User talk:PeeJay/Archive 2

UEFA Champions League 2006-07

Hi,

You used the term 'rvv' at UEFA Champions League 2006-07. I presume that stands for 'revert vandalism'. My edit was not vandalism. It was actually fixing broken code.

Just like routine use of unremarkable plain english words, there is no particular need to link dates. The reason that dates have square brackets around them is so that date preferences work. So '4 April' can look like 'April 4'. This was introduced because some people cannot accept dates presented in a non-preferred way. Unfortunately, the software has been badly designed and is confused with the hyperlink mechanism. This causes a lot of misunderstanding on Wikipedia and many editors think that *partial* dates and date-like entities (e.g. month-only, year-only, day-only, date-ranges) must be linked.

The use of date linking in the article was a good case of this misunderstanding. The linking of '3/4 April', '20 and 21 February' actually made them look broken and become: '3/April 4', '20 and February 21'.

If you don't understand what I am blethering on about, feel free to ask at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). Hope that helps. Keep up the good work. Lightmouse 01:28, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Manchester United FC.png

Hi, I just accidentally reverted Image:Manchester United FC.png to an earlier version (was aiming for the date to look at older version and hit (rev) instead), have put it back to proper version, just thought I'd better let you know in case it's on your watchlist and you were wondering what was going on. Sorry! Struway (talk) 09:29, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

MCFC and grammar

I noticed your changes to Manchester City F.C., which changed several uses of the discretionary plural to the American-style singular. While either is acceptable and usage varies to taste, IMO "Manchester City was founded" would rarely be used. Also, the places you inserted "and"s look like run-on sentences. (That sounded rather negative, I hasten to add that I think you made some good changes too). Oldelpaso 17:00, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, it was you who put the F.C. in ;-). My usual convention is to only use F.C. the first time, in the same way one might spell out an acronym the first time but not subsequently. Not that there is or ought to be any firm Way To Do Things. With regard to the two "run-on" sentences, they could probably be tightened up to be better than either version, I'll see what I can think of. The article is probably due a facelift all-round, FA standards have gone up since I got it featured. I'm pondering what to do about the bit you added about Billy Meredith, the full story is rather more complex. He was just one of several players who were transferred (under pressure from the FA) following the suspensions, with the best players being sold to United, the club having the opinion "better our neighbours than elsewhere" (how things change!). A lengthier account is worth putting in the History of article, but it would be a bit much for a summary in the main one. Oldelpaso 18:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Manchester United F.C.

No, I don't think there's a guideline about it, but I just thought that since there are several pages in the book which are referenced, it might be better to combine all of them under one reference. But I admit that I thought some people would be against it, and since you feel that it's more appropriate to have references to specific pages, I will change it back. Thanks for the comment anyway. Thaurisil 10:15, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Apologese

Right, I'm not a fan of grudges, so sorry for removing the transfer. It has been the way in the past, that if they have no page then the don't get mentioned, as they are not notable. It was to save space. But now space won't be a problem anymore. Anyway, you are right to keep the move as completeness within the articles set guidelines is a key criteria for FLs, which the article has a chance of becomming in the future. Gran² 15:15, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Any Dream Will Do

Hi, I was wondering why you changed "former" to "eliminated". It's just a detail, but I somehow find "eliminated" a bit harsh and thought "former" put it a bit more nicely. In the show they were announced as "our former Josephs" too which is why I think the term is appropriate. Little-quiqueg 20:54, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I didn't really see it as a case of being "nice". I just thought it would be more appropriate to make the distinction that the "Josephs" who were performing were the ones who had been eliminated from the competition. PeeJay 20:57, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Isn't that obvious? I doubt anyone reading that will assume that all people who ever played Joseph in the past suddenly appeared to perform. In the light of it being the exact words with which they were announced by Graham Norton I think "former" really sounds (and looks) better and I'd like to change that back. Little-quiqueg 21:35, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

As you wish. PeeJay 21:37, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! Just making sure I'm not getting into an editing war with you! I thought your other changes were very good. Especially reordering the expert panel. Have been agonizing over that for a while now. Of course the seating order was the most obvious one! Little-quiqueg 21:41, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

To be quite honest, the former/eliminated debate is a bit of a non-issue. Like you say, few people will assume that everyone who has ever played Joseph got up on stage to perform. Regarding the expert panel, I would have preferred to have the order going from left to right, starting with Andrew Lloyd-Webber, but I thought it best to leave him til the end, due to him being the only one to have information appended to his name. PeeJay 21:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

On the other hand, ALW always was the last one to be asked, so it makes sense to have them in that order! Maybe someone should add that Barrowman liked to wave around with his arms and yell "Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant" while Kenwright went on about fantastic journeys all the time... (not serious btw). Maybe the info box at the top should re-ordered accordingly? Or maybe alphabetically? Little-quiqueg 21:52, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Royal family Arsenal fans

Methinks you'll have to provide some source that supports your claim that The Queen, the Late Queen Mother, and Prince Harry are/were all Arsenal F.C. fans. I'm not saying it isn't possible, but I've certainly never seen anything to affirm it. --G2bambino 16:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the links, but I have some comments. I've moved the discussion to Talk:Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon#Arsenal, where someone else questioned your edit. --G2bambino 16:33, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Hartlepools United

You recently changed the entry on Leeds City F.C. from Hartlepools to Hartlepool, however at the time of the sale they were called Hartlepools, see here. I have reverted the edit. Chappy ^T_C 17:54, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

June 2007

Please do not add unhelpful and unconstructive content to Wikipedia, as you did to Cardiff Blues. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Eliz81 09:43, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

My bad, I may have been getting a little revert-happy. Go ahead and revert my revert. So, I have a question about the person who commented on my talk page right before you. What's the protocol for dealing with these things? I put a vandalism/personal attack warning on his page, but I wasn't sure what else to do. Advice is appreciated. Thanks! :) Eliz81 09:51, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Official Man Utd stats

I've placed a question on the Man Utd discussion page. When you get a moment, can you have a look at reply there? Darkson - I have a dream 13:21, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

2007 AS Roma-Manchester United conflict

I think this article could be put up for deletion, as a non-notable, badly written, and non-neutral article. However, the AfD page, especially the 3-steps you have to follow aren't clear to me (Wiki instructions seem to all be written as if everyone has a PhD in Wiki-speak) so if you understand it better than I do, perhaps you'd consider doing so? Darkson - I have a dream 13:37, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, I think I've done it. Darkson - I have a dream 13:41, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, it looks like the consensus is against deletion, but that the article needs a major rewriting. Looks like now might be a time to go for it, and if Daddy Kindsoul comes in and reverts all correct revisions, then take the info back to the AfD. Darkson - User:Darkson(Yabba Dabba Doo!) 20:56, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Category:Celebrity football (soccer) fans

Hi PeeJay2K3, I just thought it polite to let you know that following a brief discussion on WP:FOOTBALL, the category you added about celeb football fans have been nominated for deletion. Feel free to add your arguments to the discussion which can be found here. If you'd like to discuss this with me then please feel free to leave me a message. All the best... The Rambling Man 15:21, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Irish Support for Man U

Why did you delete my entry? Millbanks 15:45, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

As I mentioned on my talk page, thanks for the message, and I'm now quite happy with what you've done. By the way, I was delighted that Man U won the Premiership. In September I put a small bet on them at 3-1 at our local bookie, and come May I was richer! Millbanks 22:06, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

English

Why are you ashamed of your one eighth English blood? It shouldn't matter a toss. I'm from Ireland myself, but some English people are OK, though many are not. That goes for all races - doesn't it? Millbanks 15:49, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Would you like to Participate

Hi PeeJay,

I'm an Australian Research Student who is researching Wikipedia for my thesis. As part of this I'm interviewing many Wikipedians about their experiences and views-and I'd love to interview you if you're interested.

It would involve a short interview via email at a time convenient to you. All the research has been approved by the uni's ethics committee, and of course you can remain anonymous.

If you're interested please let me know on either my talk page or by email, and I can give you the full details of the project.

Hope to hear from you, tamsin 04:53, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletions

Please bring this up with WikiProject Football before you try and delete them all. Mattythewhite 19:39, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

"Speedy deletion - because the subject matter is non-notable and can be found on any football website"

Neither of those are valid reasons for deletion, speedy or otherwise. Moreover, your assertion that the information can be verified by several other "football websites" is a strong argument for keeping it. —freak(talk) 19:42, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

If you fancy making a page for every season of every club's history, be my guest, but if not, then I really can't see a reason why we need to have a multitude of pages like this on a website that is supposed to be an encyclopaedia. This may be encyclopaedic information, but it's very over-specific. - PeeJay 19:45, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The burden of balanced coverage is not mine. My message to you is that your "speedy delete" rationales are without merit and unlikely to be taken seriously. —freak(talk) 19:55, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

That is not for you to decide. I will revert your reverts and modify my deletion rationales. If you revert again, I will treat it as vandalism in bad faith. - PeeJay 19:59, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

If you do that that, I shall revert you for trolling. —freak(talk) 20:06, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Your bot is apparently out of control. Moreover the criteria which it exercises are or appear to be inconsistent with the core values of Wikipedia, notably the concept that [1] Wikipedia is not paper. While often bots are of great value, I suggest you spend a little more time sensitively tuning it before unleashing it unnecessarily on valid, informative and potentially content rich pages and wasting editors' (the people who put the real work in) time. Sjc

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Borussia dortmund badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Borussia dortmund 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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. BetacommandBot 03:53, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Premier League Table

OK, compromising here... we will have your table, with dark squares instead of the 3 'X's'  ¢нαzα93  07:39, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

FA Cup Finals

Hey there. Sorry I didn't have the chance to help out with the debate, but I haven't been around for a few days. In any case, I don't think I would have made much difference, since it seems to be heading for yet another no consensus. Cheers. 11:53, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Thierry Henry

Adding a protection tag as you did here does not protect the article. You need to ask an admin to do it. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 14:15, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Arsenal F.C. seasons

It's all competitions. I've added a footnote elaborating - thanks for the heads up! Cheers. Qwghlm 16:04, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Le_nouveau_logo_FFF.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Le_nouveau_logo_FFF.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BigrTex 21:59, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

UEFA Champions League 2007-08

While you may disagree with the repeated edits of the above article to indicate that Sevilla won the UEFA Cup last season, I feel you are going way over the top by referring to it as vandalism, your last edit summary and placing a warning template against the anon IP address last used. Please be WP:CIVIL and assume good faith. If you don't agree with the edits, start a discussion on the article's talk page and obtain group consensus. - fchd 16:55, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

• Don't even try and convince this guy - he's out of control - he HAS to have the final say on everything! He checks Man United's wiki seemingly every two hours to make sure no-one has made any changes to HIS page. No, PeeJay, it's everyone's page. 86.129.198.79 11:56, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, excuse me for being vigilant! - PeeJay 12:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Not that I'm watching your edits closely, but I will also query your edits to the team names for teams in the First & Second Qualiyfing Rounds, "as per UEFA.Com". If you look at the Draw page, [2], it has the long names such as FK Khazar Lenkoran and FC BATE Borisov (although it does agree with you about APOEL FC. - fchd 16:35, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, there's two versions. One lot is on the draw page, which has the full team names, sans full stops, and the other lot was on the Flash draw, which only used the short names. I'm just trying to get some measure of consistency on these pages, and all these inconsistent edits are making that very difficult. - PeeJay 16:42, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Nani cat

I know it still turns up in the cat, but with using DEFAULTSORT the (footballer) tag is removed from the sorting - its only there for Wikipedia purposes in the first place, and using DEFAULTSORT its as if the "(footballer)" isn't there, so in theory its sorted more accuratley. Mattythewhite 15:24, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

Figure you deserve this. Gran² 20:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

		Football (soccer) barnstar
		For keeping List of English football transfers 2007-08 fully referenced and up to date as best as is physically possible. Keep it up! Gran2 20:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Sam Hewson

