User talk:Mightytotems/Archives/2020/March

Disambiguation link notification for March 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Amber Brooks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Defender (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:36, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Reign FC logo.svg

Thank you for uploading File:Reign FC logo.svg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Also:

• File:Seattle Reign FC crest (alternate), 2013.png
• File:Seattle Reign FC crest (primary), 2013.png

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Crest of OL Reign.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Crest of OL Reign.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:54, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

"Factually incorrect information"

What exactly was the factually incorrect information? It went specifically by the sources. ViperSnake151  Talk  14:29, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

(1) you removed definition of "international" in your first edit; (2) the distribution of matches are for 2020 season only, not for the entire three-year duration; (3) the distribution of matches for 2020 season among the three CBS Sports channels/streams are yet to be finalized and subject to change towards the backend of the season. This info was included in revert edit summaries already. Mightytotems (talk) 14:40, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Also re: WP:BRD, you went bold, I reverted, then you should initiate discussion. In the future it would be nice not to do BRBRBR a bunch of times in a circle. Mightytotems (talk) 14:42, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Jenna Dear

Thanks for the notification - but a bit confused by the exclusion of WP:GNG in your nomination and nothing else beyond NFOOTY mentioned. Can you clarify? Hmlarson (talk) 14:03, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi no problem! Just doing some patrolling and went for NFOOTY as the most easily verifiable criterion. If you believe the page currently satisfies WP:GNG, just remove PROD and add appropriate justification in talk (so it doesn't get missed in the future). Mightytotems (talk) 14:09, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Ok. Just seems odd the article was created in 2016 with numerous contributors. Why'd you select it to nominate for deletion? Do you disagree with WP:GNG? Hmlarson (talk) 14:12, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

At a quick glance I didn't find any of the sources cited to definitively indicate GNG; they all seem to be about stats or transfers which, in the absence of NFOOTY, do not in and of themselves indicate GNG. I know current NFOOTY criteria disadvantage female footballers but it doesn't seem like the subject played in high enough levels (e.g., youth world cups). But as you said folks have worked on the page and I might've been a bit haste in PROD, so it's probably better to be more inclusive here. Mightytotems (talk) 20:35, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Femine footballers article

Is UWCL appearances enough for a female footballer to get a wiki article? It would be helpful for me to save 3 articles - Lèa Khelifi, Lina Boussaha and Sandy Baltimore.

I have seen many articles on female footballers who have only played league matches in Spain or Italy having wiki pages. Wondering why pages o. France based footballers are getting nominated for deletion all at a sudden! Kokoeist (talk) 02:41, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

@Kokoeist: Again, please read WP:NFOOTY; if a player does not satisfy that, then WP:GNG must be satisfied. In these cases, please note that non-English language coverage do count towards GNG. We're all here to improve Wikipedia coverage, and let me reassure you that there's no personal or systematic motivations here; WP:WAX arguments are not helpful. Mightytotems (talk) 16:56, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Damallsvenskan players nominated for deletion

Hi again. Please review WP:BEFORE before nominating. Hmlarson (talk) 17:32, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Particularly B2 and D. Thank you. Hmlarson (talk) 17:33, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder! I did, and none seems to have received significant and non-routine coverage per GNG. Feel free to DEPROD if you disagree. Mightytotems (talk) 17:38, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Really? You might want to double-check. Please do due diligence -- or better yet -- continue your good work on contributing to the articles by improving and expanding. Nina Jakobsson's got a cap or two for Sweden if that matters. Thanks. Hmlarson (talk) 17:53, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Apologies for missing that one. I've edited it. Mightytotems (talk) 20:08, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Also, can you check if the Damallsvenskan was on the NFOOTY list when these articles were created? Context is essential -- but hugely lacking here in Wikipedialand. Hmlarson (talk) 18:03, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Re: the history of Damallsvenskan's professional status, there was consensus at link. Mightytotems (talk) 19:58, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

That's rather hilarious if you consider that a consensus. LOL! You can find info about consensus, though, if you search Wikipedia guidelines. Hmlarson (talk) 22:13, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Also, so if the Damallsvenskan was on "the list" in 2016 and was removed due to a consensus of two editors in 2017... are the articles created in 2016 adhering to WP:FOOTY not notable in 2020? or is FOOTY just not a reliable guideline? Curious of your feedback on this. Hmlarson (talk) 23:01, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

NFOOTY provides a measurable guideline for notability based on a player's current status, whereas GNG can be subjective and therefore up for debate. As I said above, if you disagree with my assessments of GNG, feel free to just DEPROD. If you want to (re-)start a discussion on Damallsvenskan's professional status or NFOOTY's reliability, my talk page is not the place. As far as my personal opinion on this goes, it's no secret that current NFOOTY could systematically bias against female footballers, but the same could be said about GNG too given that there is less significant and non-routine coverage of female footballers. If a bio page basically re-creates a database entry like Soccerway's even with sources cited, then I think its case for GNG is weak. Mightytotems (talk) 08:58, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Interesting... Was your job impacted by this coronavirus? Hmlarson (talk) 18:02, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Why is that relevant? Mightytotems (talk) 18:15, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Think a similar sense of powerlessness IRL influences a lot of behavior here in Wikiland. Anyhow, if so - I'm sorry. It's a stressful time. Thanks for your previous work. Hmlarson (talk) 18:47, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

File:Seattle Reign FC crest (alternate), 2013.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Seattle Reign FC crest (alternate), 2013.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 20:23, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy request to slow down AfD/PROD volume on footballer articles

Hi Mightytotems. While I appreciate what you are doing to improve sub-standard footballer articles, I worry that the sheer volume of recent nominations for deletion is too much for interested editors to respond before the deletion processes run their course. If you could spread these out a bit (or perhaps wait to nominate articles that have well-sourced articles on other-language-wikis), it would help us evaluate and improve them (if possible) in the time available. Best regards. Jogurney (talk) 01:50, 24 March 2020 (UTC)