User talk:Qed237/Archive 14

Archive 10

←

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

→

Archive 20

Football DataCo

You're gonna have to substantiate that claim about one fixture being allowed. – PeeJay 10:49, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

@PeeJay2K3: As you may know this has been discussed many times, and last time at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football the legal issue was rejected and the discussion was more about not showing a list of empty fixtures. Anyway this article from inbrief clearly states If you mention more than one fixture this will not be accepted and you will be found to be in breach of Copyright laws. (under header "What happens if I do not have a licence?") and under header "Can I mention just one fixture?" they say In order to infringe copyright protection you must have reproduced a substantial part of the work. Simply mentioning a fixture in an article or on a website prior to or after the match will not constitute a substantial part of the work. It is thought that however, more than one match will be deemed to be a substantial part of the work.. Happy reading. Qed237 (talk) 11:08, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thank You TeaLover1996 Talk to me ☏ 16:37, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Bundesliga total goals

I'm curious, where are you getting the number in this edit from? Adding up the goals for, as listed in the league table in the article, yields exactly 843. What am I missing here? Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:18, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

@Sir Sputnik: Firstly timestamp was not updated so it said "as of 23 May" and at that time all 843 goals was not scored. Also the number of matches is 306 (and not 340 as it should be after season has ended) so by updating only the goals and not matches the goal average (goals per match) was wrong. The entire infobox needs updating and unfortunately I did not have the time at that moment. Qed237 (talk) 20:22, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

I see the source of the confusion. I assume your point of reference was the English Premier League, which is not entirely analogous because it has 20 clubs, whereas the Bundesliga only has 18. This means there are there are 9 matches per matchday for a total 306 over 34 matchdays, the last of which was on 23 May (see article lede), meaning the infobox was in fact accurate. Sir Sputnik (talk) 21:41, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

@Sir Sputnik: Yes it seems like you are right, I made the mistake thinking it was 20 teams and did not know league ended already 2 weeks before the Champions League final so I thought all matches had not been played. Nicely spotted by you and thanks for the explanation. Qed237 (talk) 22:03, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Schoolboy Stabbing

A 14 year old school boy was killed in a Carlisle cemetery, is it notable enough to merit an article here? TeaLover1996 ^{Talk to me ☏} 21:34, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Probably not, per WP:NOTNEWS. Generally if someone's only claim to fame is being murdered, then they aren't notable enough. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:37, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: I was really unsure about this and I was leaning towards no, so I trust Joseph2302 here and say no as well. Qed237 (talk) 22:05, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Table format (officials)

The table format based in below articles:

• 2014 FIFA World Cup officials
• 2010 FIFA World Cup officials
• ...

This is not edit war. This is delete of extra data (vandalism).

Υou and the IP ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/50.153.149.65 ) should report the reasons for deleting the extra data. --IM-yb (talk) 22:44, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

@IM-yb: There is a difference between pure official articles and the lists inside regular articles and also I am not the one edit-warring I just restore content pre edit war. It is a content dispute and not vandalism. Perhaps you should read WP:VANDALISM. Qed237 (talk) 22:46, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Is the same 2014 FIFA World Cup#Officials. Not a difference. You and the other IP delete extra data. If you want to revert flags read WP:MOSFLAG and don't delete the table and the confederations list. --IM-yb (talk) 22:56, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

@IM-yb: As I said I really dont care what is "right" I just restored the content to a version before the edit war. I reacted when you said you would report the IP while being just as quilty yourself. Discuss and find consensus, perhaps at WT:FOOTY as it spans over several football articles. Qed237 (talk) 23:02, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Language

Can only English be used on the English Wikipedia? TeaLover1996 ^{Talk to me ☏} 06:53, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Yes, all articles and all communication between users should be in English. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:55, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

However, I have seen references in another language, that is okay right? Vaselineeeeeeee (talk) 03:10, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

@Vaselineeeeeeee: Yes that is okay. English references are the best but if no good english references exists, then a reference in an other language are okay. Also in Champions League were I do much work, reference from an other langauge can be good for example if the official national football association makes a statement about a participating club. Qed237 (talk) 10:39, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Trolls

