User talk:RedPatch/Archive 1

Archive 1

April 2014

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at Talk:Air Canada Centre, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 14:21, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Ager Aketxe

Hi there,

can you please help me keep this in check? Getting beyond ridiculous, no need to mention his jersey number over and over AND OVER again...

Thanks in advance, happy editing --81.193.141.118 (talk) 19:27, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Meh, I don't care that much to get involved in an edit war re: jersey numbers. Or with the Stadium name/Cadiz name - both those ways sound good to me, so I'm fine with either. RedPatchBoys (talk) 02:42, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Duane Notice moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Duane Notice, fully fails notability considerations. Particularly, this subject fails WP:NHOOPS. When you feel you have demonstrated how this player passes that standard, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Sulfurboy (talk) 08:13, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Duane Notice has been accepted

Duane Notice, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Bkissin (talk) 18:44, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Auro stats

I added the table at the beginning of last year. I Can't really remember this specific edit. I likely looked at the wrong column and put the minutes as the total matches played. Kingjeff (talk) 02:06, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok thanks, I thought that might have been the case, I just wanted to check before I edited it. RedPatchBoy (talk) 02:13, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

2020 CSL season

Hey RedPatchBoy, thanks for your help I really appreciate your edits because it finally gives me a chance to focus on other articles instead of the CSL related ones. Every since that dispute with the CSA around 2013-2015 the Canadian soccer community has really neglected and treated this league as some kind of roadkill so your help is really appreciated and don't worry as long as your doing constructive and objective edits on the topic (as I see your are) your edits are welcomed and even encouraged. Now to your question that's a tough one. The only reason I included those stats was to continue the tradition from previous seasons. I guess we can look at the CPL and MLS 2020 season pages and see if they included those stats as an example. Shotgun pete (talk) 21:14, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Reply

Hi there again, same here. Yes, great work overall from you in Ager Aketxe, i "pitch" here and there too...

Take care from Portugal, thanks for the kind message and happy editing as well (PS i do have an account, this here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Quite_A_Character). I have no problem whatsoever editing from the IP occasionally, as mine is static and therefore people can easily contact me - or "scold" me if they think i'm disrupting/vandalising)! --81.193.141.118 (talk) 22:31, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

@81.193.141.118 Good to know. So if I see that username I'll know who you are. If you want a good laugh, since I saw the edit summary for Victor Vazquez about the lottery ticket, I was laughing until I realized it was from my edit. But it turns out I have Google to blame for that LOL https://i.imgur.com/bzA8mXJ.png RedPatchBoy (talk) 01:45, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Daily Mail reference at FC Santa Claus

Hi. Please do not use the Daily Mail as you did at FC Santa Claus. It is not a reliable source. See WP:DAILYMAIL. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 20:28, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

DYK for FC Santa Claus

On 24 December 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article FC Santa Claus, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a football club in Finland called FC Santa Claus has competed as high as the third tier? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/FC Santa Claus. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, FC Santa Claus), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Good work on that by the way for your first DYK. Have a happy Christmas! The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 07:49, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas to you as well User:The C of E. Thanks for the help in improving the article. RedPatchBoy (talk) 20:53, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

FC Kalamazoo crest

Good morning! I wanted to touch base, after you made an edit to the Kalamazoo page the crest got deleted for "not having permission". I think what happened was your edit attracted the attention of a bot or fair use patroller to an old image file. Did you change the file itself? Or just the scale in the info box? If you did change the file (e.g. uploaded a hi-res version) please keep in mind for future edits that for most low-tier soccer clubs in the US, we must prove fair use, so that means low-res and filling out the permissions form. Thanks and happy holidays! Pirmas697 (talk) 16:59, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Pirmas697:, I didn't change the file, just resized it on the page (not the image itself). However, I looked into it and the file was uploaded on Wikimedia Commons. Those fair use files for articles should be uploaded on Wikipedia itself, which is probably why it got deleted from Wikimedia, since those fair type of images are not allowed there. The file was actually recommended for deletion on the 16th, several days before my edit on the 22nd, and then automatically deleted 7 days later (the 23rd). I'll reupload a copy of it under fair use on Wikipedia itself. Happy holidays RedPatchBoy (talk) 17:13, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

@RedPatchBoy: - Awesome! Thanks for looking into it!Pirmas697 (talk) 17:25, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Links to draft articles

Please do not introduce links in actual articles to draft articles, as you did to League1 Ontario. Since a draft is not yet ready for the main article space, it is not in shape for ordinary readers, and links from articles should not go to a draft. Such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been removed. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 10:37, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of FC Santa Claus

