User talk:Stevie fae Scotland/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Debut of National Teams

I'm picking up WP:OWN issues here. Why is it so important that you police that article? The Debut of National Teams section, which I inserted over a decade ago on the original page, surely doesn't need sources when it summarises information which is self evidently true? doktorb _words^deeds 16:15, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Doktorbuk Thanks for contacting me with your concerns. A table like that, if unsourced, is original research. It was also brought up in the deletion discussion as a WP:NOTSTATS violation. If it wasn't a violation of NOTSTATS, I would've left it up there with a citation needed tag like a lot of the other unsourced stats. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information and the article, as it was a couple of weeks ago prior to the discussion, had far too many needless and pointless statistics. The information in the Debut of National Teams section is better covered in the History of the FIFA World Cup article.

Ps- I don't own the article, it's not even on my watchlist. I've just offered a hand in improving it since the discussion was brought forward. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 16:42, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Fiji national soccer team

Due to Australian influence, soccer is the common term in Fiji. In fact, the Fijian name for the sport is "soka". So, I think it should be moved. Thiscouldbeauser (talk) 08:02, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Thiscouldbeauser I would disagree. I looked it up after you moved the page as I was uncertain but the Fiji Times uses football and not soccer which is why I reverted the page move. If you have evidence of reliable English-language sources from Fiji which use soccer rather than football, please do bring forward a move request so consensus can be determined. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 14:05, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Council wards

Hi mate, obviously no objection to your edits on South Lanarkshire ward articles but just to give you a heads up of the intention for them to be merged at some point into one overview for each Council per Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom/Archive 15#Ward articles and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dundee City Council wards - and the preference was to do so without the election results displayed (transcluded or otherwise) and just link instead. A waste of a bit of time I'd spent doing that coding for other elections and its now pointless, but hey ho. So that's the reason they hadn't been fixed for 2022 in SLC, and would not want you to waste too much of your time with the same issue. PS if you feel like doing any of the merges, please go ahead, 2 down and 30 to go as things stand - I am quite happy with the look of Wards of Renfrewshire for a starting point but the layout isn't set in stone. Crowsus (talk) 16:40, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Crowsus Thanks for pointing that out. I did not know about the Ward articles discussion, I had seen the Dundee one but my recollection was more that people had just gathered all the election results together and not done any work expanding it beyond that so it was rightly merged. Ngl, slightly disappointed but the way you've got Renfrewshire looking is a very good start for a merged article. I had envisaged expanding some of the non-merged stubs to look more like Ballochmyle (ward) (although, it probably needs a better lead). I created some older ones at the weekend and thought I'd wait and test the waters before doing any others in case I would be wasting time so it may be that they get merged as well. For some, it might be worth creating a series of articles as the changes in 2017 were very minor for some councils but others seem completely different. The only problem with that though is you lose how things changed over time if council x has just one or two wards that were in use for the full duration. We'll see how it goes anyway. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 16:55, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Ouch, yeah I can see that you have spent a fair bit of time on these recently, if I had noticed I would have mentioned to you earlier.

With the opinions tending to be against standalone articles for the multi-member wards, it seems unlikely there would be much support for the older, smaller, ones, in part because in theory it would open the door to the creation of ~1200 for that era, without bringing SIGCOV into it. In the case of the Ayrshire ones dating back to the 70s there is more history and potentially more points of interest, but then again it's the pre-internet era so harder to come by. And to be honest, most of the interesting stuff being reported on a village ward level would probably be seen by more readers if placed in the article for the village itself.

Having said that, it was a fairly small group of editors who decided on the merge-in thing, nothing is so feel free to scout around for alternative opinions. I certainly won't be tagging, merging or otherwise fiddling with the ones you've already done recently. An option going forward might be something like 'Cumnock and Doon Valley' etc and 'Wards of East Ayrshire (1995-2007)' which would retain most of the information that you have spent time putting together, while also complying with what seems to be the consensus about overviews by council. You can see someone has done similar years back at Category:Highland council wards, albeit there is a bit of overkill there IMO with basically election-by-election summary articles, as well as the recent individual articles on the current wards which will probably be merged back in at some point.

