move may not be appropriate, you should firs go to Talk:Tinchy Stryder and discuss the issue. If you want the opinion of uninvolved editors, you can request a formal move discussion Wikipedia:Requested moves. However, that's not necessary if the local editors all agree on the name change (and that matches our broader policies on article titles). Please let me know if you have any questions. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:04, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mark. I had no choice because it was cut-and-paste. That was the correct thing to do. If you think the correct name to use you should read Requested moves. Don't worry about it too much I have been slapped over the wrist because I did a cut and paste! You should also remember we should be working together. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 06:54, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Only One (Ria Ritchie song)

The article Only One (Ria Ritchie song) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NSONG

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Giant Snowman 15:54, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ghana district capitals

Your edits appreciated. However, don't you think that the template has become too large with the maps?--Natsubee (talk) 23:14, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Only One (Ria Ritchie song) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Only One (Ria Ritchie song) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Only One (Ria Ritchie song) 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. Giant Snowman 07:28, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

Hi Mark, your edit summary of "pre fix" - can you please explain what it actually means? Giant Snowman 15:23, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GiantSnowman, "pre fix" - it's short for "informational correction, expansion or update/fixing of errors". I will be more precise of an edit summary in the future if the term is too challenging to understand/figure out. I got the term from one fellow editor, but I cant remember what editor it was. MarkMysoe 15:39, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you could please - edit summaries should be as informative/descriptive as possible. Regards, Giant Snowman 15:58, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Plus whenever you add and remove information you must take into consideration what the sources are saying. If you edit a sentence without consideration of what the cited source says, then you are adding misleading text because people will mistakenly believe that the info comes from that source, when it really doesn't. If you are adding new information you must have a new source. Kindly read Wikipedia:Citing sources WhisperToMe (talk) 19:51, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Several things

"Typo" refers to spelling mistakes and like, not to changes in information. And please read this discussion about you at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Africa#User:_MarkMysoe WhisperToMe (talk) 19:52, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please do be careful about this. Your edits are appreciated, but adding or changing information under the heading "typo" creates confusion for editors who have watchlisted the article; they would understandably assume that you've corrected a typo instead. Simply "adding info" or "correcting info" might work better if the change is too complicated to detail. Thanks for your attention to these articles, Khazar2 (talk) 20:19, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Akanland

Akanland redirects to Akan people. The many articles on African groups do need attention, and encyclopedic attention, the last thing we need is editors obsessing over selected tribes. --dab (𒁳) 06:33, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Akan

Hello Mark - I would like to help you, but one of the links doesn't appear to mention the Akan or any of its various subgroups. The other link does include data on the Ewe and Fante Akan subgroups. However, it ultimately combines that material with data from other populations in the Niger-Congo language family [10], so it's not possible to make out from this what exactly is the data on the Akan alone. Soupforone (talk) 00:44, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Akanland

Akanland does not appear to be a recognised geographical entity. PamD 11:38, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your image uploads

Hi, thank you for uploading photos of AC Milan players. Though I have a couple of suggestions.

Would you consider uploading the photos at Wikimedia Commons instead of the English Wikipedia? That way, the photographs can be used across all Wikipedia projects, not just this one. The photos from the match are available under commons:Category:Real_Madrid_C.F._vs_A.C._Milan,_August_8,_2012 --Mosmof (talk) 01:41, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Whenever possible, try to upload the highest resolution photos, so the quality is higher and we have more flexibility in how the images are used. Flinfo is an easy tool that lets you download the original photos instead of the thumbnails. --Mosmof (talk) 01:41, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Advice

Ok Mark, we've been here before, and since we last spoke you have come close to blocks because of the way you edit. So I'm just going to ask you as nicely as I can - please do not reintroduce the celebration section on the Kevin-Prince Boateng article. I trust that you'll just leave it, as you wisely chose to do last time. If you don't I'll be forced to take this to a noticeboard, and given your recent history of discussions being raised about you, I suspect that would result in a block. Please, please, please read WP:OR and implement it into your editing. Regards Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 16:32, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kevin-Prince Boateng Signage.jpg

I saw your message on SchuminWeb's talk page. The file was deleted because it was a derivative work of an image that was not compatible with Creative Commons licenses. In layman's terms, a "derivative work" is a work based off of another work. All derivative works must be compatible with the licensing terms of the original works (if you bring a camera into a cinema, then sell or otherwise restribute your recording under the CC-BY-SA or any other licensing terms, you're going to get sued). The image in this case did not meet this requirement, as there was no evidence that the ad being photographed was CC-compatible. The image, being a copyright violation in this way, should technically be removed from Flickr as well. Also read SchuminWeb's response by clicking below. CtP (t • c) 02:42, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you stop uploading low-res files?

Please upload the original from Flickr, not the thumbnail. Just use Flinfo. It's super easy.--Mosmof (talk) 02:49, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A warning

Your incapacity to learn the basic points of WP:OVERLINK, and the subsequent requirement for others to go around after you cleaning up, is annoying. That I can live with.