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article FC Santa Claus you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of REDMAN 2019 -- REDMAN 2019 (talk) 12:41, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of FC Santa Claus

The article FC Santa Claus you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:FC Santa Claus for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of REDMAN 2019 -- REDMAN 2019 (talk) 16:01, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of FC Santa Claus

The article FC Santa Claus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:FC Santa Claus for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of REDMAN 2019 -- REDMAN 2019 (talk) 18:01, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Alliance United

Wexford SC is detailed on the AU page as being part of it. GiantSnowman 17:39, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Tomato, tomato... GiantSnowman 17:46, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

AU "was formed as a partnership between two youth clubs - Markham FC and Wexford SC". That is not the same as a feeder club set up as you suggest. GiantSnowman 17:54, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

No, it's standard to have a category for every club that has at least 2/3 players - and with scope for expansion. GiantSnowman 18:04, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Exactly, every cloud ;) GiantSnowman 19:36, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Dylan Carreiro

Please can you re-organise the career stats table? Per MOS there is not a 'Playoffs' column, there is an 'Other' column which is at the end of the row and not next to league... GiantSnowman 15:28, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: I feel that a Playoffs column should be added to the MOS given it is a key part of North American leagues (for Carreiro, given he had limited playoff games, I can see the rationale for it being in Other, I'll just add a note). Similar to how State League was allowed for Brazilian players. I'll pose this question to establish consensus on that. On another note, why did you revert the date format to DMY citing MOS:DATEFORMAT? MOS:DATEFORMAT states "Articles on topics with strong ties to a particular English-speaking country should generally use the date format most commonly used in that nation", while it does say "Articles related to Canada or Israel may use either format with (as always) consistency within each article" that is because the province of Quebec uses DMY, the rest of Canada uses MDY. Carreiro being a non-Quebec native of Canada should thus use MDY. RedPatchBoy (talk) 15:51, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Disagree on the playoffs column but that's a discussion for elsewhere. Ad for the date, please see WP:DATETIES - "Articles related to Canada or Israel may use either format with (as always) consistency within each article" - and WP:DATEVAR - "The date format chosen in the first major contribution in the early stages of an article (i.e., the first non-stub version) should continue to be used". DMY is the longstanding format. GiantSnowman 15:54, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

I get that rule but it doesn't make sense given that 99% of non-Quebec Canadian players use use MDY. I feel it should be consistent. Every article I create I tend to use MDY out of habit, but then I end up changing it based on the nation/area of the player. I get that you created the article and probably chose DMY out of habit since you're in England, but for a Canadian player it should've been created in MDY. I get the rule exists for disagreements, but as someone who lives in Canada, I can say for certainty that MDY in the dominant form used. RedPatchBoy (talk) 16:02, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Collaboration

I absolutely feel the same way, and thanks for reaching out. I can disagree with people (even repeatedly!) and still get on with them...after all we're both here for the same reasons. GiantSnowman 17:24, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Evergreen FC

Err any reason why you posted using my signature? GiantSnowman 18:00, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman:Whoops sorry. I copied the template from one of the other Rename Requests when posting it one of the WP FOOTY page and guess I forgot to change the name. I really should just put one in my sandbox instead of always coping from an active one. I changed it to mine now. RedPatchBoy (talk) 18:04, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

The 'original' template is at WP:FOOTYDEL. GiantSnowman 18:05, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Good to know. Sorry again. Egg on my face. I really should've noticed that it's on top of that table I always edit. I've been copying and pasting old ones and just changing the signature all this time. RedPatchBoy (talk) 18:07, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Merge request at the RMT

Hi RedPatchBoy, I've rejected your merge request at the RMT because the request doesn't belong there. You can just try placing this template on the destination category page.{{History merge | originalpage=the page you want to get merged (with history) | reason= why? }}. Regards, ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 16:34, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

ThanksTheAafi:. I placed it at Category:Ottawa Intrepid players, but did I do something wrong? The text came out red, so I think there's a mistake somewhere or is it fine?. RedPatchBoy (talk) 17:36, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

RedPatchBoy, No it is fine. Anthony Appleyard, may you complete this merge request? ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 17:44, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