What does it mean to troll someone on Wikipedia? TeaLover1996 ^{Talk to me ☏} 12:17, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: What is a troll?. In general someone that disrupts editors from making constructive work. This could for example by continous off topic discussion (sorry but you have actually been on the borderline) or someone making disruptive edits on articles to get attention. I have not read about myself, but it might be a good read. Qed237 (talk) 13:02, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

To clarify I dont think you are a troll (at least not on purpose) but asking about favourite football teams and such questions are off topic. Qed237 (talk) 13:03, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Re: Champions League and Europa League

I have not started working on them. So go ahead and create the pages. I will edit if there are any issues, but I trust you can do a good job. :-) Chanheigeorge (talk) 13:35, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Thomas Vermaelen

I just saw you have removed earlier his honor , I know you are frustrated about Danny Welbeck thing. and I really understand. but the difference is barca officially saying he got the medal. while Arsenal said nothing about it. do I think Danny didn't win it? no I don't think this a player has played 3 games should be considered a winner of it,but does my opinion matter ? No It doesn't it is irrelevant to be honest. because neither the player or Arsenal has said something about if he won it or not. but and since there is no source for him to support this and it seems people have a strong opinion about Danny's not winning it they removed it . if you have a question please let me know :) read the talk page and see the sources i have provided please. thank you ! Adnan (talk) 15:50, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Watching

Hi, I was on someones user page not long ago and there is a userbox saying, this user is watched by 38 other editors, does that mean 38 other editors have him on their watchlist? Regards TeaLover1996 ^{Talk to me ☏} 18:26, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: probably. Qed237 (talk) 18:34, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@TeaLover1996: I guess so. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:43, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Bot Archive

Could you check why the bot isn't working on my talk page? --TeaLover1996 ^{Talk to me ☏} 21:48, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: made a small edit, lets see if it works. Qed237 (talk) 22:34, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank You TeaLover1996 ^☏ 22:39, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

AGF

If someone repeatedly doesn't assume good faith does that mean they shouldn't be here? TeaLover1996 ^☏ 10:07, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: In dont know, that not my cup of tea. Focus on editing not people is my general thought. Qed237 (talk) 14:36, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Speedy

Is a speedy keep the opposite of a speedy delete? TeaLover1996 ^☏ 18:54, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: As it sounds, yes. Did you really have to ask that? You asked about trolling, this could be considered trolling. Qed237 (talk) 18:57, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

No I'd never troll you, or anyone, I was only wondering and you have confirmed what I thought, to add the bot archived some talk page messages and comments earlier, your edit worked Thanks and happy editing TeaLover1996 ^☏ 19:02, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Yeah I know, but it seemed like a question that you did not have to ask (and you knew the answer). And I am glad the bot is working. Qed237 (talk) 19:07, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Disrupt

Is repeatedly adding un–sourced content to an article disruptive? TeaLover1996 ^☏ 10:08, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes...as is repeatedly asking questions you know the answers to. Theroadislong (talk) 10:22, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

@Theroadislong: If I knew the answer I wouldnt be asking TeaLover1996 ^☏ 10:25, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: The policies are available for you to read. Why don't you? And then you will cease to give the impression of intentional disruption. Which incidentally is synonymous for trolling... which also answers another pointless question you previously asked. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 11:08, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

@Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: I am not trolling, focus on editing not attacking other editors, you have already been warned before TeaLover1996 ^☏ 12:27, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Nonsense. Your repeated asking of easily answered questions smacks of low-level trolling designed to interrupt the usual flow of the 'paedia and keep yourself in constant eye-line. And repeating what other people have told you just because you think it sounds good is worthless- and obviously worthless- if you clearly do not understand what those words actually mean. If you actually listened to other editors instead of ignoring them, you would not- as you have been warned before- be the focus of so much deserved criticism. Know what I mean son? _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 12:36, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996 and Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: Both of you, calm down. Yes, TeaLover1996 should learn to be more independent and read the guidelines, but at the same time there is no need to "attack" him so strongly. There is something called "dont feed the troll" and if you get so upset with the questions you dont have to answer him at my talkpage, just leave it. Also the warnings on eachothers talkpage are just silly (in my mind), TeaLover1996 the "attack" against you is not that strong just leave it. And Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi you say do him not to revert your edits on your talkpage, while you at the same time restore a warning he removed on his talkpage? Seems a bit strange and label a header as trolling is no good either. If I were you, stop arguing and just remove the warnings on both talkpages. Qed237 (talk) 13:00, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it would be nice if people could be sensible (BTW I didn't 'restore' the warning- it was two warnings for two instances of trolling). I did say I would stretch GF with him the other day- but that is a quid pro quo, of course, for his change of behaviour (when it happens). Cheers! As you say, it certainly livens up the talkpage _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 13:26, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

