Hi,
I was part way through reverting all your edits to It Ain't Half Hot Mum as vandalism before I realised that you had split the article to a subsidiary page. Using clear edit summaries saying what you were doing (particularly on your last edit) would avoid such confusion. Cheers, dramatic (talk) 00:56, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Moving pages
Hi,
you asked if I could move (rename) 1972 England Tour of South Africa and 1973 England Tour of Oceania. You (ro anny looged-in user) can easily do that. In the default (monobook skin) layout of wkipedia pages, there is a tab at the top right with the link "mov" (in the line with article, discusion, edit, history etc. It's a fairly east process, so I'll leave it for you to exlore :-) dramatic (talk) 09:16, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, that was stupid on my part :( It would really really help if you used edit summaries in cases like this where it looks like you're removing information though and in general. --Tombomp (talk) 20:37, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Mr Hall of England. You have new messages at Xp54321's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, Mr Hall of England. You have new messages at Xp54321's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hi there. I notice you've made a couple of templates for the England European Championship templates. I believe such templates shouldn't be made per WP:FOOTY policy. I've started a discussion at WT:FOOTY#Euro 1968 template. For the time being, I'd pause with your work - there's no point wasting your time if they would end up being deleted anyway. Peanut4 (talk) 20:38, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is clear that this is your preference, but if you wish to build a consensus, you need to present reasons, not just decree that it ought to look like something. As I have said, I'd be happy with that grid after some tweaking, but it has major issues. Can I remind you that comments on talk pages should be signed, and that an edit summary should always be provided (having said that, this post won't have one, because it was set up as a new section). Kevin McE (talk) 19:45, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Portsmouth - Liverpool
OK - penalty takers and captains found and added. I still don't know the timing of Portsmouth's subs, though, nor the exact kits worn in the replay. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 09:49, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted your most recent edit to FA Community Shield (your other edits to that article looked ok). You added a heading "This Is How It Should Be" - this appears to be your own point of view, so has been removed. Unless you are saying that those were the actual matches that took place, in which case I think you will find numerous reliable sources against you. The existing table is the correct one (of course if you do find any more errors, feel free to correct them). Thanks --Jameboy (talk) 22:40, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Page moves
You have moved a load of season pages without any explanation, replacing the dash with a hyphen. Can you explain your reasoning for this, as the manual of style prefers the dash in date ranges? I've seen many bots moving pages in the opposite direction, i.e. replacing the hyphen with a dash, so you may be wasting your time. If you want to put your case forward, I have opened a topic to discuss this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Season page moves. --Jameboy (talk) 21:42, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop moving season articles to the incorrect name. WP:DASH clearly startes that en dashes (–) should be used "to convey the sense of to or through, particularly in ranges (pp. 211–19, 64–75%, the 1939–45 war, May–November)" and also that "when naming an article, a hyphen is not used as a substitute for an en dash that properly belongs in the title", however "editors should provide a redirect page to such an article, using a hyphen in place of the en dash".
Your continued moves against policy are creating extra work for other editors who are having to go back and fix your edits. Please stop. Dan1980 (talk ♦ stalk)17:35, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Tagging articles
Hi, please be careful when tagging articles with project templates like the England rugby tour articles you tagged. The quality of the articles should conform to the assessment standards agreed to at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment. You may also want to have a quick look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Rugby union/Assessment. Featured Articles should only be tagged as such if they have succeeded at being promoted at Featured Article Candidates. If you are unsure what rating an article should be tagged with, it may be best to simply leave that blank for another editor to do so. Tagging is great, and is helpful when promoting various WikiProjects, but if done incorrectly can be quite misleading. - Shuddetalk05:56, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
1906 Springbok tour of Europe
I've added a comment on Talk:1906 Springbok tour of Europe proposing a reversion to the article's previous title - for consistency with a number of other rugby union tour articles. As you changed it to the current title, I'd be glad of your thoughts on whether it should remain under that title. Thanks.--Bcp67 (talk) 19:08, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help with this. I am going to restore the club links on the 1979 tour article as I would prefer to have these in the article - at some point I might add these to the other England tours. --Bcp67 (talk) 19:34, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Its also useful and a bit easier to use the templates for the national rugby union teams (like England), rather than the version using a piped link. You do some good and useful stuff on rugby union - you ought to add your name to the Wikipedia Project:rugby union and looked at what is on there?? There aren't many people contributing to RU articles at the moment and it would be good if you can add yourself to the project. --Bcp67 (talk) 19:41, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your message. This article was flagged up as a blank page and, as consensus is that Wikipedia should not have blank pages, see WP:BLANK, I reverted it. I then see that you appear to have also performed a cut and paste move to 1920–21 in English football, another