User talk:Oldelpaso/Archive 7
Premier League
[edit]So, update on what needs to be done. The transfer records needs to be prosified and referenced. Do we really need to mention all of the records given that we already have Progression of British football transfer fee record? I also think that the top scorers section should be moved up and made a subsection of the players section. It makes more sense there and would flow a bit better. Thoughts? Woodym555 12:48, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Saved. Thanks for all your time and effort. Regards. Woody (talk) 22:28, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Peer review/Gavin Donoghue
[edit]Hi, i would greatly appreciate it if you could try leaving some comments on Wikipedia:Peer review/Gavin Donoghue/archive1.Thanks.--Sunderland06 18:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've done The Rambling Man's comments and i would love to recieve some more.Thanks--Sunderland06 20:29, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
I suddenly noticed this has been sitting around doing nothing at WP:GAN. I'll review it as soon as possible. The Rambling Man 19:41, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I'll review it anyhow, and we'll see where we need to go. Deal? The Rambling Man 20:12, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Done, comments await you.... The Rambling Man 20:49, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Phenomenal oggie. I'll allow the text! No stress about getting it done, just as long as you can allow me to finish the review before I sod off to Laos this time next week...! The Rambling Man (talk) 20:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Done and dusted. Well done, great work. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:44, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Phenomenal oggie. I'll allow the text! No stress about getting it done, just as long as you can allow me to finish the review before I sod off to Laos this time next week...! The Rambling Man (talk) 20:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Done, comments await you.... The Rambling Man 20:49, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
December Newsletter, Issue III
[edit]The Greater Manchester WikiProject Newsletter | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
WP:LOTD
[edit]You are the nominator of a WP:FL that was promoted in the last month. I am inviting you to participate in nominations and voting in a List of the Day experiment I am conducting at WP:LOTD.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 23:53, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
I would like you to reconsider your early April assessment of Weston-super-Mare A.F.C. as a start class article as I have been doing a lot of work on it recently. Thanks! GauchoDude 11 December 2007 —Preceding comment was added at 17:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
delete man city re-direct
[edit]can you delete the following page, I am not an admin and can't figure out the process for this type of page
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Manchester_Shity_F.C.&action=edit
Pbradbury (talk) 23:34, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- done. Woody (talk) 00:07, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Didier Drogba
[edit]Hi, I noticed you've been updating Didier Drogba with information from an article in the Times. I've removed the Olivier Tebily reference, on the basis it's a total myth. You'll see that the article Times says that Tebily was at Chateauroux when Drogba was supposed to be living with him. In 1993, Tebily was 17 and in the youth team at Niort (some 400km from Drogba's Paris suburban club); he didn't join Chateauroux until five years later. Disappointingly, the Times journalist sourced his background stuff from the Wiki article which at the time did contain the "fact" that Drogba and Tebily are cousins, for which the only evidence appears to be that they share a surname. The reference I've cited to Drogba's official site says he lived with "his cousin Kriza" the year before he rejoined his parents in Antony in 1993; the Levallois club which Drogba joined is the local professional club to Antony, only a few miles away. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 14:12, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
I've left some comments there. Thanks for giving some ideas. :) Rt. 19:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
I was wondering if it would be notable because it was in the first round of the fa cup proper. Thanks. Sunderland06 22:02, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
FARness
[edit]Kaypoh does like his cite counting doesn't he. I will help out if needed, though I am off on holiday skiing in a couple of days. Will see what I can do, though I am struggling to actually work out what is wrong with it. Woody (talk) 23:13, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Rapid deletion
[edit]I did an article about the Hotel Belvedere du Rayon Vert (a marvellous art deco building in France) having already put it in the page of the town (Cerbere), and added it to the Art Deco page's list of art deco buildings in Europe. Some mad keenite (Chris Kreider) deleted it instantly as blatant advertising - for a hotel that's been shut over 20 years! Said it wasn't sourced. He didn't give me time to add any links.
Is this the norm now on wikipedia because I've had to defend my last new entry (Omega Development Site)? Frankly I can't be arsed doing it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bloovee (talk • contribs) 21:33, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
I've amended it with the reference.