What do you mean stretch good faith there is no limit or extention to someone agf, you have to agf its not something that runs out TeaLover1996 ^☏ 14:19, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Germany FC

Hi, someone has ruined the infobox at the article Germany national football team and I can't seem to find out how to fix it, can you help? TeaLover1996 ^☏ 16:32, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Thanks for letting me know, this was a good use of talkpage. It was a bracket error, when someone tried to change the team captain. Qed237 (talk) 16:36, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Great Thanks for the help. TeaLover1996 ^☏ 16:37, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thanks for your help, you have been great helping me edit and improve Wikipedia. Appreciated TeaLover1996 ☏ 16:52, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

U'haching Players

You deleted all my content which is totally accurate. Why? Terrible waste of my time and total bullying. I believe it was an attack. Where may I report such things? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:558:6020:13B:59CF:327C:9730:8AC4 (talk) 22:53, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

I am sorry but you need to be more precise, what article? You were most likely reverted because you did not provide any source. Qed237 (talk) 00:06, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

All the players on U'Haching - Koepke, Erb, et al. Why not look to see if there is any validity to the correction instead of wantonly deleting things??? Wouldn't that make more sense? Again, I believe this to be an act of bullying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:558:6020:13B:59CF:327C:9730:8AC4 (talk) 16:52, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Why was a lot of players removed? If a players contract expires, they are still at the club officially until 30 June. Qed237 (talk) 16:58, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

WP:Twinkle

When an editor is viewing the history of an article, and at above the current version is, Rollback (AGF) Rollback and Rollback (VANDAL) is that because the user has enabled Twinkle in their preferences or does it appear their for all users? Regards --TeaLover1996 ^☏ 16:45, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: That is twinkle and not for all editors. Qed237 (talk) 16:48, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

As you recommended I'm going to spend time looking at Wikipedia's Policies and Guidelines, is there a list of them somewhere? TeaLover1996 ^☏ 16:54, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

✔ I've reviewed my signature and removed the phone. Thanks TeaLover1996 (talk) 17:26, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

British or American

Does Wikipedia mostly use American English on its articles TeaLover1996 (talk) 18:24, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

It depends. For guidance, read MOS:ENGVAR. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:11, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: For most football articles (which seems to be where you do lots of editing), they're in British English, except for ones about American/Canadian teams, which are in American English, and Australian teams, which are in Australian English (I don't know the difference between British and Australian English). Joseph2302 (talk) 19:15, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Reverting entries

Hello my friend... Regarding 2015 Copa América Group C editions and reversions. The group's positions cannot be defined yet. Either the possibility of advance is shared among the 4 teams or not shown at all. 2 of them (maybe the third) will move on, we still don't know yet which. I want to be fair with all teams so I'm putting all 4 teams in blue and you keep reverting my editions, we should reach an agreement otherwise we will be doing this all day :P Krosto (talk) 20:03, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

@Krosto: I suggest you look at many other articles and how the module works. In the qualification column we display what happens on those positions and then the teams get statusletters if they have qualified or if they are eliminated. Look for example at UEFA Euro 2016 qualifying Group G, 2018 FIFA World Cup qualification (CONMEBOL), 2015 UEFA European Under-21 Championship and many other pages. Also many editors have reverted your table edits, not only me. Qed237 (talk) 20:11, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Yes, I've seen this before and I believe the module is not showing the data fairly when the event is in progress. It works fine when the info is final. Please check the current information, including the official source (Conmebol Standings) and verify that we can't assure the positions right now. With this in mind either we putting all 4 teams in blue (possibility to qualify) or no color code at all. Krosto (talk) 20:34, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

