User talk:PeeJay: Difference between revisions
Machismo500 (talk | contribs) →Undid my revision:: new section |
|||
| Line 679: | Line 679: | ||
:::::::::Yeah, we should probably do that. It's getting hard counting the number of indentations now anyway. <span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Falastur2|<font style="color:#000000;background:#AAD0FF;">'''Falastur2'''</font>]]</span> <sup><b>[[User talk:Falastur2|Talk]]</b></sup> 22:03, 2 August 2011 (UTC) |
:::::::::Yeah, we should probably do that. It's getting hard counting the number of indentations now anyway. <span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Falastur2|<font style="color:#000000;background:#AAD0FF;">'''Falastur2'''</font>]]</span> <sup><b>[[User talk:Falastur2|Talk]]</b></sup> 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? |
|||
Revision as of 02:00, 3 August 2011
For older comments, please see:
|
Warning!
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on UEFA Cup 2007-08 knockout stage. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.
Happy First Day of Spring!
Just wishing you a wonderful First Day of Spring {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}! ~~~~
To spread this message to others, add {{subst:First Day Of Spring}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Segunda Division 2007-08
Tom, if you could suggest any improvements for the article Segunda División 2007-08 please do so. Thanks! User:Qampunen 7:57, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
UEFA Cup
I have no idea how to use the talk page, so i think its here? but anyway i've linked it in the talk discussion page of the main uefa cup page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fadiga09 (talk • contribs)
RE:Template:Welsh Premier League seasons
Sorry if you were wondering what was going on. I had problems with the templates and had to rename one as two templates were just duplicating themselves. I have ameded this now and there is now two season sections. One is League of Wales and the other is Welsh Premier League. Onshore
Although the league changed in 2002? Also I didn't try to delete the League of Wales seasons as it was in use until 2002. I had to change League of Wales seasons to League of Wales seasons (1992-2002) because it was duplicating the information with Welsh Premier League seasons Onshore
Okay fair point. Well it's now says "League of Wales / Welsh Premier League" hope you have no objections to this? and we'll leave it at that Onshore
So what is going to happen when the Welsh Premier League is split into two divisions in a few seasons from now? Onshore P.S. I'll leave the navbox as it is because at this rate it would have just blown out as a fude or something
Also Thank You for sorting out the caregories, it was taking me ages trying to change it to League of Wales :-) Onshore
Transfers
Hi. I was just wondering why you deleted my list of the 2007/08 Premier League highest transfers.
Ok no problem
Tottenham Hotspur
so why can't the badge be used...when in the club season football infobox there is a section labelled "logo =" and the description being "{{{logo}}} — The club logo."?
FC Shortcuts
Just a quick tip for you. The next time you wish to link a football club all you need to do is type {{fc|Team Name}} rather than the full name. I did that on the Derby County record. NoseNuggets (talk) 1:46 PM US EDT May 14 2008
Warning!
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on UEFA Cup 2007-08 knockout stage. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.
Happy First Day of Spring!
Just wishing you a wonderful First Day of Spring {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}! ~~~~
To spread this message to others, add {{subst:First Day Of Spring}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Segunda Division 2007-08
Tom, if you could suggest any improvements for the article Segunda División 2007-08 please do so. Thanks! User:Qampunen 7:57, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
UEFA Cup
I have no idea how to use the talk page, so i think its here? but anyway i've linked it in the talk discussion page of the main uefa cup page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fadiga09 (talk • contribs)
RE:Template:Welsh Premier League seasons
Sorry if you were wondering what was going on. I had problems with the templates and had to rename one as two templates were just duplicating themselves. I have ameded this now and there is now two season sections. One is League of Wales and the other is Welsh Premier League. Onshore
Although the league changed in 2002? Also I didn't try to delete the League of Wales seasons as it was in use until 2002. I had to change League of Wales seasons to League of Wales seasons (1992-2002) because it was duplicating the information with Welsh Premier League seasons Onshore
Okay fair point. Well it's now says "League of Wales / Welsh Premier League" hope you have no objections to this? and we'll leave it at that Onshore
So what is going to happen when the Welsh Premier League is split into two divisions in a few seasons from now? Onshore P.S. I'll leave the navbox as it is because at this rate it would have just blown out as a fude or something
Also Thank You for sorting out the caregories, it was taking me ages trying to change it to League of Wales :-) Onshore
Transfers
Hi. I was just wondering why you deleted my list of the 2007/08 Premier League highest transfers.
Ok no problem
Tottenham Hotspur
so why can't the badge be used...when in the club season football infobox there is a section labelled "logo =" and the description being "{{{logo}}} — The club logo."?
