User talk:Qed237/Archive 15

Archive 10

←

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

→

Archive 20

U-20

I stated my reasons in talk board. It is highly unproffesional that you did not go in there first and state your reasons instead you changed without saying anything.

As i said in that time Yugoslavia consisted of croats, bosniaks, slovenes, macedonians and serbs so saying that Yugoslavia and Serbia is the same is not true. It's like taking pride on something someone else did. And i showed an example of how they did herehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_European_Under-21_Championship where Serbia and Yugoslavia are seperated.

If Croatia would of won the cup, would it say Croatia 2nd title or 1st title? Of course it would say 1st title.

Another thing is that it has always been Yugoslavia on the board until you edit it on june 19. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=FIFA_U-20_World_Cup&diff=667679652&oldid=667664252

Im gonna change it back as you are clearly not doing a correct job. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.216.136.107 (talk) 22:57, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Clearly you dont know how the editing process works. You have to establish WP:CONSENSUS before imposing such change. You can not just go to the talkpage and say what you want and go with that. In football it is widely considered that Serbia is replacing Yugoslavia, the same way we see Russia as Sovjet. Qed237 (talk) 23:13, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Editors usually reach consensus as a natural process. After one changes a page, others who read it can choose whether or not to further edit. When editors do not reach agreement by editing, discussion on the associated talk pages continues the process toward consensus. I tried to discuss this and yet you changed without trying to discuss it. In football is widely known according to you that Serbia replaced Yugoslavia not according to anyone else.

http://www.fifa.com/fifa-tournaments/awards/index.html

As you see in official fifa(who holds the tourmament)there is no Serbia with two titles. Why don't we use facts instead of your opinions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Borovine (talk • contribs) 23:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

It is not my opinion this is how it is on all other articles not only this. The Serbian Football Association comes from Yugaoslavia football association, just like an other user explained at the talkpage. You can always go to WT:FOOTY if you dont agree. Qed237 (talk) 23:53, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

WP:SOCKING

How can an editor tell if an account is a sock–puppet?, like how would two or more accounts be connected? TeaLover1996 (talk) 07:18, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I am not that experienced in that process and I dont think you need to care about that right now, as we said several times: "focus on editing not editors". The best answer I can give is that sometimes it is very obvious with the names and behaviour and sometimes it is done via a WP:SPI. Qed237 (talk) 10:05, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Forgot to ping, sorry. Qed237 (talk) 10:06, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

User:Oldstone James

Please take a look at the user's behaviour on Jackson Martínez. SLBedit (talk) 15:51, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@SLBedit: I can not say that the edits from User:Oldstone James are very good when he re-adds peacock terms and insists on putting national years in the opening paragraph, but the main question here is if the transfer can be confirmed as a done deal if the selling club has announced it but not the buying club. This is a situation that does not happen very often and is a bit problematic. In my mind it is a 50-50 call because possibly the clubs hs agreed about the 35 million but he may not have passed medical or agreed on personal contract. This is a case that may be taken to WT:FOOTY before it gets out of hand and both of you get blocked for edit warring. Qed237 (talk) 16:18, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Oldstone James doesn't mind being banned. SLBedit (talk) 16:20, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

hello

can you please provide your opinion on this matter please ? you are like me neither a liverpool or man united fan so your opinion should be neutral thank you :) Adnan (talk) 17:38, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@Adnan n2: That is a fairly long discussion and I have also seen something about it at WT:FOOTY if I remember correctly. I am neutral between those two clubs so I could probably take a look later but it is too much to "dig in to" at the moment. What I can say is that we should report honours and not decide on our own what is major and what is minor. Qed237 (talk) 18:29, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I it ok my friend I understand, just when you have free time please provide your opinion on this matter, I 100% agree with you about not decide but one of the editors found english papers articles mentioning minor and major trophies and he used it as a reference and won't let it go as we only report honor as you said and 100% agree with , so if you ever had a free time , provide what you think there . thank you :) Adnan (talk) 18:32, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

To add Qed I am a Manchester United fan and a Middlesbrough fan, does that mean I shouldn't be editing articles related to the clubs? TeaLover1996 (talk) 19:11, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: No thats fine as long as you can stay neutral and follow sources. If you start writing "great game", "owned the opponents", "The greatest player in history scored the first goal.." and such words then it is a problem, but not if you stay neutral. For example some editors have a habit of saying "Newcastle thrashed Barnsley with 4–0" when thrashed can be POV (according to who was they "thrashed") when "Newcastle defeated Barnsley with 4–0" is more neutral. Qed237 (talk) 19:19, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Apology

