Staphylococcus

Please click here to leave me a new message.

Field hockey

Your edit was generally very good, whole thing had got very bogged down, and needed a complete re-vamp. However, in my view you made some factual errors (or possibly just over-simplifications, or used too local a viewpoint), so I've straightened those out, and generally converted yards to metres as this is what the rulebook now uses and in some cases this actually makes a difference 5m is actually further than 5 yards for example.

I also noticed that on this page your leave a message link was actually pointing to User talk:AYArktos, rather than this page, so I've straightened that out too. Anway, feel free to shoot my changes down. David Underdown 16:28, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks David, I think "all of the above" would apply (factual errors etc) - I genuinely did think that PS subs were banned though... should read the rule book more often I guess ;) (and go to bed as well - its 0230 here !!!) Must be getting tired I think... Thanks a lot for proof reading that for me, I hope the changes I've made will be (generally) appreciated as it did look very dysfunctional when I came across it.

Edit: also with the drop off procedure - we've used that at domestic levels in Australia (at least that I've seen) - my teams don't play in many finals unfortunately.... ;)

Cheers, Staphylococcus 16:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

As I said on the whole your changes were extrememly necessary, but I'm an umpire so being a pedant comes with the territory. I assumed you did have experience of that particular tie-break mechanism being used, which is why i left it as an alternative, but international matches (and domestic competitions here in England) use "straight" golden goal - for example at the Commonwealth Games at Melbourne England men lost the semi (or was it the bronze medal match, I forget) to Pakistan on Golden Goal after about 2 minutes of extra-time. David Underdown 08:44, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Notability of Sprint Music

A tag has been placed on Sprint Music requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Rockfang (talk) 05:46, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Australian feral camel

Gday, i've tagged Australian feral camel (the article, not the animal itself) for copyvio. You seem to have viewed and compared one of the two sources with the wikipedia article, but that source - a deh.org.au URL - is no longer online. You may want to comment to help whoever will try to clean up at Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2011_July_29 or at Talk:Australian feral camel. See Template:copyvio and Wikipedia:CP#Instructions for instructions on tagging "complicated" copyvio's. Boud (talk) 00:19, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)