User talk:PeeJay/Archive 6
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:PeeJay. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
Disagree that it is not notable but the community seems to think so.Cptnono (talk) 06:08, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done. Sorry about that. I also put up Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Newcastle United F.C. 8–0 Sheffield Wednesday F.C.. As a Newcastle fan that stung.Cptnono (talk) 06:24, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Goal time
I was at Old Trafford for the match, but when I watched it back again the next day, the ball clearly crossed the line at 40:59, but if the media is reporting it as 42', I suppose we should too.
RednessInside (talk) 17:09, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Yeah I know what you mean it is confusing sometimes. I paused the highlights when the goal was scored and the ball was hitting the back of the net and the time still showed 40:59 (41'), although I admit when watched at full speed it does look like 41:00 (42').
RednessInside (talk) 19:58, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Looks like your email account has either been hijacked or spoofed - I just got some spam purporting to be from your email address. Oldelpaso (talk) 07:47, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Read
Talk:1968 Intercontinental Cup#Page protection
...
And I am a man of my word. And as a sign of good faith, I could help you with the Manchester United F.C. in Europe list. It could be FL material in a few days. What do you say? 68.215.155.80 (talk) 07:51, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Carlos Tévez
Hi PJ2K3! Thanks for that; I get so accustomed to see sports statistics changing without explanation that I didn't spot that this was a simple "totals" row when I reverted the change the first time it was made. Cheers -- Timberframe (talk) 14:06, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
FYI
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:HappyDudeThe_MadTim#Religious_agenda —Preceding unsigned comment added by HappyDudeThe MadTim (talk • contribs) 23:15, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thansk for taking the time to respond. No wait ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by HappyDudeThe MadTim (talk • contribs) 22:48, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Man U players
Hi mate, I have now (to my knowledge) completed the two Man U player lists. Can you check that I haven't missed anyone out and correct any errors that I may have made? I have noticed that the player lists for some clubs include stats for the wartime matches played in 1939, so I have included Beaumont Asquith (who is noticed in my Player by Player book) - I'm not sure whether he should be removed.
We can now try and add some prose and references to the two articles.
Thanks. 03md 22:47, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Winging it again?
Re.[1]. So come on then, where exactly is it documented in a policy or guideline, that our readers are so moronic, so absolutely fucking retarded, that they would be confused by a column which is clearly listing annual seasons from 1992-93 to 2009-10, that it needs to be broken up in such an obviously stupid and visually disgusting way, just to include 1999-2000? MickMacNee (talk) 01:25, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Graphic
Hey, how to do those Graphics like you did for the Inter-Sevilla match? Kante4 (talk) 12:43, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- Ok will give it a try next timne, thanks. :-) Kante4 (talk) 13:21, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Kits
I'll give it a go over the rest of the bank holiday weekend. It would be appreciated and rather time saving if you get people to go through the file history of Bruno's kits and reupload those which don't feature the logos. VEOone five 02:04, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
- On my user page, I've made a list of what teams' kits I have saved on my hard drive, just so you know... VEOone five 13:39, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
PL results table
Hey PJ. Can you think of any reason why this is getting out of date? I'll update if no reason. Thanks. gonads3 11:18, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Four clubs?
FYI: I like the Blades, the Tigers, and the Magpies and only hope for Chelsea to WIN and for ManUtd to LOSE. TRBP talk 11:19, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
- OK sorry for getting snippy. TRBP talk 11:23, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Imagemap
Hmmm...possibly I can. I did the map using this tool. Its a fairly easy process :) ResMar 19:44, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, looking at it again, there are a variety of positions fielded. It's still completely possible, but might be a very bulky template. ResMar 19:59, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Well, after working around with it, I think it can't be done. Trying to insert templementation, it simply burps out error codes no matter what I do. Obviously a MediaWiki issue, sorry. ResMar 20:24, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
- You can still grab the tool and manually imagemap each article, though. Nothing stopping you there :) ResMar 20:40, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Wales
I have put the Wales article forward for GA status. It just needs tweaking, and maybe a heavy-handed swipe from outside to get it in place. I am writing to those who are constant contributors and defenders of Wales and Welsh articles, to not scream at me for doing this, but to help get the article through. If we fail, we fail, there is nothing wrong with that; but Wales should be a Good Article at least and if it takes good intentioned amateurs to reach that then so be it. FruitMonkey (talk) 01:41, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Deletion review - Samuel Galindo
I started a deletion review for Samuel Galindo on WP:DRV because I found out he made in international appearance back on February and I think I misunderstood one of the requirements on WP:ATHLETE. – Michael (talk) 01:32, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
English-only
I have no clue where you got this crazy idea that English Wikipedia should only cover items relevant to "English-speaking countries", but there is no such policy. Your removal of validly sourced information on this concept has been reverted on FIFA 11. Not only is it silly to assume that English speakers will only reside in "English-speaking countries", but it's also silly to assume that only people from these countries will be interested in our article on FIFA 11. We are an encyclopedia for the world that happens to be written in English, not an English encyclopedia for English subjects. Do not removed validly sourced information regarding covers for various regions of the world from this article again. The359 (Talk) 21:44, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Hey,
Regarding this: got a reliable source? I've changed it back for the time being. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 22:21, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Bebe
On the source, it says nothing of Buddhism on there. Lushhhhhhhh (talk) 22:16, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- I don't really know why he's a source for vandalism D: He hasn't even done anything yet Lushhhhhhhh (talk) 22:18, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure, I think subject for deletion? Lushhhhhhhh (talk) 22:21, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- I doubt the 3rd division would be professional. Lushhhhhhhh (talk) 22:31, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Is it worth adding that Real Madrid were interested? Says here Lushhhhhhhh (talk) 22:59, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- Ok cool, I'm not too sure about these Attack midfielder rumours either, seems to have just come from messageboards? Lushhhhhhhh (talk) 23:10, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
It says that he's the 3rd Cape Verdean to play but technically he hasn't played yet? Therefore surely he doesn't count? Lushhhhhhhh (talk) 22:28, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Says on here that Bebé is 6ft 2inches in the last paragraph? Considering Bebé doesn't have a profile anymore on Vitoria, that reference of 6ft 3inches leads to nothing? Lushhhhhhhh (talk) 10:19, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Should we add the Champions League inclusion? I've added it to the talk page. But i'm busy right now so I can't add it D: Lushhhhhhhh (talk) 11:28, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Premier League FAR
I have nominated Premier League for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:34, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Manchester United
Hi,
I noticed that since most NFL and Australian Rules Football use the words American football and Australian Rules football respectively. I've had another user ask to discuss this somewhere, and i'm fine with that to gain a consensus(an RFC or maybe one of the wikiprojects), but it should be standardized one way or another either by what people call the sport per ENGVAR; in the US, American football is known as just football, and football refers to other codes in Australia, Canada, Ireland, and South Africa (I may be missing some countries), or by the official name of the sport (English football is governed by the Football Association and FIFA, the FA standing for association football.) Doc Quintana (talk) 01:06, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- The FA stands for the Football Association, not association football, otherwise it would be called the AF. Maybe it should be discussed on Wikiproject Football, but in England people call the sport 'football'; I'm not sure I've ever heard anyone call the sport 'association football'. Kind regards, Tom (talk) 17:05, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Nicola Rizzoli
Hey, why exactly did you undo my work on Nicola Rizzoli? It was a perfectly valid point, look at any major referee's page and you'll see stuff exactly the same as what I put on his page. You say you're 'cleaning up' Wikipedia, but all you're doing is deleting relevant information and I really don't get why you would do that. AndrewvdBK (talk) 18:43, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:33, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Metrodome
Good call. — KV5 • Talk • 15:27, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- Bad call. You moved it against consensus of a previous discussion. Consider yourself warned. - BilCat (talk) 00:49, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
- BOLD doesn't apply here, as there is a previous consensus. Please be civil. - BilCat (talk) 07:14, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
- Because as a regular, you should have known to look for discussions before making a move. That's also why I didn't give you a {{uw-move2}} warning template. This isn't a joke - moving against consensus is serious, and you need to be more careful. - BilCat (talk) 10:05, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
- I concur. Even though new discussion may result in the move that KV and some others advocate, or may result in simply "Metrodome", doing a move unilaterally without apparently having read the previous talk page discussion (which is still there, in a green background), is typically not kosher. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:34, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Don't use profanity!
Why do you have to use profanity on an edit summary while reverting nonsense on the FIFA 11 article. I know it annoyed you but you shouldn't crack up. So keep your foul mouth to yourself or you could be banned! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wonderwizard (talk • contribs) 08:19, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
- Well, why the fuck would people browsing the English language Wikipedia give a shit about the Russian cover of the game? Seems like a reasonable question to me, not profanity. Why not take your uncivil threats elsewhere? Malleus Fatuorum 11:26, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
- Although it's best to keep edit summaries G-rated, I have to admit that this[2] was kind of funny; and I wonder what Wonderwizard's personal interest is in this subject, given that the user has never edited that article (not under that ID, anyway). Also, the threat to get you "banned", on the basis of that one comment, is unlikely to get any traction. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:35, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
super rugby
Hello, i would like to inform of a discussion on in the WikiProject Rugby Union discussion page about the format to be used through the season articles of the super 12, super 14 and super rugby seasons. Please click the link below and have your opinion, thank you. JaFa 01 (talk) 05:31, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
Link: Discussion
Record attendance
An editor recently changed United's entry on Record home attendances of English football clubs to an FA Cup match against Bradford PA and used stretfordend.co.uk as a ref. Now I know it is meant to be a reliable source, but is at odds with all the other sources I've encountered, which put United's 1948 match against Arsenal as a club and league record 83,260. Any idea where this difference comes from? Oldelpaso (talk) 20:21, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
United first team players on loan
Hi PeeJay, I noticed you undid my edit on first team players on loan. If you search the official website for for the first team players I added, they all appear on the first team except James Chester. Seems like if you have a squad number, your in the first team... Will you change it back please? (Without Chester since he doesn't have a squad number, should maybe be stripped of it on the Reserves article as well) lil2mas (talk) 23:27, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Metrodome rename?
Go for it. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:23, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
aboutmanutd.com
Re this edit you made to the Alan Davies article [3] have you got any evidence/details that aboutmanutd.com is not a reliable source, and thus that my edits are not reasonable (bearing in mind they're simply sourcing text that was already there). If there is such information it should be posted on one of the Utd talk articles (Talk:List of Manchester United F.C. records and statistics?] Also, why did you revert the Neil Brown reference I added relating to his international career? Eldumpo (talk) 07:48, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Opinion?
Talk:2009 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final#"Extra time" Saw that you were up and about over there and everyone over here is still celebrating the win vs Chicago or asleep.Cptnono (talk) 10:30, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
2013 Africa Cup of Nations qualification template
Can you help me with this template template:2013 Africa Cup of Nations qualification. I want to be able to make it easier for people to add to in the future. Currently it's difficult for people to work on due to the unusual format. TheBigJagielka (talk) 21:11, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 07:16, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
MOA field at hhh metrodome
I reverted your edit on Chronology of home stadiums for current National Football League teams the Vikings and the NFL call it MOA Field. that page is specific to the NFL so that page should reflect the team calls the stadium. Smith03 (talk) 17:16, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
Manchester derby
My considering work on the derby article as a derby approaches is nothing new, I've been meaning to do a proper job of it for years now. However, having now obtained the two long out-of-print books that have been written about the derby, this time I might actually do it. That and its compensation for the fact that I'm unable to attend the next one due to inescapable work commitments, first home one I'll have missed since 1989 :( . Anyway, to get to the point, I'm asking editors of both red and blue hues what they think should go in the article. Naturally, a History section which goes chronologically through the major events of the fixture will be the bulk of it, but what else? A short "non-competitive derbies" section is one thing I'm thinking of putting in. A section on the nature of rivalry between fans and their attitudes to the fixture may have mileage, but I fear it would become a magnet for dubious POV edits. Oldelpaso (talk) 10:40, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah that's one of them. I have an Amazon wishlist that I put expensive books on and check back every now and then to see if the price has come down. There was a copy for £3.95 last month so I snapped it up. The same happened with this one, that was £2.75, I bought it at the same time. Oldelpaso (talk) 16:30, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:53, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
FA Youth Cup Finals
My reasoning for these redlinks is that the article isn't going to get edited as and when players become notable. Unlike a club page, or squad template, which is constantly being updated as things develop, historical pages naturally tend to get left. If you knew there was a reference to a player on the page, you might go and link it, but in most cases you'd only know that the reference was there via the link. If think if we took away these redlinks, a lot of potential future links would be lost, as well as background information on the player at their article's author didn't know about. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 21:22, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- I know people can search, but in practice they don't, and I think a lot of potential connections would be lost if the links were removed, while keeping them seems fairly harmless, whatever the rules are. Obviously if a player has clearly not become a footballer then it can be removed, but in most cases it's worth keeping, I think. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 21:34, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:UEFA Euro 2012 logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:UEFA Euro 2012 logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 01:47, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:FIFA Football 2005 UK cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:FIFA Football 2005 UK cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
- I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
- I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
- If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
- To opt out of these bot messages, add
{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}to your talk page. - If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:35, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Man U lists
Hi mate, Good to see you back on wiki. I have submitted the two Man U player lists that I was working on for Peer Review. Feel free to have a look over the articles and add anything you think is missing. I am also in need of an image for the <25 apps article - I think a picture of Beardsley is probably the best bet considering the successful career he went on to have, but I am having trouble location a free image. Cheers mate. 03md 21:03, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Help
I know you last edited the 2006-07 Manchester United F.C. season with the FA Premier League fixtures over three years ago, but can I do some for you? Do you want to come back to it, also? Velociraptor888 12:25, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Eurotech Soccer Camp
I removed the prod tag you placed on Eurotech Soccer Camp, as an editor explicitly objected to deletion on the talk page. I have opened an AfD; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eurotech Soccer Camp. —KuyaBriBriTalk 18:01, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Manchester United website changes!