Sorry 'bout the revert on 2015 FIFA Women's World Cup Final, your edit occurred after I viewed the page and prior to my revert of the ip. And thanks for reverting the ip. Vsmith (talk) 19:27, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@Vsmith: No problem, I know you were acting in good faith and everyone makes mistakes. Have a nice day! Qed237 (talk) 19:33, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thanks again. Goodnight TeaLover1996 (talk) 22:55, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: I appreciate the barnstars but 3 stars in one month from the same user is more than enough. Those should be a bit rare. Qed237 (talk) 23:22, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

De Gea

Something strange has happened at the article David De Gea can you help? TeaLover1996 (talk) 07:12, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Doesn't matter now. All has been sorted. thanks TeaLover1996 (talk) 08:42, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

WP:Don't use Disclaimers

What does it mean when editors shouldn't use disclaimers? TeaLover1996 (talk) 13:45, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: I can not find that guideline so dont know what that means. Qed237 (talk) 13:47, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

This is the guidline here TeaLover1996 (talk) 13:49, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Not my best area. Try reading Wikipedia:No disclaimers in articles and Wikipedia:Content disclaimer and see if it gets any clearer. If not, feel free to ask again. Qed237 (talk) 13:57, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Disputes

Should an admin provide full protection to an article when there is a content dispute between 2 or more editors? TeaLover1996 (talk) 15:24, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: It depends on the situation, if there are only two editors (and they refuse to discuss) the alternative could be to block both (if they are edit warring) so that others still can edit the article. Qed237 (talk) 15:30, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Admins and Rights

Is becoming an admin and gaining rights to different tools, a bit like a job, people have to work their way up through the ranks rather that get things straight way, they need to work for them? TeaLover1996 (talk) 16:47, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Boy, you ask a lot of questions! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:55, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: (edit conflict) Focus on editing. Qed237 (talk) 16:56, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry

Hi, apologies for my edit, I thought that with you giving me guidance and mentoring me, as you said in a previous discussion on my talk page, I thought you might consider adopting me, I wasn't trolling you, I was just asking. Hope we are cool. Cheers! TeaLover1996 (talk) 17:20, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

He might have written that because you've made 341 edits to his talk page. You've only made 215 edits to your own talk page so you are spending a lot of your time on this talk page, asking questions. But Qed237 is a very patient editor. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:22, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: I have told you way too many times to start focusing on your own editing and talking about personal life is trolling. If I were someone else you might even have been blocked indefinately as all questions are getting disruptive (I am having a hard time doing my work, having to read talkpage all the time). Questions related to editing is fine (read guidelines first), but drop the rest and start editing pages instead of just talking. Qed237 (talk) 17:43, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Arsenal

Man after signing Petr Čech ,I was reading Arsenal definitely need to sell one of their goalies , I know rumors say David Ospina is going to be sold , He really had a good Copa America and seems a better choice than Wojciech Szczęsny for me what do you think ?Adnan (talk) 17:34, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@Adnan n2: Tough choice, I trust Wenger. It all depends on what offers we get. Anyway, I must ask you to consider that talkpages are not a forum, and although I like to discuss Arsenal it is better to focus on editing and keep talkpage clear for edit-related questions. Qed237 (talk) 17:45, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

You are right sorry :) Adnan (talk) 17:56, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@Adnan n2: No problem, it is just that this is always the period when I have the most work. Today 48 matches in Europa League along others. Qed237 (talk) 18:04, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Do you need any help with it? let me know how I can help with this article please :) Adnan (talk) 18:09, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@Adnan n2: At the moment, no but thanks for asking. I have had way to many edit conflicts in the past when a lot of users try update one match each. I just update scores when matches finished and then follow with scorers when I have the time. Qed237 (talk) 18:13, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Copy

I've seen copy–editing mention in articles, but what is it? TeaLover1996 (talk) 18:48, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Copy editing (or ce) is basically fixing typo's re-wording sentences and minor fixes. Qed237 (talk) 19:16, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

2015–16 Valencia CF season

I can't figure out for the life of me why every time I try to access this page it redirects me to the Valencia CF main page. Do you have any idea? Italia2006 (talk) 19:01, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Italia2006: It may be because the page doesn't exist, just a guess but I could be wrong, Qed knows more about it than me. Thanks and happy editing TeaLover1996 (talk) 19:14, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

If it doesn't exist the title of this section should be red rather than blue. Italia2006 (talk) 19:15, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@Italia2006: The season article is a redirect to the main article. Sometimes this is done to avoid redlinks, when article should not be created. This way redlinks was avoided in Champions League articles, previous season league table and probably more pages. If you click on the link below the article title on top of the page (after trying to click on the season article) you should be able to reach the redirect if needed. Any more questions just ask and I will try and explain better. Qed237 (talk) 19:19, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

2015 FIFA Women's World Cup at 23 June 2015

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at 2015 FIFA Women's World Cup, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you! User:Boyconga278 (talk) 00:02, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