@Krosto: No, we use the standard convention as always and according to general consensus. Qed237 (talk) 20:46, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Many Thanks

I've been on Wikipedia 8 - 9 months now, you have helped me whenever I have asked any questions, you have also notified me of mistakes I have made when asking questions or editing articles, and I'd like to say a big thank you, not only for being a good friend, but always remaining civil even when letting me know I have I done wrong and also helping me to the best of your ability. So thank you so much. . Thanks again TeaLover1996 (talk) 22:37, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Euro U21s

Very disturbed by your revert. Why on earth did you not just look it up yourself if you were concerned the numbers were fake? Please don't revert constructive edits unless you have a good reason, thanks. Number 57 22:57, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

@Number 57: It is not my job to go around and look for source for you and you know that. If unsourced it can be removed. Dont attack me when you were being lazy. Qed237 (talk) 22:59, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

You need to have a good reason for removing content. Did you seriously think what I was adding was wrong? Number 57 23:02, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

@Number 57: Attendance usually differ from one source to the other and should be sourced. Qed237 (talk) 23:03, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Reverting another editor in good standing is not the answer though. Next time I suggest raising it on their talk page rather than winding someone up with a revert of perfectly good additions. Thanks, Number 57 23:04, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

@Number 57: Hi, to comply with Wikipedia's policy on verifiability which I assume you know a lot about considering you are an admin, you need to add at least one credible reliable source to verify something and to give it ground to be mentioned on Wikipedia, unreliable content is likely to be removed. And remember when an editor adds content it is their sole responsibility to find sources, not other editors. You should be fully aware of this considering you are an administrator. Thanks and happy editing. TeaLover1996 (talk) 23:04, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: And you should be aware (I hope) that not everything needs a reference, only material "whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged". I assumed this would not be challenged (I didn't think anyone would seriously consider this a problem, but you learn something new every day). Try not to lecture experienced editors on basic stuff like this please. Number 57 23:09, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

@Number 57: "Perfectly good" is your point of view, and I dont share that view. Please try and use source. Qed237 (talk) 23:06, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Not sure I'll be bothering with this type of article if this is the sort of reception normal editors get. No wonder we have problems retaining and attracting new editors if this is standard treatment. Number 57 23:09, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

@Number 57: Yes not everything needs a reference or source, however adding sources to material that isn't likely to be challenged improves the quality and credibility of the article and makes information much more reliable. Thank You TeaLover1996 (talk) 23:12, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Tags

what do the tags <noinclude> and </noinclude> do in an article? TeaLover1996 (talk) 23:49, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: WP:NOINCLUDE when you have things you done want to transclude you can use noinclude. For example text in a template that you dont want transferred to the article, like template documentation. Qed237 (talk) 20:09, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

NPOV and DUEWEIGHT

When there is an opinion on references relating to content that is added here, if one person has an opinion on it, and another person has a different opinion, do both opinions have to be included and one not left out to prevent bias? TeaLover1996 (talk) 19:53, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: No opinions should be included, we should report what sources say. If two sources say different things the article should reflect that. If there is an issue, I suggest taking it to article talkpage. Qed237 (talk) 20:11, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Ah that clarifies it, once again your help is helping me improve myself. Cheers TeaLover1996 (talk) 20:13, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Trusting Users

One user commented that me having on my user page a list of users I trust is inappropriate as it possibly shows I only trust some users and not them all, is it bad for me to have that list on my user page? TeaLover1996 (talk) 07:09, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: It is not something I would have, but it is your choice and you are allowed to keep it. You can always add a note to it that you also trust others but those are the ones you turn to with questions (or something) or you can remove it. It is really your choice, not mine. Qed237 (talk) 08:01, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Anfield

Stadiums on Wikipedia have UEFA stadium categories. It's important for stadiums to have this represented. For example look at Camp Nou or Santiago Bernabéu Stadium. They are UEFA Category 4 Stadiums [1]

Anfield is a UEFA Category 3 stadium [2]

I don't know why you would remove the stars as they are widely used to represent the stadium standings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shreerajtheauthor (talk • contribs) 17:12, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Shreerajtheauthor (talk) 17:14, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

@Shreerajtheauthor: You must provide source when you edit, otherwise it might be removed. Qed237 (talk) 17:29, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Okay if I add this back to the same place in the Anfield article and include the this source [3] for reference would that be acceptable?