Bloovee —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bloovee (talk • contribs) 18:10, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi - I have expanded this article which is on your "to do" list. Can you add anything to his Ardwick career details. Cheers & seasons greetings. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 08:30, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
DYK
[edit]Keep up the great work! --Royalbroil 05:32, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Oldmanchestercitylogo.gif
[edit]Thanks for uploading Image:Oldmanchestercitylogo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:43, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
International football results
[edit]Greetings! A few days ago I created the article "International football results" and 2 or 3 days later I received a proposed deletion from this article in 5 days from you. A user told me that I could create this article as long as there wasn´t an article with this information. You told me I must improve the page if I didn´t want this page to be deleted. What do you propose I do? I promised I would update this article every single day.Qampunen (talk) 17:20, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedia administrators open to recall category member! |
---|
I am leaving you this message because recent events have given me concern. When Aaron Brenneman and I, and others, first developed this category well over a year ago, we visualized it as a simple idea. A low hassle, low bureaucracy process. We also visualized it as a process that people would come to trust, in fact as a way of increasing trust in those admins who chose to subscribe to the notion of recall. The very informal approach to who is qualified to recall, what happens during it, and the process in general were all part of that approach. But recent events have suggested that this low structure approach may not be entirely effective. More than one of the recent recalls we have seen have been marred by controversy around what was going to happen, and when. Worse, they were marred by some folk having the perception, rightly or wrongly, that the admin being recalled was trying to change the rules, avoid the process, or in other ways somehow go back on their word. This is bad. It's bad for you the admin, bad for the trust in the process, and bad for the community as a whole. I think a way to address this issue is to increase the predictability of the process in advance. I have tried to do that for myself. In my User:Lar/Accountability page, I have given pretty concrete definitions of the criteria for recall, and of the choices I can make, and of the process for the petition, and of the process for other choices I might make (the modified RfC or the RfAr). I think it would be very helpful if other admins who have voluntarily made themselves subject to recall went to similar detail. It is not necessary to adopt the exact same conditions, steps, criteria, etc. It's just helpful to have SOME. Those are mine, fashion yours as you see fit, I would not be so presumptuous as to say mine are right for you. In fact I urge you not to just adopt mine, as I do change them from time to time without notice, but instead develop your own. You are very welcome to start with mine if you so wish, though. But do something. If you have not already, I urge you to make your process more concrete, now, while there is no pressure and you can think clearly about what you want. Do it now rather than later, during a recall when folk may not react well to perceived changes in process or commitment. Further, I suggest that after you document your process, that you give a reference to it for the benefit of other admins who may want to see what others have done. List it in this table as a resource for the benefit of all. If you use someone else's by reference rather than copy, I suggest you might want to do as Cacharoth did, and give a link to a specific version. Do you have to do these things? Not at all. These are suggestions from me, and me alone, and are entirely up to you to embrace or ignore. I just think that doing this now, thinking now, documenting now, will save you trouble later, if you should for whatever reason happen to be recalled. I apologise if this message seems impersonal, but with over 130 members in the category, leaving a personal message for each of you might not have been feasible, and I feel this is important enough to violate social norms a bit. I hope that's OK. Thanks for your time and consideration, and best wishes. Larry Pieniazek NOTE: You are receiving this message because you are listed in the Wikipedia administrators open to recall category. This is a voluntary category, and you should not be in it if you do not want to be. If you did not list yourself, you may want to review the change records to determine who added you, and ask them why they added you. |