no-no as it loses the attribution in the history to all the editors who have worked on the text, thus breaching the terms of the GNU license under which all contributions are made. Further, I see that you have made a very large number of page moves without apparently discussing them first (but do correct me if I am wrong). I suggest that you voluntarily refrain from making any more page moves before someone stops you forcibly. I have raise the page moves at Wikiproject Football for input from others if you would like to chip with your comments. Kind regards, --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 20:32, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I've only just seen your message - I've been offline all weekend. It looks to have been sorted out now. If you spot any problems in future it's probably best to mention them on the Football Wikiproject talk page, that way you'll reach a wider audience and if the fix requires the attention of an admin then you'll probably also attract one there. Also try to avoid copy and paste moves - only move a page using the move function at the top (bearing in mind any naming conventions before you do so of course). Any controversial or potentially problematic moves should be discussed before being moved. — Dan1980 (talk ♦ stalk)21:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on 1997 FA Charity Shield requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Λuα(Operibus anteire)13:08, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on 1996 FA Charity Shield requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Λuα(Operibus anteire)13:08, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on 1994 FA Charity Shield requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Λuα(Operibus anteire)13:08, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on 1992 FA Charity Shield requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Λuα(Operibus anteire)13:09, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on 1991 FA Charity Shield requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Λuα(Operibus anteire)13:09, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on 1995 FA Charity Shield requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Λuα(Operibus anteire)13:09, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on 1982 FA Charity Shield requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Λuα(Operibus anteire)13:09, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on 1981 FA Charity Shield requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Λuα(Operibus anteire)13:10, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on 1993 FA Charity Shield, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because 1993 FA Charity Shield is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting 1993 FA Charity Shield, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click hereCSDWarnBot (talk) 13:10, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on 1980 FA Charity Shield requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Λuα(Operibus anteire)13:10, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on 1957 FA Charity Shield, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. k84 (talk) 14:24, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Minimum content concerns
Hi. :) The articles tagged above have been deleted under criteria for speedy deletion because they were very short articles providing no content to the reader. Please note that external links, "See also" sections, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, rephrasings of the title, or attempts to contact the subject of the article don't count as content. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.
You are, of course, welcome to recreate these articles at any point that you may have time to expand them to meet the minimum information standards. If you can't complete them in one go, you're welcome to tag them with {{inuse}} or {{underconstruction}} to indicate to other editors that they are not finished, but please in that case consider building them one at a time rather than creating a group of articles that do not meet minimum information standards. You can also work in user subspace by creating a personal sandbox as explained here. If you want the ones you've already started restored, I'd be happy to restore them for your further development when you have time to bring them into compliance.
I might get round to those articles eventually, but I have other priorities at the moment, and I don't know enough about the opposition's line-ups. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 14:52, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on 1910 FA Charity Shield requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. AngelOfSadness talk 17:06, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FA Cup Finals in club navboxes
Hi there. A consensus has been reached at WT:FOOTY that FA Cup finals should not be listed in clubs' navboxes, as it gives undue weight to the FA Cup, and to include links to finals that clubs were involved in would take up too much space. Therefore, it would be prudent for you to cease your actions regarding this matter. It's not that we don't appreciate the effort that you're putting in, it could just be better placed, that's all. Cheers. – PeeJay18:23, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have just reverted your edits to FA Cup finals involving Manchester United. Please stop adding links to FA Cup finals to club navboxes. I have given reasons above. Thanks. – PeeJay20:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Proposed deletion of List of All Black Tests outside the Main 4 test venues
In response to your comment on my talk page, those pages will all be deleted in a few days, provided that no one removed the PROD templates from the top of the page. I would also suggest that you create one big list of every single All Blacks Test, including ones played at home and overseas. – PeeJay20:59, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All Black tests
Why split the All Black tests article into home and away? If you look at the lists of England matches, they aren't split home and away. Just makes sense to have one single list which would then give the full set of All Blacks matches all in one. The article which is currently being created can be quite easily expanded to cover all All Black tests - you and other people have done a lot of good work on it and it would be a useful article with the extra matches included.