Having said that, it was a fairly small group of participants in the discussions above and nothing is set in stone so might be worth chasing up alternative opinions on the topic. I certainly won't be tagging, merging or otherwise fiddling with the ones you've put up recently, although it does strike me that 'Wards of Cumnock and Doon Valley' etc and 'Wards of East Ayrshire (1995-2007)' could be an option going forward to retain most of the stuff you've taken the time to put together while keeping it contained in an overview as seems to be the preferred option. Someone has done something similar with Highlands (Category:Highland council wards) although there are also recent individual articles for the current wards which will probably be merged back in at some point. Crowsus (talk) 02:12, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Crowsus It could be worse, I knew when I started that AfD was a possibility because I just wasn't sure. Tbf, I think it might be easier to find SIGCOV of the older wards in newspaper archives than it will be for the currents wards. Not that local papers have ever been well staffed but they had more reporters 20+ years ago than they do now. With just one or two to a paper now it's a lot more difficult to build up the relationships with local councillors so you don't see as many stories about individual wards.

It might not be a bad thing if we end up with a hybrid solution where some council areas have articles on individual wards and others have merged articles. I like that people want to be consistent but that doesn't mean everything has to be identical. Especially if editors have a particular area of interest and spend more time fleshing out some council areas and not all of them.

On the other hand, the unnamed wards in Kilmarnock and Loudoun are an absolute nightmare. I have good sources for post 1984 wards and the 1974 wards that were created from former burghs but I honestly have no idea what the boundaries for most of the Kilmarnock ones were for 1974–1984. The directive that created them just uses former electoral divisions and polling districts but gives no indication what bit of Kilmarnock they cover (or a map of what they were made from or what they became) so a merged article for them might not be a bad thing haha. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 09:42, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Stevie fae Scotland. Thank you for your work on Catrine, Sorn and North Auchinleck (ward). User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for creating the article! Keep writing!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 02:26, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Stevie fae Scotland. Thank you for your work on Ochiltree, Skares, Netherthird and Craigens (ward). User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article! Hopefully you will write more!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 15:25, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Destub Request

I would appreciate if you could destub The Suffragette Oak, an article on a tree in Scotland. I would do it myself, but I am not very good at finding sources. QuicoleJR (talk) 00:48, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

QuicoleJR Thanks for asking. I've looked at it and it's not a stub, there are more than 400 words of prose so it's definitely a start class article. Unfortunately, it's not a subject I know a lot about so I wouldn't know where to look for sources either or be able to expand it further. Thanks for bringing it up though. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 13:58, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 South Lanarkshire Council election

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2022 South Lanarkshire Council election 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Shawn Teller -- Shawn Teller (talk) 02:42, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Clydesdale East (ward), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Biggar.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2023–24 UEFA Europa Conference League

Sorry, I don't really understand whether your reply agrees or disagrees with me. Mwiqdoh (talk) 11:02, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

No worries, I agree the note is not needed. I meant that the empty cup winners space implies that any team in the cup can fill that space, Lillestrom included, so we don't need to restate that. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 11:18, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

ChatGPT issue with recent GAN

Hi Stevie, a recent GAN of yours, 2022 South Lanarkshire Council election, was reviewed by a sockpuppet, likely using ChatGPT. Unfortunately, ChatGPT is not good at this job, and these reviews have been removed. Your nomination has been returned to the GAN queue at the original nomination date. No action is needed on your end, aside from the usual GAN process! Apologies for any inconvenience. Best, CMD (talk) 01:31, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for letting me know. I'm really frustrated at this because I'd used a lot of the feedback I had with a previous GA for the same elections in another part of Scotland to get it at least close to GA standard so I wasn't surprised when it passed relatively easily. Hopefully someone else can review it soon. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 07:54, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Heart of Midlothian F.C. 0–2 Kilmarnock F.C. (1965)

Hello, Stevie fae Scotland. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Heart of Midlothian F.C. 0–2 Kilmarnock F.C.".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:38, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: 2023–24 UEFA Champions League qualifying phase and play-off round has been accepted

2023–24 UEFA Champions League qualifying phase and play-off round, 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.

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!