Please read the follow, Manchester United website changes!,
Thanks,
– HonorTheKing (talk) 06:29, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Ashes
Why? The differentiation between tests is much clearer with "==" (level 2 headings?) rather than "===". Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 10:17, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
- Because the section links to each Test in the table of contents get lost when you use Level 2 headers. It's better to have the matches under a separate level 2 header, because then it makes them more obvious in the TOC. – PeeJay 10:23, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick reply. (Most appreciated.)
- Well, I follow your logic. But I don't agree with you.
- (By-the-way: Please prefix statements like "It's better to ..." with "I think/feel it's better to ... ", or alternatively provide a supporting reference to show that it is not just your opinion.)
- As I said, "The differentiation between tests is much clearer with h2 rather than h3." In other words, I think clarity in the body of the article is more important than clarity in the TOC. But I acknowledge we're talking opinions here, not policy or facts.
- However, I'm not about to start an edit war. If you are that determined in your POV, I'll let it slide. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 10:43, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 06:34, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
File:UEFA members Champs League group stage.gif
Seems Montenegro did not had a team in group stage in history. Matthew_hk tc 17:00, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Nomination of Manchester United F.C. 9–0 Ipswich Town F.C. for deletion
The article Manchester United F.C. 9–0 Ipswich Town F.C. is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manchester United F.C. 9–0 Ipswich Town F.C. 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 good 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. Sandman888 (talk) 15:20, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
- Note that the nominator inadvertently blew away the previous discussion so the link to the current AFD is incorrect. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:23, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:2010-11 Vodafone Ashes series logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:2010-11 Vodafone Ashes series logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hugahoody (talk) 21:14, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Stfu
You don't know shit about the Vikings. Stfu. It's not made up analysis, its THE TRUTH. LEARN SOME. --฿aous•the•Deacon 22:02, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
- The tone of the text I inputted is inappropriate? There is no tone, all that's spoken is the FACTS. I'm a bigger Vikings fan than any, and I'll be the first to tell you what a disappointing season it was, marred by all the distractions that I mentioned there. When people look back at this '10 season, people are gonna remember the Vikings as a team that was regarded 'a Super Bowl contender, but marred by distractions', that's what my insight provides to that article. Thanks. --฿aous•the•Deacon 00:00, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Post season QB's
Howdy! For some of the other list of quarterback pages such as Pittsburgh and Arizona I combined the post season starters table with the regular season. Before I do any more on some of the other articles I would like your opninon if you think they should be combined or remain seperated. Thanks! Gilliganfanatic 22:28, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! That is what I was kind of leaning towards for the same reason. I am not going to do any more then. I will go back and add more references to some of the other articles though. Gilliganfanatic 23:57, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Magnus Eikrem
Just saw your recent reverts regarding Eikrem's alleged departure from Man U. Looks legit—if you believe The Sun that is. Favonian (talk) 21:08, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
2007 RWC articles.
You seem to be confusing the word "cleanup" with wholsesale reversion of my edits with no justification. I removed the large flags and ALL CAPS country names from the 2007 RWC articles because they are entirely unnecessary, serve no purpose other than decorative, and in the case of the ALL CAPS country names, are simply incorrect English. I legitimately removed this unnecessary clutter, and you decide that restoring it is somehow a "clean up". If you are going to just revert my changes, at least have the decency to say so, and justify yourself. As it is, there is no reason to restore over-sized flags and ALL CAPITALS country names. Further, the words quarter-final, semi-final, final and their derivatives are not capitalised unless part of a name. For example the 2003 Rugby World Cup Final is the name, and so capitalised, but the final of the 2003 Rugby World Cup is not. Nouse4aname (talk) 14:39, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
- 1. The articles don't revolve around the flags, so larger images that show more detail aren't necessary. If it were the article on the flags of the southern hemisphere, perhaps, but this is an article on a rugby tournament, the minor details of a flag are virtually irrelevant. Besides, there is already a small flag above, and the team name written twice (once in the score line, once above the line up). I think that is sufficient to make it clear what team is referred to.
- 2. English formatting rules apply no matter whether it is a heading, title, or prose. There is no justification for ALL CAPS.
- 3. Just because the IRB site gets it wrong, doesn't mean Wikipedia should. We use standard English language here - that means capitalisation, grammar, spelling etc etc. Nouse4aname (talk) 15:32, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
- It's the English language. We use standard capitalisation rules etc on Wikipedia. The IRB can refer to them how they like, but they aren't following the same rules that Wikipedia does. Unless quarter-final etc is a proper noun (which it isn't) then it is not capitalised. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (capital letters). This also covers why ALL CAPS nation names should not be used. Nouse4aname (talk) 15:50, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Warning
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. --ashwinikalantri (talk • contribs) 21:04, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
This is your last warning; the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashwinikalantri (talk • contribs) 19:24, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
2011 Cricket World Cup
Hello PeeJay2K3, I have noticed that you were in a dispute with a user, Ashwinikalantri. I have had the same problem with him for for the past week. I've warned him and started a couple of dispute resolutions but his acts like he owns the page. This has been going on for too long and I don't have time to waste on people who are stubborn and don't abide to the guidelines. Could you please join in on this dispute and help finish it once and for all, Talk:2011 Cricket World Cup#Matches section. Thanks--Blackknight12 (talk) 07:13, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Here is something that may act as your so called "Proof"
Here are some sites which emphasize on the importance of attendance in Cricket:
- Record crowd forecast for 4th Ashes test at MCG
- austadiums.com austadiums.com
- See the second part of the thread
- Gabba crowd smashes previous record
- ‘Taxi driver test’ hinting towards great crowd attendance during Ashes: Cricket Australia
- See the match notes of Australian Innings
Do you want more? I can still provide much more of them.--Karyasuman (talk) 12:03, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Vote in WP:CRIC
There has been a issue in WT:CRIC that needs your vote. Thanks --06:32, 1 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AshwiniKalantri (talk • contribs)
Squad template
Need your attention at this TfD. Matthew_hk tc 14:15, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Club names
Hey, I need you to take part in this discussion here. – Michael (talk) 18:08, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
Stade de France
Will you please give up your obsession with Saint Denis and the Stade de France. In the Six Nations articles, the table lists stadiums by location according to city. There is no reason to make a special case for SdF and list the suburb as well. This is consistent across all such articles. Please also try not to be so patronising - I understand the situation perfectly well - you seem to have some issue with ownership and are unable to accept that there is no logic in including the suburb for this stadium but not others. Either they all should have the suburb included or none. This is an article about a rugby tournament. The precise geographical location of a stadium is irrelevant, which is why only the city is listed as that is all that is required. If readers want to find out the suburb that a stadium is located in, then they can go to the article about the stadium. Nouse4aname (talk) 09:13, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- Firstly, I am not slagging any one off. Secondly, I have no ownership issues. I am reverting your edits because you fail to justify the inconsistency that you are introducing. Thirdly, from our very own article on Saint Denis "Saint-Denis is a commune in the northern suburbs of Paris, France" (emphasis added) and the article on the Stade de France itself "The Stade de France is the national stadium of France, situated in the Parisian suburb of Saint-Denis" (emphasis added). However, this is all irrelevant. It is by no means incorrect to suggest that the city that the Stade de France is located in is Paris. All the other stadiums in these articles are located by city, why should SdF be any different? As I have repeatedly stated, this article is on a rugby tournament - locating the stadium by city is sufficient. Nouse4aname (talk) 09:13, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- I might have guessed you'd bring up the whole self referencing thing - are you suggesting that these articles are wrong? Anyway, I am not disputing that SdF is in Saint-Denis. Just like Twickenham Stadium is in Twickenham. But we don't list Twickenham Stadium by the suburb/borough/district it is in, it is by city. That is all that is required. To make a special case for SdF for no reason is inconsistent and pointless. Nouse4aname (talk) 13:29, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- Further, not that it matters, but the Six Nations site refers to the "Parisian suburb of Saint Denis" here, and the city information is for Paris, not Saint-Denis, and in the ground guide Saint Denis is again referred to as a "suburb in the north of Paris". The point remains that including the suburb/district/borough for one stadium is inconsistent and unnecessary. Listing only the city is sufficient for the context of the article. Nouse4aname (talk) 13:36, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Added template for SuggestBot
Hi,
Thanks for being one of SuggestBot's users! I hope you have found the bot's suggestions useful.
We are in the process of switching from our previous list-based signup process to using templates and userboxes, and I have therefore added the appropriate template to your user talk page. You should receive the first set of suggestions within a day, and since we'll be automating SuggestBot you will from then on continue to receive them regularly at the desired frequency.
We now also have a userbox that you can use to let others know you're using SuggestBot, and if you don't want to clutter your user talk page the bot can post to a sub-page in your userspace. More information about the userbox and usage of the template is available on User:SuggestBot/Getting Recommendations Regularly.
If there are any questions, please don't hesitate to get in touch with me on my user talk page. Thanks again, Nettrom (talk) 20:54, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Cardiff rfc badge.png
Thanks for uploading File:Cardiff rfc badge.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 03:52, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:UEFA Euro 2012 logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:UEFA Euro 2012 logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 05:06, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:22, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
You kinda messed up the 2009 ICC World Twenty20 article
Hey PeeJay. I am not accusing or anything but your edit on this article more than a year ago has messed up the whole page. All the matches of the tournament are hidden in the "warm up matches" section. I have been going through all the edits and it seems to be your edit here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2009_ICC_World_Twenty20&action=historysubmit&diff=352264971&oldid=348386649 that has messed up the format. I cant seem to fix it so I was hoping if you could help out. Thank you --Xinjao (talk) 12:25, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Runners-up in honours section?
A quick search reveals two threads on this subject (perhaps "ad nauseum" was a bit O.T.T.) - see here and here. As you can see, neither discussion was exactly conclusive; in the absence of a firm consenus, I suggest that the article on Jim McCalliog should stay as it is now; i.e before your changes to the Honours section. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 16:45, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
March 2011
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Manchester United F.C.. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.
In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
- Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Bocafan76 (talk) 20:18, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Dates in Infobox football match
The purpose of {{Start date}} in {{Infobox football match}} is explained in the latter's documentation. Regards Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:22, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Association football
This article needs a significant amount of work to be brought back up to FA status. An editor has listed this article for FAR (see Wikipedia:Featured article review/Association football/archive1), but due to the relatively new requirement that talk page notifications be made first, the review is being placed on hold. If work is completed on the article in the near future, the review does not need to proceed. You have been notified as you have been identified as a major contributor to the article. Please let me know if you have any questions. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:28, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:38, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Changes
First, I thought WP was a freely editable encyclopedia. I can make edits in good faith. If you feel differently, kindly discuss. Using toss in the way I have, only uses wasted space and standardizes the way it is represented. If you feel this way of representation wrong, please give a logical reason. Please dont be scared of change, it can be good! ;) --ashwinikalantri talk 20:13, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
- If only you would spend some of your time doing something constructive! Now that you have things your way, would you like to discuss your rampage? ashwinikalantri talk 20:53, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
I've commented on the issue at WT:CRIC. This needs to be resolved through talk page discussion rather than reverts. Nev1 (talk) 21:58, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Reward
|
Football (soccer) barnstar | |
| For all your work with many football articles. Good job! Qampunen (talk) 15:43, 15 March 2011 (UTC) |
2010 FIFA World Cup squads
This edit is a bit of a mess. German clubs use the extension since the city may, and in the case of all the clubs you change does, have additional clubs in the city. There's an agreement somewhere on Wikipedia. If I can find it I'll show you. Do you mind reverting that part of your change? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:47, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
- That didn't take me too long. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 49#German club names. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:48, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 08:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
1991 European Cup Final
Hello. Re Olympique Marseille/Marseille, you may well be right that Marseille is more common in literate English sources, though I'm not convinced. Let's hope any disagreement between English editors about what the common name actually is, doesn't just encourage the anon's POV... Even so, I'd still argue that using the full-ish name in infoboxes and tables and first use in prose, for clarity and to establish context, is in general a more constructive approach, because we're not just writing for the knowledgeable reader. Not everyone knows that "Olympique Marseille" and "Marseille" are the same thing, and not displaying the full-ish name anywhere in the article isn't particularly helpful. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 12:18, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
- Maybe you'd feel differently if there was plenty of prose, so most of the mentions would quite rightly be just Marseille? rather than, as in this article, one infobox, one footballbox with the name 3 times, and one mini-para of prose. How about keeping Olympique M in the infobox, opening sentence, and scoreline of footballbox (where, incidentally, it has Red Star Belgrade rather than just Red Star), and just Marseille (and Red Star) under the kits and above the team lists? Don't worry, I'm not going to join the edit war, only got involved at all because you posted at WT:FOOTY. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 12:51, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Match listing
You seem to be jumbling the matches of the Cricket World Cup. Could you explain rationale behind it? I am unable to understand why it should be listed as "Winner of QF 4 v Winner of QF 3" rather than the conventional "Winner of QF 3 v Winner of QF 4". Also why are you jumbling up the QF sequence? They need to be chronological. ashwinikalantri talk 19:09, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Owen Hargreaves
Are you sure it's not noteworthy? It pretty much sums up his career at Manchester United. Kingjeff (talk) 21:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Derry
See WP:IMOS. The city is called Derry, the county Londonderry. --John (talk) 14:37, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
1956 European Cup Final / 1956 European Cup
Hi,
I was wondering why you deleted the link i put?