...My guinea pigs and the "A"s through "K"s having felt this message was OK to go forward with (or at least not complained bitterly to me about it :) ), today it's the turn of the "L"s through "O"s! I'm hoping that more of you chaps/chapettes will point to their own criteria instead of mine :)... it's flattering but a bit scary! :) Also, you may want to check back to the table periodically, someone later than you in the alphabet may have come up with a nifty new idea. ++Lar: t/c 00:05, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
January Newsletter, Issue IV
[edit]The Greater Manchester WikiProject Newsletter | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Mercury Hayes GA on Hold
[edit]I have responded to both your comments as well as that of the main reviewer for my GA on hold.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 20:50, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
According to www.allfootballers.com, the Bill Harper who played for Manchester City in 1923-24, was born on 15 November 1900. He also played for Sunderland (28 games, 1921-1923), Crystal Palace (57 games, 1924-1926) & Luton Town (31 games, 1926-27). --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 19:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
I think that changing of his shirt number was an editorial comment on that user's behalf. - Dudesleeper Talk 00:14, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Rollback
[edit]I've given it a read through, and looks good. Sure! Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 12:32, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Reply
[edit]then why is the Championship called the Championship as it's a sponcered league name? Skitzo (talk) 09:46, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Rollback feature
[edit]Hi, I was aware of this and had considered applying for it, so thanks for the offer and yes please! cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:28, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Nery Castillo
[edit]Any and all help would be greatly appreciated, either in the form of peer review or in direct edits. I am still learning my way around wikipedia and what constitues what. I have no ownership issues, just want to add value, so no stepping on toes problems there. Pbradbury (talk) 21:58, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for all your help with this, I have left some questions/comments on Nery's talk page regarding most of the outstanding items on your list of peer review type comments, I would value your input. Thanks again Pbradbury (talk) 21:44, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Leeds PR/MCFC seasons
[edit]Humblest apologies, your honour; when writing quickly, what I put and what I mean are often not the same thing, gets me into all sorts of trouble ;-) Though I did follow MCFC seasons in including the one wartime BCFC season when we won something for which complete and understandable source material was available and will probably add the rest if/when I can make sense of which games went in which competition. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:30, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Tommy Johnson (striker)
[edit]--howcheng {chat} 19:38, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Bianchi's photo uploader
[edit]In his userpage, the Commons user who uploaded it claims to be "a professional photographer involved in cycling and football games". I noticed the photo as well, but I did not tag it since I noted it was uploaded with a notably high resolution (over 1000 pixel by width), so it's likely to be his own work. --Angelo (talk) 19:07, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
FIFA World Cup passed FAR
[edit]Well done on saving another article from the clutches of relegation! ;) Woody (talk) 11:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, just noticed that too, excellent work. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Portman Road
[edit]Hey Oldelpaso, firstly thanks again for your comments at the PR for the aforementioned. I hope I attended to them to your satisfaction. Secondly, I just wanted to let you know that I've listed it at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Portman Road. Feel free to pop by and slate it! Cheers again! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Kinky PR
[edit]Hey Oldelpaso, saw your PR request, I've added some comments. Perhaps you'd return the favour should you see fit and have the time and check out Portman Road. It's currently at FAC looking all lonely and unloved for the past day or so. Anything you see that's missing or whatever, let me know. All the best... The Rambling Man (talk) 17:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hey, found your email languishing in my junk (thanks hotmail!) today, I'll respond later. In the meantime, fancy getting your hands dirty at List of Ipswich Town F.C. statistics and records? I'd really really like to get it into a state where it could be considered for featured status. It's a tough one because it'd be a precedent for this type of thing (as far as I know) but I'm prepared to do the work... The Rambling Man (talk) 08:42, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
DYK
[edit]Congrats! Ruhrfisch ><>°° 14:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Assistance requested