UtherSRG (talk) 15:07, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

2023–24 UEFA Europa Conference League

"they have qualified due to their league position." Well no they have not because 3rd place does not even qualify to the Conference League until Lincoln Red Imps win the cup, so therefore them being in 3rd place means nothing until the Cup has been played. Mwiqdoh (talk) 20:23, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for bringing this up here. The team which will occupy the cup winner's berth hasn't been decided yet because the cup isn't over. The only team that gets anything from the cup is the cup winner and if they have already qualified, the cup winner's berth is passed onto the highest-placed team from the league. Bruno's Magpies have qualified as the two cup finalists will finish in the top three of the league so it is impossible for third in the league not to qualify. As a result, it's their league position which has determined their qualification at this stage. They aren't guaranteed anything for the cup so it would be wrong to rank them above Europa. I'm also fairly certain it has been done this way in previous seasons, particularly for intra-year leagues which have an inter-year cup competition. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 20:45, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Guam national team results

Hello, could you please collaborate with me to rebuild the page table Guam national football team results? I have already started this reconstruction, but I need you to make this reconstruction quick. YangerAAS (talk) 00:36, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Hey, sorry for the late reply. That's a good start. If I get a chance, I'll see what I can do. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 21:05, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

2023–24 UEFA Europa League qualifying phase and play-off round moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, 2023–24 UEFA Europa League qualifying phase and play-off round, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 09:50, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

@Onel5969: Hey, just so I can understand the process here. You've reviewed an article in *exactly* the same condition as this one but not drafitified it so I'm confused. Not contesting the primary sources tag but you can also go ahead and remove the notability tag given the same article exists for every previous edition of the competition. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 10:00, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Which other article are you speaking about? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:02, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

My apologies, I have confused two articles with similar titles. It would appear the reviewers were different. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 10:07, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 South Lanarkshire Council election

The article 2022 South Lanarkshire Council election you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2022 South Lanarkshire Council election for comments about the article, and Talk:2022 South Lanarkshire Council election/GA1 for the nomination. 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Shawn Teller -- Shawn Teller (talk) 02:02, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Paraguay national football team results (1980–1999)

Hello, Stevie fae Scotland. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Paraguay national football team results (1980–1999), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:04, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 North Ayrshire Council election

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2022 North Ayrshire Council election 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Asheiou -- Asheiou (talk) 20:41, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

@Asheiou: Thanks, much appreciated. Will add the review page to my watchlist so I can keep up with it. Thought I should let you know as well, it's based on a current GA (2022 East Ayrshire Council election). Obviously, that doesn't mean it's definitely ready and any feedback will be used to improve the other article as well. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 20:45, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll definitely give it a good look through. I see you have one for North Ayrshire too that I can probably have a look at afterwards if no-one snaps it up!

-ASHEIOU (THEY/THEM • TALK) 21:02, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 North Ayrshire Council election

The article 2022 North Ayrshire Council election you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2022 North Ayrshire Council election for comments about the article, and Talk:2022 North Ayrshire Council election/GA1 for the nomination. 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Asheiou -- Asheiou (talk) 23:02, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 South Ayrshire Council election

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2022 South Ayrshire Council election 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Asheiou -- Asheiou (talk) 23:04, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 South Ayrshire Council election

The article 2022 South Ayrshire Council election you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2022 South Ayrshire Council election for comments about the article, and Talk:2022 South Ayrshire Council election/GA1 for the nomination. 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Asheiou -- Asheiou (talk) 23:21, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

		The Good Article Barnstar
		For your work on the Ayrshire Councils elections. -ASHEIOU (THEY/THEM • TALK) 00:20, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

East Kilbride West by-election

Hello, I am abstaining from further edits in the relevant section due to being a candidate, so just to let you know the Statement of Persons Nominated has now been published: https://www.southlanarkshire.gov.uk/info/200237/elections/2151/ward_9_-_east_kilbride_west_by-election_-_thursday_6_july_2023/4

Kind regards! KristoferKeane (talk) 20:17, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

No worries, thank you for letting me know. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 11:03, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Paraguay national football team results (1980–1999)