Why did you report it as spam? Do you think it's off-topic? I think the article is very informative and well deserves to be linked from wikipedia.
Thanks
07:47, 30 March 2011 (UTC)07:47, 30 March 2011 (UTC)07:47, 30 March 2011 (UTC)07:47, 30 March 2011 (UTC)07:47, 30 March 2011 (UTC)07:47, 30 March 2011 (UTC)07:47, 30 March 2011 (UTC)07:47, 30 March 2011 (UTC)07:47, 30 March 2011 (UTC)~~` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Klethegr8 (talk • contribs)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 09:45, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Definition of Setting
Alright, when you deleted the categories for some sports games, you argued that the game is not "set" anywhere. I believe this is untrue. The player directly controls characters inside sports stadiums, which are real locations, in real countries. What if an entire game was set in the White House, The Kremlin and Big Ben? The game would still be set in Washington, D.C., Moscow, and London, would it not? So how are stadiums any different? Please discuss on my user page before further removing setting categories.
Gaijin Ninja (talk) 23:26, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
FIFA 10 deletions
"if you can't be arsed to read back through discussions, that's not our problem" said you to me after deleting my edit on FIFA 10 page. Well, if you can´t be polite, the problem is yours, not mine. If you want to be rude to me, forget the idea: I can´t stand people talking to me that way because I always express my p.o.v. being respectful with anyone, so I expect the same from you, right?. I hope you change your manners (at least towards me), thanks. Fma12 (talk) 16:26, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- I didn´t request any link, I just complained about your ways. The problem with that videogames' pages is that some editors believe they are the owners of those pages, deleting anything they are not agree with. Fma12 (talk) 16:41, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Someone asked on the talk page, did Montenegrin team participated in the group stage. Matthew_hk tc 14:03, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Re: Kits
I had no idea. Is it? I knew it wasn't a commonly-done thing, which is why, when MLITH asked me to make an updated version of the 2003-04 kits for the write-up we're trying to improve on the Spurs 3-4 City FA Cup game, I made two versions: one with sponsorships and one without. I simply liked the "embellished" style, so I made a further one. If that's against consensus then I'll take them down again. I can only presume that the reason it's frowned upon is because of the sponsorships? I can see no other reason it would be sensible to outright edict against such things otherwise, n'est pas? Falastur2 Talk 16:54, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
- Fair enough, and I'll accept that my kit graphics probably don't meet any sort of inclusion rationales (though I figured they were so horrendously low-resolution that I could legitimately argue that whether or not they represented existing logos is entirely a matter of an individual's opinion...). However, since I noticed that you recently took down the City badge from the various articles, can I draw your attention to this? Does not that City badge satisfy all 10 of the inclusion criteria, therefore making it eligible for use? Falastur2 Talk 21:57, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Edit warring and MoS "debate" at 2010–11 Manchester City F.C. season
Sorry for the copy-pasta but I wanted to consult both yourself and OldElPaso - I'm sure you'll understand where I'm coming from here. This is nothing more than a consultation, if I may? You may well already have seen the various stuff going on in the above linked article. While I don't disagree so wholly with the edits as Mancini's Lasagne does, I do broadly disagree with Digirami's assertion that it is an abomination that the said article does not look exactly like every other club's, nor that the existence of one infobox means that it MUST be used in all cases. However, I am unsure how to counter without simply be drawn into an edit war. Does Wikipedia policy really dictate that our article may not do things even a little differently, or is there actually a valid defence against Digirami doing what essentially seems to be a case of imprinting his layout of choice onto the said article? Falastur2 Talk 23:15, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
1991 and all that
Hello, and thanks for taking it to the talk page, wish I'd had the brains to do that in the first place. I've made a suggestion there which I hope you can agree to: personally, I don't have a problem with the Serbian succession being mentioned on the article, but purely as an aside, and hopefully that will be enough history education. We did "The Balkan Question" – the 19th-century version – at school and I never understood it then. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:25, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
revert?
what did i do wrong? --Pabloviva22 (talk) 13:35, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
United v Town 9 - 0
Hey dude. Hope you liked the couple of additions I made. But I noticed you put the spacing back into the scoreline in the main match description. I just wondered why you wanted this to be inconsistent with the other scorelines on the page? It's no big deal but I thought we should be, at least, internally consistent...? The Rambling Man (talk) 15:54, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, no problem. I was thinking about expanding it a little more, somewhat masochistically! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:06, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 09:33, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
1977 European Cup lineups
Hey Peejay, I noticed that you have produced most of the line-ups that are in the finals articles and was wondering whether you would create one for the 1977 article. I've had a go myself and without Photoshop which I no longer possess it is almost impossible to do. Your help would be much appreciated. Cheers NapHit (talk) 22:16, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: John Sharples (footballer born 1973). The community has decided that all new biographies of living persons must contain a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article as per our verifiability policy. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:10, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
James Hayter
Hey PeeJay (Tom),
I am new to this Wikipedia thing but am trying to edit former rugby players wikipedia pages to give a more up to date account. i have been trying to change James' for a while now but it seems to keep being changed back to the original. I can't understand why it keeps being undone to the original when the information I have put on is true and up to date. You say my references dont seem to be appearing..do you know how I can sort this out? If you want you can have the credit for the page but I really believe my entry is more representative of James. Please help so this issue can be resolved. You seem an expert at this wikipedia thing and I would really appreciate your help in sorting this out. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahrah22 (talk • contribs) 13:38, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply and the explanation for the changes. I am not very computer savvy, and wikipedia is all new to me and am learning how to properly use it. On my edits it says I have made references to changes I have made. Do I have to make reference to every change that I have made throughout the article? i.e proof of school, barbarians etc? If I send you the link to the proof could you use my paragraph with the sources to help make james' page more up to date for all wikipedia users? Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahrah22 (talk • contribs) 14:00, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
PeeJay,
Thanks for getting back to me quickly on this and for being so helpful. I have managed to get sources for the information on my changes, hope these are all ok so that the entry can be changed.
Barbarians squad - http://www.rfu.com/News/2007/May/News%20Articles/BarbariansNameSquadForSummerTour.aspx?a=1&y=2007 Scarlets – http://scarlets.co.uk/eng/1324.php Coventry – http://www.thefreelibrary.com/RUGBY+UNION+Coventry+pounce+for+young+stars.-a060494659 Liverpool sporting alumni – http://www.liv.ac.uk/insight/Insight_Autumn07.pdf NYAC – http://www.erugbynews.com/article.php?sec=123&a=4811 U21 – http://www.thefreelibrary.com/RUGBY+UNION+Coventry+pounce+for+young+stars.-a060494659 KES – http://www.enotes.com/topic/King_Edward_VI_School_Stratford-upon-Avon
Interview/most things included – http://www.thefreelibrary.com/RUGBY+UNION+Coventry+pounce+for+young+stars.-a060494659
James has also just moved into the lithium mining industry as a marketing director for Western LithiumUSA Corporation. Information on this can be found at - http://www.minesandmoney.com/london/presentations/2009/Day2/MMLondon2009-Day2-James-Hayter-Western-Lithium.pdf
Once again thanks for helping me out with this, really appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahrah22 (talk • contribs) 13:18, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi PeeJay,
Sorry to keep hassling you with this but I would really like the correct information for James to be on Wikipedia to give a true reflection on the player. Was there a problem with the links I sent to you?
Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahrah22 (talk • contribs) 10:00, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi,
Our contact seems to have subsided recently. I have posted the links on this discussion board, if they are not right then please let me know. Was really hoping to have James' page sorted by now, hope you have time to help me out soon.
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahrah22 (talk • contribs) 09:55, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Manchester United FC crest.png
Thanks for uploading File:Manchester United FC crest.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 05:32, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Hey PeeJay, I was going to revert your edit but I thought it better to discuss first. The criteria for a mid-rated article is "Teams with nationwide notability. Players or managers that have participated at international level or in a top-level league. Mid-level leagues." Looking at the talk page there, the general consensus appears to be stricter than that in the guidelines anyway. Ben Amos hasn't actually played in the league for United, and even if he had it seems silly to give such a high ranking to someone who's only played 29 career games, most of which at quite a low level. doomgaze (talk) 20:11, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia Ambassadors UK
I saw that you expressed interest in becoming a Wikipedia Campus Ambassador at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ambassadors/UK/Campus_Ambassadors . In order for you to apply to be trained to become a Wikipedia Campus Ambassador in the fall, you will need to apply to be trained this June. If you are interested in participating in the program, please send me a brief e-mail and I will send reply with an e-mail with the application attached as well as a couple of short things describing what the program is going to look like. Happy editing, and I look forward to your e-mail, Sadads (talk) 15:14, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Bias?
I'm baffled. Where? Stevo1000 (talk) 23:41, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
- Was it this?
- As of the 25 April 2011, Manchester United, Chelsea, Arsenal and Manchester City are still eligible to qualify through winning the 2010–11 Premier League title. The champions will then either play Manchester City or Stoke City depending on which club is victorious in the the 2011 FA Cup Final. Only Manchester City still have the opportunity to qualify through both the Premier League and FA Cup. In such an event, the Charity Shield will be contested between Manchester City and the 2010–11 Premier League runner-up.
- I certainly don't think it is showing bias at all. All I'm doing is explaining what is an anomaly. I'd do it for any other team too as a reader might be confused at how a club can qualify through both the Premier League and FA Cup. Don't you think? Stevo1000 (talk) 23:43, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
- You see my point about the anomaly? I'd explain it for any other club(s) if they were still in City's situation, its nothing to do with bias. And I know it will be a shame for you to have to take that banner down within the next couple of years. Stevo1000 (talk) 23:51, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
- Well, I have been thinking of giving the Manchester Derby page a good revamp. Honestly, I think its a bit of a mess and it is definitely not a coherent article. Most importantly, I really cannot believe there is absolutely nothing on the late 1960s when the rivalry, or comradeship was at his peak back then. It's a shame there are too many editors who monitor the page and totally misunderstand the historical relationship between both clubs.
- My difficulty is whenever I do make a constructive edit, someone will say something like: "oh that is making the article too recentist" and your left thinking "wait up, I am revamping the page from 2011 back, give me a chance" - it is hugely frustrating. I would love to see the page as a featured article as a proud Mancunian but I feel there are too many editors monitoring the page which are hinder any possibility of this.
- I've tried to talk a few round such by urging them to make constructive edits to improve the page and give some leniency to my edits as I have nothing but good intentions to improve the page. Their responses have been tepid to say the least and I'd put money on my edits being rolled-back if I decided to revamp the page. Stevo1000 (talk) 00:35, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- That might be idea. If I have time in the future, I'll do a draft in my userspace and then we can see what can be worth adding and what should be removed. Stevo1000 (talk) 15:06, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 17:53, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Actually had you of looked through my version then would've realised there wasn't A.C. and you can look right now! You're trying to overrule the changes I'm making. Taking away the under-23 goals for no reason? Healy10 (talk) 11:50, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
- Bit of a mug aren't you? stop trying to correct every little bit of revision for your liking as you aren't the wikipedia GOD. Sit down and behave OK PJ! Healy10 (talk) 00:19, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
- You're the man who knows it all. Healy10 (talk) 00:25, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
- I've been using my brothers account to edit for the past few years and decided to make myself an account. I do know how this place works. Healy10 (talk) 00:34, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
- You're the man who knows it all. Healy10 (talk) 00:25, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
John Ramshaw
I've finally managed to get the infobox almost there. I only knew about Arnold Town as I've kept an eye on him, due to being on the Hucknall Town committee when they were ascending the pyramid under his management. Bevo74 (talk) 14:44, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Why?