Deleted again -- the consensus here has been that youth and reserve players aren't notable. As soon as he gets into a first team match, feel free to repost. NawlinWiki 14:52, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

ECL 2nd Qualifying Round draw formatting

I agree, it's best thrashed out on the talk page rather than a minor edit war. I just can't see why you want it that way. The third qualifying round is already Team x/Team y format, and for working out potential opponents the "Winner Match 1" format forces users to have to look back up to see what Match 1 actually was. Actually, if you want it your way it should read "Tie 1" as it is the results of two matches which go to deciding which team progresses. - fchd 20:16, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Squad Numbers for 1991 UEFA Cup Winners' Cup Final

Where did you find the squad numbers for this final, because I can't find a site anywhere which has the squad numbers available NapHit 15:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I have a DVD of the 1991 Final, and the players' numbers are listed on there. - PeeJay 03:18, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Premier League 2007-08 article

I have again removed the paragraphs about teams "looking to do this", or aims and asperations in general, and whether or not signings are "astute" etc. This is mostly POV and speculation, and does not deserve a place in an encyclopaedia. Let's stick to the facts please. - fchd 20:35, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

British Isles naming dispute

As an American with Irish blood (yes, don't hold it against me :D ) obviously I'm sympathetic to the Republic. I'm also a Republican (not the U.S. type) and anti-monarchist. I think Great Britian and Ireland doesn't favor one side and is a simple solution to, like you say, a trivial issue. I see you're from Wales. I visited England and Wales in December. I got to attend, with a Mancunian-born friend, the Champions League match versus Benfica. Of course that was my favorite part of the trip, but my second favorite was driving through North Wales and Conwy in particular. I didn't care for Southern England or the Midlands much. Anyway can't wait for August 12th to roll along! - Tocino 20:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Your right about the term Great Britian and Ireland... it leaves out the Isle of Man and etc. however until United has a captain from the Shetland Islands or wherever we won't have to worry about this problem. I really don't mind the term, British Isles, but this is wikipedia and I think we should obey the strict non-POV guidelines, and since there is a small controversy about this, I think we should avoid using the term. As for Wales, yes we drove around the small roads around the shores of Anglesey and it was great. We made it all the way up to Holyhead and then went back. You'll love OT. Maybe it was because it was an European night, but we had seats in North Stand tier 2 and that's an area in the stadium that has a reputation for not singing as much as the other parts of the ground.... well it did not disappoint... the atmosphere was great. However it could be a bit different with you going to an exhibition match. - Tocino 21:39, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Recent Anderson edit

Ok, so maybe I should have checked before cleaning up what was incorrect info (not posted by me btw), but don't you think your "get your facts straight" comment was slightly out of line? Darkson (Yabba Dabba Doo!) 01:06, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

No worries - I guessed it might be directed at the original poster, but after the shit I've been taking on the DB talk page... Darkson (Yabba Dabba Doo!) 01:13, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

RE:FCK-Beitar dates

Hi. I cannot see why they should be removed as there is a reliable source. I could if necessary insert a reference note. kalaha 12:02, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Premier League fixtures

That article got speedied as a copyright violation. I'm confused, though--what rationale does the Premier League use to copyright its schedules? Was wondering because an American sports league would find it hard to copyright its schedules. Blueboy96 00:33, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, such a claim would get thrown out in the States ... it's established precedent here in the States that you can't copyright facts. That said, I don't think that article belonged here in any case, per WP:NOT. Blueboy96 14:32, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Player categorisation

See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football/Archive_9#Categorizing_players for the most recent discussion of this issue (it comes up fairly often). Consensus is that anyone who has had a contract with the club is professional. ArtVandelay13 21:59, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

No, you're not paying attention - whether he has played yet is irrelevant. The fact that he is (or has been) contracted and registered as a Man United player means he qualifies for the category. If you were to describe Hargreaves, you would describe him as a 'Manchester United player', therefore he goes in the Category 'Manchester United players'. The same goes for (say) Ben Collett - during the time he was at Man U, he was a 'Manchester United player', regardless of whether he made the first-team or not, so he fits the category. Honestly, what is gained from omitting Hargreaves from this category? ArtVandelay13 22:10, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

But 'played for' doesn't necessarily mean 'played in the first-team', in this context it's taken to mean 'was a player for'. Put it this way: Owen Hargreaves currently plays for Man United, i.e. they are the club he is at. And it's that meaning that's what the categories are for - the clubs a player has been at. ArtVandelay13 22:17, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, playing in a competition is a different thing from playing for a club - more of a status issue, and you have no real attachment to a competition (apart from in MLS) as you do with a club. To take a parallel issue, in the World Cup players categories, non-playing squad members are listed, because they were registered players for that tournament.

The WP:FOOTY discussion is perfectly acceptable - I would say Hamann at Bolton is a debatable case (much more so than a current player who hasn't made their debut, or a former reserve), but the point of a category is an exhaustive list of everyone that's been a player for a particular club, and failed youth team players, reserve goalkeepers and new signings are part of that. I struggle to see what is gained by leaving out Owen Hargreaves. ArtVandelay13 22:38, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Response

I am perfectly civil. The category says "Manchester United Players" not "people who have played in matches for Manchester United." Regardless of whether or not Hargreaves EVER plays a game for Manchester United, he'll always go down in history as a Manchester United player. Batman2005 20:29, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

United Home Kit

I bought it yesterday, and noticed the "stripy" pattern is slightly different to the one on the wiki. The stripes fan-out at the bottom of the shirt at about 15 degrees, rather than following straight down to the bottom of the shirt. Hope you can edit the wiki image to match this. Diolch Vycasio yhn Honór - Cräiteland 12:11, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

HP character infobox colours

I would direct your attention to the HP project page, where this matter has already been discussed and decided in favour of removing the colouring. Please revert your colour changes. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 14:58, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Access dates

Hi there, do you know where's the Wikipedia guideline/policy page which says that the access date is the date first accessed? I was looking at this guideline and noticed that it doesn't say access date equals first accessed. My view is that for websites with content that is periodically updated, the "last accessed" principle will tell which version was looked at. Thanks. Chensiyuan 13:31, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Manchester United squad numbers

Did you even watch the Community Shield yesterday? Gerard Pique is now #19, and Lee Martin is #30. - PeeJay 14:41, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Nothing is definite until SAF makes the official announcement later this week. Both Eagles and Pique have worn #19 this pre-season. Manutd.com was JUST updated earlier today to show Lee Martin as #46, so we can't be publishing contradictory information on the wiki page. Wikipedia is for publishing definite information, not speculation. User:dsapery

46 is the number Martin wore last season. The ManUtd website is known to be very slow when it comes to updating the squad list. - PeeJay 14:51, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not trying to argue with you. Yes they wore those numbers yesterday. Yes manutd.com is slow in updating the squad list. But the Community Shield squad numbers are not definitive and can change before the end of this week. Just be patient. With the league starting this upcoming weekend, the OFFICIAL squad lists will be announced this week. [user:dsapery]

What makes you think the numbers worn in the Community Shield are not definitive? It is a competitive tournament, for which the players use the same numbers that they wear in the Premier League and other competitions under the Football Association banner. - PeeJay 14:56, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

We're going back and forth, and keep changing the squad numbers around. I give up and will simply wait until it's officially announced.

I've just heard from a friend of a friend of someone who works at Carrington. Hargreaves will definitely be #23. Pique and Martin are likely 19 and 30, but not definite yet. Press release will be coming out this week.

_

I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but I just heard back from an official at the club. Q: "Are the squad numbers worn by the players on Sunday confirmed now for the Premiership season?". A: "Not yet... confirmed list for Premier League numbers is due later this week, Thursday I believe."

Personal attacks

Hello. Please refrain from making personal attacks on edit summaries, such as this one. Personal attacks are disruptive and in no way contribute to the resolution of a disagreement on Wikipedia. Thank you. Regards, Húsönd 02:37, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Owen Hargreaves

I got it semi protected. I hope we can relax a while now. Kingjeff 02:41, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Carlos Tevez

My mistake, I assumed Man Utd were only playing either Dunfirmline or Glentoran, not both. sepmix 23.39, 7 August 2007

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Valencia CF.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Valencia CF.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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. BetacommandBot 01:05, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

What's your problem, men?

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Simion Eugen-Andrei, Bucharest, Romania (talk • contribs) 09:26, 9 August 2007.

Valencia logo

Ief has been consistently trying to remove the Valencia CF logo and replacing it with a false or outdated one he apparently uploaded; you can see the history page for his revisions and further details. I've left a warning on his talk page but I don't know if he'll continue. ···巌流^{? · talk to ganryuu} 10:12, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Warning about your comments at User talk:Batman2005

Comments like "You seem like a very bitter person. Were you abused as a child?"([3]) are unacceptable. Please try to be more civil towards other editors and not resort to making personal attacks. Adambro 22:26, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I dont understand your rational

And that's in gentle terms speaking. This image is good for real Madrid basketball page? If so, its good for anything else(If you haven't noticed, the team that won both competitions is.... real). --ArnoldPettybone 23:06, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

nonsense. article 3 of the fair use explains why is it ok to to use it under bb european cup pages. its not "decorative", and the fair use doesn't states such use as this as "breaching", anything, anywhere. It does "illustrates the team in question", such as the fair use (does) states --ArnoldPettybone 00:03, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

well, if its only a guideline it doesn't obliges anything, does it?.

as long as it doesn't breaks any low of wikipedia written code or standard, it should be capt. Oh btw, the flag of Spain has even less "entity connention" to the article then Real coat of arms. should we delete all national flags from sport competition winners articles? I'm game. --ArnoldPettybone 00:37, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Man Utd Transfers In/Out

Man, why did you delete this section I spent time creating? It's worth it for new members and people who need to know transfer details!

Need your advise

Hello! I hope you are feeling great. I need your comments on this issue with regards to grammar here. Your comments would very much be appreciated! --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 12:02, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Unblock

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I am not requesting to be unblocked, as I feel the punishment is fair. However, I do not believe the length of the punishment fits the misdemeanour. Surely two days is a bit much? Would one day not be more prudent? I will respect your decision, whatever you decide, but I just thought I'd let you know that I feel a bit aggrieved by the length of the "sentence".

Decline reason:

Procedural decline; seems to be dealt with already. — Kurykh 16:51, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

---

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.

I asked the blocking admin to review your block, keep in mind that this might take a while since he seems to be offline at the moment. -- lucasbfr ^talk 13:28, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

As it is your first i'd be reducing it to 24h. From you message above i understand that you acknowledge your wrongdoing. I would only ask you to avoid it in the future. In case you're confronting a delicate situation please always think about WP:DR. Always, please understand that "edit summaries" are used to briefly describe changes you have made. It is in no case dedicated to attack other people. Thanks you. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 13:52, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for being so understanding, man. I appreciate it. I'll try to keep a cool head in the future and not respond to people baiting me. - PeeJay 15:54, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Need your comments

Hello! I hope you are feeling fine. I would like you to view and read this page carefully. This is in regards to the Manchester United F.C. article. As this subject is dealing with English based articles, we should follow the usage of British English so as to be more consistent with grammar. Moreover, British English has to be used here as per consensus in the Talk and FAC pages. Your understanding of this issue is crucial as well. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 13:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Notable players

In All Blacks and France national rugby union team which both passed WP:FAC it's stated as Notable players. The fact they are past players is redundant. In the interests of consistency the Welsh page should be the same. - Shudde ^talk 00:19, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Of course that was not the reason it passed; you know thats not what I mean't. But clearly it was acceptable. If you look at both those articles then you will see that it's not a list, the list is on most national team pages are WP:OR anyway, and I've slowly managed to delist them (still going though). The point remains that it is redundant - if people add names who cares? But having all the articles the same seems like a good idea to me. - Shudde ^talk 01:29, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

2007 Rugby World Cup squads

Hi! See this, please. --necronudist 19:00, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Stretford End.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Stretford End.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Premier League Results Table 2007-08

If you want to keep that table, please make the BLACK future fixtures sqaures, white, because otherwise it looks hideous El-Nin09 18:47, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Cheerfully Withdrawn El-Nin09 19:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I Will try and keep a copy of the table on my computer El-Nin09 19:24, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Edinburgh rugby badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Edinburgh rugby badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 09:14, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

!