Also, can you "sign" your posts on talk pages please!! You can do this by typing four "tildes" at the end of your post, which is the symbol which shares the # key on UK keyboards, or by clicking on that thing which looks like a signature at the top of the edit page. It's helpful to be able to see who has the left the message. Thanks.--Bcp67 (talk) 19:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I assume you're referring to this edit I made to the 1939-40 in English football page. As I made the edit three years ago, I can't remember where I got the information from. It could well have been the FA Community Shield page, which looked like this at the time and listed Portsmouth as the winners. Having searched around a bit, I can't find any evidence that the Charity Shield was played at all that year, but I did find out that the result listed on the page matches the FA Cup final score of that year, so I presume that someone accidentally added the FA Cup score to the list. This is particularly plausible as the same mistake had been made with the 1946 and 1947 results, which I removed at the time. I note that the 1939 error has since been removed from the FA Community Shield page, but not the 1939-40 in English football page. I have now rectified this. - Green Tentacle (talk) 00:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button 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 useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. Woody (talk) 10:28, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Can also add my name (again!) to this request - I'm quite happy to look at the Irish RU tours category but its easier if you can sign your posts please, I had to look at the edit summary to see who placed the comment. Thank you. Nice work on the Irish tours anyway. --Bcp67 (talk) 18:37, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I have reverted your addition of the FA-Cup semi finals to the Villa Park page. A summary of this is in the other uses section. This was originally in the article, but was removed as a result of the GA Review which recommended its removal. This information is already covered in the FA Cup Semi-finals and there is no need to duplicate it. It has little relevance to the history of Villa Park and its architecture other than that it is the most used stadium in semi-final history, which is listed. Can I also please strongly encourage you to use a sandbox or preview your edits so as to not make mistakes and clog up the article history. Regards. Woody (talk) 14:24, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Irish rugby union tours
Can't exactly see what you are driving at in asking me to look at the tours pages and find out what's wrong. Is it something specific you're concerned about? The articles themselves look very reasonable and are a similar pattern to the articles which you started on England RU tours. If you could give me an idea of what you are after I'll be happy to comment. Thanks.--Bcp67 (talk) 18:41, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is it the orphaned tags which are the problem? Someone has tagged some of the articles as orphaned because no other articles link to them. You need to find maybe players or management who are involved with the tours and work something into their articles, linking to the tour. Have a look at a couple of revisions which I have made to Ollie Campbell and Tony Ward which will give you a lead on how to "un-orphan" the tours! --Bcp67 (talk) 19:16, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your message. When you say that you think there are mistakes, what have you got in mind? I can't just look through them generally - I'd need to have a clue where to start. I did have a brief look through and most of them look reasonably solid enough with no glaring mistakes standing out. I changed one of the tour venues in 1981 according to a printed reference, but you subsequently changed it according to a website, which is fair enough. Apart from that, I need a lead on what to look for. Also, can you please sign your posts on talk pages!! There are several sets of advice on how to do this scattered across your talk page. Thanks--Bcp67 (talk) 19:07, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK I see you've started adding personnel to various tours. I'll gladly look through them once you've completed and put all the links in place. Personally I prefer full names now rather than names and initials, and I've also come over to linking all instances of a club rather than just the first but I'm not too dogmatic about it. Good work anyway. What are your sources for the articles?--Bcp67 (talk) 19:12, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
References
Another thing which you need to start doing is putting references on articles, which could be either to printed works or websites - have a look at the ref I've added to the 1981 Ireland rugby union tour of South Africa to see what a printed ref looks like. If you don't reference (and I admit I don't always either!), you'll run the risk of someone putting an unreferenced tag on the article or even worse, putting up into AfD on the grounds of non-notability. You've clearly got some good reliable sources for your RU articles but a few references would be a good idea. Not trying to preach, just trying to offer a bit of friendly advice.--Bcp67 (talk) 19:20, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Signing comments
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! —the_ed17(talk)19:32, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Proposed deletion of The Dad's Army DVD Collection
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article The Dad's Army DVD Collection, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.