I did this because completed templates shouldn't have the closing markers on the same line as the last parameter as is demonstrated at Template:Footballbox. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:46, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- I've never seen a Wikipedia directive that says the closing tags shouldn't be on the same line as the final parameter. Where did you read this? – PeeJay 01:23, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- It's not a directive per se, I've always seen templates closed on the line after. Check various template examples. It's not a big deal though and syntactically identical. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:29, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- What about for templates like {{cite web}}? – PeeJay 08:31, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- When it's on a single line, I see it end after the last parameter. When each parameter is on its own line, I've seen it close on the line after. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:51, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- What about for templates like {{cite web}}? – PeeJay 08:31, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- It's not a directive per se, I've always seen templates closed on the line after. Check various template examples. It's not a big deal though and syntactically identical. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:29, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
1995-96 Manchester United F.C. season
Can you give me a single reason to why the Manchester United season articles should not be in line with the Wikipedia policy of the collapsible Footballbox? Roslagen (talk) 20:55, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello! I see you undid my change William "Bill" Ridding to William "Nibbler" Ridding with explanation "no colloquial nicknames please". He's certainly known as Nibbler (rather than Bill) in Tranmere articles about him. Following Dixie Dean, how about "William "Bill" Ridding (4 April 1911 in Heswall, Cheshire – 1981), better known as Nibbler Ridding, ..."? U+003F? 14:14, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- Done as you suggested, thanks! U+003F? 14:30, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
Violation of WP:3RR
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war on 1967–68 Mitropa Cup. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively. In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
- Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
You are definitely in an editing dispute with User:Kostun. While I have removed the flags pending a resolution, other users may add them back - this is not a cue for you to re-revert. The appropriate course of action in the event other users continue to war is report said users. You have now both been warned in relation to this incident. Further violations will result in administrator action.--ClubOranjeT 11:44, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
- Unfortunately due to continued action by User:Kostun it has become necessary to file a report at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Kostun_reported_by_User:ClubOranje_.28Result:_.29. As an involved editor your name may be mentioned. --ClubOranjeT 12:46, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
anderson fee
what do you mean contentious, i posted a link direct from porto fc themselves, a document they sent their own shareholders quoting the price to be €30m for anderson, fees quoted on newspapers and websites are contentious but when a club themselves outline the exact fee how is it contentious then unless you are arguing both porto and sporting lied to their shareholders about fees received, for the record nani cost €25.5m so the two combined €55.5m, there is no argument, thats how much they cost, http://web3.cmvm.pt/english/sdi2004/emitentes/docs/FR13708.pdf
portugese clubs always send a memo to shareholders outlining fee received for players e.g others
raul meireles to liverpool http://www.fcporto.pt/IncFCP/PDF/Investor_Relations/FactosRelevantes/VendaRaulMeireles29082010.pdf ronaldo to man utd http://web3.cmvm.pt/english/sdi2004/emitentes/docs/fsd6380.pdf david luiz to chelsea http://web3.cmvm.pt/sdi2004/emitentes/docs/FR31637.pdf david luiz to chelsea —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.46.155.211 (talk) 17:18, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 10:49, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
2011 FA Cup Final
That link to YouTube was to The FA's official Youtube channel, that's there choice of medium and they are happy to do that. And how is linking to City's website copyright infringement? Their content is copyright, but if they choose to publish video highlights on THEIR website then there is no copyright infringement. Linking to a website that does not have permission to show highlights is copyright infringement i.e. unauthorised Youtube highlights. It is my understanding that from the Monday after the weekend when the match is played the clubs who played have the rights over what to do with the video highlights. City broadcast match highlights free while Stoke City video highlights are pay-per-view. Preferably speaking, I would rather have the highlights from the FA YouTube channel than from City's, ideally on the FA website but there is not guarantee video highlights will remain there. And it has always been my understanding that a few external links are permitted, I have no intention of building a reference bank for readers. Stevo1000 (talk) 02:18, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Hargreaves
Shouldn't Hargreaves release note be in next season article and not current one? same as past seasons articles.
It's already mentioned in next season one.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 23:14, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Nasser Hejazi
In the discussion section I've already explained, why the recent pic, showing the hidden face a fat, old man doesn't fit. If you've a better pic, please upload it; otherwise the pic from 1977 should remain there. MiNeum71 (talk) 05:32, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
- He's dead now, do you want to use the pic showing his dead face in the grave? Btw, it's quite common to use a pic, which represents the person best; I know, that's sometimes very difficult, speciall when the person has been active for a long time. You can't know this because of your missing knowledge of the Iranian football hsitory, but you should know, that Hejazi was beloved because of his efforts during his active career and not because of the managerial activities.
- PS: If you are Welsh, can you organise the match Iran vs. Wales in 1978; I think, this was covered by ITV. Be sure, I will be very generous ;) MiNeum71 (talk) 18:56, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Comment on content not contributor
Please don't assume to know anything about me. I made an edit in accordance with WP:OPENPARA which you have just reverted with comments on me and not the edit. Tell me why someone's ethnicity is relevant to the opening line in breach of above MOS? Mo ainm~Talk 15:59, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
3 Revert Rule
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jonny Evans. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.
In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
- Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Mo ainm~Talk 16:20, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Reverts/Edits On Pages "2011-12 Manchester United F.C. season" and "Ben Amos"
Dear PeeJayK23, We are aware of your kind intentions over the reverts and edits on the above-mentioned pages, but, there are two things we would like to warn you about.
- Please do not revert edits repeatedly, instead try to contact the user via the talk page on the article or his user talk page, because an edit war is waiting to happen (on page "Ben Amos")
- DO NOT put David de Gea as an "IN" transfer for page "2011-12 Manchester United F.C. season", because he is not signed to United, and may never be, even though it is reportedly true that United will announce his signing to the club two days after the Champions League final. This classifies under vandalism.
On the whole, if you continue to persist, we may come to the conclusion that you have evil intentions and you might be blocked. Do not remove this message until you find a way to resolve the problem. If you were to classify this message as vandalism on your talk page, please do note that is also a wrongdoing. Thank you. EspañolDaLanguage!AmorEspaña! (talk) 03:32, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
May 2011
Please do not attack other editors, as you did at User talk:Mo ainm. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Calling an editor a liar is a personal attack Mo ainm~Talk 07:56, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
No Respect (DAVID DE GEA IS NOT IN MAN U)
Once again, I have to tell you. STOP IT. Stop stopping people and their edits on Wikipedia. You must learn to respect people's edits and/or reverts. You actually have started an edit war on pages "Ben Amos" and "2011-12 Manchester United F.C. season". You seem to ignore messages, and you abused User talk:Mo ainm. Seriously, Wikipedia's aim is to spread public information of stuff for research. If you revert edits and just think you are right, then dear Tom, you must know you are not the kind of editor Wikipedia wants. Tom Jones, understand this: Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia. An encyclopaedia, from the top of the first page to the bottom of the last page, contains detailed information that can be picked up easily with one scan of the eyes. Wikipedia is more like a convenient encyclopaedia. You want important information, you just have to read through the article. In "Ben Amos", I added the long summary so a casual reader will be able to understand the later parts of the article. And in "2011-12 Manchester United F.C. season", I added Kit Changes and Search for Replacements so a casual reader will get a full picture of who Man Utd wanted to buy and how the kit looked like. I will revert your reverts for the last time. If you were to revert it again, I'll appeal for a block and report you. Because, TOM PARRY JONES, your actions will prove your worth on Wikipedia and how fake you are as a Manchester United fan. I'M SERIOUS. EspañolDaLanguage!AmorEspaña! (talk) 08:45, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 10:15, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Apology; Yet With Pride And Dignity
I apologise for my trivia and unnecessary edits. I hope to discuss how to put facts I found in appropriately and I hope to work with you for as long as I can. May I look forward discussing with you on how to improve some articles. Though, I do hope you will learn to respect my decisions in future and call in a third party user (not affiliated with you by any means, and not a sock puppet of yours) to discuss controversial edits/reverts. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YoAmorEspañol (talk • contribs) 05:01, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
Picture
Hey, why did you deleted my formation pic and added yours at UCL Final? Was i wrong? Right now it is shows the left team (home team) plays from top to bottom and not vice versa like it normally does. Kante4 (talk) 20:08, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
- Next time then the UEFA source it seems. ;-) Btw: How do you add the barca trikots? I copied the one from a earlier match with the red-blue kits. How to make those "lines", "stripes"? Kante4 (talk) 20:32, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
Could you explain your revert on the above article in light of your previous comments were you stated that a footballers nationality was "...defined by his country of birth and the national football team he plays for". Mo ainm~Talk 09:50, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 15:11, 31 May 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Mo ainm~Talk 15:11, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
2011 UEFA Europa League Final
Thank you for your cleanup job on this article, it is much appreciated. I'm going to put this for peer review, if you wish to contribute with comments you'll be very welcome! Regards. Parutakupiu (talk) 00:11, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Civility
Please try to be more civil when leaving edit summaries such as this one as it breeches Wikipedia civility policies and is offensive. Mabuska (talk) 12:23, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Re: 2012–13 UEFA Champions League
Message added 12:31, 5 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Infobox layouts
Hey PeeJay. I joke about it in edit summaries to try to keep the mood light, but you're right - I really, REALLY dislike the infobox layout where clubs are reduced to one line. It just looks horrible to me, and I genuinely have a hard time differentiating between the different lines of text - I think it must be something to do with the way my brain processes spatial awareness. The reason I change it to the four-lines-per-team style on pages I update regularly (like John Thorrington, and his compatirots in the American leagues) is because it massively reduces the potential for me making a mistake when I'm doing stats updates and things like that - a lot of the time, I just won't notice that I've changed the wrong stat, not because I'm not paying attention, but because my brain doesn't process it properly. I understand that it really makes no difference one way or the other as the infobox shows up in the same way - it's purely a personal preference which helps me not make mistakes. JonBroxton (talk) 20:12, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Celtic/Magners/Pro12 Italian Irish Scottish Welsh rugby league thingy...
So the Magners League has a new sponsor... Debate ongoing regarding where to locate the main article page here if you'd like to add your opinion... Cheers, Nouse4aname (talk) 12:43, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
1998 FIFA World Cup Final
Hi mate, I saw your request for an expansion of the lead on 1998 FIFA World Cup Final and have gone ahead and done so. Feel free to copy edit it but it should cover what we are looking for. Cheers. Dan. 03md 18:40, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
H Cup finals
I have no problem with articles on the cup finals. What I have a problem with is unnecessary stand alone articles that do not include any further detail to the main article. They are unnecessary and fail notability guidelines through lack of sourcing per WP:GNG. Until sufficient content is added to warrant an article, then they should remain as redirects. You may believe that articles deserve to exist for the finals, but unless such articles actually contain sufficient, reliably sourced content, then there is simply no point in creating them. Why do we need to duplicate what is already present on the main article page as a separate article for the final? As for the navigation box, the sole purpose of this is to provide a collection of related links to aid navigation (see Wikipedia:Navigation_templates#Properties). Thus, if no article exists, then it is not included. The nav box is not there to "encourage" people to make articles. Surely the lack of such links on the nav box is encouragement enough to make a suitable article? Nouse4aname (talk) 18:48, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:05, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
2008 Heineken Cup Final up for deletion
If you have any comments please leave here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2008 Heineken Cup Final --Bob (talk) 20:45, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
John Chapman
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.
In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
- Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Frietjes (talk) 23:44, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
*****finals
Hey PJ.
Really? The words "semifinal" and "quarterfinal" exist in Wiktionary: [4] [5].
Now, are you going to change back yourself, or will I have to do it?
Cheers.
HandsomeFella (talk) 19:27, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
- (moved here from HandsomeFella's talkpage)
- Those words do not exist in British English, which is what the articles to which those navboxes relate were written in. Please respect WP:ENGVAR. – PeeJay 02:04, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- First, to be able to follow a discussion, it's best to keep it on one talkpage, so I moved your response here. Please respond here. I have your talkpage on my watchlist.
- Second, could you please elaborate on why you believe that those words do not exist in British English? How did they find their way into the wiktionary then? In fact, the "semi-final" page [6] in wiktionary is the lesser one, and only described as an alternative spelling of "semifinal". Please check the links I provide.