Hello, Stevie fae Scotland. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Paraguay national football team results".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:28, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:List of Scottish Cup and Scottish Qualifying Cup entrants

Hello, Stevie fae Scotland. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:List of Scottish Cup and Scottish Qualifying Cup entrants, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:04, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:2023 SAFF GrA.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:2023 SAFF GrA.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:01, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 South Lanarkshire Council election

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2022 South Lanarkshire Council election 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Grnrchst -- Grnrchst (talk) 11:03, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 South Lanarkshire Council election

The article 2022 South Lanarkshire Council election you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2022 South Lanarkshire Council election for comments about the article, and Talk:2022 South Lanarkshire Council election/GA1 for the nomination. 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Grnrchst -- Grnrchst (talk) 13:41, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 Aberdeen City Council election

The article 2022 Aberdeen City Council election 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:2022 Aberdeen City Council election and Talk:2022 Aberdeen City Council election/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 04:42, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for participating in the August 2023 GAN backlog drive

		The Minor Barnstar
		We really appreciate your efforts to review GANs. During the drive, the backlog of unreviewed nominations reduced by 440 articles, an astonishing 69 percent.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:06, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Edit Warring at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Club seasons

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. PicturePerfect666 (talk) 19:52, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Just because something exists on Wikipedia doesn't mean it should. It also clearly states at the top of the style guide Please discuss any changes on the talk page before editing this page. The bold addition I reverted should be discussed before being re-added based on wider community consensus so I would request that the page be restored to before the dispute arose. However, I accept the warning and will learn from it. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 20:07, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

You are clearly going over and over to engage in an edit war, you did so in 2021 and are doing so again in 2023. Do not engage in an Edit War.

Please also do not claim a consensus exists through discussions where the links to discussions you have provided do no such thing.

Please cease your current behaviour PicturePerfect666 (talk) 20:22, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, but I haven't touched the page since your warning so I don't understand that. I accept what you have said and I will not be editing it. If you don't understand what I've said then please frame it differently and I'll happily answer. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 20:30, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

You didn't just revert myself you reverted a second user.

The diffs are as follows:

1. [1]
2. [2]
3. [3]
4. [4]

PicturePerfect666 (talk) 20:35, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Okay, I understand you now. I hadn't realised you were involved when I first replied. I would welcome you bringing forward your views in the discussion started by Govvy at WT:FOOTY. I would also appreciate it if you could explain how the discussions I have linked don't show consensus against the footballbox. I am listening and hopeful this can be resolved with wider community input. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 20:43, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Simply having a discussion does not mean a consensus is formed, both end with no consensus either way. There is also clear consensus by use when it comes to the templates. I imagine few people, is any, check the footy wikiproject before simply picking up the templates and using them. PicturePerfect666 (talk) 20:54, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

I fully agree. Editor's, in good faith, see something on one Wikipedia article and then edit another article in a similar manner. I know I've done it but that doesn't mean it's correct, no matter how many pages it's on. I would appreciate it if you could elaborate about those discussions. I understand what you're saying about simply having a discussion but my reading of them is different and no other editor has disputed it when I have a pointed out those discussions before (and I have done this a few times). Thank you also for taking the time to engage in this discussion, it can happen on Wiki that editors don't engage like this when similar disputes arise so I do appreciate it. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 21:06, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

In short, the football Wikiproject can talk as much as it wants over its MOS. New and casual Wikipedia users either seemingly don't know or don't care about the MOS devised by the Wikiproject. They use the template regardless. This is a clear cut case of consensus by use. No amount of internal Wikiproject chat is going to change that and nor is any amount of change to the Wikiproject devised MOS. PicturePerfect666 (talk) 21:18, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Notice of Disupute resolution

This is a formal notice of a dispute you are involved in being listed for dispute resolution. The discussion to the dispute resolution can be found here on the dispute resolution notice board PicturePerfect666 (talk) 22:02, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

The to do list on your username page.