@Boyconga278: Could you explain a couple of things for me? Why did I deserve a level 3 (of 4) for a single revert of you, do you know how it works? Ever heard of WP:DONTTEMPLATETHEREGULARS? How can you add positions in tournament ranking when thoe positions has not been set and may change? Seriously if you dont know how things work, stop putting a threat on me. This just made me laugh, you have some explaining to do. Qed237 (talk) 11:33, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

To summarize I made a list of my concerns regarding this warning (that I dont take seriously) and your edit:

• Why do you change to small text in infobox without explanation? We should not make small if we dont have to as readers may find it more difficult to read.
• Why did you add "Div col" when there was only two players on 5 goals? It is not that long so we need columns for that, wait until it is three or more players.
• The big/small D in "Div" is nothing to argue about, both is fine so I see not why you needed to change that
• Why did you add Nwft-template? At Template:Nwft/doc it clearly states it should not be used without substitution (subst). It would be best to use wikilinks if you want links. (The template code needs some work to perfect the subst).
• How could you add team positions when they are not known? Please look at User:Qed237/sandbox#2015 FIFA Women's World Cup where I keep track of the teams and their positions. You just need a quick look to see that Colombia may finish 14th (if they lose with 5 goals) and not South Korea like you added. And Brazil in 11th? They will be 9th or 10th depending on the result of Japan. I can not see what you were thinking there? Someone else alsop removed the teams after you adding them a second time.
• WP:ASG has no meaning to you? How could you say my edit was vandalism, perhaps you should read WP:VANDALISM to see what that actually is.
• How did you decide it was worth a level3? A high level of vandalism given when editors are notorius vandals and keeps on vandalising?
• Ever heard of WP:DONTTEMPLATETHEREGULARS? I am a major editor and if you dont understand my edit, talk to me instead of making a fool out of yourself given me the warning above.

@Boyconga278: Some answers to these questions would be lovely. Qed237 (talk) 12:43, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

@Boyconga278: Why give a level 3 warning when you only reverted Qed237 once, you only give a level 3 warning if you have already given a level 1 and level 2 warning before that, I don't know why you have given a level 3 warning straight away, also as Qed has said you shouldn't Template regular editors a short friendly message is preferred for frequent editors. Thank You TeaLover1996 (talk) 16:36, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Thank you for info on when to warn, but this is really not your place to come and play authority. It is between me and him and I have already started talking to him and he should not be questioned again without having a chance to reply to me. Qed237 (talk) 16:50, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Yawn, and also, Level 3 templates are for bad faith. He didn't do bad faith, didn't he? Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 06:05, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

For god's sake, his edits were not vandalism, really? Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 06:07, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@Boyconga278: Not even trying to reply and explain why really shows how much "in to the blue" you were. Dont you have any response? I will keep asking. Qed237 (talk) 09:56, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Dictionary

Although Wikipedia isn't a dictionary, definitions of words are given in articles aren't they? TeaLover1996 (talk) 14:21, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Read some articles and you will see. Qed237 (talk) 14:28, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Qed237. You have new messages at Sammanhumagain's talk page.
Message added 14:32, 4 July 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Reply??? Sammanhumagain^t@lk 14:32, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

I am not able to be on wikipedia every second. Some patience please. Qed237 (talk) 15:02, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

2015–16 Manchester United F.C. season

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2015–16 Manchester United F.C. season. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. GiantSnowman 15:14, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: Message recieved. I realised it one revert to late and has attempted to open this discussion since, after the other editor failed to do it despite being told to do so. Qed237 (talk) 15:22, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Football

Good Luck with edits on football related articles, many of us editors will be very busy once the season starts! TeaLover1996 (talk) 22:02, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Reverts

If an edit has been reverted, it doesn't mean an editor has done something wrong does it? TeaLover1996 (talk) 18:19, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: It doesn't have to, but that is often the case. Good faith edits are often solved better than with reverts. Qed237 (talk) 20:03, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

2015 Fifa Women's World Cup Top Goal Scorers

There is an alert at the top of the page stating that this is a current tournament therefore information may not be reliable or may be unreliable so how does me updating the page to reflect the current top goal scorers constitute vandalism? Since when is updating the page of a current tournament disallowed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnMercedes (talk • contribs) 00:40, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@JohnMercedes: No live updates are allowed and there is a big editnotice telling you to not live update when you have the editwindow open. After the final is played a lot of editors edit and it is then there can be some rapid errors. Qed237 (talk) 00:44, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

2015 FIFA Women's World Cup Final

Could you explain this revert? I'm failing to understand why you would undo an official sourced addition that won't change come the final whistle. From my reading of the situation, I don't think that is what the prior consensus was intended to be used for. Fuebaey (talk) 00:27, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@Fuebaey: The discussions and consensus is for all updates during a match. One reason is that the match may be interupted/abandoned in which case no stats are valid. Qed237 (talk) 00:37, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Although I understand your reasoning, I still think it was a bit redundant given the improbability. I would also appreciate it if you could remove the edit template now that the match is over, as to not confuse other editors like below. Fuebaey (talk) 01:17, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

How improbable it might be, It could still happen. The edit template has an expiry time set so it should be removed automatically some time after the match. Qed237 (talk) 11:22, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Jackson Martinez 2

Madrid — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldstone James (talk • contribs)

@Oldstone James: Thanks for the information. Qed237 (talk) 11:23, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for yesterday!!!