- Have you read the WP:HYPHEN section in the Manual of Style? I quote:
- There is a clear trend to join both elements in all varieties of English (subsection, nonlinear), particularly in American English. British English tends to hyphenate when the letters brought into contact are the same (non-negotiable, sub-basement) or are vowels (pre-industrial), or where a word is uncommon (co-proposed, re-target) or may be misread (sub-era, not subera). American English reflects the same factors, but tends to close up without a hyphen when possible. Consult a good dictionary, and see WP:ENGVAR.
- (My bold)
- Have you read the WP:HYPHEN section in the Manual of Style? I quote:
- None of the four cases mentioning a tendency in British English fit in on semifinal or quarterfinal. Any comment?
- (moved here from HandsomeFella's talkpage)
- First of all, I have the right to respond wherever I choose; as long as you can read it and respond to it, it doesn't matter where I reply. Second, if you look at the Oxford English Dictionary, you will see that words of that ilk are written as hyphenated words. Furthermore, FIFA uses hyphens in those words, as do the articles to which the navboxes relate. – PeeJay 21:11, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- Of course you have that right, it was just a friendly advice to improve readability for anyone who tries to follow this discussion, including you and me, and nothing to be angry or irritated about. But if you prefer to zig-zag between talkpages, by all means.
- I was going to notify you that I had started a thread at the MoS talkpage, but I can see from your comment there, that you've discovered it by yourself.
- Have a nice day.
Deletion help
Hi, I've listed an article for deletion and need help listing it properly. How am I supposed to make it show up on the main AfD page? Hermione is a dude (talk) 00:29, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, that was exactly what I needed! Hermione is a dude (talk) 00:51, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Conor Devlin
I searched for a news online but did not find any, I saw the Bebe and Devlin on TV (Sport channel which shows only offical announcements) -
– HonorTheKing (talk) 10:45, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- I agree with you, hopefully they will mention it, as past seasons only the BBC published youngsters releases.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 10:48, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Man Utd kits
Funnily enough I did come across that website yesterday and it did help me with the 2000/01 uniforms, very handy site indeed. VEOonefive 19:13, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
In Reply
Just to advise i am having nothing to do with it any issue us between yourself and User:DUCKISJAMMMY. My intelligence is not in question. As i have been asked i have added the page to my watchlist and will try and update when i can. 20:36, 20 June 2011 (UTC)Warburton1368 (talk)
- I will accept that. Happy Editing. 21:47, 20 June 2011 (UTC)Warburton1368 (talk)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:29, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
The article John Sharples (footballer born 1973) has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 14:43, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Hint needed
Hi, might you be kind enough to tell me what software you use to create images like this? Also I'd appreciate to get some additional info, for instance those regarding the basic pictures that you employ to compose the whole thing and the technique whereby you align on the pitch the jerseys. Thanks in advance. --87.6.115.207 (talk) 13:15, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
P.S.: Please answer on this page, just below this message.
- Many thanks. Thankfully it's easier than what I had supposed. Bye bye. --82.61.50.135 (talk) 09:54, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Man United Academy Players Professional status
Hey, I'm not gonna edit the page any more knowing that you will undo it time and time again. It is a waste of my time, possibly yours too. However, don't you think that the retained/released players lists published by the official Premier League website at the end of the season 2010-11 has enough credibility?
I'll provide the link [7] to you, and it's not only Marnick Vermijl, other kids too, are identified as being signed Professional contracts.
If you are still very much stubborn to insist the page remaining the way you want it to be other than the correct one, fine, I couldn't care less. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.175.128.166 (talk) 23:03, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Question: When adding a transfer where the player is moving from a different sport am I right by putting free agent or is there something more suitable instead. (DUCKISJAMMMY (talk) 19:32, 23 June 2011 (UTC))
Appreciated (DUCKISJAMMMY (talk) 20:33, 23 June 2011 (UTC))
Would you have an issue with me adding photos & a caption to the Scottish transfer list somewhat like this although no photos at the top just at the side.(DUCKISJAMMMY (talk) 20:58, 30 June 2011 (UTC))
- Don't worry about the thing with Soccer-holic its sorted. Whats your opinion on the question above. (DUCKISJAMMMY (talk) 23:56, 30 June 2011 (UTC))
Orphaned non-free image File:2011 UEFA Women's Champions League Final logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:2011 UEFA Women's Champions League Final logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
- I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
- I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
- If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
- To opt out of these bot messages, add
{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}to your talk page. - If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:50, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Question
What is this here is it something for me to worry about could you explain. (DUCKISJAMMMY (talk) 00:31, 2 July 2011 (UTC))
- Ok Thanks :) (DUCKISJAMMMY (talk) 00:41, 2 July 2011 (UTC))
Creating the playoff bracket with 16 teams advanced from 6 groups at some football tournaments
You erased my contribution. Please give it back or create a new page with this. This playoff system is relevant and must remain somewhere on Wikipedia. Maiō T. (talk) 10:49, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
I would like to apologize as now I see that you weren't acting out of spite or being vindictive as I have read the discussion on scottish football transfers in Wikipedia talk:WikiProjectFootball you were just trying to act within the guidelines.Maybe if the guidelines were better outlined we could of avoided this conflict. However what lead me to believe you were acting in a malicious manner is in your first correspondence you used aggrevise & offensive language as result I would urge you to apologize also, So we can work together on current & future football page in productive & helpful manner. (DUCKISJAMMMY (talk) 11:29, 23 June 2011 (UTC)}
Thank You (DUCKISJAMMMY (talk) 12:31, 23 June 2011 (UTC))
User:Lloydf640 really messed up the English football transfers & I had to send him the following message :
Hey there, I appreciate you putting the 1st of July transfers in alphabetical order in even do it’s not necessary, I will leave it like that, however I urge you to be more careful when editing as you messed up Rob Edwards flag icon & you created a dead link to Villarreal on the Valero transfer. You also re-added the Scott Wootton transfer which I also added but have since learned it’s not official read this. Also you put Darren Pratley as unattached as his contract with Swansea only ran out on the 30 June & he joined Bolton on 1st of June a matter of hours later it’s not really accurate to call him unattached because if you considered him unattached then all the free transfers on the 1st July would also have to say unattached. Also you deleted the Kingsley James & Phil Roe transfers who moved from Sheffield United to Port Vale as they were not considered unattached see here & Sheffield United are a championship side the transfers need to be included. You deleted the Mehdi Abeid transfer which happened on the 1st July, the previous transfer in May was deleted as he was only on trial; you deleted the one in June leaving no versions of the transfer at all. You also deleted Donal McDermott’s flag icon. Finally you also messed Paul McKenna’s link sending users to English hypnotist rather than the footballer & sent users to Patrick McLaughlin’s disambiguation page where he is not as he doesn’t have a wiki page & you deleted his flag.I hope you continue to add missing transfers in the further, however I ask you be more diligent, Regards.
- Anyway it’s a pretty lengthy list of mistakes which I had to fix manually as he did 2 edits, which took a long time partly cause of numbers of mistakes & also somewhere less obvious. If he does it again in the further will you talk to him as you’re a more experienced editor & he may listen to you.(DUCKISJAMMMY (talk) 02:46, 3 July 2011 (UTC))
One administrator does not know what another one is doing
Administrator Skamecrazy123 (talk) wrote this message to me:
Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Knockout Stage with 16 teams from six groups. ... Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Single-elimination tournament. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion.
In the next message he proposed to merge these two pages.
The result? Both - new page & new contribution in the Single-elimination tournament page are cut off.
What can I do now? I want this playoff-system in Wikipedia.
I never knew how teams from six groups are allocated into the Last-16-bracket. Finally I found this on the internet and I want to share this thing in Wikipedia.
Please, do something! Maiō T. (talk) 11:59, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- Woah woah woah, I am not an administrator, I merely nominated the page for deletion --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 20:12, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
"Reducing three groups of four teams to a knockout stage of 8 teams" - that's a very good idea, too
OK, I will not change this (your) page anymore, however I want a brand new page in Wikipedia, on which will be written about methods of reducing groups to a knockout stages. But, I think, it will not last a long time. :(
Maiō T. (talk) 12:48, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- Just putting my two cents worth in here. You must indicate notability. If the thing you write about is not notable (if it does not have coverage in reliable third party sources) then there is a high chance it could be deleted. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 20:19, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
John Arne Riise
Why are you reverting my edit? There are no flags in that edit, what is your problem!? 62.50.175.31 (talk) 21:15, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
List of NK Maribor seasons (help)
Hello, I have seen that you have made contributions to my list I have been working on. I thank you and I would like to ask you (since I see on your user page that you have lots of experience with articles/lists achieveing FA status) if you could have a look into it and let me know what whould it take for List of NK Maribor seasons to become a Feautered List? The list in question has recieved a recent Peer review, as you know, and I have made recent adjustments based on comments in the review. Thx, Ratipok (talk) 00:58, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:23, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
I want to avoid an edit war
This series of edits are a concern. Anon doesn't seem to understand that a video replay of a goal ruled as offside doesn't count as verification. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:32, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Re this edit, I think my version is better. Italian and American are both common words that would be "understood by most readers of the English Wikipedia" and so should not be linked per WP:OVERLINK. Your edit also de-linked citizenship which, in my opinion, is a much more difficult word, particularly for readers whose first language is not english. I see a lot of inconsistency in articles relating to linking like this so I would be interested in your thoughts. Cheers, doomgaze (talk) 20:14, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Live scores
Okay, Wikipedia is not a news source.
Look some sport event article page history... – Tomcsy (talk) 19:56, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
consensus
Thanks for your contribution. I wanted you to know that I have always said there there is not a consensus for change. The other three claimed a consensus even though there was none. Thanks. --Ring Cinema (talk) 22:10, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
- Ring Cinema don't know of what he speaks when he speaks about consensus. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:13, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
- I have always said that there was not a consensus. That's what PeeJay says, too. So here you are again in the minority. I assume that means to you that you have a consensus. --Ring Cinema (talk) 01:56, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
penmiss
The template doesn't actually use the parameter. Why include it? Please continue discussion on the template talk page. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:13, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
Navigation Road station
Hi, re your move of Navigation Road station to Navigation Road railway station - the previous name was correct, because it isn't just a railway station: there are trams too. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (UK stations). --Redrose64 (talk) 22:36, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
Celtic F.C. task force
Thanks very much for your help in creating the category pages. I appreciate it. Adam4267 (talk) 23:52, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
- Same I really should be getting to bed, but Wikipedia is so damn adictive. Adam4267 (talk) 23:59, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Europa league
I obviously disagree. You say the draw was done with numbers but the match 35, match 38 etc used in the wiki article formed absolutely no part of the draw so I don't buy that argument. Teams were split into groups per here. Five seeds, five non seeds. UEFA then drew numbers 1 to 5 for seeds and 1 to 5 for non seeds and simply paired each number in each group as you'll see if you click on the relevant UEFA page and especially if you click "replay draw." You'll also see from that that UEFA used a "team A/team B" format rather than a "winners of match X" format and it's obvious to see why. It's much easier if you're looking for your team's opponent(s) to see them at a glance rather than have to further hunt above for "winners of match whatever" something which violates the spirit of WP:EASTEREGG. I'll copy this to the article's talk page but needless to say, I believe we should go with the format which UEFA themselves use, not one made up by Wikipedia editors. Valenciano (talk) 01:07, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
flags
Hi, putting flags along with previous/next item is done in the Copa America articles so there should be a common practice. Iska (talk) 01:36, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- I'm going immediately to those articles and removing them as being against WP:MOSFLAG. Thanks for informing us of the problem. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:58, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- Done. Thanks for the info! --Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:08, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Scrollable reflists
That's fine with me. I'll remove them. But, doesn't it look bad to have a list of hundreds of references making you to scroll down for a while? Would you leave it this way? Cheers. Qampunen (talk) 12:51, 27 June 2011 (UTC) Sure. See you another time ;) Qampunen (talk) 12:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
I really don't mind sorting the summer transfer list as it is right now, but is there a specific reason for this sudden change in format? Apparently the outcome is the same, but is it really necessary? Again, I'm not against using this format. Anything which tires to improve the article is welcome and great. It's a real shame that the scrollable reflist was removed, though. Qampunen (talk) 22:03, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry, PeeJay2K3... I try to update the article with the new format as best as I can. I think I'm getting used to it now. Cheers ;) Qampunen (talk) 22:38, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
We've solved the problem now... It was a stupid minor thing (>) !!!!!!!!!! Thanks for trying anyway... Qampunen (talk) 10:37, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
2011 Copa Libertadores final
I left you a message on wikimedia commons (here) but then I realized you might not check your discussion page as often as you do on english wikipedia. Basically I was wondering if you could make svg images of the lineups used in the two games of the 2011 Copa Libertadores final (I noticed you have made such images for other games). There are links to official data on your discussion page on commons.