So this is about trying to make all of the national team pages in table form instead of being in the footballbox form. Because I might be able to assist with part of that if you want? HawkAussie (talk) 23:08, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

It is, yeah, and that would be greatly appreciated. What were you thinking? Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 06:00, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

@HawkAussie: Hey, I take it you didn't see this. Any help is much appreciated. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 16:59, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

@Stevie fae Scotland What I was thinking was working on some of the smaller nations first and then our work our way up until the bigger nations. The first nation to probably work on would be Mongolia. HawkAussie (talk) 10:04, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

@HawkAussie: Yeah, that sounds like a good idea. It would make a lot of headway as it would get more countries fully completed but without taking too many matches. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 12:36, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

@Stevie fae Scotland: I have just finished off the Mongolia page and just wondering if I missed anything before going to the next page? Also Northern Marina Islands are also complete but you haven't marked that off. HawkAussie (talk) 12:57, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

@HawkAussie: Excellent, thank you for letting me know - and great work on the Mongolia list. I managed to get Faroe Islands from 1988 to 2020 done quite easily as it was only changed to footballboxes a couple of years ago. I just found the last good revision of the list and added the remaining results. I shall tick all those off. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 14:59, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

@HawkAussie: I don't know if this will be of interest or not but I thought I'd let you know anyway. You can use {{Football result list}} for these articles. It produces the exact same table from parameters that are similar to the footballbox. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 09:15, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

@Stevie fae Scotland That might make a lot easier to convert these football boxes to the football result list. HawkAussie (talk) 09:57, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

National football team / men's national football team

Hi there... given the "no consensus" result with the RM at Talk:Afghanistan national football team, I'm not sure how or whether you want to test the waters for anything else... Maybe a smaller RM with just one or a few teams in it, those where there's a clearly prominent women's team to contend with, e.g. England national football team or Spain national football team? I suppose in retrospect I should have pruned the list of those I included in the last RM to not include those where a women's team doesn't even exist, but I don't think the appetite was there for a wholesale mass move anyway...

I'm actually undecided or neutral on where I stand on the issue myself, hence why I didn't even vote in the last discussion - I can certainly see the case for moving, it does seem more and more sources are making that distinction now, but on the other hand many of the men's teams are still likely to be WP:PRIMARYTOPIC by the usual standards. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 12:08, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

@Amakuru: Hey, thanks for asking. I see another editor has jumped the gun and nominated every article without a women's team. My thinking was to leave it for wee while and let the dust settle (maybe two or three weeks) and then think about revisiting it. Your suggesting about more prominent women's teams I think is a good idea so that might be where to start. I think it should be one at a time now as the mass move didn't really result in any progress either way (I think the closer was spot on with their reasoning for the close) so that would at least allow consensus to be established (either in favour or against moving) on a country-by-country basis.

My reasoning in favour of moving is that increasingly, national teams are referred to as just Country Name and context provides clarity as to whether it is the men or women. As a result, the most natural form of disambiguation is the use of men's/women's. I understand though that there are Wikipedia policies which favour both moving and not moving so it's important we discuss this properly. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 15:20, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Addition of (a.e.t.)

Good evening, I just have one question, how can I add "(a.e.t.)" in the national team results tables to represent a match ending in extra time? YangerAAS (talk) 23:17, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@YangerAAS: Hey, there are a couple of ways to do this. The most basic is to use the template {{aet}} and it will display as (a.e.t.). You can also add |aet=yes to some existing templates and it will automatically display for you. Hope that helps. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 10:00, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 Aberdeen City Council election

The article 2022 Aberdeen City Council election you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2022 Aberdeen City Council election for comments about the article, and Talk:2022 Aberdeen City Council election/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", 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 at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 09:00, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Results table: Taiwan

Hello, seeing that you have reformed the results table for San Marino, I need your support for the production of the page Taiwan national football team results (1954–1979), and perhaps the reform of the page Chinese Taipei national football team results. Are you able to provide such support? (No problem if you want to use another table model) YangerAAS (talk) 18:58, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Good work with the Taiwan page btw, it looks in decent shape. I'll have a look at some point this week, possibly later tonight as well but I don't know if I'll get the time. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 21:03, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:List of Scottish Cup and Scottish Qualifying Cup entrants