Hi, I am sorry for involving in a revert war yesterday but that was not my intention. Tell me one thing I don't understand why after reverting a vandalism via rollback, why is the page added in watchlist witout your permission? Cheers!!! NextGenSam619^t@lk 15:11, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@NextGenSam619: That is a function in twinkle and how it works, it assumes that you want to watch the page for more vandalism. I can agree it is annoying sometimes as my wathlist is growing big, very fast. Qed237 (talk) 15:14, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I created 2015–16 Beşiktaş J.K. season this morning (in my country) but I have not received the message regarding the page being patrolled. Could you check it? NextGenSam619^t@lk 15:25, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@NextGenSam619: It look slike you can change that at Wikipedia:Twinkle/Preferences (if you use twinkle). Qed237 (talk) 15:26, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I went into that page but nothing went to my head. Could you explain. NextGenSam619^t@lk 15:30, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@NextGenSam619: Not much I can explain. Under Wikipedia:Twinkle/Preferences#Revert and rollback you can uncheck boxes if you dont want them on your watchlist. There is a question "Add pages to watchlist for these types of reversions:", just uncheck the boxes and press save at the bottom. Never done it myself. Qed237 (talk) 15:34, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Done for now. Let's see what happens. NextGenSam619^t@lk 15:37, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 7 July

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the 2015 Allsvenskan page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help) and a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Bandau Spallet

I have raised at SPI - Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PabloOsvaldo17. @Bandau Spallet: I suggest you protest your innocence there. GiantSnowman 17:31, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the info. Saw now that the accounts has been blocked. Qed237 (talk) 21:04, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Characters

There are articles about TV characters, which have a first appearance and a last appearance, if a TV character dies, is the date of the episode they died in credited as their last appearance, or if their body appears in a subsequent episode is that episode their last appearance? Any thoughts?, thanks TeaLover1996 (talk) 16:05, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996:I have no idea. Qed237 (talk) 18:22, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Pretty sure Qed237 shouldn't be expected to know about things other than football/sport, I'd recommend asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Television. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:46, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

@Joseph2302: Although I am a sports freak, I know a few other things =). But yeah in general sports is my area of expertise. Qed237 (talk) 21:48, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Fair enough, I'm kind of a sports-freak too, but seem to do a random selection of other things too (although nothing about TV programmes). Joseph2302 (talk) 21:49, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Lead section consensus

Hi, I edited an article about a week or more ago, and it was reverted by Mattythewhite, who said the current consensus is not to display the division in the lead section of a footballer's article, do you know where this consensus is? I've been looking at footballers articles and I have removed the division, believing that it is the current consensus not to put the division at the beginning, could you help? TeaLover1996 (talk) 14:48, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: I saw the discussion at your talkpage so I will reply there. Qed237 (talk) 14:49, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Re: Laughing

Please get off your high horse. I find the notion of Di Maria moving to PSG after only a season with Man Utd to be highly amusing. It's nothing to do with the editor in question. – PeeJay 15:14, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Albania

http://www.tas-cas.org/en/general-information/news-detail/article/football-the-cas-rejects-the-appeal-filed-by-the-serbian-fa-upholds-in-part-the-appeal-filed-by-the-albanian-fa-the-match-serbia-albania-is-deemed-to-have-been-forfeited-by-serbia-0-3.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.128.176.4 (talk • contribs)

You did not provide any source so how would I know? And also use proper language without personal attacks or you will be blocked from editing. Qed237 (talk) 10:02, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Don't just revert something which is being edited, people are in the process of providing the source! Nobody wakes up in the morning all of a sudden to change a specific score which has been there since October 14. It's just very cynical in your part. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.128.176.4 (talk) 10:07, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

You changed the score without providing any source so I had the right do remove, very simple. Qed237 (talk) 10:09, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Uefa match

You sent me a warning as I had made edits at the UEFA Euro 2016 qualifying Group I article.Someone had made some nacionalist edits (this user 212.200.53.37 ) and I was going to delete it .While I was trying to undo that ,Eni.Sukthi.Durres undid 212.200.53.37's disruptive editings.This way mistakely I undid Eni.Sukthi.Durres's edit.See hear https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=UEFA_Euro_2016_qualifying_Group_I&action=history .The only problem here is that I took another warning. Rolandi+ (talk) 10:46, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