Wow - can I ask where the hell you got that squad number history from?! Nice work on the stats page JPMJPMJPMJPM 10:47, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

The Combination

Re: This edit - do you have a better quote about a first incarnation of The Combination existing in 1888-89? The quote you've given doesn't really back up the claim as far as I can see, and I can't find any other sources for it. Thanks. Qwghlm 22:40, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Could you give me the full quote? As it stands it says:

“Other clubs were not slow to see these benefits, and a meeting in Crewe was attended by many of the clubs not included in the 12. This led to the formation of the 'Football Combination'.”

And that makes no reference to a separate first version, or the Combination being found in 1888. Is it possible they might be referring to the Combination being founded in 1890 - this led to doesn't imply it was founded straight away even if it is in the 1888-89 section. Thing is, I can find no other source (the usually reliable RSSSF makes no mention of it) for the existence of a Combination in 1888 so I'm a bit sceptical. Qwghlm 22:51, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for that - wasn't expecting that much! Must have taken you ages to type. Anyway, OK that looks fine to me, thanks for clearing it up. I'm not sure if the competition was called "The Combination" or the "Football Combination" and online sources are pretty thin on the ground - bizarrely the most informative source I can find is on the French Wikipedia. Anyway I'll rejig the The Combination page for now with the additional information in that quote and if it should be moved to another page in due course if I can find any further information. Qwghlm 08:53, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

"New" The Football League 2007-08 table

I'd like to invade you to participate in this discussion. Regards.--ClaudioMB 00:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Champions Youth Cup

Never mind. I see your point. When I added the badge I didn't notice that you had already removed it once, so it was completely my fault. — Luxic 10:52, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

MUFC seasons

I'm afraid the timing means I shall have to abstain. While I can normally keep my bias under reasonable control I can't possibly maintain NPOV on derby weekend. Speaking of which, at some point in future we should collaborate to improve Manchester derby. Oldelpaso

Sorry about my late reply, I was at Lowlands and forgot to put "On holiday" on my user page. As for any concerns, I'm happy with the points I raised. I had a brainwave about what to do for the seasons that don't have a page, and I'll post it on the FAC too. Would it be a better idea to link to that period in the club's history? On top of that, it could then be counter-argued that many of United's seasons simply weren't significant enough to warrant their own pages, and therefore you'd "only" have 10-20 pages to create, as opposed to 130. BeL1EveR 16:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

RWC2007 form guide

My boy, I am sorry that you thought the form guide was 'totally unnecessary'. I believe it would have been helpful for readers new to the sport to see which matches would be worth following; not everybody knows that the final in St Denis between France and New Zealand will result in five tries, two drop goals and three yellow cards. I was going to tear you off a strip, but reading that you're a Scarlets fan, I realise that you've suffered enough (I was at the Walker Stadium on a very sunny and pleasing April Saturday...). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.66.42.0 (talk) 02:31, August 23, 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Rugby union national team Improvement Drive

For the 2007 Rugby World Cup WikiProject Rugby union is launching an Improvement Drive for national rugby union teams; specifically those participating in the Rugby World Cup.

We need your help! Here is what you can do:

• Adopt a national rugby union team article and collaborate with other members to improve it.
• Find, create and upload free images that will help improve these articles.
• Copy-edit, reference, and expand articles when and where you can.
• Promote the project and encourage others to join.

The World Cup is fast approaching and these articles are going to get a lot more hits during the tournament. It would be great if we could have them at a high standard!

For more information see the discussion on the WikiProject Rugby union talk page here.

Shudde ^talk 05:39, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Craig Lawton

The book PFA Premier & Football League Players Records 1946-2005 gives his middle name. Brilliant book, recommend anyone to buy a copy. Mattythewhite 12:19, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

If you do get to buy a copy and have an ebay account, I'd recommend buying a copy from this guy, reliable seller. And thanks, I don't think anyones said anything like that to me before! Mattythewhite 12:29, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Manchester F.C. seasons

If I believed that criterion 1(a)1 could be so easily sidestepped, I would have removed my objection. I do follow debates I have contributed to, so I don,t need ro be follwoed to my talk page about them. Circeus 01:07, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

"The season articles are being created, and I believe that allows that particular objection to be ignored, regarding the article's FL candidacy."

This is simply preposterous. Have you ever heard of a featured article being promoted "because objections are being worked out"? No FA is passed until, in the eyes of the FA director, all reasonable objections have been addressed. As for saying that criterion 1(a)3 works instead, that is equally inappropriate. It was added so that lists whose individual element are not notable could be featured. Since the article could clearly be made to satisfy criterion 1(a)2, it's entirely inaccurate to attempt to apply 1(a)3. Circeus 01:23, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

My bad, I did mean 1(a)1 and not 1(a)2 in the above message. Circeus 01:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

There's been *plenty* of FLC whose promotion depended entirely on large article creations. Why, pay tell, should this list be given a special treatment? Circeus 01:45, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

2008 UEFA European Football Championship qualifying Group F

TThankyou for your personal attack [4],, it is not often I get the opportunity to recieve one. If you are going to continue to make controversial edits, it may be of interest to you that there is an "article talk page" on which you can raise your concerns The Fashion Icon 06:28, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, WP:NPA was maybe a bit of an over reaction, but could you please look at the article talk page, and at least see that I have genuine reasons to want the attendence cited The Fashion Icon —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 11:40, August 26, 2007 (UTC).

History of Wales rugby team

Hey, I've been working on Wales national rugby union team and was wondering if you had any resources that could help reference and expand the history section of the article? Most of the rest of the article is coming along without to many problems, but the history section (especially Post-war years (1920 - 1969) and Second 'Golden Age' (1969 - 1982)) lacks enough information. Being from NZ I'm having trouble finding good books and stuff on Welsh rugby. Looking at the French article's bibliography gives me the impression there are lots of books out there that could help. Anyway, point is, could you help me? - Shudde ^talk 23:55, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Yeah my personal library is very limited, but the real problem arises when I visit the local library. There are *heaps* of books on the All Blacks, but very few on general rugby histories, let alone those of another national team. - Shudde ^talk 01:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Manchester United F.C. seasons support

You're welcome. ;) Keep up the good work around here.--Serte ^{[ Talk · Contrib ]} 18:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Article title describing what the article is

I am disappointed that someone would take it upon themselves to move a page without discussion or reference to the editors who have worked on that page. TAFKA Gillingham F.C. managers' records is, as its first line states, a chart that shows the managerial records of those who have held the post of manager at Gillingham F.C.. It is not "merely" a List of Gillingham F.C. managers. On what grounds, therefore, did you conclude without discussion that the latter is a more appropriate title? Kevin McE 23:41, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Could you put the English names in your mind?

I found you are not the first time to confuse "Kyiv" and "Kiev", also you could not find that Red Star Belgrade is the English name but Crezda Zrevda is not. According to WP:NAME, you should use the English name if there is a English name. But the idea you gave me is, you do not know what is called English names. KyleRGiggs 18:20, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I repeat that one time again, this is not the problem of common or not. It is the problem of English name or non-English name. Because en-wiki is the most popular wikipedia, most people using English could not get what "Kyiv" is. "Kiev" is the English and "Kyiv" is not. Stop doing editing at UEFA CL 2006-07 or so on again. Raymond Giggs 05:11, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Mancgester United FC seasons

As I said at WP:FLRC for Frölunda HC seasons, if there is a higher level of articles exist to substitute the individual seasons for the time being, then it's fine. Frölunda HC seasons does not have any "Swedish hockey" articles(that's why I want it delisted) while MANU has those "English football" articles (that's why I supported).--Crzycheetah 19:46, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

The Combination

I was wondering if the Definitive History of Newton Heath which you used to reference their record in The Combination on your season list (congratulations on the FLC, by the way) has a full league table for the unfinished 1888 incarnation. If it does, and if you still have access to it, I'd be very grateful if you could find a moment to let me have details of Small Heath's record. Cheers, Struway2 | Talk 08:27, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Now the requirement for a full set of individual season articles has very sensibly been dropped I'm sure more season lists will come through. Believe me, there can't be many people who'd really consider Birmingham City 1937–38 (as usual managed to avoid relegation due to sound defence, good job really as leading scorer only got 9, knocked out in 3rd round of Cup 1–0 at home) as remotely worthy of an article to itself! Cheers, Struway2 | Talk 11:05, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Banned...

You have been asked nicely not to edit it while it is in use. Next time, you will be reported to an admin. You are trying to own the article! Universal Hero 16:47, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

It's not your page...please look at how much times you have been blocked! Behave! Universal Hero 16:49, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Kiev vs Kyiv

Hello. I've noticed that you've changed "Dynamo Kiev" to "Dynamo Kyiv" several times. If you think that's how it should be, the article, FC Dynamo Kyiv should be renamed in the first place. Be aware, however, that this issue is sensitive; Talk:Kiev/naming is 364K long. Conscious 05:33, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Because you don't related to your atlas, right? Secondly, I could not see any discussion from you at THAT TALK. Raymond Giggs 17:45, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I could not see "Moskva", "Wien", "Praha", "Kiev" - "Moscow", "Vienna", "Prague", "Kyiv" instead. And we could not sound "Kyiv" by English pronunciation as "Ki-if", but "Kai-if". If no decision is made, the best solve is - using Moskva, Praha and Wien instead. Raymond Giggs 17:54, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

According to my English Firefox Spelling Check system, there is no Moskva, Praha, Wien and Kyiv. They show as mistakes. Raymond Giggs 17:56, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

A MATTER OF OFFICIAL NAMING? So CSKA Moscow should be CSKA Moskva, but you have not did CSKA Moskva there!!! Raymond Giggs 18:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I reverted your change to the Champions League article. I realise this subject is close to many peoples hearts, but while the decision on Wikipedia is to use Kiev, this article should to. It's not up to the Ukraine to decide how it is spelt in English, that is up to the common usage, and up to now that has been decided as Kiev. I personally don't mind either way (as in according with Wikipedia rules I have a neutral point of view), but if the consensus is to use Kiev, which from the discussion above it is, then it should be used. John Hayes^talk 18:39, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

You seem to have ignored that. Where is your WP:NPOV. I'm not going to get into an edit war on this. Just think about the policies. John Hayes^talk 18:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Apologies, you are quite right, the talk on the city isn't related to the football club. But my point is that currently wikipedia uses Dynamo Kiev, not Dynamo Kyiv (yes I realise this was a recent change). It's not up to an article on the Champions League to define the name of the club, it should use whatever the article on the club uses. If this is changed back (after the proper process), then it should be changed in the Champions League article. Also Uefa isn't always the best source for an English article, as it is a Swiss organisation, so may not use the English usage; take for example their use of CSKA Moskva, whereas CSKA are almost always refered to as Moscow in English usage. John Hayes^talk 19:16, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Well actually it seems to have been changed back to Kyiv on the main article now. In which case Kyiv is fine. ;) John Hayes^talk 19:19, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

True. While I now agree with Kyiv, as another example take Crvena Zvezda. Whilst UEFA use that, in English they would almost always be refered to as Red Star Belgrade. John Hayes^talk 19:29, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(geographic_names) . Kiev is the common English usage and should therefore be used. GameKeeper 20:21, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) is not limited to just Geographical names but is a general principle. GameKeeper 20:28, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes I would agree that it is a discussion for the Kiev article. I doubt that the fact it is a bad translation will have any effect on the debate as what matters is what is in common English usage. Unfortunately the 'bad translation' you refer to has become the common English usage over many years. See Kangeroo#Terminology for a more amusing case of how something got its name in English. GameKeeper 20:43, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I have been annoyed with going heart attack nearly. I don't want to be annoyed again. If you still go using Kyiv, use Moskva, Praha, Bucuresti. But if you don't accept those three names, use Kiev. Raymond Giggs 06:56, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bayern Munich 1 - 2 Norwich City

Hi. You were one of the first to contribute to this AfD. Since then, the debate has been extensive and several users have significantly enhanced the article, demonstrating cited notability (and getting rid of POV). I'd be grateful if you'd review your opinion, as I genuinely believe this to be notable. (Also, the specific point you raised has been addressed in the deletion debate). Thanks. --Dweller 20:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Good on you. I wish people were more prepared to change their minds in debates here. I appreciate that. Thanks. --Dweller 20:51, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Why delete it!