Hello, Stevie fae Scotland. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "List of Scottish Cup and Scottish Qualifying Cup entrants".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:08, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Hillhouse (ward) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hillhouse (ward) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hillhouse (ward) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Crowsus (talk) 07:29, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Stevie fae Scotland. Thank you for your work on 1984 East Kilbride District Council election. SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hello my friend! Good day to you. Thanks for creating the article, I have marked it as reviewed. Have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 05:50, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Your thank on my 2022 Clackmannanshire Council election edit

Hello, Stevie! You thanked me on my 2022 Clackmannanshire Council election edit at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2022_Clackmannanshire_Council_election&oldid=prev&diff=1198519541 - however, such small edits are considered cosmetic edits and are not encouraged if they are done en masse, see the discussion at User_talk:Maxim_Masiutin#CiteByBot on my Talk page - you can commend there if you wish, for example, if you have on opinion on whether all "cite" templates should be lowercase or, vice versa, they should start with an uppercase letter {{Cite.... Anyway, thank you for your appreciation, this is very important for me, and it is a big pleasure for me when people thank me for my edits.

Thank you again! If you in the future will like my edits, please don't hesitate to thank as you did, or, if you didn't like them, please also let me know, so I knew that the edits are constructive. Maxim Masiutin (talk) 19:05, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 Aberdeenshire Council election

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2022 Aberdeenshire Council election 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of The C of E -- The C of E (talk) 18:30, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 Angus Council election

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2022 Angus Council election 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 23:43, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 Angus Council election

The article 2022 Angus Council election 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:2022 Angus Council election and Talk:2022 Angus Council election/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 00:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 Aberdeenshire Council election

The article 2022 Aberdeenshire Council election 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:2022 Aberdeenshire Council election and Talk:2022 Aberdeenshire Council election/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of The C of E -- The C of E (talk) 07:41, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 Argyll and Bute Council election

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2022 Argyll and Bute Council election 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Ganesha811 -- Ganesha811 (talk) 23:23, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 Clackmannanshire Council election

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2022 Clackmannanshire Council election 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Ganesha811 -- Ganesha811 (talk) 23:24, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 Glasgow City Council election

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2022 Glasgow City Council election 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of DimensionalFusion -- DimensionalFusion (talk) 10:21, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

DYK for 2022 Glasgow City Council election

On 14 April 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2022 Glasgow City Council election, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 2024 Hillhead by-election was the first by-election won by the Scottish Green Party? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2022 Glasgow City Council election. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2022 Glasgow City Council election), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

Z1720 (talk) 12:03, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 Angus Council election

The article 2022 Angus Council election you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2022 Angus Council election for comments about the article, and Talk:2022 Angus Council election/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 17:24, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 Aberdeenshire Council election

The article 2022 Aberdeenshire Council election you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2022 Aberdeenshire Council election for comments about the article, and Talk:2022 Aberdeenshire Council election/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of The C of E -- The C of E (talk) 12:06, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 Clackmannanshire Council election

The article 2022 Clackmannanshire Council election you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2022 Clackmannanshire Council election for comments about the article, and Talk:2022 Clackmannanshire Council election/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ganesha811 -- Ganesha811 (talk) 21:44, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 Argyll and Bute Council election

The article 2022 Argyll and Bute Council election you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2022 Argyll and Bute Council election for comments about the article, and Talk:2022 Argyll and Bute Council election/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ganesha811 -- Ganesha811 (talk) 21:45, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Argentina vs Brazil football rivalry

Hello! I´am tottaly agree with you about the unreliability of the source of Elo Ratings, as you said here [5]. Bless you that you said!!! Please, tell this to the user Svartner that it seems it has more value than (for example) a FIFA source or an AFA (Argentine Football Association) for him... Look, there is a dispute with this user in the article Argentina-Brazil football rivalry and all the related articles because of the count of the official matches of the rivalry. There are 6 controversial games that many sources count them as official games, many others do not count as official, and many others count some of them and do not count others. These are those controversial games:

• 1920 (Oct.6): Argentina 3 Brazil 1: many sources say it was not a “Class A match”. It was played with 8 players each [6] [7]

• 1922 (Oct.22): Brazil 2 Argentina 1: many sources say it was not a “Class A match". Brazil played with their B team, because the A team played the same day the 1922 Copa America final vs. Paraguay) [8] FIFA Source. To see the complete list of matches, please click in "Advanced search" and then in "Show all matches". AFA´s source El Gráfico magazine´s source. None of them includes this match.