@Rolandi+: Okay I understand and I have removed the warning from your talkpage. Just be more careful next time. Qed237 (talk) 10:56, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Revert on 2015–16 UEFA Europa League qualifying phase and play-off round

Hi, I saw you reverted the change I did in 2015–16 UEFA Europa League qualifying phase and play-off round. I know the match report says Strømsgodset scored in 90+5th minute, but it's definitely wrong. The match clock said 92:57 when he scored, so the correct time is 90+3. You can see it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNDaCvUjFfw&t=228 Why should we use the wrong info, just because it's from UEFA?

--Cashewnøtt (talk) 12:25, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

We follow the official sources. Qed237 (talk) 12:32, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok. I've contacted UEFA to get them to fix the match report. Cashewnøtt (talk) 12:58, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Okay sounds great. I know UEFA sometimes have errors, like for example that Malmö will play in Västerås, but in these cases with goal times and such 0there is consensus to follow the matchreports or the numbers would be changed back and forth from a lot of users. Qed237 (talk) 13:11, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Talk page messages and comments

Are user's not allowed to edit other users messages and comments, even on their talk page? TeaLover1996 (talk) 23:25, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Allowed, but use extreme caution. People can be upset if you edit what they wrote and if you dont have a really good explanation it is best to let it go. Qed237 (talk) 23:38, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

On my talk page someone tried to ping you but they had put {{ping|QED237}} and it was a red link, possibly meaning you wouldn't get the notification, but I edited it to say {{ping|Qed237}} so that you did get it, also the notification may have said I mentioned you instead of the user who put it, also the editor in question thanked me for it so they were pleased or happy that I had corrected it. Thanks TeaLover1996 (talk) 23:42, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: THe ping did not work (I did not get it) because when using ping it must be followed by a fresh signature to work. Qed237 (talk) 23:45, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Did you see the message that was left for you? TeaLover1996 (talk) 23:47, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Maybe, maybe not. Cant remember any message. Qed237 (talk) 23:56, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

UEFA Euro qualification group I

Albania must be second. Check the standing at UEFA's official page for group I http://www.uefa.com/uefaeuro/qualifiers/season=2016/standings/round=2000446/group=2002436/index.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.242.28.219 (talk) 10:35, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

We follow the rules for the tournament, while UEFA are inconsistent and sometimes order by goal differential and sometimes alphabetically. We follow the tournament rules and honestly I dont see why you are arguing, it is not final table anyway. Qed237 (talk) 13:06, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Friendlies

Do friendlies count for appearances in club football? TeaLover1996 (talk) 11:46, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: No, for clubs it is only league matches in the infobox and in career stats section it is all competitive matches but not friendlies. Qed237 (talk) 11:59, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Group I

Hello and thanks for allowing me to write on your talk page in wikipedia. Your edit is, I feel, incorrect, as, according to the tiebreakers below, while Albania and Denmark are equal in points #1 through #5 (remember #4 cannot apply, since the match in Denmark is not played yet), Albania is better in point #6 (# Superior goal difference in all group matches). Kindly thus revise to put Albania second. I think that's what UEFA will do, but they haven't updated their page yet. Still, livescore.com (reliable source) puts Albania second already.

Tiebreakers

If two or more teams are equal on points on completion of the group matches, the following tie-breaking criteria are applied:

1. Higher number of points obtained in the matches played among the teams in question;
2. Superior goal difference resulting from the matches played among the teams in question;
3. Higher number of goals scored in the matches played among the teams in question;
4. Higher number of goals scored away from home in the matches played among the teams in question;
5. If, after having applied criteria 1 to 4, teams still have an equal ranking, criteria 1 to 4 are reapplied exclusively to the matches between the teams in question to determine their final rankings. If this procedure does not lead to a decision, criteria 6 to 10 apply;
6. Superior goal difference in all group matches;
7. Higher number of goals scored in all group matches;
8. Higher number of away goals scored in all group matches;
9. Fair play conduct in all group matches (1 point for a single yellow card, 3 points for a red card as a consequence of two yellow cards, 3 points for a direct red card, 4 points for a yellow card followed by a direct red card);
10. Position in the UEFA national team coefficient ranking system

Cimcimcakungashijaku (talk) 13:54, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

@Cimcimcakungashijaku: If you look closely on the rulebook it says that all tiebreakers are taken to consideration after all matches are played, but before that there is actually no "true" order. For that reason we have, based on community consensus, started following the official rules when we order the tables even if the teams have only met once. So we do use criteria 4. Sometimes it has been written in the rules that the head-to-head should not be during a season or group stage but only when it has finished, which is not the case in the UEFA Euro rulebook. Since rules says to order teams according to those tiebreakers after all matches played, different sources do different things during qualification and UEFA even ordered teams alphabetically at one point (not sure now) so you can see different order on different places. For that reason we decided to follow the rules already. Qed237 (talk) 15:59, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