• @AafiOnMobile, RedPatchBoy, and TheAafi: I was asked to history-merge Category:Ottawa Pioneers players and Category:Ottawa Intrepid players, but both of these 2 categories have members, and these 2 categories are WP:Parallel histories. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:27, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
• @Anthony Appleyard: I'm not too sure what that means, but I'm assuming it just means it's not possible? I could just add the two players who are in the Ottawa Pioneers category (but not Intrepid) to Ottawa Intrepid and then would deleting Ottawa Pioneers work? Makes no sense for there to be two categories for the same team, especially given their very narrow scope and 4 are in both already. RedPatchBoy (talk) 00:07, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
• @AafiOnMobile, RedPatchBoy, and TheAafi: I am in England. I know nothing about Canadian soccer and the histories of its clubs and players, except that I have just looked at page Ottawa Pioneers, which proved to be a redirect to page Ottawa Intrepid, which I then looked at. Did Ottawa Pioneers (apparently a soccer league) rename themselves as Ottawa Intrepid? Or what happened? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 11:00, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
• @Anthony Appleyard:Yes, Ottawa Pioneers changed their name to Ottawa Intrepid, which is why I proposed the merge, since it's the same team. That's why most of the listed players are duplicated in both lists - the team simply changed names. Not sure what you mean by "apparently a league" it was a team in the Canadian soccer League. RedPatchBoy (talk) 11:20, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
• @AafiOnMobile, RedPatchBoy, and TheAafi: Pages Ottawa Pioneers and Ottawa Intrepid are WP:Parallel histories, so they cannot be history-merged. Also, any player (say X) may or may not have been a member of this club when it was named Ottawa Pioneers, and separately, he may or may not have been a member of this club when it was named Ottawa Intrepid. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:21, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

  Anthony Appleyard, The mainspace articles from the two, former is a redirect to the latter (since 13 years) so two Categories don't make a sense to me. Even if per WP:Parallel history, we may copy things from one cat to the other, indicating the copying on the talk page, and marking one of the two as a redirect to the other. ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 13:25, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

• @RedPatchBoy: Ottawa Pioneers and Ottawa Intrepid are the one same soccer club, indeed; but Wikipedia pages Ottawa Pioneers and Ottawa Intrepid have existed side by side with separate edit histories from April 2008 to now. History-merging Ottawa Pioneers with Ottawa Intrepid would not affect their membership lists. Some category pages have a fair-to-large amount of text of their own; but not these two. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:14, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

  Anthony Appleyard I just meant the Categories. Not the pages. The pages are fine because one is a re-direct to the other.

It's the categories that don't need to be separate. If the pages are combined (i.e. a redirect), the same should apply to the categories. A merge isn't necessary. Deleting Category:Ottawa Pioneers players would be fine instead of merging histories, since it's just a category. All of the players in Category:Ottawa Pioneers players are already in Category:Ottawa Intrepid players, so the Pioneers category is redundant. It's probably just easier to delete the category/turn it into a redirect

When a soccer/football club changes names, a new category isn't formed, it is just renamed. For example, Montreal Impact changed their name to CF Montreal in January 2021, a new category wasn't created, instead Category:Montreal Impact players was just renamed to CF Montreal players. So the same should apply to this with Ottawa Pioneers and Intrepid being the same category.RedPatchBoy (talk) 14:46, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Anthony Appleyard thanks for doing that. Would you be able to do the same with Category:Kitchener Spirit players and Category:Kitchener Kickers players]? It's the same situation as above with the Ottawa team. See Kitchener Spirit. RedPatchBoy (talk) 15:17, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

• @RedPatchBoy: You will have to go through all the articles about Kitchener Spirit players and change each page's Category: line approppriately. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:40, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

@Anthony Appleyard: Another user already did (after I posted that message). It's now just an empty category. Will it get deleted automatically since it's now empty? RedPatchBoy (talk) 23:00, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Canadian payer stats

When adding player stats, please can you include the reference in the article, rather than just the edit summary? GiantSnowman 10:21, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Historical logos

Hi,

I've tagged several of the non-free historical logos you've uploaded. Non-free older logos need to have significant sourced commentary about the logo in oder to satisfy WP:NFCC#8. Just being an old logo is not sufficient. -- Whpq (talk) 00:34, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

March 2021

Your edit to Canadian Soccer League (1987–1992) has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 10:43, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, I'm really confused by this accusation of plagiarism. I source every sentence I use and make to not quote word-for-word. My edit history shows this, including on this edit. The only thing I can think of is maybe I missed one sentence by mistake since I was doing a large edit. I know for a fact I did not plagiarize that article, but used it as a source. I just re-read that webpage and am fairly sure that I changed every sentence and there is maybe one sentence that I perhaps did not change enough. Is it the case of not changing something "enough". RedPatchBoy (talk) 11:53, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

I've undone the revision deletion so that you can more readily view the overlap. See Earwig's tool— Diannaa (talk) 11:57, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Diannaa. I fixed it up. Sorry for that, I'm usually much better at rewording the articles. I found the sentences that were the issue and fixed them. RedPatchBoy (talk) 12:16, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Name change?

