User talk:Sir gidabout

Welcome!

Hello, Sir gidabout! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! JMHamo (talk) 20:30, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: ask questions • make requests Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community (The Signpost)
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

October 2015

Hello, I'm Mattythewhite. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Justin Edinburgh, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mattythewhite (talk) 22:41, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Justin Edinburgh, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:17, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Justin Edinburgh. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Still largely unsourced, even with the Soccerbase link. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:54, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

November 2015

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Darren Sheridan. Mattythewhite (talk) 21:42, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Rob Scott, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Unsourced content. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:08, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Preece

Hello. Noticed you added and are updating managerial stats for Andy Preece. Please would you go back to the page and add reference(s) to the reliable published source(s) from where you draw your information. I've also noticed that elsewhere you seem to be using a list of fixtures from a Liverpool F.C.-related fansite as a source. Personally, I wouldn't class counting matches off a probably incomplete fixture list on such a site (certainly this one doesn't include any cup matches) as reliable for managerial stats for low-level clubs. You've already been made aware on several occasions that we can't publish unsourced information. This is particularly important where living people are concerned, so it's a little disappointing that you continue to add it. Thank you for listening. Struway2 (talk) 17:02, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thing is, I realise it isn't easy to source any sort of stats for lower-level competitions, and you're clearly putting a lot of work into these tables, so I really can't see why you won't say where the content comes from. If you continue to add unsourced content, as at Tim Harris (footballer), it'll be removed, and you'll end up getting blocked. I strongly advise

1) don't add any more content without a reference: that means every row of a table needs to be completely sourced, not just the odd row or, as at Steve King (football manager), half a row;

2) don't claim figures to be what they're not: if you're using sources that only include league matches, then restrict the table to league matches and state at the top it's only league matches, don't claim it covers all competitions. Struway2 (talk) 10:12, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Jim Harvey, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Struway2 (talk) 10:32, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Since my note above, you've added completely unsourced managerial stats tables to Jim Harvey and David Mehew and added unsourced content to others.

Additionally (and what I hadn't realised before), you seem to be adding rows to tables that count matches for clubs' whole seasons, rather than for when the subject was actually manager. E.g., at Tim Harris (footballer), the Forest Green row counts every match in the 2003/04 season (and no others), but Mr Harris wasn't appointed until January 2004 and left shortly after the 2004/05 season started.

Content in this encyclopedia needs to be both accurate and verifiable. If not, it's useless for the readers. Struway2 (talk) 10:32, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Loui Fazakerley

The article Loui Fazakerley has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NFOOTBALL.

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

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mattythewhite (talk) 19:12, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

December 2015

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Steve King (football manager).

Please stop adding unsourced content to articles about living people. I'm not sure why you're finding it so difficult to understand that managerial statistics need to be sourced, need to apply only to the period for which the subject of the article managed the team concerned, and, most importantly, that the source(s) need to verify both of those requirements. Struway2 (talk) 20:21, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Mattythewhite (talk) 22:28, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Sir gidabout (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am not editing any pages to be distruptive as They are actual facts! Please unblock me

Decline reason:

Until you add reliable third-party sources your edits are disruptive. Please modify your editing when this block expires. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 22:44, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Sir gidabout (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My dad is my third-party and he has just said that they are not disruptive edits and therefore reliable edits!

Decline reason:

That just got your block increased to 72 hours. Think carefully before you make another unblock request. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:03, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Garry Hill. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Mattythewhite (talk) 01:47, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Darren Freeman. More unsourced statistics. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:11, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Dennis Greene (footballer), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Lo and behold, more unsourced managerial statistics. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:58, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Mattythewhite (talk) 15:15, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are suspected of sock puppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/{{{1}}}]]. Thank you. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:26, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Mattythewhite. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Míchel (footballer), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mattythewhite (talk) 21:05, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Eduardo Berizzo. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Largely unsourced statistics. Mattythewhite (talk) 22:15, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Paul Cox (footballer). Unsourced managerial statistics. Mattythewhite (talk) 22:45, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Ernesto Valverde, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Addition of managerial statistics that were largely unsourced. Mattythewhite (talk) 16:41, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Mattythewhite (talk) 16:03, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Dennis Greene (footballer)

The article Dennis Greene (footballer) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NFOOTBALL.

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

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:54, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Sir gidabout. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Gary Lowe (footballer)

The article Gary Lowe (footballer) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Hasn't played or managed in Football League

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Telfordbuck (talk) 13:22, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]