I see. Basically you are presuming Denmark-Albania still to be 0-0, as it's usually before the start of a match. That makes sense, thanks! --Cimcimcakungashijaku (talk) 17:59, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, exactly. Qed237 (talk) 20:23, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

In light of UEFA's recent change (which puts Albania second), I think we should put Albania second too: Wiki can't decide against the main source, and the organizer of the event. Could you kindly think about making the change? Best! Cimcimcakungashijaku (talk) 00:13, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

It is not my decision, it is community consensus. Qed237 (talk) 12:00, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Edit warring

If two users are engaged in an edit war, can one of the users warn the other about their behaviour? Cheers TeaLover1996 (talk) 22:41, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: They can, but should be very careful of WP:BOOMERANG. Qed237 (talk) 23:13, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

UEFA Euro qualification group I

Ok maybe you are right. I just thought that Uefa's official standings should be the official source for that topic. Anyway it's not the final standing as you say. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.242.28.219 (talk) 12:14, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, it will change soon. Qed237 (talk) 12:18, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

ChelseaFunNumberOne

Fenix down looks to be on it already... GiantSnowman 10:56, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: Okay, thanks. Qed237 (talk) 11:49, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Right I have moved the categories and templates back, let me know if I've missed any. GiantSnowman 12:18, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Yep, looks to be an old club and a phoenix club. Talk pages fixed. GiantSnowman 12:41, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Meistriliiga

Hi, there! Changed red3 because of more contrast. red1 & red2 are really close. All I found on colors was this table [1] that only says: Relegation and relegation play-offs Lighter colours depending on rounds so i didn't think there will be an issue with that. About club names. Estonian FA is the primary source here... and home pages of the clubs. Tartu JK Tammeka [2], or JK Tammeka as on their own page [3] is the right name. Tammeka Tartu is wrong. Same with Viljandi JK Tulevik, it's a Club called Tulevik (future) from Viljandi [4]. --Klõps (talk) 23:38, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Searching the cause for this.. if found, that the ones who long ago created articles about Estonian Football clubs wanted to create single system for all the names... and as FC Flora Tallinn and FC Levadia Tallinn were the two top clubs they decided that all other Estonian football clubs articles must follow this pattern FC–clubs name–location although most clubs in Estonia use Location–FC–clubs name. --Klõps (talk) 00:22, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

@Klõps: Hi, and thank you for opening a discussion about this. About the colors, I can understand why you wanted to change red2 to red3, but I dont agree, these colors has been discussed and agreed on (consensus at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football) and how to use them. Also there is a text in the status column so they should not be to easy to confuse. I am currently going through every European league table to see that they are consistent and following the new module, and I think it would be best to use the standard red1, red2 and so on everywhere. About the names, I was trying to be consistent with all teams and we often pipe names to avoid FC, AFC, PFC, JK or whatever abbreviation is being used as well as piping to WP:COMMONNAME. If you look at the logos and name of websites of the clubs you linked they are jktammeka.ee and Tammeka Tartu 1989 (logo) which both imply Tammeka Tartu is correct, and the other team are jktulevik.ee. I just followed the same principle as FC Flora (known internationally as Flora Tallinn), FC Levadia (known internationally as Levadia Tallinn), Nomme Kalju and Sillamäe Kalev also have location as second. When you look at other sources, to see WP:COMMONNAME, Soccerway has only Tammeka and Tulevik, Flashscore has Tammeka Tartu and UEFA has also Tammeka Tartu. I also tried looking in their articles here on wikipedia and for Tammeka it mainly says only Tammeka but we have for example category with name JK Tammeka Tartu and the Tulevik article for example states Since 2015, Tulevik Viljandi one again play in the Meistriliiga. Qed237 (talk) 00:32, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

@Klõps: As you say this has to do with naming of the clubs and since this is English wikipedia we go by commonname and say for example Tammeka would qualify for Europa League, I believe they would be called Tammeka Tartu outside of Estonia. The way Estonian clubs have their names causes conflict with how team names normally are. We have a similar situation with club F.C. Internazionale Milano (from Italy) that has been moved (a few years ago to the English name "Inter Milan", Bayern München is a "Bayern Munich" and so on. To be honest I gave it a lot of thought when creating the template table. Qed237 (talk) 00:43, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Facts first: Nõmme Kalju... Nõmme is one of the 8 districts of Tallinn & Kalju means Cliff or rock. So Location-clubs name.