Thanks in advance and apologies for any trouble. Cheers.–Nuno93 (talk) 13:27, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
- That would be great, thanks! Being uruguayan I dunno if its ok to say it this way, but up the Red Devils!–Nuno93 (talk) 13:34, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot! Cheers.—Nuno93 (talk) 01:38, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- Dont worry about it, there was no rush.—Nuno93 (talk) 02:37, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
ALT text
Hi mate, I was wondering if you could maybe edit the images in List of Manchester United F.C. players (25–99 appearances) to include Alternative text for images, as I my self not sure what to write there to fit.
As I'm trying to get that list FLC aswell.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 19:08, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you for the addition.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 02:49, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Slight problem (happens every year...)
Any ideas on how to repair the problem with the references (List of Spanish football transfers summer 2011)? Qampunen (talk) 22:25, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- There was a missing > in one of the refs, It is now fixed.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 02:42, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Squad numbers
Hi PeeJay, ManUtd removed the 4 players numbers, as of here First-Team, Please note that acording to Reds name tour squad - "The trio's squad numbers for the tour will be as follows - de Gea 1, Jones 4 and Young 18. However fans should note that as these numbers have not yet been registered with the Premier League, they could change for the season."
Thats why we should remove the numbers like the offical website does.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 02:42, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Question
Why did you revert my edit? ΔT The only constant 11:26, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Scott Wootton
Seriously, you are being ridiculous now. http://www.theposh.com/page/NewsDetail/0,,10427~2394297,00.html This link is from the Peterborough United Official Website, where the squad numbers have been "officially" announced. Fans will be able to get shirt numbers on the back of their shirts because they trust the official website has officially confirmed their numbers for the 2011/12 season. Sometime there are transfers that are never officially announced. If Scott Wootton plays for Peterborough on the first game of the season, will you still not consider him a Peterborough player because he has not been officially announced? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.59.96.38 (talk) 17:02, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Runner-up in Europa League
Hi PeeJay, do you think I should remove all Fulham players with Europa League 'runner-up' in their Honours list? Zoltán Gera and Clint Dempsey for example? Thanks, JMHamo (talk) 21:24, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Champions League qualifying process
Fair enough, thanks for assuming good faith, I was merely making the page consistant with the past 2 champions league season articles (2010–11, 2009–10) which use path and non-champions instead of route and league. Should they be changed too or was that what they used to be called? Delusion23 (talk) 21:28, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
- No worries :) I should've checked the official site to see what was being used by UEFA before making the changes. Cheers Delusion23 (talk) 21:40, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
What was this about? An article for a footballer who had an eighteen-year career at the highest level of the sport is a paragraph long and it's "definitely not a stub"? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 09:18, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
MLS All-Star 2011
I am putting the Canadian flag on this article, because that is how its formatted on Portal:Current events/Sports and it is a way to standardize across all articles. Intoronto1125TalkContributions 16:03, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Re: New markup?
Message added 07:22, 22 July 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:24, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Infoboxes
Hi there PEEJAY, VASCO here, longtime no talk,
i did not alter anything out of respect for your work, but after continuing to see the infoboxes scrambled up, instead of lined up (i.e. Gabriel Heinze, Ricardo López Felipe), i ask you what is the technicality i am missing there? I would really like to know, to avoid making a "bad move"...Always learning!
Keep it up, happy weekend - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 00:32, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Online versions of newspapers
Hey PeeJay, I'm just following Template:Cite news. Cheers, doomgaze (talk) 11:43, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 12:00, 23 July 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
doomgaze (talk) 12:00, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 19:04, 23 July 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
doomgaze (talk) 19:04, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Michael Carrick
Well spotted :-) I never noticed they'd taken 2 edits to add that cat... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:18, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Template:Football/sandbox
Im Hoping you might be able to help ive set up Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Scotland task force i think ive created all the correct categories but not one hundred percent sure. i tried to get the code correct for the taskforce label to display on Template:Football on Template:Football/sandbox but cant get it to work. Im know sure if done something wrong but not sure what. Would you be able to take a quick look. Would really appreciate it. Warburton1368 (talk) 20:39, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks just hope i got the categories correct as well. I take i now just copy the text from the sandbox into the discussion page at the main template WP:FOOTY template for approval or am i wrong. Warburton1368 (talk) 20:55, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- The reason im thinking the categories may be wrong is on the template i have |TF_10_ASSESSMENT_CAT = football in Scotland articles. But i havent created one labeled that but that wasnt in the instructions and other task forces dont seem to have one labeled like that eithier. Warburton1368 (talk) 21:01, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you so much for your help its really appreciated. Would it be ok to ask for your help again if anything else comes up as i am sure it will as creating this has been above my usual wiki skill base. Warburton1368 (talk) 21:35, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- does it normally take this long for an admin to update a template. Warburton1368 (talk) 16:44, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you so much for your help its really appreciated. Would it be ok to ask for your help again if anything else comes up as i am sure it will as creating this has been above my usual wiki skill base. Warburton1368 (talk) 21:35, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- The reason im thinking the categories may be wrong is on the template i have |TF_10_ASSESSMENT_CAT = football in Scotland articles. But i havent created one labeled that but that wasnt in the instructions and other task forces dont seem to have one labeled like that eithier. Warburton1368 (talk) 21:01, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
,
who cares?? is ugly in the source but no in the page¡¡ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chuyalex (talk • contribs) 05:06, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Sam Johnstone loan
I have removed him from the loans list, will wait for ManUtd statement about the goalkeeper.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 14:22, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- My opinion is that until he actually sign some loan contract we wouldn't add him, same as Wootton (Peterbourgh), King (B. Mönchengladbach), Norwood and Drinkwater (both Blackpool).
– HonorTheKing (talk) 18:43, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Featured Topic help
Hi. I'd be inclined towards including it as I imagine some reviewers would see it is as a notable omission. I've had a look at the Villa FTC and Woody's reasoning for not inlucing a POTY list is a lack of resources. This doesn't appear to be the case with the MUFC list. But at the end of the day what matters is the topic being complete and there being "no obvious gap" (per the criteria). So, it depends really whether you feel it would be an important enough part of the topic. Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 18:56, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
MUFC topic
Hiya,
I think you'll probably be alright with the ones you listed. I'd think you could argue that the PotY list is not an integral part of the topic, in fact I'm sure I've seen that specifically stated before now with regard to the other two you mention, although for the life of me I can't remember where...... ;-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:08, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- I replied on my talk page by the way. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:12, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Excuse me for butting in. You may want to consider including Bank Street and North Road, which I think are already GA and FA. The York City topic included their former ground. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 19:33, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Hey PeeJay, I made a model on how it might look like, see Here. What do you think?
– HonorTheKing (talk) 22:08, 27 July 2011 (UTC)- Sure m8, I will start the History articles once I come from work tomorrow. and hopefully the 25–99 apps article will also be reviewed and promoted.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 22:21, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Sure m8, I will start the History articles once I come from work tomorrow. and hopefully the 25–99 apps article will also be reviewed and promoted.
- Hey PeeJay, I made a model on how it might look like, see Here. What do you think?
- Sure thing.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 22:39, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Excuse me for butting in. You may want to consider including Bank Street and North Road, which I think are already GA and FA. The York City topic included their former ground. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 19:33, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, I'm really not up on books at all..... :-] -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:35, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Mud-slinging
It really is very sweet that you're trying to come back at me with unfounded insults instead of swallowing your pride and taking responsibility. Why on earth would you suggest that some faction of WP:FOOTY members is attempting to fabricate attendance figures in the first place? The very thought is utterly ridiculous, and such accusations are unlikely to endear you to anyone. If information is not accompanied by a source, remove it; simple as that. – PeeJay 14:19, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
- I hardly believe that the attendance figures are fabricated as I am sure that they are coming for a source which is quite legitimate and therefore it should be referenced. Since you are a great believer in placing up to date sourced information of wikipages I am very surprised that you let the attendance figures slide in your usual cleanup effort of the Europa League/Champions League pages. Which seems to me that you do know where the attendances are coming from. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 14:33, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
- I also have faith that the attendances are coming from a reliable source, but you expressed concerns over the source of the attendances, so it seemed that you were more worried about it than I was. I mean, why are you throwing accusations all over the place if you're not bothered. – PeeJay 14:46, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
- I am bothered because I placed an attendance for a game (which I could of referenced) and it was corrected with another figure. Again if you know where that attendance figure is coming why are you not releasing the source? Pretty simple question isn't it? Brudder Andrusha (talk) 14:55, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
- I am the person that added all the attendances(at least most of it), I have no reason to fabricate attendances. Syjytg (talk) 13:12, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- I am bothered because I placed an attendance for a game (which I could of referenced) and it was corrected with another figure. Again if you know where that attendance figure is coming why are you not releasing the source? Pretty simple question isn't it? Brudder Andrusha (talk) 14:55, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
- I also have faith that the attendances are coming from a reliable source, but you expressed concerns over the source of the attendances, so it seemed that you were more worried about it than I was. I mean, why are you throwing accusations all over the place if you're not bothered. – PeeJay 14:46, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
- As per your suggestion I have opened an entry in the Talk:2011–12 UEFA Europa League qualifying phase and play-off round as a start to the process of deleting attendance figures if they are not sourced. I am awaiting your contribution to this thread. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 15:13, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Scottish Task Force
Nice one, that will certainly save an enormous amount of time & effort, myself or warburton will make a request when the task force is fully functioning. (★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★) 23:20, 28 July 2011 (UTC))
User:Raulseixas asked me to ask you this: Can we change the player's position to STRIKER? This guy is a pure striker, one of the best in the last 15 years. I feel we should differentiate between STRIKER (more static player, plays inside the box) and FORWARD (do not score as many goals per season, operate also in the wings, especially in the 4-3-3 system - Pedro Rodríguez Ledesma, Michael Owen, Pedro Munitis come to mind).
Oh and i think that Dimitar Berbatov should also "be" a striker (the top goalscorer in the Premier League is not a striker?). Your thoughts please, happy weekend - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 17:17, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- So can i change it? - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 17:22, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
Marco Bueno
Why have you chosen to delete The marco bueno thread all is correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.198.26 (talk) 23:01, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
Manchester derby all-time results
Hey PeeJay. We know each other well enough now that I'm guessing I don't need to tell you that I don't always agree with Wikipedia's recommended practises for laying articles out and for what constitutes encyclopædic knowledge, but I am receptive to your arguments and willing to compromise. You said in the discussion on the article's talk page that you don't believe people come to the article to view results (actually that may have been someone else, but I'm sure you agreed) and I only partially accept that idea. I don't think many readers would come to this article looking to look up specific results, but I DO think that many people would read this article wanting to get a fair impression of how successful the two teams have been in comparison to each other in the derbies, and furthermore I believe that if that data exists only as a small part of a block of text (or even worse, spread out in a decade-by-decade analysis) it will not suit the casual reader - nor do I believe that a simple table listing how many times each team has won will do so. Now, as I've said before I actually kind of like, and support the use of, the list of results, but I see your point that these such things are frowned upon, and while to all intents and purposes I do not honestly care that they are frowned upon, I do acknowledge that this article will probably never reach FA status that way. I have my reservations about which I believe should change (i.e. the article or the FA guidelines) but I also know which will ultimately change, so I pondered this for a while and decided that the best option to my mind for replacing the results would be to implement a graphic that demonstrated a chronological progression of how the teams did. We already have a graphic for comparative league position, and I always thought that that graph looked pretty lonely. Perhaps we could replace the season-on-season results with a graphic showing something season-on-season for comparative performance? A cumulative total of derbies won, for instance, or a comparison of league points won in derby matches each, etc. To demonstrate what I mean, I've thrown together some very rough ideas which you can see in a screenshot here. Now these are just rough ideas - something I threw together over the space of about 30-40 minutes just now. I haven't even got some of the years right, but I just wanted to demonstrate what I mean. Now if we could produce a graph (or hey, maybe even two or three tops) which could be big enough to be obvious, and well-placed enough to draw attention, and situated with a decent block of text so that it doesn't look out of place, I would feel far happier about relinquishing the table of scores.
Incidentally, given how small the table for scores in cup matches is, I would actually feel stronger about keeping that than the league scores. If you want to delete that I will put up more of a resistance. However, for the time being let's work on what we have. What do you think of my proposal? Falastur2 Talk 00:27, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- On the inclusion/removal of the table, I can see the merit in both positions, and would happily go with consensus as I don't feel strongly either way. Perhaps one for WT:WPF? A List of Manchester derbies would resolve the issue, but I doubt it would (or should) survive an AfD.