I spent ages doing them stats on the Euro 2008 qualifyers only for you to deem them 'unnecessary'. Everything i make or edit on this bloody website ends up getting deleted. All you mods do is scroll through deleting people work that they've put time an effort into.

Just asking!

Could i expand the top scorers table in the Euro 2008 Qualifying section. Or is there anything else i could do football related.

Ok

3RR

You need to be careful not to break 3RR. Sometimes it is best to step back from an edit war, regardless of whether you are right or wrong. In the end it will harm the encylopedia more if we lose valuable contributors such as yourself then if everything is correct. John Hayes^talk 22:16, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

List of English football transfers Summer 2007 - references

I was going to put the reeferences in for every single transfer. My intention was to then nominate the list for FA list status. Davnel03 10:14, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Ah, OK. What does "transcluded data limit" you mentioned mean? I've never come across that term before. Davnel03 14:41, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Edinburgh rugby badge.png)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Edinburgh rugby 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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. fuzzy510 19:20, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Is it me

Is it me or do people not respect this site anymore? El-Nin09 19:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

And it is that and more personal reasons that i see no reason to continue here, see you around El-Nin09 19:49, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Conor Devlin signed for Man Utd media source

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4161/is_20061029/ai_n16811999 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooki2222 (talk • contribs) 19:44, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Sale sharks badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Sale sharks badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:23, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Cs bourgoin badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Cs bourgoin badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:23, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Owen Hargreaves

Owen Hargreaves was born in Calgary, Canada. That makes him Canadian. Just because he has attained British nationality because of his parents, to be able to play for England (as many non-European players do to circumvent the rules as to who is allowed to play in Europe while UEFA winks and looks the other way), does not mean he has changed his place of birth or lost his Canadian citizenship. I think he should be marked as Canadian. Alexf^{(Talk/Contribs)} 18:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I did not change it back (you reverted someone else), as I understood your point. I mentioned my opinion on the matter in order to get yours. Alexf^{(Talk/Contribs)} 19:18, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Man Utd League title winners

This message is just to let you know I wrote a basic stub for 9 players who won a league title with the club thqat were listed here, but did not have an article. Thanks! Patken4 23:53, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

World cup

Hey do you think we should explain what the dif. bids were like? Goldman07 16:21, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

cool. There is some more info about the dif. bids in the references in that section. Goldman07 16:30, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I played around with that section heaps before. Have you checked out those links? Wanna give it a go? Have you got any other ideas on ways to improve it more? Thanks Goldman07 16:43, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Aston Villa F.C. seasons

Could you have a look at the article again and make any further comments at the FLC when you can. I am inclined to leave it as it is, in terms of text alignment. Thanks. Woodym555 21:42, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

My revert in rugby article

PeeJay, I reverted your recent edit to 2007 Rugby World Cup to fix the grammar. Spreadbury "controlled the opening game". He didn't "officiated the opening" game. Cheers. Moriori 21:50, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Devlin Man utd academy

some pictures might help make ya believe

http://file020b.bebo.com/1/large/2006/10/04/18/17094644a2176300507b259049068l.jpg

http://file020b.bebo.com/1/large/2006/10/04/18/17094644a2176299795b737695588l.jpg <-- in this foto u can see after the goalpost in the second set of nets he has a ball on his boot —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.80.10 (talk) 21:18, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

IRB Hall of Fame

Shows Ieuan Evans and other 2007 inductees. Is this list not valid ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pwimageglow (talk • contribs) 10:53, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Leinster rugby badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Leinster rugby badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:32, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Bristol rugby.PNG

Image Copyright problem

This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Bristol rugby.PNG. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:57, 13 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 21:57, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Cardiff rfc badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Cardiff rfc badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:12, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Swansea rfc badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Swansea rfc badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:16, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Juventus old badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Juventus old badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Leicester tigers badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Leicester tigers badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:22, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Rugby viadana badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Rugby viadana badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Bridgend rugby badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Bridgend rugby badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:12, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Montpellier herault badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Montpellier herault badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:16, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Bedford blues badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Bedford blues badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:18, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Section paloise badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Section paloise badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:22, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Rugby calvisano badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Rugby calvisano badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:23, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Rugby parma badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Rugby parma badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:23, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Rugby viadana badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Rugby viadana badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:23, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Castres olympique badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Castres olympique badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:26, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Montpellier herault badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Montpellier herault badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:27, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Benetton treviso badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Benetton treviso badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:39, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Ca brive badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Ca brive badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:57, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Caerphilly rfc badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Caerphilly rfc badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:06, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Clermont auvergne badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Clermont auvergne badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:37, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Gran parma badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Gran parma badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:46, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:England rugby.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:England rugby.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:49, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Su agen badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Su agen badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 16:15, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Cs bourgoin badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Cs bourgoin badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 16:33, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Club season MoS

Hi, first I'd like to apologize for the harsh away I've expressed my point of view on the Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football#Football_club_seasons_MoS and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football/Club_seasons. I have no reason to continue a rough dispute over that. I'd like to continue discussing this subject in the best way possible. Having said that, I'd like to know from you what should be changed in an article like Manchester United F.C. season 2007-08. The whole thing or something could be acceptable? If I could understanding better your point of view we could restart this discussion in a better way. Beast regards. --ClaudioMB 16:57, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

William Robertson (footballer)

Just created a stub for the above, as there was no article of that name, only to find having done it that there was a redlinked Man Utd & Scotland player of that name on your subpage and a couple of other pages. Don't know if you want to call your one (Scottish footballer) and rename mine (Welsh footballer) or any better ideas? cheers, Struway2 | Talk 18:51, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

(footballer born 1873) is fine, sorry to have made work for you. cheers, Struway2 | Talk 19:36, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Dab conventions

Hi PeeJay. I notice you moved the articles about Simon Davies citing standard conventions. Could you explain your reasoning please? Given that one of these players is currently active, and far better known than the other, there would appear to be no reason not to place the Simon Davies that currently plays for Fulham as the primary article. I look forward to your response. Thanks, Deiz talk 05:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

"Recentism" is bad in many ways, but I would venture that using the move function to help guide readers to the page they are most likely to be interested in is not one of them. They can be moved again should circumstances change. Recentism is bad when an article fills up with minutiae about recent events - the latest season on a football club article for example - and becomes unbalanced. I agree it's subjective to argue about their merits, although - counting myself as entirely neutral with regard to these two players and the clubs they have played for - I would say Davies '79 is far more a person of interest. It's a shame that "(footballer born 19xx)" is such a clunky dab method. I appreciate your taking time to drop me a note and can see you take a keen interest in this. I know it's also something that affects several players with the same name and you're doing good work on dabbing a lot of them, I wish it looked prettier but I'll let you get on with it. Nice one, Deiz talk 14:16, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

List of Manchester United F.C. Players

Hey man, I think we need to revise this article, it needs to be sortable, like all the other articles of this kind, see Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool. I know my revision was a tad sloppy, but if we can either get ride of the sub appearances column, or add a games started column and re-arrange, it will be better and much more useful, as some people (like myself) have been on the article and wanted to sort by either appearances, goals, alphabetical or otherwise. Let's revise. Andre666 14:38, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Real madrid

Hey, you effectively reverted my edit about the Real Madrid peer review. Did you mean to? Anyway it has been archived because it is now an FAC (again!, fourth time lucky). You can see it in the Current archive. Just wondered if you knew and ask you to remove it. Thanks.

Oh and you can look to List of Aston Villa F.C. players for inspiration if you want. ;) Woodym555 20:34, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Glasgow warriors badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Glasgow warriors badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:52, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Alex Ferguson

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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. --John 18:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

stop taking the comma out —Preceding unsigned comment added by RednessInside (talk • contribs) 19:09, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I didn't realise people might try and use this data in a sorting page. My apologies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RednessInside (talk • contribs) 20:28, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Saracens badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Saracens badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:17, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Scarlets badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Scarlets badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:54, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Hiya, I notice you reverted my resolution reduction of the image. WP:LOGO states "Overly high-resolution versions of copyrighted logos should be avoided, however, as they are less likely to be fair use." so that's why I reduced it's size. Now as for the automatic message above, I've no idea why you got that because the FU rationale seems sound. AlexJ 22:35, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

loan italics

The standard for infoboxes is not to have 'loan' in italics, as per the WP Footy Player MoS, hence I've reverted your change to Tomasz Kuszczak. I was doing exactly the same myself until fairly recently, so just passing on what I've learned. I guess you're free to discuss the template if you dispute it. Cheers. --Jameboy 13:58, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Exeter chiefs badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Exeter chiefs badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:54, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Newton Heath 86/87

In reference to Newton Heath L&YR F.C. season 1886-87, can you please state some references to the Manchester and District Challenge Cup results please, we need to clean up these previous season articles, thanks. Andre666 17:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Scarlets badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Scarlets badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 17:47, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:England rugby.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:England rugby.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 18:06, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Jeff Wealands

Just to let you know the article Jeff Wealands now exists, you have him in your Man Utd players list as Jeffrey Wealands. cheers, Struway2 | Talk 13:16, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

AIV report

Hi PeeJay2K3, I need a little more info on why this edit is vandalism, the addition seems to be valid...but then I'm not that familiar with the subject. Thanks! Dreadstar † 18:23, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Scottish bias?. I'm not sure I understand what that means..too many Scottish players being added? Dreadstar † 18:28, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see, so the bias is that a non-best in the world player was added by someone inappropriately adding Scottish players to the list. Dreadstar † 18:32, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

P.S. It wasn't that too many Scottish players were being added, it was that most/all of those who were added aren't considered "world-class" enough to be included in their respective lists. - PeeJay 18:31, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Where does this view of relative player classes come from? Is there a list of the "top ten" or something like that? Dreadstar † 18:34, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's basically it. I know it's terribly subjective, but I'm trying to maintain this list as best I can, and if you've seen how many reverts I've done over the past few months, you'll see how much maintenance it needs. - PeeJay 18:33, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I can imagine. Is this list sourced? If not, it could actually cross the boundary into being Original Research. Sounds like the list generates a lot of troll activity, perhaps the example list should just be removed. Is there a listing of all Goalkeepers anywhere? A link to that rather than specifying a few in such a hotly contested sport might be the wisest course of action. Dreadstar † 18:37, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Good question, and to be honest it just comes from a general impression that I and others have gotten from other football fans. I think I see what you're getting at though, and I agree that the lists should probably be deleted. - PeeJay 18:38, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the deletion idea. Let me know if you encounter resistance.. Dreadstar † 18:44, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

LoL..! You one-up'd me with that one, first time I've seen that article..! Thanks! Dreadstar † 18:50, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I've semi-protected the page for a week..hopefull by then the decision will have been made regarding the examples. Dreadstar † 19:11, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

That was quick, good job. I'll leave it semiprotected so it has a better chance of remaining stable. Dreadstar † 19:13, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