JK Sillamäe Kalev... Sillamäe is a town in north-east Estonia. Kalev is a nationwide sports sssociation. Again Location and name.

Belive me in Estonian language attributive adjective comes before the object and most of the clubs have place name in front.

Your other arguments are all WP:OSE. As I said You can find this wrong version, because some people decided to create some unified system for names which was wrong. You shouldn't cherry pick sources. Estonian FA is the main source. Others can make mistakes.. for example just two weeks ago BBC used first names as family names for Levadia players in thire Champions league match review Levadia vs Crusaders F.C. [5]

Nõmme Kalju and Sillamäe Kalev have played in 2015–16 UEFA Europa League they were not called Kalju Nõmme And Kalev Sillamäe--Klõps (talk) 00:59, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

And how about then United Manchester, Albion West Bromwich. This is just the most ridiculous dispute ever. --Klõps (talk) 01:09, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Well, If you dont agree we can take the discussion to the football project for input. We dont write Tallinn Levadia. Qed237 (talk) 01:17, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, because Levadia is officialy Levadia Tallinn – they call themselves so. That's my point.... there can't be this kind of system all the names must follow this single rule! They are called Viljandi Football Club Future... why we need to rearrange words? Whats the reason??? Why are You doing it?--Klõps (talk) 01:41, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

@Klõps: Now at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Team names and piping. Qed237 (talk) 13:51, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

2018 World Cup Qualification Second Round (AFC)

Why is the spelling of the word Or in the normal way you hate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.122.122.10 (talk) 15:13, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Here's real help,why write OR like this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.122.122.10 (talk) 15:17, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

And what nickname I could come up with,let's just peacefully go? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.110.12.27 (talk) 15:20, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

First of all we should distinguish between the two scenarios and with small "or" it could be interpreted as "WC Third round" and then qualification to "Asian Cup or asian cup third round qualifying" instead of "Third round and Asian Cup" OR "Asian cup third round qualifying". Secondly, we should not mix (Or), it is either "OR" or "or" and then OR is more suitable per the first argument. If you dont agree you could always open a discussion at Talk:2018 FIFA World Cup qualification – AFC Second Round or Template talk:2018 FIFA World Cup qualification – AFC Second Round Group A. Qed237 (talk) 15:22, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Creation ban

Yep, take to ANI and request a topic ban from creating new articles. I've done it before. GiantSnowman 13:11, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Morgan Schneiderlin

Schneiderlin's birth place is relevant to the lead, since he began his career at RC Strasbourg, which isn't far away from where he was born. If you insist on removing it from the lead, however, please re-add it to the body of the article. – PeeJay 19:13, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Dont agree with the relevance, but yes it should be in the body (preferably in a "personal life"-section but he does not seem to have one of those). Qed237 (talk) 19:16, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Tautologies

RoPS is short for Rovaniemen Palloseura, which means that "RoPS Rovaniemi" is a tautology. Same goes for Vaasan Palloseura (VPS, not VPS Vaasa) and Fimleikafélag Hafnarfjarðar (FH, not FH Hafnarfjarðar). – PeeJay 16:51, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

@PeeJay2K3: I just follow WP:COMMONNAME and UEFA calls HJK for "HJK Helsinki", SJK is "SJK Seinäjoki" and so on. Qed237 (talk) 16:54, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

@PeeJay2K3: Look for example at Seinäjoen Jalkapallokerho, the article states "Seinäjoen Jalkapallokerho (or SJK Seinäjoki or SJK) is a Finnish football club". It is same situation there, where UEFA and others say "SJK Seinäjoki". Qed237 (talk) 16:57, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

If you think the article titles are wrong, feel free to open WP:RM discussions, but using tautologous pipes is daft. – PeeJay 16:58, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

I go by what they are called, and what the articles states. Nothing wrong in that. Qed237 (talk) 16:59, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

If the names were wrong already, then you'd be right to correct and standardise them. But they were already correct and standardised. They just weren't to a standard that you're familiar with. Tautologies are wrong, we know they're wrong, and sometimes we need to stand up in the face of WP:COMMONNAME because it can lead to situations like this where we end up with wrong names being displayed. They may be common names, but just because they're common doesn't make them right. – PeeJay 17:13, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

I can agree, some articles may be at the wrong place but we should pipe to the commonname so editors can recognize the teams. Qed237 (talk) 18:28, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Don't listen to haters

I have seen lots of hate and anger aimed at you in the past but no one praises you. I think you are doing a great job on the Wikipedia and you correct many mistakes so keep going

Regards, Dannyd74 Dannyd74 (talk) 12:26, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

@Dannyd74: Thank you very much, it is always fun to hear nice words. I try not to focus to much on "haters" if they have nothing constructive to say, and I know that I work very well with other editors and has support from the experienced editors that know what they are doing. But it is always fun to hear these kinds of spontanious comments saying that you do a good job, so thank you very much! Qed237 (talk) 12:53, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Liga I

Rules for classification: 1) points; 2) head-to-head points; 3) head-to-head goal difference; 4) head-to-head goals scored; 5) goal difference; 6) number of goals scored; 7) play-off.