[edit]I have an issue with an anonymous user regarding the deletion proposals of two article: Aoife Hoey (bobsleigh) and Siobhán Hoey. This user has proposed nomination for deletion on this article three times for notability. From my perspective on the rules for WP:BIO regarding athletes, it fits because Aoife competed in the FIBT World Championships which is the highest level you can compete in other than the Winter Olympics. Because of the notability, several items within Aoife's article were removed by this anonymous user to further this deletion. Also on Siobhán's article, her article was nominated back last March, but was voted to keep. The anonymous user is trying a second attempt at her. I am trying to avoid this escalating into something I don't want to. Chris (talk) 23:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for your help on this. I have also followed up with a report on abusive User ISPs because this user regarding both Aoife Hoey (bobsleigh) and her older sister Siobhán and the edit histories for both. Chris (talk) 21:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- If you look at the past histories of the article, especially with the AfD for Siobhán, you will see some of the User IPs labels as single purpose accounts. The WHOIS states that they are all from Ireland. Chris (talk) 23:56, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- The Aoife Hoey (formerly Aoife Hoey (bobsleigh)) article was kept earlier today. Thanks for your help. Chris (talk) 21:54, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
- If you look at the past histories of the article, especially with the AfD for Siobhán, you will see some of the User IPs labels as single purpose accounts. The WHOIS states that they are all from Ireland. Chris (talk) 23:56, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Georgi Kinkladze
[edit]Yeah, of course I'll help! Jhony 00:14, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- But are you ready for correct my broken English? :) Jhony 00:32, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- By the way I hadn't time to write the article itself, by now I just had time to search for information! :) Can you wait a week or two? Jhony 21:01, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Ha, thanks! :) Unexpected? Jhony 15:44, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Transfers
[edit]Hey Oldelpaso, thanks for your comment. I'm not that tempted about transfer fees since unless you get access to the club financial records, all "reported" transfer fees are very dubious. For example ITFC bought David Norris a couple of days ago. ITFC said it was for an "undisclosed fee", BBC said £2m, Sky said £1.5m, and then dealing with add-ons, like appearance bonus, international bonus etc, it's a minefield really. I was almost tempted to axe the whole section because sourcing it is dodgy at best! The Rambling Man (talk) 10:29, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, and good work on FC Mretebi Tbilisi by the way! The Rambling Man (talk) 10:30, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Notability of footballers
[edit]Hi, you contributed to the discussion about football notability criteria in November, so you will be delighted/appalled that I have restarted the discussion here. Please give your opinion so that we can move towards formalising the criteria. Regards, King of the NorthEast 15:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Everton FC players
[edit]Well you put in the ground work. I had been contemplating doing the player list to fit with the rest but it looked difficult and I did not know where to start plus I had been spending my time creating Everton F.C. seasons and adding the whole match list for the Merseyside derby. Great work by the way, I really appreciate it - even if you are a Manc ;) Good luck at weekend, I'm afraid you'll need it! Xenomorph1984 (talk) 22:56, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Boy, was I wrong! Great result. Xenomorph1984 (talk) 00:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Villa history
[edit]A review would be good thankyou. I am away from my books at the moment so can't really respond. If my memory serves me correctly, he was asked to leave by resignation. As I say, won't have sources until tommorrow so we will see what mine say and what yours say... Thanks. Woody (talk) 21:52, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
- Right, the Villa history says he retired. My Dean Hayes book says "He suffered a stroke due to overwork and had to retire." The Ward/Griffin book talks about it in two places: "...and in 1964 he left the club." (in his manager profile). In the text it states "In July 1964 he resigned on grouns of ill health." The pretext to that statement though, is that he was under a lot of fan pressure. So I have shown you mine... ;) Woody (talk) 23:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- I have done those prose fixes thanks. Woody (talk) 16:25, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hi there Oldelpaso, thanks a lot for the barnstar, it is very much appreciated.