FC Shortcuts
Just a quick tip for you. The next time you wish to link a football club all you need to do is type {{fc|Team Name}} rather than the full name. I did that on the Derby County record. NoseNuggets (talk) 1:46 PM US EDT May 14 2008
exactly
what do you mean what do you mean by exactly, i was agreeing you were right dipshit
Dr. Richard Hawkins
Hey Peejay, I've provided a link on the Manchester United discussion page. I was just browsing through the Sheffield United website and it stated that he left Sheff Utd to join Man Utd on March 9th 2008.
consulrjo 20:41 7 June 2008 (BST)
Tottenham Hotspur
Barcelona have confirmed that Giovani dos Santos has signed with Tottenham and will join the club on the 1st of July. Michael 7:34, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Nice job
You're doing a really fantastic job keeping the various Euro 2008-related articles up-to-date and clean. Keep it up! JACOPLANE • 2008-06-10 16:30
Fabio
I've been writing articles for 5 years on Wiki and that's not how I interpret the spirit of wiki - you will find lots of reserve team players on here so how do you justify this decision? Theo Walcott was a prime example and I could point out lots of examples
David Healy
What is wrong with the David Healy page of his international carrer if you merge it with the main page it makes the list longer.
last comment
'You should also realise that they didn't use the same formation in every match'. What am I supposed to know. my opinion is that scolari always used a 5-3-2 formation with Brazil and yet you criticize me for not knowing. I take it you are another one of the upper class snobs in wikipedia who claim to be right about everything.
formation for Brazil.
have a look at formation (association football) on wikipedia and have a look at 3-5-2 and you will see Brazil 2002 World Cup winner played it all the way throughout the tournament. Ronaldinho played as a central midfielder and Rivaldo played as a striker alongside Ronaldo and Cafu and Roberto Carlos played as wingers.
yep I was right about you. you are an arrogant upper class snob who claims to know everything like everyone on wikipedia. just because people get things wrong you like to put people down by showing off your arrogance.
enforcing policy!!!! why are u involved with people who want to make people be wrong all the time and writing u should do this and that and effectively saying ha you're wrong and I'm right and I am the best because I am a computer master with wikipedia who has got A's and B's in computer science or whatever and there is nothing u can do about it. why mate? why be involved with nasty people like that.
alplogy accepted. at least there is some decent human beings around.
| PeeJay, we would like you to become a member of the Football Variants Taskforce of WikiProject Football. |
 Hello PeeJay, it is nice to meet you. I came across your page when I went through the list of people who had edited articles in this category about Football variants, and I wondered if you were intrested in joining a new taskforce that covers this category, as we are looking for members. Thank you for your time - DeMoN2009 |
Wembley Cup Final Templates
.jpg) | |||||||
| Event | European Cup 1962–63 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||
| Date | 29 May 1968 | ||||||
| Venue | Wembley Stadium, London | ||||||
I propose you use your template and you could replace these templates which are on Wembley Stadium (1923)
Every Wembley Cup Final should have this templete
I will go up the 1969 FA Cup Final at put in the details when I finish the job.
I have done 1923-1962 could you check the useless parts but keep the Wembley picture because it shows you the groud with the final.
I agree but when i get to the 2008 FA Cup Final it will be England v Wales.
Cardiff City v Portsmouth
CONCACAF U-20 Championship
Hey, I was trying to move CONCACAF Under-20 Championship to CONCACAF U-20 Championship since all of the yearly articles are titled 2009 CONCACAF U-20 Championship, etc. I was unable to because the title was on the "title blacklist." You know what the deal is with that?
Check this out
Manchester United "diary of the season"
I have recorded the events of Manchester United seasons in the style of articles such as "years in the United Kingdom" as shown in the following link.[1]
Notice you where in a bit of a edit war on the 2009 UEFA European Under-21 Football Championship, just wondering if you could point out where in the rules it forbiddes "live updating", have been in similare situation and wants something to fall back on or is WP:NOT#NEWS ok?. --> Halmstad, Charla to moi 22:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thnx. --> Halmstad, Charla to moi 22:35, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Piqué
but why that but? all others estão FC Barcelona. Wherefore shift just a single? already we talk on the subject of that & they had he came a peace accord what barely the Henry remain Barcelona. I no has agreed to. FC Barcelona is the title of the club. Always is above mentioned with the FC ". Thus , owes continue being FC Barcelona.
About the FC Templates
For the record, ((subst:fc)) and ((fc)) are both one in the same. The second one is just a shortcut. NoseNuggets (talk) 7:42 PM US EDT Aug 12 2009.
Match details
      West Ham United
|
 Millwall
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
MATCH OFFICIALS
|
MATCH RULES
|
List of Manchester United F.C. records and statistics Edits
Tom
Anything wrong with the changed table i contributed to?
Matt435
3RR notice
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 1968 Intercontinental Cup. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barek (talk • contribs) 18:03, 11 August 2010
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Rodrigo Possebon nationality
Hey PeeJay2K3, I got a question and a subject that I think should be changed. Why is Rodrigo Possebon nationality is presented as Italy and not Brazil? even tho he did play for the Italian national team he played in the under-20 team, which by FIFA does not mean he can not play or present in the senior team the country of birth which is Brazil.
Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Lists of National Football League starting quarterbacks
Category:Lists of National Football League starting quarterbacks, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.
Football/Soccer player infoboxes
Do you ever follow this entire statement on WP:KARLSRUHER regarding the club names? – Michael (talk) 7:47, 5 December 2010 (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)
Man Utd Season Info
This is the website that I got the goal times from. I don't know how far it goes back.
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
,
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)
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)
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)
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?