FL Main page proposal

You either nominated a WP:FLC or closed such a nomination recently. As such, you are the type of editor whose opinion I am soliciting. We now have over 400 featured lists and seem to be promoting in excess of 30 per month of late (41 in August and 42 in September). When Today's featured article (TFA) started (2004-02-22), they only had about 200 featured articles and were barely promoting 20 new ones per month. I think the quality of featured lists is at least as good as the quality of featured articles was when they started appearing on the main page. Thus, I am ready to open debate on a proposal to institute a List of the Day on the main page with nominations starting November 1 2007, voting starting December 1 2007 and main page appearances starting January 1 2008. For brevity, the proposal page does not discuss the details of eventual main page content, but since the work has already been done, you should consider this proposal assuming the eventual content will resemble the current content at the featured content page. Such output would probably start at the bottom of the main page. The proposal page does not debate whether starting with weekly list main page entries would be better than daily entries. However, I suspect persons in favor of weekly lists are really voicing opinions against lists on the main page since neither TFA nor Picture of the day started as weekly endeavors, to the best of my knowledge. Right now debate seems to be among support for the current selective democratic/consensus based proposal, a selective dictatorial approach like that used at WP:TFA or a non-selective first in line/calendar approach like that used at WP:POTD. See the List of the Day proposal and comment at WP:LOTDP and its talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 18:43, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

CL Final

Having a "Runner-up" in what is essentially a match report seems odd to me. Surely they should be down as runners up in the CL 2007 page and losers in the CL final match report. RoyalBlueStuey 10:11, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

So is that the convention? Seems odd to me but no probs. RoyalBlueStuey 12:03, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Ospreys

I have nominated Category:Ospreys (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to Category:Ospreys (rugby team) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Bencherlite^Talk 20:17, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

And I've nominated Category:Ospreys players for renaming as well. The discussion's at the same location. Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 20:22, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Rugby calvisano badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Rugby calvisano badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:18, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Rugby parma badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Rugby parma badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:20, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Sale sharks badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Sale sharks badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:15, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Regarding IP block

Well, if he reoffends again, inform me, and I'll block him for longer and longer durations, after the block is lifted.--Alasdair 12:11, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Psg badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Psg badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:46, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Celtic warriors badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Celtic warriors badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 12:05, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Caerphilly rfc badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Caerphilly rfc badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 13:39, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Borders badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Borders badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:34, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Bath rugby badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Bath rugby badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:15, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Kevin Cooper

That is spooky. Springnuts 22:57, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Martin Jols resignation on Premier League 2007-08 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

This part is badly described, thusly why i got confused, could you possibly reword it? F9T 20:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Bedford blues badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Bedford blues badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:33, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

You annoy me

Oh, I have to apologize. Because of my overexciting, it annoys everybody, not only you. I will correct my attitude. Sorry for making that disgusting action. Raymond Giggs 17:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:Footy

Hi,

I would like to continue the discussion about notability criteria, as you suggested in your mass AfD of non-notable footballers but I backed out after I was told in no uncertain terms that consensus was against me (I counted, there didn't seem to be any consensus), and that my contributions to the debate were maddening. If people want to keep their non-playing reserve team footballers that much, I'll just stick to creating articles about the thousands of championship winning, world cup playing, record setting players from outside England and let them get on with eliminating redlinks from their team's navbox by creating articles about non-notable players. I will just get a little annoyed next time I see a Conference players AfD reading "Delete fails to meet WP:BIO, Delete As per norm, etc. Kind regards, King of the North East (T/C) 00:50, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Connacht badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Connacht badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:28, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Llanelli rfc badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Llanelli rfc badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:01, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Munster rugby badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Munster rugby badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:02, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Neath rfc badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Neath rfc badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:34, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Northampton saints badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Northampton saints badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:36, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Mutv new logo.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Mutv new logo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:43, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Harlequins badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Harlequins badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:43, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:London irish badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:London irish badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:London wasps badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:London wasps badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:London welsh badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:London welsh badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Newcastle falcons badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Newcastle falcons badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Newport gwent dragons badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Newport gwent dragons badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Newport rfc badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Newport rfc badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:42, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Ospreys badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Ospreys badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Some thankyou spam, glorious spam

Hey peejay, my rfa was successful with 58 supports. If i am honest i am rather humbled by the unanimous support and i hope to live up to everyones expectations. If you ever need any help, don't hesitate to ask. Thanks again for your kind words. I am now your admin! :) Woodym555 15:45, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I do have some Venezuelan beaver cheese in the fridge somewhere. Thanks for your kind words and bring on the WP:FT. (Everlast and myself will get there eventually!). As always, i am at your service, be it reviews or admin actions ... Woodym555 17:37, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Edit warring on 2006 FIFA World Cup

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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 you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 19:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Manchester United managers

Just a quick note regarding your worry about the length of the lead. I recently set up List of Bradford City A.F.C. managers with essentially the same tone of lead section. But instead I simply labelled it the history section because that in truth is what it is as well as expanding on the table. If you are worried about the lead being too long, and I don't see why it is, it might be worth an idea. Otherwise very good stuff. I can't believe this article didn't exist until a few hours ago though!! To the extent I've changed the Man U template to now include it. Peanut4 02:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I've reviewed it at the peer review. Hope the comments help. -- The Rambling Man (talk) 18:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Featured List of the Day Experiment

There have been a series of proposals to initiate a Featured List of the Day on the main page. Numerous proposals have been put forth. After the third one failed, I audited all WP:FL's in order to begin an experiment in my own user space that will hopefully get it going. Today, it commences at WP:LOTD. Afterwards I created my experimental page, a new proposal was set forth to do a featured list that is strikingly similar to my own which is to do a user page experimental featured list, but no format has been confirmed and mechanism set in place. I continue to be willing to do the experiment myself and with this posting it commences. Please submit any list that you would like to have considered for list of the day in the month of January 2008 by the end of this month to WP:LOTD and its subpages. You may submit multiple lists for consideration.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 21:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

2007 Rugby World Cup

Hi - I've left some comments at peer review for this article. Are they the sort of thing you were looking for? If so, I'll keep going. Sorry to seem a bit precious about it, but I've spent quite a lot of time providing detailed comments for some articles at peer review that never get acknowledged or acted upon. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 20:54, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello again. While hoping I'm not being too precious, I suspect I am being. ;-) Tell you what, if that's the kind of thing that useful to you, drop me a line when you're in a position to put time into the article (Sadly I agree that work, even university work, probably should take precedence over Wikipedia!), and I'll continue from where I left off. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 18:04, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

TfD

Yes, thank you for pointing that out.

• 04:47, 22 November 2007 RyanGerbil10 (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Template:Singapore Squad" ‎ (Deleted per TfD at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 November 14)

This sort of thing happens quite frequently. Happy Thanksgiving! (If you celebrate it) RyanGerbil10(Говорить!) 04:49, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Liskeard Athletic F.C. Mario Basler Floribert N'Galula Saltash United F.C. FIFA World Rankings Bedwas RFC Abbey Hey F.C. Iain Dowie Caerphilly RFC Franz Beckenbauer Chorley F.C. Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink Alf Ramsey Gerd Müller Micky Adams Blacktown City Demons Thomas Hitzlsperger Hristo Stoichkov Don Revie

Cleanup Matt Busby Ľuboš Micheľ Tony Adams (footballer) Merge Manchester United F.C. Academy Scottish Football League Premier Division New Birth Add Sources Denis Irwin National stadium Martyn Williams Wikify Catenaccio Dawlish Town F.C. Threave Rovers F.C. Expand Umbro Selkirk RFC International competitions in women's football

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 ForteTuba, 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) 18:25, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

MUFC managers FLC

No worries my friend. Let me know what you get up to next, I'll be there for advice/annoying commentary/support and so on. All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 22:31, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Are you idiot?

Why did you remove all of my images from wikipedia pages? Jcer80 (talk) 09:46, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

You removed the image BEFORE consensus, plain and simple Jcer80 (talk) 17:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Watford crest.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Watford crest.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:30, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Worcester warriors badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Worcester warriors badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:00, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Maltese Third Division

Template:Maltese Third Division has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Esprit15d(۝ • ۞ • ▲) 15:50, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi PeeJay. Just wondering how you came to the conclusion that 9 teams in the Maltese 3rd division are notable - have they played in the top division in the past? Cheers, пﮟოьεԻ 57 09:41, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Andy Hill

I was wondering if you would be able disambiguate Andy Hill's birthplace, as you were the one to add it. Thanks. MrKIA11 (talk) 00:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks anyway. MrKIA11 (talk) 14:11, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Pontypridd rugby badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Pontypridd rugby badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 17:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Penzance rfc badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Penzance rfc badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 17:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Ulster rugby badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Ulster rugby badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:55, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Sporting Clube de Portugal.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Sporting Clube de Portugal.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:18, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Wigan athletic badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Wigan athletic badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:35, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

AVFC FT

Yep, that was the idea. User:Everlast1910 and myself had that as the end goal. The second history one needs some work and possibly the statistics one, then who knows? My attentions have currently been diverted by the VC recipients, another one of my pet projects!! Woodym555 18:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Dynamo/Arsenal Kyiv...

PeeJay2K3, I'm now slightly confused by WP:NC#Sports_teams and your edits to the Dynamo. Shouldn't the club be moved to 'FC Dynamo Kyiv' after the new naming conventions? --Palffy 16:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Plymouth albion badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Plymouth albion badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 17:40, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

 Done The Rambling Man (talk) 17:43, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

User page

Was that you or a collection of vandals? I semi-protected for 2 weeks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 20:43, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Nah, you get them everwhere. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 20:47, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Premier League 07-08 top scorers

Surely this should not be edited in the middle of a match, because people are getting confused with editing all the time F9T 16:23, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Premier League 2007-08

I know that the League Table has an update date just underneath the table, but it's in footnote font, which virtually no casual reader will catch. It should be made abundantly clear to the average reader that the table is only current as of a certain date. Also, it should be pointed out in the "competition or relegation" column that the teams in colors have NOT been promoted or relegated, only that they are currently in those slots. Otherwise, the average reader will think that, for instance, the bottom three clubs in color have already been relegated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.89.187.178 (talk) 23:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:LOTD

You are the nominator of a WP:FL that was promoted in the last month. I am inviting you to participate in nominations and voting in a List of the Day experiment I am conducting at WP:LOTD.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 23:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Block

I mistakenly blocked you... you did not violate the 3RR as I had originally thought (I have since unblocked you, in case you didn't know). Please, please, please, please discuss this change on the talk page prior to editing this article in the future as this exact edit has been hotly contested in the past and resulted in the page being semi-protected. Please don't force my hand and make me fully protect it (like I have in the past, if I am correct). If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 04:15, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Leeds seasons

Do you think you could reassess your vote on the FLC page when you can find the time. Buc (talk) 21:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

AFC subpage

No fear - I didn't delete it - just moved it to a dotless version at User:Qwghlm/Arsenal_FC and then deleted the redirect (I don't like the full stops, I've decided). Maybe I should reinstate it... Qwghlm (talk) 09:40, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Celtic Cup (football)

I have no objection to the term British Isles, but I know plenty of people who do, you can check the talk page of the British Isles article to gauge the strength of feelings on that term. I had changed the term to B&I, following the previous edit, as it is less contencious, and less likely to be a target of anons who object to the other term as imerialistic! However both geographic terms include England, which is wrong in this context, however I cant think of a better replacement Fasach Nua (talk) 16:58, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Bridgend rugby badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Bridgend rugby badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:29, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Please contact me off-project.