Also the Intro section only talks about phase 1 of the anfield expansion but leaves out details of phase 2. If I correct that and include appropriate sources would that work?

Thanks. Shreerajtheauthor (talk) 17:49, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

I think so, if the edits are reliable sourced, I have no problem with it. Qed237 (talk) 23:41, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Asking Questions

Its not trolling if someone asks too many questions is it? TeaLover1996 (talk) 23:34, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: It depends on the questions. If they are of the type "I am concerned about user X, are his edits okay?" or "Could you take a look at what is going on at article Z" or other edit-related questions it is not trolling. But if it is many question like "where do you live?", "how old are you?", "what is your favourite football team", "how do you feel about..." and other edits that takes focus away from editing can be considered trolling. Qed237 (talk) 23:40, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

So a question like my previous one about the infobox on the Germany national team article being ruined would be fine? TeaLover1996 (talk) 23:47, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Yes that is a good question, where you notify an other editor of an issue you could not solve yourself. Qed237 (talk) 23:50, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Does asking for help mean I am not yet very independent? TeaLover1996 (talk) 23:51, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Tough question, but I would say no (but a small yes). If you try and find the answer yourself first but can not find an answer there is no problem in asking for help. Qed237 (talk) 23:53, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

You are highly independent but you may still ask questions if you don't know what to do, so yes you are right TeaLover1996 (talk) 23:55, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Bot Archiving

Will manually archiving messages disrupt the bot from doing it? TeaLover1996 (talk) 14:57, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Not given much thought to it but I guess it is possible if the archive reaches maximum size or if you move on to a new archivnumber without updating the header for the bot. Qed237 (talk) 15:06, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

How would I update the header TeaLover1996 (talk) 15:20, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: You have a row for the parameter |archive= that says the name of the archive-page. As you can see it uses the parameter |counter= towards the end that the bot himself ticks up when previous archive is full and he starts a new archive. Look for example in this diff where bot increase my counter when archive 12 got full and he continued in archive 13 (that the bot created). Currently you have counter at 12, saying to bot you have 12 archives but you have already yourself created archive 13 which may confuse the bot. Qed237 (talk) 15:27, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I've edited what was there could you check I've done it right, and if not possibly change it and tell me what you did. TeaLover1996 (talk) 17:33, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: I have corrected it, as I said below archive-parameters decides name and the counter the archivenumber in that name. Qed237 (talk) 21:32, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Bad Editing

If a user has edited an article and they have done something wrong, and they are not notified or warned about it, is it possible they may believe that editing in that way is good and possibly do similar editing in other articles? Regards TeaLover1996 (talk) 22:13, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I can not know what they think. Also if it is an IP there is a good chance they never read their talkpage. Qed237 (talk) 22:15, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Is a Conflict of Interest on Wikipedia, when someone works for a company, and their company has an article on Wikipedia, is it true that person may want to edit that article in the way they want rather than what Wikipedia wants and the two conflict with each other? TeaLover1996 (talk) 22:20, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: I guess, it is always hard to stay neutral for someone writing about themselves or their company, but some editors can manage that. Qed237 (talk) 22:22, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

League table colors

Hi. Can you point me to the list of colors which are used in module League Tables? I have a query about the color for some of the states of the club. They might be worthy for discussion in WP:FOOTY. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 21:49, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

@Brudder Andrusha: Hi. The way the colors are used is explained in the League season MOS, Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/League season#Table formatting and has been discussed many times. If you have any questions feel free to ask. I will also add the hex codes for the colors if you want in a second. Qed237 (talk) 22:04, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Alternative 4

Level	Green	Blue	Yellow	Red	Black
Level 1	BBF3BB	BBF3FF	FFFFBB	FFBBBB	BBBBBB
Level 2	CCF9CC	CCF9FF	FFFFCC	FFCCCC	CCCCCC
Level 3	DDFCDD	DDFCFF	FFFFDD	FFDDDD	DDDDDD
Level 4	EEFFEE	EEFFFF	FFFFEE	FFEEEE	EEEEEE
White	White	White	White	White	White