• 1923 (Dec.2): Argentina 0 Brazil 2 (Copa Confraternidad): many sources say it was not a “Class A match”. Argentina didn´t play with its “A” team because they played in the same day the decisive game against Uruguay in the 1923 Copa America. [9] FIFA Source. To see the complete list of matches, please click in "Advanced search" and then in "Show all matches". AFA´s source El Gráfico magazine´s source. None of them includes this match.

• 1956 (Dec.5): Brazil 1 Argentina 2 (Copa Colombo). Many sources say it was not a “Class A match”. Brazil didn´t play with its first team. It was a Guanabara´s Selection. [10] [11] [12] But... The same sources that Svartner uses to say there would be a few matches apparently official that won Brazil, this sources (THE SAME: rsssf.com, 11v11, Elo ratings) ALSO say there are a few matches won by Argentina that would be official too, but HE doesn´t count those matches (won by Argentina) only because he wants; simple...Those disputed games won by Brazil, yes, they are right for him, but when THE SAME sources he uses for those games say that the disputed games won by Argentina are official he says "nooooo, unofficial"... Double standard... Look [13] (figures the 1920 and 1956 match) [14] (figures the 1920 and 1956 match) [15] (figures the 1956 match), [16] (figures the 1920 and 1956 match)... The SAME sources he uses for one thing, he doesn´t use for another... Again: double standard...

• 1968 (August 7): Brazil 4 Argentina 1. Many sources say it was not a “Class A match”. Brazil presented a Guanabara´s State Selection (a provincial team of Rio de Janeiro). [17] [18] [19]

• 1968 (August 11): Brazil 3 Argentina 2. Many sources say it was not a “Class A match”. Brazil presented a Minas Gerais Selection.[20] [21] [22]

The naked truth is that those 6 matches (4 won by BRA and 2 won by ARG) are unofficial according to FIFA. This user disrespects the FIFA´s source I gave with the complete list of official matches and I do not see these 6 matches in the FIFA´s source with the complete list of games; no 1920, no 1922, no 1923, no 1956, no 1968 (the two games)!!! There is notihing in football more official than FIFA, and this source and many others says clarely that 1920, 1922, 1923, 1956, and the two matches of 1968 were unofficial!!! Look, the source from FIFA: FIFA official´s page (archive). Argentina vs. Brazil head to head. February 2013. This FIFA´s source is from Feb. 2013. After that date, they played 10 times, with 4 wins for Argentina, 4 wins for Brazil and 2 ties. To see the complete list of matches according to this FIFA´s source, please click in "Advanced search", and then in "Show all matches". Moreover, yesterday he had the nerve to accuse me to be "disruptive" and to try to impose WP:POV [23]. So I´am the "disruptive" and want to impose WP:POV?

The only sources he accepts are those that "beneficiates" Brazil! I tried to discuss lot of times and he refused [24] [25]. I also took this issue to the Football Wikiproyect but nobody came to participate. [26]. I can´t do anything else... I think the most important and official source in football that we can have is FIFA... No other site or association can be above FIFA, and the only source of FIFA that have the complete list of matches is the one I put above

Please, see the articles Argentina national football team results (1920–1939) (there are more unofficial matches according to FIFA, Oct. 1922 and Dec. 1923 matches against Brazil), Argentina national football team results (1940–1959) (there is one unofficial match according to FIFA, Dec. 1956 match against Brazil), Argentina national football team results (1960–1979) (there are 2 unofficial matches according to FIFA, Aug. 7 and 11 1968 against Brazil)... Also here, in Argentina national football team results (unofficial matches), we have to add the unofficial matches of 1920, 1922, and 1923... Here, in Brazil national football team results (unofficial matches) we have to add the 1920, 1922, 1923 and 1956 matches... Here, in Brazil national football team records and statistics we should have to correct the numbers, according to FIFA´s source (I think).

So I ask you "almost on my knees": can you participate in the discussion of this 6 matches in the talk page of Argentina-Brazil football rivalry here [27], please???.