Hi Tom -

Please contact me off-wiki at jd@joinMUST.org. I have a question for you that I hope you might be interested in.

kind regards, - jddphd (talk · contribs) 03:08, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

aka (JD, of the independent Manchester United supporters' trust)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Gran parma badge.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Gran parma badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Award

		The Running Man Barnstar
		You are hereby awarded this "The Running Man Barnstar" for dedicating your time and effort during the month of November, 2007 on formulating Wikipedia's NC for sports teams.--Riurik(discuss) 07:18, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I was going to give the Football Barnstar, but since you already have that one, this seemed like a good alternative.--Riurik^(discuss) 07:18, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Talk:2006 FIFA World Cup

Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on Talk:2006 FIFA World Cup. Instead, assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. Just because they don't try to make a compromise does not mean the edits are vandalism. They may be disruptive, just not vandalism. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 01:23, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Notability

Hi. Perhaps I am fuzzy on the difference between being signed by a team such as Liverpool (as reported by the Beeb, no less) and having played at least one game. I don't know if the player signed has played or not; I gather you do, since you appear to follow the sport. But I so believe you're wrong about the FIFA World Cup Under-17 thing. Please see WP:SPORTS, where is says: "Players, Managers and Referees who have represented their country in any officially sanctioned international competition..." are notable, and this includes Youth players. Thanks, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:39, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Premier League 2007-08 League table

Just wanna know how to change the goal difference can you tell me? Pathfinder2006 19:16, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Phil O'Donnell

Please do not replace en dashes (–) with hyphens (-) per WP:DASH and WP:DATE as you did in the above article. Thank you. Cheers, CP 19:38, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The AFD Barnstar
		For consistant contributions to WP:AFD, I, Sharkface217, hereby award you this barnstar. --Sharkface217 23:00, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Leeds seasons

Are you sure it's an FL candidate. It's currently under peer review, but I can't see it on the FLC list. Peanut4 (talk) 01:49, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

No worries. Any reason it's not on the main FLC list though? Peanut4 (talk) 01:57, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

One thing I noticed is Buc made the first nomination and also put it back up for review with the intent of then putting it back for FLC. Peanut4 (talk) 02:11, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Ai indeed. Plus a couple more issues for me still with it that continually fail to be addressed. Peanut4 (talk) 02:17, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

LOL. Don't even get me started. Peanut4 (talk) 02:20, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what to make of him sometimes. He clearly means well, puts in plenty of work and wants to get articles to featured status, but he doesn't take any criticsm or even simple advice all too well, as in the first FLC, some of the reviews of James Milner and this recent one. I haven't been round too long, but your word stubbornness sums it up. Like I said he means well, but that stubbornness can make it difficult to work with him all too well. Peanut4 (talk) 02:29, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry you don't come over like that. I'm not sure anyone else could mind. He's certainly got his own individual character. Peanut4 (talk) 02:41, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

LOL. And wow, he lists Vincent Van Gogh among his FA nominations. I didn't expect to see that there. Peanut4 (talk) 02:49, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Nothing seems to be happening on the PR so is it worth re-nominating? Buc (talk) 07:46, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

FC Red Star Belgrade move

Sorry, PeeJay, but I'm not gonna take a decision. If you look at it, you can find out I directly participated in the discussion and even declared my opposition to the proposed move, and I think the closing admin in a consensus-based discussion must be a user different than the ones who voiced support for one or the other sides, in order to avoid a potential conflict of interest. I hope you understand. --Angelo (talk) 13:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I posted about it in the WP:WPF. Let's wait and see. --Angelo (talk) 13:34, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Invitation

Hello there

I see you are interested in the Life On Mars Television Series, as I am.

At the moment I have A Life On Mars Wikiproject currently up for approval by the Wikiproject Approval Council. As you are interested in Life On Mars I was wondering if you would be interested in adding your name and joining. If you are interested you can find it on Wikipedia: WikiProject Council/Proposals its right at the very bottom you cant miss it as its titled ‘Wikipedia: Wikiproject Life on Mars (Television Series)’. And after your name is added to Wikiproject propsals please add it to the main page Wikipedia:Wikiproject Life On Mars

If you are interested by all means feel free to join

Regards

Police,Mad,Jack —Preceding comment was added at 20:10, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Jimmy Bullock

Hi - I have created an article on Jimmy Bullock who played for Manchester United in 1930-31. Can you add anything? Cheers. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 08:07, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

European Rugby players

I may need a tutorial. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 18:37, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I think I'll knock it on its head. Just trying to tidy up the rugby pages. I shan't be looking to change the weights of any further British or Irish based players.Alexsanderson83 (talk) 18:45, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Lee Martin, again

Since there appears not much support for my move proposals, instead I suggest moving them to Lee Robert Martin, Lee Andrew Martin, and Lee Brendan Martin respectively. Using their full names are better than using "artificially constructed names" with their middle initials. I don't think the moves are controversial, so I'll move them in the next 24 hours if you don't oppose. Chanheigeorge (talk) 19:40, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Well.... honestly I'm not sure what's the reason of the opposition to my original proposal. I suppose Lee Martin (footballer born 1987) is fine to most people. I'd even guess that Lee Martin (goalkeeper) or Lee Martin (goalkeeper born 1968) is fine too, seeing many goalkeepers are similarly titled. The problem seems to be about Lee Martin (defender) or Lee Martin (defender born 1968), given that people say that he's not always a defender. But that's kind of like saying "XYZ (footballer)" is no good because he's now a football manager or television presenter, or "XYZ (musician)" is no good because he also acted in a few movies. The title of a page is used to sufficiently disamb with other pages, not 100% say what the person is (because that's impossible for many people). Anyway, I guess the situation has reached some stalemate where no proposal has got enough support (I personally hate using the month in the title) and there's no discussion going on, so at least I'm proposing some sort of "interim" solution that improves on the current situation of using "artificially constructed names". Their full names, while not commonly used, are at least their real names. I do not consider these titles to be final, if there's a consensus on better titles I'm fine with them. On a final note, you may be surprised to see this, but according to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people)#Qualifiers not between brackets, Years of birth and death should not be used in a page title to distinguish between people of the same name. Chanheigeorge (talk) 21:30, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Then is "(football goalkeeper)" etc. an acceptable disamb? Or I suppose other football codes also have those positions? Or maybe "(footballer)" isn't even a good idea to begin with since there are other football codes? Anyway, I don't want to engage in a discussion that goes nowhere, so here's what I'll do:

1. I'll move the pages to "Lee Robert Martin", etc. Again, I consider them to be only "interim" titles that are at least better than the current ones.
2. I'll participate in any future discussions about disamb football players. If you happen to know of any that's going on, please alert me.

That's all for now. Chanheigeorge (talk) 22:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:LakersWordmark.svg)

Thanks for uploading Image:LakersWordmark.svg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:07, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

List of Liverpool F.C. captains

Just seen you comment on the task force page. I can reinstate the data to a sandbox if you want, but it is probably best to go to WP:DRV if you want to recreate it. I suggest you try and merge it into notable players though, given that most if not all captains should be listed there anyway. Woody (talk) 13:29, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Aisea Havili

On Aisea Havili's profile, you keep on putting the unesessary references in while I am taking them out. I kept the reference about him snubbing Tonga but you insist on adding the Guinness Premiership and Celtic Warriors profiles for him when his current club is Worcester Warriors. His Worcester and Premiership profiles are in the external links section. Can you please stop doing this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.92.146.170 (talk) 19:43, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Ronnie Wallwork

I've been making a few improvements to the Ronnie Wallwork article - I think it could eventually be a candidate for GA with some more work. I'd be grateful for any information you could provide on his career at United. I found some useful info here but doubt if this page could be considered a reliable source. Cheers. --Jameboy (talk) 01:11, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

James Chester

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article James Chester, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 23:44, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Leeds season PR

Hey PeeJay, just trying to push this to FL once again, so I've opened a new PR. I think we're very close so I'd appreciate any comments you may have before I nominate it myself for FL. Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 09:19, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

We had a great PR so it's now at Leeds seasons FLC if you'd like to contribute! All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 22:58, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Association football

Wow! That was fast. You corrected my typo before I could get the page back up. :0) Richard Harvey (talk) 15:24, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA: Alexf - comment

I have been nominated for an RfA. As a fellow football enthusiast, you may have come upon my edits some time in the past. If you haven't done so already, I would appreciate if you could go and comment on this page: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Alexf. Thanks and happy wiking! -- Alexf^{(Talk/Contribs)} 12:23, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

UEFA Champions League seasons; group stage table format

Hullo,

I just modified the group stage table since the 99-00 season and added you'r coulours key in each article.

Exemple;

Key to colours in group tables
Teams that progressed to the second group stage are indicated in bold type
Teams that progressed to the UEFA Cup are indicated in bold italics
Teams eliminated from European competitions for the season are indicated in plain italics

Group A

Team	Pld	W	D	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts
Chelsea	6	3	3	0	9	2	+7	12
Schalke 04	6	2	2	2	5	4	+1	8
Rosenborg	6	2	1	3	6	10	-4	7
Valencia	6	1	2	3	2	6	-4	5

What do you think of this version ? Personally I really prefer it than the "new" one, hum =_=

Ex;

Team	Pld	W	D	L	GF	GA	GD	Pts
Porto	6	3	2	1	8	7	+1	11
Liverpool	6	3	1	2	18	5	+13	10
Marseille	6	2	1	3	6	9	-3	7
Beşiktaş	6	2	0	4	4	15	-11	6

May you just look to these articles since 99-00 season and say me if you think that the previous version was better ? ;)

--Mrpouetpouet (talk) 23:46, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Derby county badge.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Derby county badge.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:27, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Navboxes

Will look into that.CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 21:33, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

• I will look into the logo element. I have fixed any other concerns on the navbox itself. CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 22:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

• • I have gone through and broken up the forwards and backs. Many players do not have a set position, so to add it to a box would be out of place. As stated I will look into the logos. CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 23:01, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

• • • Template:Edinburgh Rugby current This has been implemented and works fine, it now is the same width of the other rugby navboxes. CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 02:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

• • • • Cant recall creating a template for a team named YYY or that xXx had turned his hand at rugby. Seriously it works now, will look into the rest later. CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 02:15, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I removed all logos from the squad templates, but User:CorleoneSerpicoMontana has since reverted all without giving good reason and with the knowledge that the use of non-free logos violates wikipolicy. I can only assume that this user does not care for wikipolicy or for working together. He or she has also reverted edits made to {{Edinburgh Rugby squad}} that brought it into line with all other team templates by using {{Rugby union squad}}. To me, it looks like this user does not want to work together with this project and instead ride roughshod over the work of others. --Bob (talk) 16:21, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Will apologise to you if I appeared belligerent, will try to be a little more contrite in the future.CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 22:35, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Africa Cup of Nations En Dashes

I am a Mac user and my computer does not distinguish between a hyphen and a dash; the ones you prefer appear longhand as '&ndash:' rather than a nice little -. Regards, Mjefm (talk) 23:18, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

En Dash on mac keyboard

Found it! It's alt+'-'. – There you go. Looks like it's just Micros**t users who still need the & ndash ; gubbins :) Mjefm (talk) 18:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Sonnets

Sure. I'll have to perfect it a bit, though. I'm not sure I know it well enough to explain it yet. Wrad (talk) 01:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I think we're going to have to re-record that one. You read it very well, just be sure to be close to the mike, but keep the mike to the side so that air from your mouth doesn't "pop" into it. In other words, point the mike at your cheek. Wrad (talk) 01:07, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, no hurry. Wrad (talk) 01:15, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

manual of style

could you please explain your recent revert of my edit? BanRay 17:43, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Just read your explanation on the talk page. I've tried it with four different browsers and it worked just fine. BanRay 17:48, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Rugby players in the UK

That template produces the incorrect details for the UK, ie not pluralising the lbs (except for 0 & 1 which should just be singular). I haven't been able to locate a template that allows for the UK standard. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 23:37, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

It is the UK standard, not just a regional thing. Also looked through a load of places and indeed as I thought the weight is meant to be pluralised in the UK. Saw it all across Sky Sports, also Tom Palmer, Chris Melling, Paul Hodgson amongst many, many others as examples. I have also looked into this on an official level and it is a UK constant, pluralisation for lbs except for 0 & 1.  Alexsanderson 83 

The MOS ([[WP:UNITS}}) states that units of measurement should not be pluralised. It doesn't matter whether it's a UK standard: Wikipedia is not a UK activity. Jimmy Pitt (talk) 00:16, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of James Chester

An editor has nominated James Chester, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Chester and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 01:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Séan Evans

An editor has nominated Séan Evans, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Séan Evans and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 01:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Sam Hewson

An editor has nominated Sam Hewson, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam Hewson (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 01:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

2008 Africa Cup of Nations

Gallery not encyclopedic? Why not? C'mon... Please don't clean all you see on Wikipedia, or you will be blocked by admins... (Talk) —Preceding comment was added at 12:43, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Transfers blanking

Hey Peejay, with this edit you blanked the page? Not sure what you were doing or which specific transfer you objected to. Just to let you know. Woody (talk) 14:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

6Nations

okay, i didnt know it was 18th minutes we were timing it, i thought it was minute 17...... if u get what i mean. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GowsiPowsi (talk • contribs) 15:29, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Notability of footballers

Hi, you contributed to the discussion about football notability criteria in November, so you will be delighted/appalled that I have restarted the discussion here. Please give your opinion so that we can move towards formalising the criteria. Regards, King of the NorthEast 15:04, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Old Trafford PR

Hey PeeJay, I've added some comments at the PR, hope they're useful. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:23, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Oldtraffordaverageattendances.png

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Oldtraffordaverageattendances.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 18:16, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Cardiff City F.C.