Here are the hex colors. Qed237 (talk) 22:05, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick input. The question I have deals with color Black - which from the assignment is for clubs which have Teams does not play a full season and/or their results are expunged or void. While I understand its assignment, the state when a condition is not this but "Merged after completing a season with a name change" IMO is not a black/gray highlight. I noticed from your color table there is a column for Extra Color. Maybe this should be the color. But I'm not sure. This is where I think a bit of input from our WP:FOOTY folks might be worthwhile. There might be some other situation as well. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 00:20, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

@Brudder Andrusha: Okay I understand your "issue" here. I guess black has been used to show what has happened after the season as well, but the question is if it should. The extra color was mainly developed for the special occasion when a club qualifies for club world cup, but I think it is possible to use in this situation also. Going to FOOTY for input might be a good idea and as you say it applies to other situations as well so feel free to open up a discussion. Qed237 (talk) 11:02, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Good Stuff. Will do so shortly. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 11:46, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Patronizing

I feel sometimes like I am being patronized, I do one thing wrong and I get chunks tore out of me for it. Sometimes I feel sick. TeaLover1996 (talk) 19:24, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: I can understand that it does not feel good, but I can assure you that no one is "after you" they are just trying to make you understand. You have been making a few mistakes and other editor have tried talking to you so a block was a possibility but that does not have to mean much in the future as long as you learn from your experience. Now you have some time to calm down, read the guidelines and become an even better editor in the future. Qed237 (talk) 21:54, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Arsenal Userbox

The gold colour features prominently in Arsenal's crest, where it is the colour of the cannon. It also helps differentiate the word "Arsenal" in the userbox, which is a link to the wiki article on the club. BlueSquadronRaven 05:15, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

I took that particular shade from a sample from an image of the club's crest, which I took from the club's website. With respect, the userbox has been around for ten years, has nearly 200 people using it, and has had precisely one complaint about its colour scheme. I'm leaving it as is. BlueSquadronRaven 21:56, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, WP:COLOR isn't going to be enforced against a userbox located in userspace which will never, ever be used in an article, when it is meant to apply to articles and article navigation templates, but thanks for playing. I will entertain no further discussion on this subject now. My final suggestion to you is that if you do not like my userbox, do what I did: learn to create your own, because there is nothing that says you have to use mine! BlueSquadronRaven 07:15, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Re: 2017–18 UEFA Champions league and Europa League

Hmmm, I guess if you can compute the maximum possible coefficient for each association (although that may be "original research"?), you can kind of create the articles for those tournaments. I actually once thought about it doing it starting from June/July, but ultimately for me it was just too much work and too little payoff (especially for those minnow associations), plus I think the articles at this current state are likely to get nominated for deletion by the other editors (since it will still contain a lot of "champions of association ranked 40, TBD"). So last time I created the articles in December, when I only need to compute the maximum possible coefficient for around 20 associations and a majority of the berths are certain. So it is your choice, but don't say I haven't warned you. Chanheigeorge (talk) 14:52, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Well, I guess the counter-argument is that the content you are going to put up there can be found in other articles: the access list is identical to the 2016–17 season, while the current coefficient ranking can be found in UEFA coefficient. Again, I personally do not see a problem with what you plan to write, but other editors may think otherwise. Chanheigeorge (talk) 15:45, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Newcastle United F.C

Please can you do the home kit and the third kit please because I don't know how to do it and them kits are out on sale so make the kits on here Newcastle United F.C.

Wenno123 (talk) 09:42, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

@Wenno123: I am sorry but I dont know how to make kits either. Qed237 (talk) 12:18, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Policies

I've looked at Wikipedia's policies on Edit Warring and Vandalism and I believe I understand more what is and what isn't vandalism TeaLover1996 (talk) 22:53, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Okay, great. Qed237 (talk) 23:22, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Sorry if my mistakes have caused you problems TeaLover1996 (talk) 23:42, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: No problem. Qed237 (talk) 00:01, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Jackson Martinez

Is that (BBC) not a reliable source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldstone James (talk • contribs)

@Oldstone James: I would say that it could be included in article as information but it is not clear evidence it is a done deal. He probably has medical to pass first and it is not a completely done deal until it is announced by the club. His "current club" should not change. Qed237 (talk) 15:39, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Then that's what I am to edit awright? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldstone James (talk • contribs)

@Oldstone James: Not sure I understand what you mean, but if you are asking about your current edit it is fine. Qed237 (talk) 15:56, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

General sanctions notification

Hello,

I noticed your message re: UK units on RGloucester's talk. It appears that you have been involved in these kinds of issues and have not yet been notified. We have generally been notifying editors fairly liberally, regardless of whether we believe they have broken the sanctions, so that they can be formally aware of the problems that have been caused in the past in UK units discussions and know to tread carefully.