Just noticed you on WP:FOOTBALL recently and the name isn't familiar, are you a renamed account or have I just been ignorant of your efforts? Koncorde (talk) 09:13, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Koncorde. I've been fairly active for the past year on WP:FOOTY. No name change RedPatchBoy (talk) 11:02, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Just my ignorance then. I have also been quiet on the board for a while I have probably just missed your contribs. Koncorde (talk) 11:13, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

North American Soccer League

Hello. Are you able to help clean up after your change to North American Soccer League? I've fixed most of the incoming links but there are still over 1,000 more articles to fix. Thanks, Certes (talk) 11:03, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Certes:. Yes, I'll try to help and so a small chunk each day to eventually get them all fixed. RedPatch (talk) 11:54, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

DisamAssist is a useful tool for this sort of thing if used carefully. Certes (talk) 12:05, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Current Dab Links: 0 articles

About 200 of those should go away naturally. They're from pages which linked to NASL via a template such as {{North American Soccer League MVP}} which has been fixed, but the articles can take a while to update to the latest version. Certes (talk) 17:30, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

That's just a tally for myself to keep track lol. I'm going to try to update maybe 50 or so every couple of days. I should've put it in my sandbox lol RedPatch (talk) 18:31, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Sorry but doing a handful a day for 2/3 weeks is not good enough. Also there are sub-articles/templates/categories etc. which will need to be renamed. Ideally this should have been done by way of RM. GiantSnowman 07:55, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Removing the posts from your talk page won't get rid of the issue. What are you going to do about all the broken links? I've already spent a lot of time today helping fix them. Time for you to do the same... GiantSnowman 14:27, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: I fixed all the rest of the links already so I archived it, since the issue is done with now. There's none left. Thanks for helping to clean them up as well. The only ones left are on user pages and talk pages I didn't think we had to fix those. RedPatch (talk) 14:30, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Lovely - it would have been helpful if you had notified us! GiantSnowman 15:07, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

No, we shouldn't change the links from user and talk pages. Thanks to everyone who helped, especially GiantSnowman who fixed about 700 of the links. I've fixed the small number of links from categories, templates, files, portals etc. The issue of category and template names such as {{North American Soccer League}} mentioned above remains unresolved; this is the sort of thing that a RM would have helped with. Certes (talk) 15:11, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Autopatrolled granted

Hi RedPatch, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. However, you should consider adding relevant wikiproject talk-page templates, stub-tags and categories to new articles that you create if you aren't already in the habit of doing so, since your articles will no longer be systematically checked by other editors (User:Evad37/rater and User:SD0001/StubSorter.js are useful scripts which can help). Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Beeblebrox (talk) 21:01, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Tony Mikhael

Hi, how's it going? Just wanted to let you know that I had already created his draft back in January (User:Nehme1499/sandbox/Tony Mikhael). Obviously, since I created it in my own sandbox, you weren't aware and made the draft. To be honest, I never expected someone to create a draft of a Lebanese player, so I was very surprised when I saw you mentioning his name :) Just out of pure courtesy, is it ok if I published my draft when he makes his debut? I've never found myself in the situation of asking this, so sorry if it comes off as awkward. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 01:30, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Hey @Nehme1499:. Thanks for the message. I mainly edit/create articles of Canadian players and the Canadian leagues, guess this is that rare occurrence where our niche areas intersected, since Tony is both. Pretty crazy coincidence. Yeah, since you started it first, it's completely fair for yours to become the article. If I come across any new info about him since he's in a league I actively follow, could I add it in your userspace draft? RedPatch (talk) 02:18, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks man! And yes, by all means improve the page with more info in you can find anything. I've already taken the liberty of adding a few things from your draft I was missing. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 05:39, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Nehme1499: Sounds good. I think we should drop the OSU stuff from the Honours section. A U14 youth title probably isn't notable enough for that section, especially with that talk page discussion recently about runner-ups/promotions not being considered for the honours section. RedPatch (talk) 10:54, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