I have undone the page move to Cardiff City A.F.C. since the official site here clearly gives the name as Cardiff City Football Club (see footer). I should welcome your support if there is another move attempt. BlueValour (talk) 21:43, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Present for you

Munich air disaster newsreel
American newsreel footage of the Munich air disaster in which XX Busby Babes were killed on DDMMYY. File format Ogg

During my daily scour for footy related Creative Commons media I came across this news footage, this is the unedited small version (about 4megs), the other larger (16meg) edited version is available via the image page but may be a bit dodgy (not many browsers like huge embedded vids).

Anyway, I don't know where to put these or which articles they'd go on so ... your job! :D The direct link is Image:1958-02-10 Britain Mourns. Soccer Champs Die In Plane Crash - small unedited.ogv for this small version and Image:Munich air disaster newsreel footage.ogg for the big one. Enjoy. Foxhill (talk) 12:17, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of UEFA Cup 2007-08 knockout stage

An article that you have been involved in editing, UEFA Cup 2007-08 knockout stage, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UEFA Cup 2007-08 knockout stage. Thank you. Eddie6705 (talk) 17:44, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Manchester United F.C. records and statistics

Did you mean to remove the vast majority of this article? I much perfered the older version to the current one. Darkson (Yabba Dabba Doo!) 00:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Londo06

I don't believe so.Londo06 13:48, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Reverting style of Football League Cup 2007-08 tables

Hey, was just wondering why you reverted these tables, on the 24th January. The tables had stood for a decently long time without any protest, and I consider them to be an improvement. Furthermore, they were designed as of this discussion, for the use of this article, with a "template is under discussion" tag over the top of the old tables during the debate (a whole month, not a quick rush-job), to alert people to the change and ask their input. We didn't recieve a single complaint, so I believe that we had a consensus agreement upon the decision - at least as far as Wikipedia is able to produce consensus decisions for its lesser-read articles. In addition, your argument is in making the article agree with the style of previous seasons' articles - this is all very well when there has been a general standard form in previous articles in the series, and then someone comes along and adds their own hotch-potch slapped-together code which doesn't really either work or improve the article, and simply stands out. However, in this case, I remind you that the new template was designed to be "the next step" in the results tables we have on Wikipedia. Surely you must have seen templates come and go as newer, better ones are/were introduced - it is virtually the principle of Wikipedia, that such a broad base of users will combine to constantly upgrade the look and the text of Wikipedia. Surely you see that by rejecting new templates for the older ones, especially with no justification or counter-argument given except "reverting to the style of <old article>" that what you is, or at least appears to me, to simply be rejecting change and attempting to keep what is known and well-used, but not necessarily best?

I am not condemning you for not accepting our template, I am merely questioning your decision to revert the use of the template so arbitrarily. If you wish to argue against the use of the templates, then I invite you to do so in the talk page of article, and give us a chance to give our reasons for the change, so that we can come to a considered decision. Falastur2 (talk) 14:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Llanelli Scarlets players

You appear to be editing a number of players of the Welsh region. Whilst your efforts are welcome there are some issues with the formatting of the external links. CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 19:10, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I was attempting to be congenial, I can understand if it could have come across as otherwise. In relation to units in articles they are not linked in infoboxes. I don't believe there is anything against them being detailed in articles as linked items. They are not linked on any major page apart from a few rugby players. A date is linked, however a %, lb, kg, m , ie Tony Blair, Fernando Torres, Kevin Pietersen, Shaq O'Neal, Israel Folau, etc. CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 19:20, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

UEFA Cup first round

According to the two top scorers of Helsingborg, Larsson and Omotoyossi only scored 3 goals in group stage. The number 6 matches when counted the goals which scored in both first round and group stage. I don't know why uefa.com didn't put Cavenaghi into the top scorer list. Something should goes wrong of uefa.com.

Also, first round is a compulsory round for every teams. Some teams have not to play in the QR1 and QR2, but they have to play in first round, including the reigning champion - if Sevilla have not to participate in CL.

Again, sorry for my poor English. Please feel free to correct my grammatical mistake. :D Raymond Giggs 03:44, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

While leaving a message on KyleRGiggs's talk page I noticed an error you made pointing out why Cavenaghi is not listed in the goalscorers table. I am not sure myself if goals in the UEFA Cup First Round are counted in goalscorers table, but Cavenaghi has only 4 goals total because he scored just 1 goal (not 2 as was written in the UEFA Cup 2007-08 group stage article) in Panionios - Bordeaux match, according to the official UEFA report. Artyom (talk • contribs) 14:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

It actually turned out that goals from First Round are counted in the top goalscorers table. According to UEFA.com, Luca Toni has 6 goals. But during the group stage he only scored 4 goals, all against Aris Thessaloniki [5] (other Bayern Munich group stage matches: [6][7][8]). His other two goals were scored in the First round against Os Belenenses [9][10]. Thus, UEFA Cup First round is indeed a proper round. Artyom (talk • contribs) 13:00, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if there is enough scope to create a separate article for it, but in my opinion First round is more important than, let's say, UEFA Euro 2008 warm-up matches. I'm not saying however that there is a need for the article, it just seems unfair to me that it was deleted twice before it was fully created... Artyom (talk • contribs) 13:18, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Help me?

Hey, I'm pretty new and I was wondering if you could help me out with the creation and editing of my sports articles, particularly in the area of Rugby Union, as I am a Second Row/Flanker/Eight Man, I have alot of interest in creating some articles. Think you could be a good sport and help me a bit?

Dboy6418 (talk) 17:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Rugby Union infobox

Your edits to the infobox has removed information from the fields. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 00:30, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Schooling. I don't think moving all the other personal information to the bottom is a good move anyway.Alexsanderson83 (talk) 00:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I meant the edit, in my opinion did not improve the infobox. This rugby infobox has distinct section for youth rep rugby, sevens, etc. I think the flow of information downwards is good at the minute. Often many of the fields such as relatives, schooling, etc remain empty and it would be odd to have one field filled at the bottom that did not fit in with the adjacent sections. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 20:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't see the need for a website link on the infobox. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 20:12, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I think schooling is extremely important. I say this because out in Australia a player is developed by a particular school rather than a junior club. Many players have siblings, father or uncle, etc and I would say that is worthwhile. Nicknames are often used in commentary. To be honest the only the only way I would go would be a pts fix, seen here with Brad Fittler. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 21:06, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Just curious

Hi - after watching the cr#p just served up by Saints, I've come onto WP to cheer myself up. Can you enlighten me regarding your edits to the Nick Wright (footballer born 1987) infobox; what (visually) is the difference between "6 ft 3 in (1.91 m)" and "{{convert|6|ft|3|in|m|2|abbr=on}}"; or "2005 &ndash ;2007" and "2005–2007", and finally between "<br>" and "<br />". After the last 90 minutes of dross, I'm feeling rather tetchy so my apologies if these are daft questions. Still - we can now concentrate on the league. Hey Ho! --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 14:42, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Spaces

As stupid as it is to fight over whether there should be a space before/after (a), I was just wondering: is UEFA Champions League 2006-07 knockout stage some kind of Wikipedia style guide? No. Besides, the linking to Away goals rule is different in the two articles. I personally don't care whether there is a space or not, but having no space before/after parantheses is not the right formatting style.  ARTYOM  19:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, the a probably won't look good without the parantheses. I've noticed that the space there looks weird with 1–1 score. There were no 1–1 scores in the Qualification section, since I was the one who added spaces there a couple of days ago, I'd have noticed it otherwise. Oh well.  ARTYOM  19:43, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Sporting Lisbon

As this is the English-language WP I follow WP guidelines and use the most familiar name in the English-speaking world, which is Sporting Lisbon. I don't know any British sportswriter who says 'Sporting Clube du Portugal', just as I know none who call Palermo 'Città di Palermo'. The article has the club's formal name as its title, which makes sense, but writing 'Sporting CP' (Sporting Braga? Sporting Gijón?) in the results article is more ambiguous than 'Sporting Lisbon', which is why we write 'Dinamo Moscow' and not just 'FK Dinamo' and so on. It's just clearer for readers.

PS, still using the – key instead of -. Mjefm (talk) 00:13, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

References: cite web template

Hi, I noticed that you've taken a mop & bucket to the references in Saughall and Mollington, Cheshire recently. Thanks for rectifying the accessdate= formatting, but curious to know; why the change from work= to publisher= ? Regards, Snowy 1973 (talk) 16:17, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

SuperSonicx1986

So I take it you know a lot about programming. How did you removed those two extra brackets that kept appearing? They game me a headache... —Preceding unsigned comment added by SuperSonicx1986 (talk • contribs) 20:16, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough! My mistake, was in a rush! —Preceding unsigned comment added by RednessInside (talk • contribs) 20:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Man U

The talk page doesn't show a consesnus. It shows one poster that has decided that anyone saying "Man U" isn't a true fan, and you chopping and changing your opinion. I am still firmly on the opinion that "Man U" is a nickname, not a contration, and is a nickname I hear used often whilst talking football, and both work and with my friends.

As such, I've put it back. Darkson (Yabba Dabba Doo!) 22:56, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

FA Cup

Hmmm, I'm still not entirely convinced. I suppose I can't argue with the FA Cup's own website but just taking a look at this report of the winner of the Player of the Round (I'll defo concede that one!), the BBC says fifth round. I personally think the FA is wrong, but it depends if Wikipedia then follows the official naming, or the correct use of English. But I'll go back to my second sentence and will concede, grudgingly to the FA. Some you win, some you lose. ;-) Peanut4 (talk) 23:12, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Lol. I hate over-use of capitals. Which is what I was referring to more in the win or lose comment. Sometimes I don't think it will be long until we have them for every word!! I do expect most media sources, not just the BBC, would use lower case letters though I might be wrong. Peanut4 (talk) 23:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

It's definitely justified. I'll just take up my gripe with the FA, but while they give a striker a longer ban for a slap, rather than a defender for nearly wrecking a striker's career, and appear to be backtracking on Leeds' punishment, I wouldn't give much hope of any sense out of the FA. ;-) Peanut4 (talk) 23:54, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

James Chester

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article James Chester, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 01:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

March 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Springfield Elementary School, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. This is especially important when dealing with biographies of living people, but applies to all Wikipedia articles. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are already familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add your reference to the article. Thank you. Jons63 (talk) 16:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Springfield Elementary

I restored the edit but also added a fact tag to it. Sorry for the inconvenience Jons63 (talk) 17:02, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

United captaincy

Any chance you could lend your United expertise to the topic of the captaincy, which has been raised at Talk:Bryan Robson? Who succeeded who, were they club captain or team captain etc etc. Many thanks. --Jameboy (talk) 11:13, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

2007 UEFA Champions League Final

2007 UEFA Champions League Final has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. --jnestorius^(talk) 12:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

First leg home team first?