However, your deceitful tendency to introduce original research into articles under the guise of phoney citations, obscured by fake and misleading edit summaries, is damaging the encyclopaedia. For the final time, you cannot add your own personal reflection or knowledge to wikipedia articles. MarkMysoe is not a reliable source.

I'm going to make this simple. The next time you try something like this (in particular I'm referring to your fanboy commentary about the 4-2-3-1 system sourced to a single graphic), I'm going to a noticeboard, with diffs from multiple discussions from across the project about the disruption you've caused in a multitude of areas that I don't routinely monitor and which you try to hide by blanking your talk page, and ask for you to be blocked.

You can't do this any more. This isn't your own personal magazine; a lot of people put a lot of effort into making this project useful and it isn't fair of you to degrade it this way. Consider this your final warning.

Regards. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 22:37, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, MarkMysoe. You have new messages at Basalisk's talk page.
Message added 00:19, 5 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 00:19, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Further feedback

Some more issues with your editing:

Here you re-insert previously removed material about Michael Ballack slapping KPB. You say that Ballack slapped Boateng, but the source you used doesn't mention it at all. You can't add your own original research. It doesn't matter if you saw it happen on TV, if it isn't in the source then you can't write it. ---> I have provided several citations.
Here you add some material to a section which you wrote previously, in which you claim Boateng is known by a series of nicknames and then supply a reference, but the reference doesn't mention any of the nicknames you use in the article. Your tendency to attempt to deceive with fake references in this way is serious. Stop doing it.
Here you state that Boateng immediately apologised to Ballack for the foul (---> Citation Here), but in the reference you supply Boateng simply states that he is sorry to the media. It never mentions a personal apology to Ballack. Moreover, you specifically state that Ballack has not apologised for the slap (mentioned above), when again the source makes no mention of this. This edit is clearly POV; you are deliberately trying to paint Boateng in a positive light and Ballack in a negative one, despite the lack of sources to back this up.
In the same edit above, you state that Boateng's mother is a nurse (---> Citation Here), but don't provide any source. This makes it impossible to verify.

The last time I confronted you about your problematic editing, your defence was that all the problems were from before the time that I warned you about them, and you'd since stopped. All the edits above are from today. You're not learning anything, you're still causing the same problems. Please stop. Read WP:V, WP:OR and WP:SYNTH before doing any more editing. Regards Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 04:22, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was in rush to get some other work done, but it should not happen again. Believe me I have learned. I will always add citations straight upon edit. Forgive me for the sloppiness, I was just a bit tired, it shouldn't happen again. My Best regards and I do also look forward to working with you more in the future Basalisk. MarkMysoe (talk) 05:46, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well done for finding the references, but there are still problems:

First of all, the only person claiming there was a slap is Boateng himself, so we can't just state his testimony as fact. I've changed the wording to reflect the fact that Boateng merely claims to have been slapped. --->

Not only does Boateng state to have been "slapped" in the face by Michael Ballack in the four citations that I presented, there is also clear video(s) evidence watched by millions of people freely available on the web to justify Kevin-Prince Boateng's words that he was first "slapped in his face" by Ballack. A slap is a slap whether it is merely a slap in your own personal opinion, nobody would know the "pressure of the slap" except for Boateng, because they are not the one that got slapped in "their face" by Michael Ballack, Boateng is the one that got slapped and felt the "pressure" of the slap. For this reason, I would strongly assume - It is why no action has been taken against Kevin-Prince Boateng by Michael Ballack or anybody else.

The sources you're using still don't say that Boateng apologised to Ballack. He only apologised to the media. The bit where you say Boateng immediately apologised to Ballack on the pitch isn't supported by either of the references you've used. This is serious - you're lying to other editors and trying to trick us into allowing you to post your own reflective commentary on wikipedia. I'm trying to be constructive, but you must stop doing this. If you don't, I will take it to a noticeboard and you will be blocked, simple as that. ----> Please take a close read once more at the citation that I inserted for Kevin-Prince Boateng immediately apologizing to Michael Ballack on the "field" http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/may/18/kevin-prince-boateng-michael-ballack, which presents the following words from Kevin-Prince Boateng himself:

“

All I can do is apologise," said Boateng, the half-brother of Germany international Jérôme Boateng. "I was just too late and I hit him straight on. It looked stupid. I apologised to him twice on the field and now for a third time. I am sorry. It was not intentional.

”

— Kevin-Prince Boateng (Source Here)

The bit you keep on inserting about how Ballack hasn't apologised yet is your own personal observation - it's not in any of the sources. Even if it were, I don't think it's appropriate to use it in the way you are because it introduces a POV - namely that Ballack somehow has a greater responsibility to behave well on the pitch than Boateng. Even besides all that, we can't talk about how he hasn't apologised because it's far from clear that he has anything to apologise for (see point 1). --->

“

There is my foul on the one hand and his slap on the other, and I think that violent conduct is far worse than a foul.

"Ballack really does surprise me. He complains for weeks when (Lukas) Podolski slaps him and yet he does it himself.