In the recent discussion, it was just decided that we shouldn't be adding play-off promotions. Runner-up titles (for cups, not leagues) can still be added, though in the case of Canadian soccer (and especially, Canadian youth/college soccer), I don't really know what titles are notable and what aren't. I agree with the changes you have made thus far btw. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 13:34, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I just referenced that because those competitions would be far too minor in my opinion. I played in some of those and never came to being a pro. Even the ones for Carleton, since they're not USports (national) titles, I'd just not include those - they're basically just regional qualification divisions/tournaments because the country is just way too large geographically for travel for amateur students to play, otherwise they'd never be able to go to school. Once a player becomes pro, those never get mentioned again. It's generally wouldn't be considered to notable for wiki standards to be included in a standalone honours section (ie. not included in comparable player articles). RedPatch (talk) 14:37, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Ok makes sense, I've removed the honours. Ideally, we should try to expand his senior career with OSU in the League1 Ontario; do you think we can find more material for the prose? Nehme₁₄₉₉ 14:47, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

I can get sources for that. There wouldn't really be much though, because he didn't play much because of his university commitments and that OSU basically was a bottom feeder. I'll get a source for his first match, I know where to find those. Tier 3 Canada is really low, so there's not too much to say. I just threw it in the college section, most articles do that since L1O and USL2 are basically special leagues where US and Canadian players play after the season so they don't lose their amateur status. RedPatch (talk) 14:52, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Perfect. Regarding the cup competitions: I see you put 0 0 for the 2018 League Cup; what cup was that? Also, are the play-offs relative to the upcoming Canadian PL? Nehme₁₄₉₉ 15:18, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

League1 Ontario had a League Cup competition, so that's why I put 0 0 for 2018 (he didn't play in their match). They was no league cup in 2019, so that's why I put the dash. The Playoffs would refer to both L1O and CPL, but OSU didn't make them in either 2018 or 2019 so that's why I put the dashes. Domestic Cup is the Canadian Championship. OSU wasn't eligible because only L1O champion enters, so that's why there is a dash. Valour should probably have 0s since they play in it ever season as a pro team, although it might not happen this year due to COVID, so might need a dash as well. Valour will have a dash for League Cup, since there is none for them, and Playoffs are TBD for them so might be zero or dash depending on if they qualify. Probably can put 0s for Domestic and Playoffs for now, since they are still eligible for both. RedPatch (talk) 15:31, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Gotcha, thanks. Is there a reason why Playoffs are in a separate column, and not under Other (as we would do, for example, for Serie B promotion play-offs, or EFL Championship relegation play-outs). Nehme₁₄₉₉ 15:47, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

In North American leagues, the most important competition is the Playoffs, not the League. You get stars on your jersey for winning the playoffs not the league (they wouldn't even give a trophy for winning the league before, although some leagues eventually started giving one MLS in 1999, L1O in 2019, etc.) So with players who basically only play in North American leagues it merits a column imo, since every league has it (doesn't really make sense to lump in the most important thing in an other column). For example, the 2019 L1O champion was the team that came in 4th. That's why I include it as a column - due to the importance placed on it. To me, Other is best used a catch-all column for a competition that is rare and would only be used in a couple of rows or in only a couple leagues (ie. a Community Shield, Super Cup, promotion playoffs). Mikhael's League Cup row could be transformed into an Other row in my view (he'll likely stay in NA for the rest of his career and never play in another League Cup - L1O was unique in having one). Since the playoffs are in every league in NA, if the player spends their entire career there, there will be playoffs for nearly every row (unless their team is terrible). Playoff stats are a well-tracked stat in NA. Here's an example of a long-tenured player Jonathan Osorio. The MLS stats page highlights the playoffs stats as well. It's just one of those quirks of North American soccer being different. The league season is basically like a long group stage of a tournament, and the playoffs like the knockout round. Players who play mostly in Europe, we end up just leaving it in Other because it's only a couple rows and other Euro based editors tend to remove them, because they don't like that NA is different. It's what happened at Alphonso Davies's old article. As soon as he left MLS, people got rid of the column because they didn't like it (although to be fair his MLS team sucked and only made the playoffs once).RedPatch (talk) 16:57, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for the in-depth explanation! By the way, have you seen Mikhael play yourself? And also, in your opinion, how good/bad is the Canadian PL compared to, say, the MLS (or some league in Europe)? Nehme₁₄₉₉ 22:21, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Mikhael I haven't seen play. CPL is well below the MLS. It's a pretty massive gulf. MLS teams will send their young players who need playing time to the CPL on loan. It's tough for me to compare to Europe because I never really see non top division Europe games. The best comparison I guess would be based on where players come and go from transfer-wise. Germany is about Tier 3. England Tier 4/5. USA Tier 2. Scotland Tier 2. Denmark Tier 2. The players don't make the Canadian national team (occasionally maybe one will get a callup). The league is mostly focused on developing young players (ie. they must play U21 players at minimum of 1500 total minutes in a season, there's one team with an average age of 22, the new development contracts like Mikhael signed). RedPatch (talk) 23:27, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Ok that's good to know that Mikhael should get some playing time. In my opinion, the most likely outcome is that he plays 2-3 seasons in Canada and, if he's good enough, he continues in the MLS. Otherwise, he'll move to the Middle East and take advantage of his Lebanese passport to play as an "Asian slot" player in a Gulf league, such as Qatar. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 23:53, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Nehme1499: He's available as a substitute for today's first game of the season, so he may make his pro debut today. RedPatch (talk) 17:21, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I'll keep an eye out for the match. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 17:50, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