Hello again! I noticed you changed the Benfica-Getafe tie on UEFA Cup 2007-08 knockout stage back (i.e. Getafe as first team, Benfica as second). What I thought when I changed that to Benfica-Getafe was that the person who added "Winner match X" to the section after the draw in December listed them incorrectly, since the first leg was held in Portugal, not in Spain. I always thought that first leg home team should be listed first, because it is confusing otherwise and the 2-1 result can be interpreted incorrectly as Getafe's home win, whereas it was an away win.  ARTYOM  23:08, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

This is weird. The first leg was indeed supposed to be played in Madrid, according to various post-draw online articles and even match background on UEFA.com. I couldn't find any news article regarding the home-away reversal, however. Perhaps a note should be added to the knockout stage article about it, unless these kind of reversals are commonplace.  ARTYOM  23:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I guess you're right. I looked through the recent seasons of Champions League and UEFA Cup, and it turned out that Benfica and Sporting never played home on the same matchday. It's interesting that this is done differently in the Champions League, as in the case of Inter - Liverpool :p  ARTYOM  00:12, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Football and Basketball templates

Hi, PeeJay2K3. Would you take a look at what I've proposed in regards to the Template:Football Template and Template:Basketball Template being moved? Thanks. Parsecboy (talk) 10:47, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

United Players on Loan

The players you removed had previously (at the beginning of the season) been listed on the official website as first team players. It was only a couple of weeks after the Coventry match and the players being sent out on loan that they were removed from the manutd.com first team page. They also appeared on the official first team squad photo in August. They do not appear anywhere else on manutd.com, for instance in the reserves team. Manucho (who remains listed as on loan on the Manchester United Page) is not mentioned in the squad listing that you are siting as the only valid source either, so maybe he should be removed too? The same can be said of Danny Welbeck as he is listed as an Academy player on manutd.com and has never played for the first team. Evans only remains listed as the official site has not been updated since December. Fraizer Campbell has also played once for the first team this season before being sent out on loan.

I only updated it as someone had requested it on the Talk page and I don't see that the information is anything less than relevant. The fact that there are inconsistencies in the players listed and the sources (or lack of them) that suggest they can be included (or discluded) on the MUFC wiki page first team players list would suggest that the players I added should be reinstated there. Anyway, thanks for the hard work you put in keeping that page as well as you do. BTW, is it possible for you to transcribe that list of reasons not to call United "Man U" that you mentioned as I can't find the magazine you mentioned. I agree with the fact that it's not a nickname, just wondering what the mag had to say about it.Decorativeedison (talk) 23:20, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Which is it?

In this edit [11] you advocate using the first team squad listing on the webpage as the reference for what goes on the wiki page. Yet you just readded somebody, who is not on the listing on the webpage, to the first team squad. I think you should at least figure out which YOU are going to use, before you start making decisions on what the wikipedia page will use...don't you? 69.219.228.163 (talk) 00:50, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Rugby Union navboxes

Believe the reason that the current member bit was there as there was the issue of illustrating that a player was with a local and state side in the same season and at the same time. Probably best to move them in line with the rugby league and football standard.Londo06 12:58, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

No sorry just the minimised appearance as the code for the rugby union one internally is diffferent as they are broken into forwards and backs. They were previously out of sync with other standards, now they are in allignment with rugby league, football and cricket.Londo06 13:06, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

No, I was saying it was probably good to move towards a unified standard. I think it is good as it stands now.Londo06 13:16, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Captain Marvel

Hi Peejay, i was wondering if we should add Bryan Robson to the club officials section on Man United's page now he is a gloal ambassador. Eddie6705 (talk) 18:27, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Dates

Finally I got it. But it is ugly. Why don't we change it into "The first leg will be held at February 19 and February 20 while the second leg..."? Raymond Giggs 18:52, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Template:Positions

Just wondering: couldn't the redirect have been speedy deleted by using db-author (blanking and tagging for CSD)? B.Wind (talk) 20:42, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Table

No i know how to add new rows, i meant to remove kenwyne jones not andy reid, sorry for the inconvenience.  Sunderland06  22:56, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

UEFA Euro 2008 warm-up matches

Hi! You wrote me, what You deleted page UEFA Euro 2008 warm-up matches, that I posted. But it's was a good article, and I understand, why You were deleted it? If You can explain it, please, write to me. Previously thanks, User:Artur9501, 18:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

      But what about information in this article? It's were good information about football matches.

Removing clubs from the "Combined Counties League" category?

Can I ask what the reason is for removing the clubs from the category of the league they play in? I've got no real thoughts on pro/con either way, but am just interested in the rationale. - fchd (talk) 21:04, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Mohammad Fanaei at 94 World Cup

Source for him being on the final: [12]. Am I missing something? NawlinWiki (talk) 12:25, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

A.F.C.

Well, AFC Sudbury is "Amalgamated Football Club", Cheddar AFC is "Associated Football Club", while AFC Wimbledon doesn't stand for anything, it is just literally "AFC". I visited Sutton Town last Thursday, and there is nothing in their programme or anything to indicate "Association Football Club", so it is original research to assume it does. Sometimes, initials don't actually stand for anything (e.g. Pilkington XXX), and sometimes the words the initials stand for have been dropped over the years (e.g. BT, VT as in VTFC, and SYCOB as in Beaconsfield SYCOB). Best to leave it as the initials, unless we're 100% sure. - fchd (talk) 19:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

And, also, do you have evidence that the F.C. in all the clubs you've been editing recently actually stands for "Football Club"? I know in 99.99% of the cases you're probably right, but it is still WP:OR to ASSUME it does. One other point, a number of the articles were changed earlier this season to say that a club are currently members of a particular league/division, rather than "as of 2007-08" etc. because it would lead to the information not needing to be changed each season if they don't get promoted/relegated. Otherwise - keep up the good work! - fchd (talk) 06:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: 2006 FIFA World Cup summary

I thought about that, but it seemed to me that having all the text in the start of the page would make the results that follow rather dull. It might also be hard for the reader to follow the article, having to read the text (group stage followed by knockout stage) first, then refocus back on the group stage and see the actual results, and then go on to the knockout stage results.  ARTYOM  14:03, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

MUFC final league position

Woops. Never realised it was in italics. Exxy (talk) 20:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: UEFA Champions League 2007-08#Trivia vandalism

I fail to see what I am 'vandilising', I'm merely putting the English team's in chronological order of progression through to the quarters. W33nie (talk) 21:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I've never put it in alphabetical order, or have ever intended on doing that. Ever. Regardless, you're handling this in a very poor manner, using your higher position to completely dominate over anything I do, and not even giving a reason for reverting my changes. W33nie (talk) 22:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

My mistake on that edit, I meant in chronological order, an absent minded mistake, but if you'd payed attention to how I changed it, you'd see that it has been changed into chronological order. As I had previously done here and here. It's fairly obvious to all what I am attempting to get changed. You may not have a title next to your name like Administrator, but that doesn't mean you don't hold a higher position than I in this community. I also fail to see how my edits make no sense. W33nie (talk) 22:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Arsenal & Manchester United's matches being on March 4, Chelsea on March 5 and Liverpool on March 11, but I don't see why chronological order makes less sense than alphabetical order. W33nie (talk) 22:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Because the trivia item talks of the progression of these teams, meaning they should be ordered as they progress. To me, kind of like ordering Presidents by their term, instead of alphabetically. So either Arsenal, or your favourite team, United, at the front of a chronologically ordered list would be perfectly fine by me. So why, when I've proven you wrong on the order of the team's progression, do you insist on alphabetical order? W33nie (talk) 23:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

See that's better. You need to just stop fuelling the fire. When you identify a nob, (me), just ignore him. & be aware that they won't stop when they're thrown ultimatums. W33nie (talk) 23:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Manchester United Reserves & Academy Edits

With the greatest of respect my friend, you can't have searched very hard for corroboration. Allow me to assist:

Edit 1 - Tom Cleverley being added to the reserve squad. Cleverley is the current United reserves captain whilst Kieran Lee is out on loan. A quick check of the match reports on the official site will show he has been practically an ever-present in the last few months. He has also yesterday been nominated by the United reserves coaching staff for the Reserve Player of the Year Award, as shown on this page of the official website - [13]. Surely being nominated for that suggest he is a member of the reserve team squad?

Edit 2 - Chris Fagan being added to the reserve squad. Proof - [14]. Again, a quick read through a few match reports in the reserve section of the official site will confirm Fagan is a member of the reserve squad.

Edit 3 - Cameron Stewart's nationality being reverted to English - please see the explanation on the discussion section of the Reserves/Academy page.

Edit 4 - adding Joshua King and Robert Brady to the future scholars section. If you want to do away with the future scholars section then fine, but if not, I fail to see why these two can't be added. both players were relatively high-profile acquisitions (as far as youth players go) in January, they will be taken on on scholarships this summer and information on their acquisitions and presence at the club is easily available via google. Brady played for the reserve team last week, King for the under 18's on Saturday morning. Again with the greatest of respect, and this applies for the above edits too, this is pretty basic stuff and information I'd expect someone taking responsibility for moderating this page to have some knowledge of, or at least attempt to investigate before dismissing as incorrect. - NickOGS20 00:12 2 April 2008 —Preceding comment was added at 23:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Football kits

This was previously discussed at Template_talk:Football_kit/Archive_1#Detail_level_in_kit_reproduction. ed g2s • talk 10:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

STOP

Listen, man the boxes are not a big deal. At the very least let's build a consensus on the issue before we start an edit war. I think I'm owed at least that. I want to keep them and I'm the one who did the work to put them there. Please don't undo all of my work over an asthetic issue. -- Grant.Alpaugh 11:44, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Brackets

Hey man, nice work on the brackets for this season's UEFA Cup and UEFA Champions League. However, I have just one small question to ask. Would it be possible for you to make it so that the final is over just one leg, and also to remove the "seed" parameter. Personally, I think it would be better if the player's nationality flagicon wasn't surrounded by a box. – PeeJay 10:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree on both counts, but unfortunately I don't know how to do either. Personally, I think the box provides a nice frame for the flag. It's actually supposed to be where the seed goes in a seeded tournament, but obviously that doesn't apply. Maybe someone with better knowledge would be able to help you with the one leg thing, so maybe posting on the talk page would be helpful. Thanks for the kind words, I did a lot of work on the data entry. -- Grant.Alpaugh 10:35, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I think that would be a bad move. More than anything I think this bracket allows for the aggregate scores to be included, which is of course the most important piece of data. I really think you're making too much of the flag-in-the-box issue, so that's a push, and I don't doubt that we can figure out how to make the final one leg, so don't worry. -- Grant.Alpaugh 10:51, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Fixed the finals on both templates. I'm not willing to work out something that is purely asthetic, but if you want to be my guest. -- Grant.Alpaugh 11:26, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough it looks good and you have my apologies. If you could do the same on the UEFA Cup page I'd appreciate it. Also, make sure you put a   in each score column that's blank so that it shows up on the article. Again, thanks and sorry if I was a dick. -- Grant.Alpaugh 11:56, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The solution I've encountered is folding the final in on itself. That was the original template I started with but I went back to an earlier version. Here's an example. That's the best idea, but I don't know how you go about changing our template into that one. -- Grant.Alpaugh 12:37, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey can you update the UEFA Cup bracket like you did with the Champs League one? I would but I don't know how you did it with the spacing like you did. -- Grant.Alpaugh 22:45, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I succesfully flipped the final in so that it doesn't squish anymore, but I don't know how to make the final a one off or space the earlier rounds. If you get the chance please see if you can give it some attention. Thanks again. -- Grant.Alpaugh 08:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Champions League 07-08 bracket

I use Internet Explorer (7); if parameters don't have any value, the cells that are supposed to contain that value show up without the border, but with background they are supposed to have. It doesn't look good. I can upload a screenshot somewhere, if you wish.  ARTYOM  19:30, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey dude, can you make it so that the aggregate totals are not always bolded so that we can bold individual items rather than the whole text. Thanks. -- Grant.Alpaugh 07:42, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Valencia CF.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Valencia CF.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:32, 5 April 2008 (UTC)