Please read this notification carefully:
A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions to curtail disruption related to systems of measurement in the United Kingdom. Before continuing to make edits that involve units or systems of measurement in United Kingdom-related contexts, please read the full description of these sanctions here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

Thanks, Kahastok talk 21:48, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

@Kahastok: Thank you for the notification. I am well aware of this so it does not really feel necessary as I have not done anything wrong. But I guess having the info on my talkpage wont hurt. Qed237 (talk) 22:06, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

It's one of those areas where Wikipedia gets a bit bureaucratic. I can't see you've done anything wrong at all - that's why I wrote the bit at the beginning. Having the info to hand is maybe useful though, and you were going to be notified by someone, so I thought I might as well try and treat it like the bureaucracy it is. Kahastok talk 20:46, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Petr Čech

Congrats on Petr ! Arsenal finally has a goalie with their standard, I am really glad it happened even I support Chelsea , because really Arsenal deserves a good goalie with high standards :) Adnan (talk) 16:29, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

@Adnan n2: Thanks, it feels good. I think Cech is way too good to be a back-up so even if I understand the "anger" from some Chelsea fans, he deserves to play, and as a Gunner I am happy that Arsenal was his choice. I am hoping for an interesting league and I think it would be good for everyone if the league is close until the end. Good luck!. Qed237 (talk) 20:04, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

I know, I understand them too but If we want to keep the premier league in high standard and not turn to a two teams race like in other countries we should accept excellent players should stay in premier league. no offense to other team in lower league but Petr should play in a high standard team as Arsenal, now with Petr and probably if they can add a proven goal scorer with Giroud and Walcott teams like Bayren and Barca would really hate to be paired with Arsenal in next Champions League. hopefully they can stay healthy though ! last few years they really were unlucky with injuries. Adnan (talk) 20:53, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

@Adnan n2: Agreed, can hardly wait for next season. Qed237 (talk) 20:56, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Discussion on WP:MOSNUM

I've opened a discussion at WT:MOSNUM that you might be interested in contributing to. It relates to the clause about primary units for personal weight and height of British people. Speccy4Eyes (talk) 20:20, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

@Speccy4Eyes: Okay, thank you for the information. Qed237 (talk) 22:58, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Question .

What does it mean if an editor has been blocked by the Arbitration Committee? Sounds serious. TeaLover1996 (talk) 07:48, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: I am just guessing, but Arbitration Commitee is one step "above" administrators. How serious that is depends on your personal opinion, but yes it does not sound good. Qed237 (talk) 09:08, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

STiki

How do I request removal of right to remove my rights with STiki? TeaLover1996 (talk) 23:52, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Not sure what you are asking. Do you, or do you not, want to be able to edit with STiki? Qed237 (talk) 00:44, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure on my talk page I said in an unblock request I was planning to stop using it, but does that mean I have to though TeaLover1996 (talk) 00:50, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes. If you keep using STiki, I will block you for one year. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:18, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

@Floquenbeam: You cannot just block people for choosing to use a feature of Wikipedia. TeaLover1996 (talk) 02:37, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Replying on your talk page to avoid bugging Qed237. --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:40, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

@Floquenbeam and TeaLover1996: No worries, I dont get "bugged" so easily, but I agree this should be discussed on TeaLover1996's talkpage. And yes, stay of STiki. Qed237 (talk) 09:10, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Template editor

Your account has been granted the "template editor" user permission, allowing you to edit templates and modules that have been protected with template protection. It also allows you to bypass the title blacklist, giving you the ability to create and edit edit notices.