- On a somewhat related note, I would really appreciate it if you could take a look at the recent history article when you have the time. Any problems will need to go on the talk page as the FAC has been archived. Peanut is waiting for your comments before he gets off his fence for the next one ;) Thanks. Woody (talk) 17:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- I have done those prose fixes thanks. Woody (talk) 16:25, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Re: Malcolm Barrass
[edit]I remembered I was unsure of something at the time. I'd mentioned on his talk page that there's a chance I might have confused him with Matthew Barrass, who's listed as Barras, M in Calley's book. I'm assuming, from his date of birth, that Malcolm never played for City either. Besides, there's no mention of them in his external links. - Dudesleeper | Talk 13:16, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Award
[edit]Thanks, greatly appreciated! Mattythewhite (talk) 12:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Barnstar and beyond
[edit]Hey Oldelpaso, hope you're well. Thanks for both the barnstar (been a while since I got one of those bad boys!) and the comments on discretionary plurals. You may have noticed that after about the third section it all goes into English (i.e. the club were etc) while up to that point it's a poor mix. I've done my best this afternoon to iron out the inconsistencies, would you be good enough to have a look for me, change any I may have missed (I'm beginning to hate that article!) and comment at the FAC for me? If you're too busy, not a problem. Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 13:07, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Spoke too soon, the plural vs singular vs Ipswich vs their vs its vs were vs was competition has been noted at the FAC. Oh well... my energy levels are too low for this right now! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:25, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Tell me about it. That was FA in six days. But there is a chance.... the FTC for ITFC is available for your comment!! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:39, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- No harm in pile-on support should you consider it reasonable - perhaps I could secure FT in six hours!!! Yeah, as for the England manager article I'd love for more help. It started as a copy of the City managers article but blew up a bit. It'll now make a decent FA in due course I'm sure, and anything you could bring about Sven would be top notch. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:17, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Tell me about it. That was FA in six days. But there is a chance.... the FTC for ITFC is available for your comment!! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:39, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
History of Aston Villa F.C. (1961–present) once again finds itself on the WP:FAC page at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/History of Aston Villa F.C. (1961–present). Your opinions would be welcome given your previous interest. Thanks. Woody (talk) 20:07, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Be nice to meet other wikip-ers, hope you're still up for it? Merkinsmum 18:24, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Big Barry
[edit]Lol. I can't fault him for effort but he's a very, very bad striker. Not got a bad first touch, but the QE2 has a smaller turning circle, and I also think the QE2 has scored more goals! For some reason he has cult status at City - I wish we'd support our good players with the same gusto, though that probably says something for his total effort. Peanut4 (talk) 20:51, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- You're probably right. His only goal from open play was one of the worst hit shots I've seen but was celebrated as though we'd won the league. Peanut4 (talk) 21:21, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
This GA nomination has taken a while to get picked up, so just in case you'd given up watching, this is to let you know that I've now done the review. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:10, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
DYK: 1976 Football League Cup Final
[edit]--PFHLai (talk) 09:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
March Newsletter, Issue V
[edit]The Greater Manchester WikiProject Newsletter | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
|
I replied, and asked really nicely if you could help me find a source :) dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:59, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
The review of this (currently at FLC) has kind of stalled. Any chance you could cast your eyes over it and let me know what you think? All the best (and Happy Easter!) The Rambling Man (talk) 10:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comments and the good spot! I've corrected Houllier's omission. Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Just read that you scraped through the first round of that season's competition by virtue of the fact that you were 2-1 ahead against Blackpool when the game was abandoned after 50 minutes due to fog. The chances of that happening today are nil. Jammy bastuds! - Dudesleeper / Talk 17:39, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, yes, I misread the note under the game in my book. It says * After a game abandoned after 50 minutes because of fog. I somehow ignored the After a part. At least you progressed via a replay, rather than from the initial game, which is what I thought. - Dudesleeper / Talk 14:46, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Oxford United Peer Review
[edit]Thank you for the suggestions on improving the article. I have made a few changes and was wondering to have another glance at it to see if your suggestions have been met. Thanks Eddie6705 (talk) 20:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Sortable dates
[edit]Hey Oldelpaso, forgive my boldness but I made this edit to show you how to get your dates sortable. It's well worth it. Good luck. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:37, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Just a heads-up that Siddall, along with a few others, can be removed from your list of City players without articles if you feel the need. - Dudesleeper / Talk 17:33, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
WP:GM Newsletter
[edit]The Greater Manchester WikiProject Newsletter | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
|
Valley Parade
[edit]Thanks very much. You're a star. I will have a look at your suggestions forthwith. Peanut4 (talk) 21:56, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- I've made some changes and added some answers. Feel free to fire any more my way. And don't worry about changing the text. If anything needs slightly amending, I'll let you know. Peanut4 (talk) 00:13, 11 April 2008 (UTC)