"He is no better than Podolski. What kind of behaviour is that?

”

— Kevin-Prince Boateng (Source Here)

Lukas Podolski confronted Ballack whilst playing for Germany against Wales in April 2009, after a disagreement over a tactical decision. ---> Source Here

Boateng has also criticised Germany coach Joachim Löw for showing mercy to Michael Ballack during the 2-0 World Cup qualifying win (Germany vs. Wales in April 2009), while saying his foul on Ballack at the weekend should have been sanctioned with a red card. ---> Source Here

“

When I hear that, I can see that he has two different ways of seeing things," added Boateng.

"Can his captain slap whomever he wants? That was clearly violent conduct.

"If I had done that, I would have been banned for years. That is why I left the Germany set-up to represent Ghana.

”

— Kevin-Prince Boateng (Source Here)

I don't know why you keep doing this, but I've just noticed that you tend to include more than one reference inside one set of <ref> tags. This means that many of the sources don't show up in the bibliography. You need to use a separate set of tags for every source. You need to go through the article and fix all instances where you've done this before you do any more editing on the article. ---> This should not happen again. It was a honest mistake of referencing style.

Regards Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 12:21, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have answered your feedback's. I hope they have answered what you have pointed out. My Best regards. MarkMysoe (talk) 14:51, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No no no, Mark. You can't keep inserting the rubbish about the slap because you haven't provided a source. It doesn't matter about what other video content is available for everyone on the web; if it's not published in a reliable source then you can't say it in a wikipedia article. You also can't keep going on about how outraged you are that Ballack hasn't apologised because, yet again, you don't have a source. The source for Boateng's apology, on the other hand is fine, but I'm removing the rest of the unsupported content. If you put it back, I'm going to ANI. Enough is enough. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 15:18, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've actually had a look at the video you're talking about. This is exactly the problem, Mark - the way you're writing about it in the article makes it sound like there was a deliberate slap, which there definitely wasn't. This is why it's so risky to add content that isn't sourced properly. You think there was a slap because you love Boateng and clearly have a PoV, but you can't find a source for a very good reason - no reliable source will publish that there was a definite slap because it's obviously contentious and open for interpretation. Stop adding it to the article. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 15:27, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Ballack had slapped Boateng in his face. You cannot say that the following sources plus video(s) evidence of Kevin-Prince Boateng's statement of being firstly slapped by Michael Ballack: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/may/19/kevin-prince-boateng-michael-ballack from The Guardian, http://www.bild.de/news/bild-english/news/michael-ballacks-slap-was-worse-than-my-foul-12606402.bild.html from Bild, and http://www.goal.com/en/news/9/england/2010/05/19/1932510/kevin-prince-boateng-hits-back-at-germany-captain-michael from Goal.com are not reliable sources. The statement of Kevin-Prince Boateng being slapped are from reliable sources and should be mentioned in the article along with Kevin-Prince Boateng's apology. This not about yor personal acclaim and belief that "I love Kevin-Prince Boateng", it is due to putting the correct information of both sides of a story which is what Wikipedia stands for, and not just one side of a story which you have just done by removing the mention of a "slap" happening before a foul. I know that I'am 100% correct on this matter of the "slap", so if you like, you can take it to ANI, then I would put the inclusion of a "slap" before the foul that should be included in the article along with Kevin-Prince Boateng's apology to ANI. Now it looks like you are trying to paint Kevin-Prince Boateng as the complete fault in the matter as for me trying supposedly trying to paint Michael Ballack as the complete fault in the matter, in which is not the case. So if you want to unnecessarily take it to ANI then, please notify me if you do. My Best regards. MarkMysoe (talk) 15:55, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not trying to paint anyone as anything, you're the one trying to use a primary source (a statement made by Boateng) to reference a claim. You aren't correct about this at all, Mark. It would be like going to the Niklas Bendtner article and writing that he's the best striker in the world, just because he claims to be. You can't take a statement that Boateng has said and quote it as a reference for a contentious issue.

As a compromise, I'm going to change the article so it says "Boateng claimed to have been slapped by Ballack". Just for the record, can you understand that there's a massive difference between Boateng claiming something in an interview and us stating it as established fact? Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 17:22, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I've removed the bit about there being no information about an apology from Ballack because it's completely redundant. We don't need to mention everything about which there is no information. We shouldn't include it because it introduces an implication that Ballack is obliged to apologise, and this is far from clear. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 17:25, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Just wanted to say sorry for getting hot under the collar yesterday. I just get really frustrated with the way you edit sometimes, but I want to work with you to make that better. Hope that makes sense. Regards Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 17:45, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:DionneBromfield & TinchyStryder - Spinnin For 2012.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:DionneBromfield & TinchyStryder - Spinnin For 2012.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:08, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:DionneBromfield & TinchyStryder (Spinnin For 2012).jpeg)

Thanks for uploading File:DionneBromfield & TinchyStryder (Spinnin For 2012).jpeg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:08, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]