You can use this user right to perform maintenance, answer edit requests, and make any other simple and generally uncontroversial edits to templates, modules, and edit notices. You can also use it to enact more complex or controversial edits, after those edits are first made to a test sandbox, and their technical reliability as well as their consensus among other informed editors has been established.

Before you use this user right, please read Wikipedia:Template editor and make sure you understand its contents. In particular, you should read the section on wise template editing and the criteria for revocation. This user right gives you access to some of Wikipedia's most important templates and modules; it is critical that you edit them wisely and that you only make edits that are backed up by consensus. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

Useful links:

• All template-protected pages
• Request fully-protected templates or modules be downgraded to template protection

Happy template editing! Qed237 (talk) 09:24, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Put the info on myself since I was approved. Qed237 (talk) 09:24, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Once again thanks for your help TeaLover1996 (talk) 10:20, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Thank you. You just "hang in there" and make good edits and you have all chances of a "comeback". Qed237 (talk) 10:44, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Good Edits?

If you look at this edit , this edit and this edit I believe these are good edits, what do you think, or maybe you have a different opinion? TeaLover1996 (talk) 14:39, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: I see no major issues with them (only looked really quick). Perhaps I would not have added the "has" but you have better knowledge of the English language then me. Did you really have to ask this though? I dont feel like reviewing all your edits. Qed237 (talk) 14:42, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I was only seeing if I was doing good edits, all the same. Have a nice day TeaLover1996 (talk) 14:44, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Okay, have nice day you too! Qed237 (talk) 14:45, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

read

why do u keep changing his information its false i know him and i have his number if u wish to talk to him Ohgeejay (talk) 16:03, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

@Ohgeejay:This was the first time I edited Tom Lister, Jr. after you and the reason was that your edit was unsourced to a WP:BLP. Please provide reliable sources if you want to changes to names. I am not going to call anyone. Qed237 (talk) 16:05, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

how can i fix this problem ? pinebluff is false information — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohgeejay (talk • contribs) 16:44, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

@Ohgeejay: You can find a reliable source that mentions his full name. Qed237 (talk) 20:01, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

i have his birth certficate in my hand , and it says he's born from Compton California , would i have to post it up or what can i do ? my client Tommy Lister wants to fix this suitation due to many people thinking hes from arkansas but thats false thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohgeejay (talk • contribs)

@Ohgeejay: "Your client"? In which case you have a conflict of interest, and per Wikipedia guidelines on conflict of interest, you are discouraged from directly editing the article. If they are paying you, you must disclose this too, per Wikipedia's terms of use. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:53, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

who's paying me ? im just doing my friend a favor . this is wikipedia isnt your information suppsose to be accurate ? the source u got his date of birth from is taking his article down today , i just want to fix this problem . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohgeejay (talk • contribs)

@Ohgeejay: There is nothing I can do about that I am afraid, unless you have a link to a source. I think the best thing you can do is to ask for help at Wikipedia:Teahouse. And as Joseph2302 says, it seems like you have a conflict of interest. Qed237 (talk) 22:58, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Wait, so he's gone from being a client to a friend? Either way, I agree, there's 2 infoboxes on that page, and only one of them has a sourced birthplace. I'm going to change his birthplace in the 1st infobox, using the source in the 2nd infobox. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:59, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

@Joseph2302: Thanks, I did not even notice the second infobox. Qed237 (talk) 23:02, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

a pic of his birthcertficate isnt a source ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohgeejay (talk • contribs) 23:12, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Possibly, but I'm not sure. I found an online source instead, and have fixed the issue. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:14, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Not sure about pictures, since not everyone can verify it. This is reason why I suggested asking for help at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but now it seems as if Joseph2302 has fixed the issue. Qed237 (talk) 23:17, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

excuse me but it says arkansas pine bluff again ? and one of the sources , the encyclopedia of arkansas took his article down because its false since he isnt from pinebluff. is there a email i can send the birth certificate too ? or a way u guys can help ? thank u — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohgeejay (talk • contribs) 20:10, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

@Ohgeejay: I'd recommend going to WP:BLPN and raising the complaint there. From what I can see, there's no sources saying that he was born in Arkansas. Neither myself nor QED237 know the answer to this question. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:13, 30 June 2015 (UTC)