@Nehme1499: He made his debut today RedPatch (talk) 01:12, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Unbelievable. The article was just created... Nehme₁₄₉₉ 01:21, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

James Rowe - Football Manager - Edits

Read article 33 again and you can clearly see it’s the words of a Gloucester fan? The fact your allowing someone who has made silly and childish edits to his wiki previously (calling him a turkey inseminator etc) and have now approved an added article by them by an unofficial news company is ridiculous. Severn Trent is not official and it’s owned by a Gloucester superfan which isn’t hard to figure out and the articles they produced our based on biased opinions and not factual. Rosie0706 (talk) 21:20, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

@Rosie0706: I've swapped the reference out with another one from Derbyshire Times (the same publication which you have added sources from previously) which says the same thing, so there should not be an issue now. Since I'm not from the area, I'm not always aware of the background of certain sources. With that said, I've long been involved in editing this article which has long been the target of disruptive editing from both sides - supporters and opposition. I do not have a side and simply try to maintain a neutral and unbiased article. That requires presenting the full picture which does include both the positive events (such as the best start in clubs history, qualification for promotion playoffs, etc) but also the negative (such as the loss to Christchurch, the loss to Notts County) per WP:BLPBALANCE. As you'll notice, I've tried to incorporate all of the information that have been added, just re-written.

Note that the specific reference you mentioned in your comment on my talk page was never mentioned in your or other users' edit summaries or on the talk page on the article questioning its validity, it was simply removed along with a great deal of other content, including every other reference that included a mention of a loss. That's creating a biased article (on the other side of the spectrum) by removing sourced and verifiable information. While you mentioned a valid issue with regards to that reference, none of the other removed references appear to have any issue of bias. When a significant amount of information is removed without discussion or an edit summary (as was the case), it is essentially viewed as a case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT, and editors typically just revert the changes - which is what I and GGS did thrice, to what was there before. It's not necessarily 'approving' what was there before, but instead is a case of not approving the new changes.

Referring back to the reference in question, which you mentioned was a critical fan-written article, I can see that you added a different fan-written article, which was on the complete other spectrum titled "FAN COLUMN: 'James Rowe is best thing to happen to Chesterfield since Paul Cook' " here. The irony is clear there - removing one biased article only to replace it with an equally biased article from the other perspective. If the issue with "reference 33" was due to lack of neutrality, that reference has the exact same issue. Neutrality and unbiased applies to both sides.

I've replaced the controversial Severn Sports reference with this article from Derbyshire Times. Again to summarize, my only stake in this article is to maintain neutrality and keep it unbiased (which includes both notable victories as well as notable defeats), which is what I believe I have done. RedPatch (talk) 15:04, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Gabriel Bitar

Hey, where did you find his Première Ligue de soccer du Québec stats? Nehme₁₄₉₉ 02:20, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

@Nehme1499: All PLSQ players stats (for Bitar and others) come from here, but direct links don't work once you close the original tab, so it involves a bit of a search. Go to TSI Sports, click "Archive" (or 2021 for current year), click the desired year, then click PLSQ, then pick appropriate division (PLSQ-M), then click on the team. (Note: 2020 doesn't appear for some reason for this method, so to get around that, open the league for 2019, then at the top where it says "Changer Annee" (Change Year) click 2020. RedPatch (talk) 11:43, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. As long as all the information is up to date all is good. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 19:02, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Yep, it's all 100% accurate. Just difficult to properly cite. RedPatch (talk) 20:17, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