The name of FC Viitorul isn't FC Viitorul Constanța, please check offical site: http://www.academiahagi.tv/, the team name was changed two years ago

Abbreviations for teams, if you still want to add- please don't add to only one team, as you do to ACS Poli Timișoara, add to all teams.

Correct name of Târgu Mureş, CSMS Iaşi, Botoşani is with ș, not with Turkish letter "ş" PLEASE STOP VANDALIZEDTHIS THIS PAGE — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.196.224.49 (talk) 05:03, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

First of all, all teams has drawn so we order alphabetically. Secondly we have the article at Viitorul Constanta, which is also what UEFA use so if you want it differently you should go through a WP:RM and try moving the article. Thirdly, we usually pipe these abbreviations, but Poli is known as ASC (see here) just like we show CFR Cluj, it is an exception. Fourthly, yes I understand the s, it was "collateral damage" reverting the rest. Please read WP:VANDALISM as to what that is, thank you. Qed237 (talk) 11:21, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Then please att to all teams abreviations liek this: CS Pandurii Târgu Jiu, FC Astra Giurgiu, CS Concordia Chiajna, etc. Check on the official site of Viitorul, last year the name of team was changed, and the name "Constanta" was removed from the logo http://www.academiahagi.tv/

On "Regular season positions by round" correct name of Târgu Mureş, CSMS Iaşi, Botoşani is with ș, not with Turkish letter "ş". PLEASE STOP CHANGE THE NAME.

Position in the ranking is determined by the following criteria: 1) points; 2) head-to-head points; 3) head-to-head goal difference; 4) head-to-head goals scored; 5) goal difference; 6) number of goals scored; 7) play-off. Botoșani, CS U Craiova, Dinamo București, Steaua București and Târgu Mureș have the same line of ranking , all teams must occupy the same position. What you don't understand? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.27.192.219 (talk) 17:26, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

As I said, if you want an other name ask for page to be moved and ASC Poli is a special case per COMMONAME as they are known with ASC. Also if they should occupy the same space, then why did you move Botosani last? B is first of those teams alphabetically. Start reading what I write. Qed237 (talk) 17:46, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Cup of Coffee

Enjoy your day, have a nice cup of coffee this Friday morning, happy editing. :) TeaLover1996 (talk) 07:08, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Meistriliiga

Don't start it again, there was no consensus. The names are best to understand for people from other countries without the additives. And You deleted update! --Klõps (talk) 20:26, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Of cource it is, I saw no one agreeing with you. But if you want we can ping more regular contributors if you want more comments. Qed237 (talk) 20:28, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

What's wrong with you? Can't You argue with some dignity? Sorry, but I'm really tired of this kindergarten You-did-it,-no-You-did-it,-no-You did-it... way you communicate. What does it matter when you say " I saw no one agreeing with you" if no one was agreeing with You too. --Klõps (talk) 20:38, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Sure, I can argue with dignity, but you were the one writing "oh, he reverted me, buhu". I can assure you there is nothing wrong with me. And how can you call table chaotic, it lists what others sources have and Tammeka Tartu is most common. You just dont like it because it does not support your case. Do you want me to contact more editors? Qed237 (talk) 20:53, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

OK, that's better. Now, did anybody agree with you there? --Klõps (talk) 21:15, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

There were editors saying commonname should be used, yes. From what I understood, the first user said to use commonname but not what the commonname is, the second editor just made a comment (no stand) and the last editor said that a commonname may not exist (but it should be used). Qed237 (talk) 21:18, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

2 Questions

Hi, just a couple of questions (you don't have to answer)

• 1: Can a userpage only be semi–protected if there is a significant amount of vandalism to justify protection?
• 2: Are talk pages ever semi–protected? Is it a rare occurence?

Thanks in Advance. TeaLover1996 (talk) 16:31, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)@TeaLover1996: I believe that officially userpages are only semi-protected if vandalised, however if you request semi-protection of your own userpages, many admins will just accept it (all my userpages are semi-protected, and most have never been vandalised). As for talkpages, it's very rare from them to be semi-protected, since it stops lots of editors from contacting you. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:10, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: I have to agree with Joseph2302 here. Offically they have to be vandalised (I think) but if you want it protected, many admins accept that. And it is not good to have talkpages protected (at least very long) because people should be able to contact you. If there is a much vandalism from deifferent IP's it can be protected a short period. Qed237 (talk) 17:50, 18 July 2015 (UTC)