Sorry for the length of this, but it´s a very difficult situation. Regards, Raúl Quintana Tarufetti (talk) 22:12, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Sorry for the delayed reply. I'm honestly not sure what exactly it should be. Having put the results articles for Argentina and Brail together, I was happy with how they were but the arguments presented are interesting. I see there's a discussion at WP:FOOTY so hopefully that resolves the situation. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 11:00, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in WP:GARC

Hello Stevie fae Scotland, I noticed you have an article listed at WP:GAN. I recently started a project, Good Article Review Circles, and thought you might be interested. This initiative helps articles get reviewed more quickly through collaborative efforts. By joining, you'll review others' articles and get your own reviewed in return. Check out the page for more details! GMH Melbourne (talk) 09:31, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 Glasgow City Council election

The article 2022 Glasgow City Council election you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2022 Glasgow City Council election for comments about the article, and Talk:2022 Glasgow City Council election/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of DimensionalFusion -- DimensionalFusion (talk) 08:23, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:History of Kilmarnock F.C.

Hello, Stevie fae Scotland. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:History of Kilmarnock F.C., a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:05, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 City of Edinburgh Council election

The article 2022 City of Edinburgh Council election you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2022 City of Edinburgh Council election for comments about the article, and Talk:2022 City of Edinburgh Council election/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Arotparaarms -- Arotparaarms (talk) 18:45, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 North Lanarkshire Council election

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2022 North Lanarkshire Council election 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Adabow -- Adabow (talk) 07:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 North Lanarkshire Council election

The article 2022 North Lanarkshire Council election 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:2022 North Lanarkshire Council election and Talk:2022 North Lanarkshire Council election/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Adabow -- Adabow (talk) 09:02, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

WP:GARC: Invitation to review Melania Trump

Hello Stevie fae Scotland, You have been paired at good article review circles to review Melania Trump. At the same time, another user will be reviewing the article you nominated. Please wait 24 hours or until all users have accepted their nomination before starting your review in case a user in your circle decides to decline their invite.

To accept or decline this invitation to review the article, visit WT:GARC#Circle #5.

PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 01:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 Comhairle nan Eilean Siar election

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2022 Comhairle nan Eilean Siar election 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of TheNuggeteer -- TheNuggeteer (talk) 05:01, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 Comhairle nan Eilean Siar election

The article 2022 Comhairle nan Eilean Siar election you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:2022 Comhairle nan Eilean Siar election for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of TheNuggeteer -- TheNuggeteer (talk) 09:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

WP:GARC: Invitation to review Carlos Yulo

Hello Stevie fae Scotland, You have been paired at good article review circles to review Carlos Yulo. At the same time, another user will be reviewing the article you nominated. Please wait 24 hours or until all users have accepted their nomination before starting your review in case a user in your circle decides to decline their invite.

To accept or decline this invitation to review the article, visit WT:GARC#Circle #6.

PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 17:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 Highland Council election

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2022 Highland Council election 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:43, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2022 Highland Council election

The article 2022 Highland Council election you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2022 Highland Council election for comments about the article, and Talk:2022 Highland Council election/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:44, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Note

Tnx for explanation. However, why cl/europa league had no same structure, they should be following structural path...... 93.140.242.94 (talk) 13:06, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

No worries. The qualifying rounds have been split by path as it is the only natural split available other than by round (which would probably end up with too many pages). This has been done to improve load times and reduce the number of template calls per article. See WP:PEIS for more information. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 13:23, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Use of boldface in election pages

I need some guidance from you for the use of boldface in these two elections: 2022 West Dunbartonshire Council election and 2022 Dundee City Council election. And could you possibly link a Wikipedia manual of style entry or similar to where it says that boldface should/should not be used in election pages such as these so that one could include them in an edit summary. SpeysideWikipedian (talk) 12:52, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

SpeysideWikipedian Hey Speyside, hope you are well. MOS:BOLD is what you are looking for. It doesn't specifically mention articles like there but when it says Boldface ... is considered appropriate only for certain usages, I would advise against. Hope that helps, Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 13:54, 16 August 2024 (UTC)