2021 CSL

Hey RedPatch, Good to hear from you again. I know I noticed the same thing thanks for making my life easier your edits are always appreciated. I really enjoyed your work and contributions on the Canadian Soccer League (1987–1992) and other related pages. If you need any additional sources for your articles let me know because I have access to multiple archive newspaper sites. Just let me know and thanks again. Shotgun pete (talk) 14:06, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Templates For Discussion - AFL Player Significant Statistics Templates

A new discussion has begun regarding the AFL Player Significant Statistics Templates. Please add your thoughts there. DiamondIIIXX (talk) 00:30, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

RM discussion

Hi. You have filled the RM Discussion with off topic nonsense. Please review other RM discussions to understand how to briefly put forward your point. No one is interested in knowing the deatails of your mistake. If they are, they can read the section above. Your lengthy post will likely annoy everyone, me included. Venkat TL (talk) 17:44, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

A rename request is a perfectly reasonable outcome. Posting a nasty message on my talk page is not needed. Disagreements happen and the key is to be WP:CIVIL when they do occur. I do not believe either Rohit Thakur (politician) or Rohit Thakur (soccer) is a primary topic. If it is indeed primary topic, the community can decide in the rename request, that is why the community is there. I have participated in many RM requests and am very familiar with the process and this is a situation I have seen played out. If anything, given your confidence in your view, you should probably be pleased that a RM request is occurring as it could potentially lead to a preferred outcome for you. RedPatch (talk) 17:58, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

You find my comment nasty, yet you feel it is ok to fill up the RM nomination at Talk:Rohit Thakur (politician)#Requested move 2 November 2021 with insinuations against me and other off topic "info". I cannot force you to shorten it or change your tone. But I am happy that I tried. I still recommend you to check the other Rename nominations on WP:RM. Venkat TL (talk) 18:59, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

What insinuation did I post. A rename request requires an explanation, so I wrote that it was due to the BRD where you created the page and rather than doing a RM request when you saw there was already a page at the title, as is the norm, and instead you just moved it. That's very mild and basically just facts, and much less than your repeated claims that I'm wasting people's time. RedPatch (talk) 19:05, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

A rename request requires an explanation, it should have substance and evidence, not insinuating garbage. Please ask the folks at Talk:RM to review your nomination statement and ask if it is fine. I am not sure who exactly I am dealing with, and I think it is better for me to stop this discussion. There is nothing more for me to say. Venkat TL (talk) 19:15, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

I had to write that to show that I was against the nomination, but was doing it as an attempt to compromise, since you did not want to do a RM. People disagree on wikipedia. When there's disagreements, you ask others. You didn't want to and instead, you repeatedly basically said "I'm right. You're wrong." So I explained you made the change, I reverted, this RM is to ask others. In my very first message, I said a RM would be a good way to solve it. Could've ended there, so I made it as an attempt at good faith compromise. You're the one who keeps continuing this discussion - there was no need to bring this to my talk page, when there was already a discussion at the page. Just the RM run its course. RedPatch (talk) 19:24, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

This was absolutely necessary to bring to your user talk page, because you have repeatedly referred to me in your nomination statement, when there was absolutely no need to do that. On the article talk page, talk about the subject of the article, not about editors. That is basic etiquette that you clearly lack. Since I had to object to you referring to my username, the only expected place for me to do that is on your userpage. And you are not the first person to start an RM with an opposing view. Just go and take a look at other ongoing RM discussions. Venkat TL (talk) 05:20, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

All I did was give the background information, I don't think there was anything discriminatory there, but I have edited it a bit for you, since you do agree. If it's such as issue for you take it to ANI. RedPatch (talk) 12:39, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

FYI, that page says on top.

Before posting a grievance about a user on this (ANI) page:

• Consider first discussing the issue on the user's talk page Venkat TL (talk) 12:50, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Although we were already having a discussion on the article talk page, so it could've continued there instead of moving to a new talk page. RedPatch (talk) 20:59, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

As another user (Joseph2302) mentioned who opposed the move as well, you then began to complain on their talk page as well. Seems this is more of a personal WP:ILIKEIT view than anything. RedPatch (talk) 02:00, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Copy edit

Hi RedPatch, Giuliano Maiorana does need copy editing, its main issue is repetition. E.g. it's mentioned twice that he's English-born of Italian parents, first in the lead, then again in the very next sentance at the start of the career section. "1989" and "reserve(s)" are overused in the Manchester United section, etc. 22:54, 12 December 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pingualuit (talk • contribs)