- Falustur - a points graph is a non-starter due to 2pts/3pts for a win discrepancies. A wins graph might work if the axes are made big enough for a thumbnail to be legible. Speaking of images, one which would pair well with the Tevez poster one is an image of the now-defunct Stretford End banner. There must be a suitably licensed one knocking about on Flickr or somewhere. Oldelpaso (talk) 21:17, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- I think there's an image of that banner in the Stretford End article. – PeeJay 21:29, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Hadn't even thought of the points discrepancy, thanks for reminding me. Another idea I had (one to compliment the other ideas, certainly not to go instead of them) was a graph charting cumulative goals scored, but it was just a vague idea. PeeJay, have you any thoughts on my ideas? Falastur2 Talk 21:01, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- To be honest, I feel the same as Oldelpaso about the points graph; it wouldn't really take off due to the change in the number of points awarded for a win. I don't really like the idea of sacrificing prose in favour of a graphical representation as I feel it dumbs down the encyclopaedia too much. Furthermore, I actually think that prose is more appropriate than a list due to the uniform attention a list would give each match. We should be selecting the important games and highlighting them in prose, devoting more attention to the more notable games. As we've apparently all agreed, people don't come to the article looking for individual results, they come for an overview of the history of the fixture, highlighted by the most memorable matches. – PeeJay 21:09, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- Hadn't even thought of the points discrepancy, thanks for reminding me. Another idea I had (one to compliment the other ideas, certainly not to go instead of them) was a graph charting cumulative goals scored, but it was just a vague idea. PeeJay, have you any thoughts on my ideas? Falastur2 Talk 21:01, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- I agree that people don't come for a list of results, but I don't believe that the natural extension is that people come to read the whole article. I reckon a good 50% come to skim for bits they are interested in, which is why I respect prose and admit its necessity, but I also value those sections which give you more of an "info-at-a-glance" side of the article. Falastur2 Talk 21:16, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- True, and I believe that the infobox and a summary table would fit the bill. I assume you're looking for something of a middle ground though? – PeeJay 21:18, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- I agree that people don't come for a list of results, but I don't believe that the natural extension is that people come to read the whole article. I reckon a good 50% come to skim for bits they are interested in, which is why I respect prose and admit its necessity, but I also value those sections which give you more of an "info-at-a-glance" side of the article. Falastur2 Talk 21:16, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- I am indeed. Something that relays how successful the two teams have been over the years, and preferably in a way that shows the periods when one club or the other had a run of form. Something about a basic adding-up of the wins, draws and losses seems to fail to adequately relate how the games have been played over the years. It's a bit like having a table of military casualties in WW2 and the eventual outcome for those countries, suggesting that the country which lost the most men de facto was the worst fighter and that is all there is to it - or to show a list of teams according to their trophies won and then suggest that that list is an accurate representation of the strength of those clubs in the present day. Just my take on the matter, anyway. It may well be that a graph is not the best solution for this anyway, not least as after every derby it would be out of date. But it's an idea... Falastur2 Talk 21:44, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- See, that's why I think prose is best. We can use sub-sections to split up the prose into appropriately sized chunks that summarise when each team was particularly dominant. Btw, do you think we've gotten the conversation to the point where we could take it back to the article talk page now? – PeeJay 21:50, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- I am indeed. Something that relays how successful the two teams have been over the years, and preferably in a way that shows the periods when one club or the other had a run of form. Something about a basic adding-up of the wins, draws and losses seems to fail to adequately relate how the games have been played over the years. It's a bit like having a table of military casualties in WW2 and the eventual outcome for those countries, suggesting that the country which lost the most men de facto was the worst fighter and that is all there is to it - or to show a list of teams according to their trophies won and then suggest that that list is an accurate representation of the strength of those clubs in the present day. Just my take on the matter, anyway. It may well be that a graph is not the best solution for this anyway, not least as after every derby it would be out of date. But it's an idea... Falastur2 Talk 21:44, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, we should probably do that. It's getting hard counting the number of indentations now anyway. Falastur2 Talk 22:03, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Undid my revision:
Hi, Why would you undo my revision? I am new to wikipedia, what was wrong in posting that link?
Machismo500 (talk) 02:01, 3 August 2011 (UTC)Machismo50002:01, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
I would advise you to have a look at the video.It is the exact thing that has been said in the para of the 2 TEST — Preceding unsigned comment added by Machismo500 (talk • contribs) 04:10, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
August 2011
This is your only warning; if you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced defamatory content into an article or any other Wikipedia page again, as you did at Rio Ferdinand, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:30, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
- I tried to be nice with you, but seems like you do not understand. You cannot go in Wikipedia saying that MUFC, UEFA, FC Barcelona and Goal.com are unreliable sources and you are right. Next time you violate the BLP policy inserting your own beliefs you will be reported. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:30, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
- I told you. congrats. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:32, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
I suggest you stay off Tbhotch's talk page if he's removing your comment. Reminding both of you to be a little more civil.Jasper Deng (talk) 19:37, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
- Please do not make personal attacks, especially on a user's own talk page. If you continue you will be blocked.Jasper Deng (talk) 19:38, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
- Report at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Rio Ferdinand. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 20:06, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 19:41, 3 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Jasper Deng (talk) 19:41, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 19:48, 3 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Jasper Deng (talk) 19:48, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello
Why you undid mi edition???? Chuyalex (talk) 00:19, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
- Ok, thank's for the aclaration. Chuyalex (talk) 00:35, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
The transfer list is in sorry state, It has numerous amount of unreferenced transfers, most of which are true but do still require a reference as they're not listed in BBC transfers in general references. I would amended the issue myself but I have been able to edit the page for number of days as I keeping error messages when trying to save the page or see preview & it took me 3 attempts just to add BBC August 2011 transfers early today. I was wondering if you had the time later today could you please sort the issue on the page. (★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★) 13:43, 4 August 2011 (UTC))
Hi, again
But wait a second, why FC Barcelona have the sponsor???? Chuyalex (talk) 22:39, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Number 7 Jersey of Man United
Hi Tom,
I see you deleted the Number 7 jersey related stuff from Man United feature page.
What is the specific reason? We can discuss on how to include this piece of information in this article as per the wikipedia standard. Thanks, AbhijitJit bec (talk) 06:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:09, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
A pie for you!
|
Thanks for the help with the templates. You rock. JonBroxton (talk) 02:39, 6 August 2011 (UTC) |
Assessment
- Yeah i now know that to be honest having major problems with it actually starting to get fed up with it. When i started doing it i tried that but couldn't get it to work so assumed that it wasn't physically possible but i have now. Warburton1368 (talk) 10:25, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
- It should only have a small number of articles around fifteen affected as we only just decided on a importance scales. One thing thats surprised me is the amount of articles i have found that didn't even have the main project football banner on it. Warburton1368 (talk) 11:02, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Task force assessement
Hi PeeJay do you know how to create the assessement tables for task forces. I'm not sure how to do it and another user tried but thought there was a problem with the categories on Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Celtic F.C. task force. If you could help I would appreciate it very much. Thanks. Adam4267 (talk) 21:01, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
- Yes please. Adam4267 (talk) 21:04, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
- It's working now. Thanks very much. Adam4267 (talk) 21:14, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
- If you add new pages to the task force. Do they show up automatically on the table. Adam4267 (talk) 21:16, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
- Ok thank you I appreciate your help very much
- I see you have changed Henrik Larssons importance to mid. IMO he should be high, if someone like Alan Shearer is high surely Larsson should be. Adam4267 (talk) 11:31, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
Lists
Hey, just thought you might be interested to know I've started a discussion at WT:VG about lists in football games after having a bit of trouble with the Pro Evo articles. The intention is to establish a firm consensus for these at last. Fingers crossed... Cheers, Miremare 19:42, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Please can you indicate what 'fix' you are making to the citation format in this diff. Both formats are included in the citation template and there is nothing wrong with the original format it was in. Eldumpo (talk) 04:53, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for response, but I'm not sure why you say 'we really should be' using first/last in the template; both name formats are clearly listed at the template. Eldumpo (talk) 14:27, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
Thank you
It's much appreciated mate, thanks. I'll try and get the rest of the Umbro kits done soon and maybe move on to the Adidas ones. VEOonefive 16:08, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
For your hard work on ManUtd articles
|
Man Utd Wiki Gold Award |
| For your great effort on everything in the Man Utd articles scale, reverting vandals, and creating great articles. – HonorTheKing (talk) 17:06, 12 August 2011 (UTC) |
Yes, you are correct, lets move him to last season article
Yes, you are correct, lets move him to last season article.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 09:04, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
UEFA European Football Championship
Everybody knows that Slovakia and Czech Republic are the inheritors of Czechoslovakia, it is clearly written in the label of the box. The point is that Czechoslovakia won the title in 1976. You cannot cancel this historic fact, it is a vandalism.--Blocci (talk) 12:02, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Remember that the source is the UEFA official website, where it is written Czechoslovakia and Soviet Union.--87.17.239.30 (talk) 12:09, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
- Given that Russia have never reached the final under that name, what is you justification for placing RUS rather than URS? If you do not believe that I have summarised the principles adequately, then please go to the talk page on that article to explain why. You are way beyond 3RR on that article today, but I would not denounce you for it as most of your intention has been about preserving the consensus version. However, in this last edit you have changed away from the version that you had been reverting to protect a few days ago. Compare your change here with what you've just done. Kevin McE (talk) 12:35, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
- You evidently are/have been on line this evening, but have chosen to ignore this. Are you intending restoring the place of Russia in the list, as you previously edited to achieve, or will you be defending your edits of today? Kevin McE (talk) 22:32, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Play nice
Your edit summary here is not appropriate. Please read WP:AGF and WP:BITE. You cannot expect an IP to be aware of some agreement reached at a project page, which is not even linked to on the article talk page. Please be more welcoming. Thanks, Daicaregos (talk) 09:01, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
Sir Matt Busby Player of the Year
Yes, I saw the same article after posting and therefor removed my comment, I have messaged him once more and we will see.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 19:27, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- It was too crowded, I was looking at similar lists, like PL Monthly and Yearly awards and few more who have FL status and it looks good there. If you feel that it will be nicer then please go ahead and revert my edit.
BTW, do you know a book that we can use to cite those players? or atleast another site apart from MUFCInfo, I told Mark about it, and he said he will fix it but so far no change.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 03:55, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
- It took a while but it was sorted.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 17:41, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
- It took a while but it was sorted.
John Mikel Obi
Hi there - you might want to double check stats sites, such as Soccerbase, which confirms the validity of my edit. Regards, GiantSnowman 22:41, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- The Club career statistics at the bottom is correct the total is just wrong, thats what caused the confusion. (★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★) 22:52, 14 August 2011 (UTC))
1993-94 UEFA Champions League
"Why does the "UEFA Champions League" only start half-way down?" Because in 1993-94 for UEFA Champions League meant only the group stage and the semi-finals (in 1992-93 only the group stage). After 1994 all the tournament was denominated UEFA Champions League. The final was escluded in 1992-93 and 1993-94 seasons because was broadcast on television by the EBU.
Example: in 1992-93 and 1993-94 A.C. Milan matches in the group stage (and the 1994 semi-final against AS Monaco) were broadcast on Canale 5 (Silvio Berlusconi's channel) because Canale 5 bought the television rights of UEFA Champions League, but the final was broadcast on RAI TV, because RAI TV is a member of EBU.
Conclusion: for UEFA Champions League, in 1992-93 and 1993-94 seasons, were escluded the first round, the second round and the final. --79.25.25.251 (talk) 10:25, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
WP:FOOTY Taskforce templates at TfD
Hi PeeJay, I am prepared to close the TfDs for Template:WikiProject Sheffield United and Template:WikiProject Sheffield Wednesday as delete but need both templates to be converted into something that calls Template:WikiProject Football so I can replace (substitute) them. Could you please either provide said code or convert the templates? Thanks. JPG-GR (talk) 17:47, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
- I believe you misunderstood what I meant: I'm trying to determine which uses of Template:WikiProject Football (i.e. which parameters) need to be implemented to clear these lists: [8] and [9]. JPG-GR (talk) 03:59, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
- I had SporkBot take care of all the transclusions, and the templates are now deleted. Basically we just needed to append
|SheffWed=yesor|SheffUtd=yesor|RealMadrid=yesto the{{WikiProject Football}}template on each talk page, then remove the corresponding WikiProject template. If there was no existing{{WikiProject Football}}, then the bot added it to the article. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 06:13, 18 August 2011 (UTC)- That is correct, Plastikspork. Thanks for your help. You may be required again later to help with the conversion of Template:WikiProject Association Football in Australia. – PeeJay 10:17, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
- I had SporkBot take care of all the transclusions, and the templates are now deleted. Basically we just needed to append
Henrik Larsson assessement
He may not be at the level of Pele or Maradona but he has certainly achieved more than the likes of Shearer, Shevchenko, Law, Batistuta, Hurst, Gren, Hoddle, Zola, Banks, Charlton, Kaka and I'm sure many other players who are rated as high. If you can read his honours section and honestly say that he has achieved less than every single one of these people. Adam4267 (talk) 21:46, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Re: MfD nomination of Portal:Hong Kong football
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Fabregas0414 (talk) 13:11, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:39, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
| Good job! Syjytg (talk) 10:57, 25 August 2011 (UTC) |
Note
I have nominated List of Manchester United F.C. seasons for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Strawberry on Vanilla (talk) 13:24, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Note
I have nominated List of Manchester City F.C. seasons for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Strawberry on Vanilla (talk) 13:33, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Note
I have nominated List of Aston Villa F.C. seasons for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Strawberry on Vanilla (talk) 13:35, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Note
I have nominated List of Liverpool F.C. seasons for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Strawberry on Vanilla (talk) 13:38, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
How to create own kit for my favourite fotball team ?
How to create own kit (wikipedia) for my favourite football team ? For example, make it look like Lokomotiv Moscow. Detailed procedure for creating kit (using photoshop or gimp, upload photo) . Please contact me on my talk page. Regards, iQual (talk) 10:05, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: User:Joshurtree/tmp
Hello PeeJay2K3. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Joshurtree/tmp, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. Thank you. Salvio Let's talk about it! 14:36, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: User:Joshurtree/test
Hello PeeJay2K3. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Joshurtree/test, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. Thank you. Salvio Let's talk about it! 14:38, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
Ha! You lecture me about Wikipedia policies whilst deleting factual information from an article because you don't like it. Some players were unhappy with the way the club treated them. That is a fact. Wikipedia is not your personal property and it's not up to you to decide what stays in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.178.31.153 (talk) 17:37, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
Your recent edits seem to have the appearance of edit warring after a review of the reverts you have made on Munich air disaster. Users are expected to collaborate and discuss with others and avoid editing disruptively.
Please be particularly aware, the three-revert rule states that:
- Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.
I suggest both of you take the next day or so and discuss your respective reasonings at Talk:Munich air disaster. I will invite members of the Aviation, Football and Germany Wikiprojects to chime in. Agathoclea (talk) 17:54, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
:I have invited outside comments. So if you are right your version would stand. Nevertheless you choose to continue to editwar. I will have to block you unless you self-revert and take the issue to the talkpage. Agathoclea (talk) 18:49, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for putting me right. And really glad this can be solved in peace. Agathoclea (talk) 18:53, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
- (e/c) I think moving content to the correct and relevant area of the article is usually considered okay. It's not really edit warring, it's more "moving stuff which was placed inappropriately to a more appropriate place"-warring, and the IP seems to have got the wrong end of that stick. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:55, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
- To be fair to the IP, the first couple of edits I made were actually straight reverts of the anon's contribution. Like I said on Agathoclea's talk page, I just didn't have the time or patience to examine the edit properly and make a constructive change. – PeeJay 18:59, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
- No wuckers. I just thought that it wasn't worthy of a block threat. No harm done. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:34, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
- To be fair to the IP, the first couple of edits I made were actually straight reverts of the anon's contribution. Like I said on Agathoclea's talk page, I just didn't have the time or patience to examine the edit properly and make a constructive change. – PeeJay 18:59, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
- (e/c) I think moving content to the correct and relevant area of the article is usually considered okay. It's not really edit warring, it's more "moving stuff which was placed inappropriately to a more appropriate place"-warring, and the IP seems to have got the wrong end of that stick. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:55, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
Re: Nomination for deletion of Template:WikiProject Hong Kong football
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Fabregas0414 (talk) 12:52, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Welsh Football
Sounds interesting. I am not really up to speed on football - the fact that there are too many Man-U fans around was kind of off-putting. But I will be back in Wales in a few weeks so I might be able to help out with local library sources if needed. If anythings else at least I't be useful for tagging and categorizing. (P.S. Evil thought: maybe we can get an article on the Monkton Swifts) Agathoclea (talk) 15:30, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
- just watching the best game ever Agathoclea (talk) 15:47, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 16:46, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
Rugby
Is it possible to add a sin binning to a rugby collapsible box & if so could you tell me how, please. Regards (★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★) 22:05, 2 September 2011 (UTC))
Project to task force
Hi PeeJay, I've noticed that you have moved our Wikipedia:WikiProject German football to Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Germany task force. A bit of discussion on the move on the Project talk page would have been good, after all the project is quite active and has a resonable number of members and articles. The whole move, right now, smells a bit like WikiProject Football asserting its authority over WikiProject German football, like China over a renegade province. Also, don't forget WikiProject German football is not just related to WikiProject Football but also to WikiProject Germany and, to some extend, WikiProject Bavaria. Consulting us as its members would have been appreciated! Calistemon (talk) 23:54, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
- It would have just been really nice to have had a say, too, either by starting a discussion on the project talk page or liking there to one somewhere else. As it is, nobody from this project had any input and we were just thrown in a sack with the likes of WikiProject Persepolis F.C., which we fastly differ from in size and scope, I think. Calistemon (talk) 00:05, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
- You are missing the point, PeeJay. WikiProject German football was an individual project until a few hours ago, when it was "swallowed" up by WikiProject Football without consultation. With the same right, or lack of, WikiProject Germany could have made us one of their task forces. But we are really neither, we are our own project, associated with both, or at least we were, until a short time ago when somebody else decided otherwise for us. As to the other projects/taks forces, that's their choice, I wouldn't go and decide for them. Calistemon (talk) 00:22, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
- I don't want to do anything by myself. I would like to hear what the other members of WikiProject Germany have to say and then go with the majority vote, which is what should have been happening from the start. Calistemon (talk) 00:27, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
- Can do, but seems a bit ironic considering the same courtesy was not extended to us! Calistemon (talk) 00:35, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
- I don't want to do anything by myself. I would like to hear what the other members of WikiProject Germany have to say and then go with the majority vote, which is what should have been happening from the start. Calistemon (talk) 00:27, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
- You are missing the point, PeeJay. WikiProject German football was an individual project until a few hours ago, when it was "swallowed" up by WikiProject Football without consultation. With the same right, or lack of, WikiProject Germany could have made us one of their task forces. But we are really neither, we are our own project, associated with both, or at least we were, until a short time ago when somebody else decided otherwise for us. As to the other projects/taks forces, that's their choice, I wouldn't go and decide for them. Calistemon (talk) 00:22, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
I've raised the question at another relevant place, see here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council. Calistemon (talk) 02:20, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
- Well, you were able to do it for Wikipedia:WikiProject Non-league football. That suggests, you have different levels of respect for Uk-based projects compare to international ones. Calistemon (talk) 10:00, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
- Look, PeeJay. A discussion is in place now on WikiProject German football and hopefully people will participate. I've got my opinion, which is that it should stay a project but I will happily accept whatever the majority wants. I know you wanted to achieve something positive but I very much disagree with the way you went about it, just making it a move above the various projects head. Beyond that, I have no quarrel with you and don't want one as really, that's not what I'm here for on Wikipedia. If you feel personally attact, my apologies, it wasn't intended. Lets see what the outcome of the discussion on WikiProject German football is, if there is one and stick with this. Have a good day, Calistemon (talk) 10:15, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Message added 12:06, 2 September 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
- On a completely differnt note, he is surely a hoax, isn't he? Claims to play for your favorite club. Calistemon (talk) 12:11, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
- Replied on the two relevant talk pages. Don't forget to alter Template:WikiProject Football, at this stage it still revers to many of the task forces as Projects on there. Calistemon (talk) 00:40, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
"Hong Kong" or "Hongkong"?
Hi. "Hongkong" is used since before 1920s because Hongkong was officialy adopted by the Hong Kong government at that time. And 1908–09 is called "Hongkong Football League" because the Second Division League was started one year later, and the name "Hongkong Football League" was used by the newspaper at that time. Using newspaper as the source of Hong Kong football before World War II is very common since all of the official records of Hong Kong First Divison League was lost during the war. These sources, including the China Mail and Hong Kong Daily Press are not easily found on the Internet. --Antonytse (talk) 03:24, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Wales
Just to say that although i don't edit wales football articles i would be willing to help you tag articles for inclusion if you don't manage to get a bot to do it. I never managed and sadly quite enjoyed doing it. You helped me with the scottish project so would like to help you if you need me. Warburton1368 (talk) 11:20, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- Now the banner is working would it be ok if i tag articles for you. Warburton1368 (talk) 23:39, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Football as a common name
I'm sorry, but where was it that "we established" that "football" is a common name? Fasttimes68 (talk) 21:02, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Soccer Ball & pitch
I'll discuss on the talk page regarding field/pitch however you have already violated BRD by removing "soccer ball" from the equipment section, which has achieved a level of consensus for quite some time. Kindly restore "Soccer Ball" to the equipment and we can discuss the venue in discussion. Fasttimes68 (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:32, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:16, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Aston Villa FC.png
Thanks for uploading File:Aston Villa FC.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:04, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 20:30, 26 September 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Courcelles 20:30, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low 
to High 
.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 06:47, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
FYI
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests#October 30 Dabomb87 (talk) 16:03, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Good Article Barnstar | |
| Thanks PeeJay2K3 for helping to promote 1998–99 Manchester United F.C. season to Good Article status. Please accept this little sign of appreciation and goodwill from me, because you deserve it. Keep it up, and give someone a pat on the back today. Sp33dyphil © • © 08:31, 11 October 2011 (UTC) |
The Signpost interview
 | "WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Rugby union for an upcoming edition of The Signpost. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, you can find the interview questions here. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. If you have any questions, you can leave a note on my talk page. Have a great day. – SMasters (talk) 02:05, 15 October 2011 (UTC) |
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 05:21, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Main page appearance: Manchester United F.C.
This is a note to let the main editors of Manchester United F.C. know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on October 30, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 30, 2011. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:
Manchester United Football Club is an English professional football club, based in Old Trafford, Greater Manchester, that plays in the Premier League. Founded as Newton Heath LYR Football Club in 1878, the club earned its first FA Cup victory on 30 October 1886. The club changed its name to Manchester United in 1902 and moved to Old Trafford (pictured) in 1910. In 1968, under the management of Matt Busby, Manchester United was the first English football club to win the European Cup, ten years after the Munich air disaster that claimed the lives of eight players. The current manager, Sir Alex Ferguson has won 37 major honours since he took over in November 1986. Manchester United has won the most titles in English football, with 53 domestic trophies, comprising a record 19 league titles, a record 11 FA Cups, four League Cups and 19 FA Charity/Community Shields. The club has also been successful globally, winning seven international titles: three European Cups, one UEFA Cup Winners' Cup, one UEFA Super Cup, one Intercontinental Cup and one FIFA Club World Cup. In 1998–99, the club won a "Treble" of the Premier League, the FA Cup and the European Cup. (more...)
UcuchaBot (talk) 00:04, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Reversion of my reversion on 2011 Rugby World Cup Final
Hi there! You reverted my reverting of someone deleting the 'missed kicks' information from the rugbybox. I had never seen that rule before and therefore I just want to know where I could possibly find these conventions listed out, somewhat like a Manual of Style, so I can learn about them? I've tried searching but I don't really know what to search for... Thanks! EryZ (talk) 11:08, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
New Page Patrol survey
 New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello PeeJay2K3! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
Please click HERE to take part. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 12:44, 26 October 2011 (UTC) |
Orphaned non-free image File:South africa rugby.png
Thanks for uploading File:South africa rugby.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 03:49, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Psg badge.png
Thanks for uploading File:Psg badge.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:09, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:35, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
Line-up images
Hi
I'm wondering if you could tell me what software and basic images you use to create line-up images? I'm currently working on improving coverage of Svenska Cupen and Supercupen finals in Swedish football on Wikipedia. I would be very grateful if you could share your methods. Thanks! --Reckless182 (talk) 11:43, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
Old Trafford capacity
Yes the ground might have in the past hold 75,957. but it is possible that PL allow ManUtd up to 75,811? While UEFA or exhibitions games allows up to 75,957?. or even all up to 75,811. Last season the PL wrote 75,797, and is also mentioned by ManUtd.com in here, 25/03/2011 article -
"So while the stadium's attendance record, set 72 years ago today, is out of reach for the current capacity of 75,797, Old Trafford remains the biggest club ground in England and a stage fit for some of the best football in the world.".
– HonorTheKing (talk) 14:30, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 03:12, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Reversion of my reversion on 2012–13 Manchester United F.C. season
Hey there, just saw that you reverted the fixtures that I put into the above article. I saw the comment that you put was "Wikipedia doesn't have a licence for those". Just wanted to find out what you meant? I copied the table from last season and edited it - Thanks! Jonathanburger (talk) 09:19, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of "Big Four Dominance"
From one football fan to another surely its time that the "Big Four Dominance"section of the Premier League is deleted.Granted as a fellow Man Utd fan I'm not being biased at all but Liverpool are not a top four club anymore.Even the top pundits and football writers accept this,well maybe not Alan Hansen.With Man City winnning the league last year wouldn't it be justified in removing this pointless and out of date section?DColt (talk) 12:46, 21 July 2012 (UTC)