@Pingualuit:. There was quite a bit of discussion about this article recently at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football/Archive_148#Giuliano_Maiorana. The consensus was that since the lead is a summary of the article, it didn't count as repetition, since the English-born only appears once in the article proper (i.e. many articles will state the person in an XYZian person in the lead, then in the early life section will say person was born in XYZ). I agree that the word reserve might be overused, I'll make a small edit, but overall I think the article is fine and several editors were involved in it to reach its current state. The 1989s are accompanied by months, outlining important dates, so I think those are okay RedPatch (talk) 01:20, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for replying, because the last sentence ended with "1989", might starting with "near the end of that year" or something similar be better, if the exact date he went to reserves is not retrievable?
I know the lead's a summary, but usually with good articles there's a lot more writting, one sentence starts with "born in England to Italian parents", then so does the next.
I still think a copy edit would do the page good, I've only now noticed at the end of the Man Utd section, "he was finally given allowed to leave". Pingualuit (talk) 10:28, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

I'll give it another once over and try to fix it. I think I had taken a few cracks at it that while proofreading I ended up reading "what I wanted it to say" rather than 'what it actually said" if that makes sense. I've been away from wiki for a couple days, so just saw this now. RedPatch (talk) 11:37, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

WPSL Canada

Hey mate, I'm looking to get the article on the proposed WPSL Canada started this weekend — likely just a sandbox in my user space. Any thoughts on naming of the article and initial content? Probably will be similar to your initial L1BC article.
Zadora13 (talk) 18:11, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Hey there. I would just call it WPSL Canada. Can always rename it if it gets a different name. I made the League1 BC article in Draft space first instead of my userspace, so that if others tried to make it, they would get a notification that it already has a draft (but they won't if it's in userspace). As for initial content, I would just say whatever you can find. I think I put anything I could find in my initial draft, just because sources were initially few and far between (since I created the original draft well before their initial launch). RedPatch (talk) 22:51, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Vashon Neufville

You updated it so that the league figure was lower than the total figure?! Also unsure why you removed the accessdate from the SW ref. GiantSnowman 16:01, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Oh, that was just a typo I missed from editing multiple lines, I had fixed all the other totals. I missed one, since I was updating every Atletico player's stats. I feel like you could've just fixed it and changed the 8 to a 13, as opposed to doing a full revert then re-adding it all again, since it was obviously a typo. Reverting seemed uncessessary to me, since reverting implies that I did something wrong on purpose. WP:FIXFIRST is the way to go in my view. I tend to not use access dates for things that will continually be updated like stats that are constantly updated. I see it all the time where stats for 2021 will have "Access dates of 2018". Since I regularly just update the stats and don't always go back to fix the old references, I prefer to just leave no access date. Maybe not the best, but still better than leaving an incorrect old access date. RedPatch (talk) 16:14, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Anyways, seems like it was just a minor misunderstanding due to a typo. Just wanted to clarify as I was confused by the revert. Happy New Year! RedPatch (talk) 16:41, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Yankee Stadium

Thanks for correcting that - I missed the beginning of the broadcast; and it looked like they were playing on a baseball diamond; so I just assumed. My gosh, what is it with that team and playing on baseball diamonds! Nfitz (talk) 05:11, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

2017 L1O cup

Hey, can you access these links (ProStars FC 3–4 OSU, OSU 1–3 Durham United FA)? We don't know how many L1O cup matches Gabriel Bitar has played. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 11:46, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

OK nvm, I was able to access them via web.archive.org. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 11:48, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I can't access them, but thanks for letting me know they're available on archive.org. There's a few other players I've never filled in those stats for because I couldn't access them. RedPatch (talk) 12:06, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
	Thank you so much for providing Bath City FC with an SVG logo! Joseph1891 (talk) 01:09, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Another for luck Joseph1891 (talk) 01:17, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Aboubacar Sissoko

Hello! Your submission of Aboubacar Sissoko at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Cielquiparle (talk) 11:25, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Svyatik Artemenko has been accepted

Svyatik Artemenko, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

_Signed, Pichemist ^{( Contribs | Talk )} 20:39, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

short description is misplaced

short description must be updated on top of article. see layout. visually it does not change anything, however it plays an important role in search results. your edit, short description is not on top of article. placement info Wikipedia:Short_description#Placement. thank u. <_> jindam, vani (talk) 14:51, 14 January 2023 (UTC)