I've changed the title of this article back to what it was this morning. The article has a talk page which is there for discussion of page moves before reaching a consensus, which is exactly what happened with the article if you care to read it (I know you treat talk pages as a type of sandbox, but in fact they aren't, they are actually a page for discussion about the article, see WP:TP). Not only did you move it on the basis "it sounds better", which is hardly rational, but you also failed to move the redirects, which leads to double redirects - when you do page moves, you need to check the redirects created and eliminate any doubles. If you want to suggest an alternative name for the tour, go the talk page and make a case for it which we can discuss. Thanks.--Bcp67 (talk) 18:49, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you've noticed, much of the information I add is from a Welsh perspective. Which is fine from my view point as at present that's all I tend to focus on, but my Bible for the South Africa / Wales connection is "Springboks in Wales" by John Billot (1974). Found it in an old bookshop in South Wales. This is why I fill in all the info for the Welsh teams and then leave the rest of the nations with very little info, the book doesn't hold the info for the rest. Scrum.com will give the players and scorers for the main games, but I'm hoping there are books out there from an England, Scotland and Ireland perspective to complete the articles. FruitMonkey (talk) 16:59, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
UEFA Cup group stage fixtures
The fixtures for the UEFA Cup group stage have not been announced yet. It is not necessarily true that the team from Pot 1 is Team A in each group, or that the team from Pot 2 is Team B, and so on. Please stop adding incorrect information to the article. – PeeJay16:48, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on New Zealand rugby union teams, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. V. Joe (talk) 19:04, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
American (etc.) Academy Award Winners
It doesn't seem useful to have separate articles for each nationality of award winner. The category might make sense. Why do you see them as necessary? (John User:Jwytalk) 19:14, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You don't explain why different lists are necessary (and I'm not sure what links you are saying are wrong). One article with a table with a column for nationality would suffice. Even better, a category for each country would provide the same information. Unless there is going to be extensive information on the page beyond the information of the winners, it doesn't seem useful. (John User:Jwytalk) 19:24, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on 1969-70 South Africa rugby union tour, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Theseeker4 (talk) 17:33, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
France Rugby Tours
Saturday 27th June 2009 F Australia v France TBA Stats
Sat, 12 Jun 1971 ST France v South Africa 9-22 1:2 0-4 Vodacom Park, Bloemfontein A
Sat, 19 Jun 1971 ST France v South Africa 8-8 1:1 2-2 Kings Park Stadium, Durban A
Sat, 21 Jun 1975 ST France v South Africa 25-38 4:5 1-5 Vodacom Park, Bloemfontein A
Sat, 28 Jun 1975 ST France v South Africa 18-33 1:2 0-4 Loftus Versfeld, Pretoria A
Sat, 08 Nov 1980 TO France v South Africa 15-37 1:5 0-5 Loftus Versfeld, Pretoria A
Sat, 26 Jun 1993 ST France v South Africa 20-20 1:1 2-2 Kings Park Stadium, Durban A
Sat, 03 Jul 1993 ST France v South Africa 18-17 0:1 4-1 Ellis Park, Johannesburg A
Sat, 17 Jun 1995 WC Semi France v South Africa 15-19 0:1 1-4 Kings Park Stadium, Durban A
Saturday 30th September 1978 F Canada 9 - 24 France XV Kingsland
Saturday 4th June 1994 F Canada 18 - 16 France TBA
Saturday 9th September 1978 F Hong Kong 6 - 26 France XV TBA
Saturday 23rd September 1978 F Japan 16 - 55 France XV Chichibunomiya
Sunday 7th October 1984 F Japan 12 - 40 France XV Chichibunomiya
Sunday 30th September 1984 F Japan 0 - 52 France XV Hanazono Field
Saturday 12th June 1999 F Samoa 22 - 39 France Apia Park
Wednesday 16th June 1999 F Tonga 20 - 16 France Teufaiva
Sunday 2nd August 1992 00:00 Zimbabwe 16 - 37 France XV Police Grounds
Saturday 1st August 1992 00:00 F Zimbabwe 15 - 42 France XV Hartsfield
Saturday 12th June 1976 F United States 14 - 33 France Northfield
AfD nomination of List of Academy Award Historical and Non-Fictional Roles
Please use the "Preview" button instead of doing lots of minor edits one after the other. Editing in this way uses server and download time, and fills up "Recent changes" and "Vandal patrol" listings with minor inconsequential edits. Thanks. DrKiernan (talk) 18:36, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on List of People who have won a Academy Award with a 100% record requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Megaman en m (talk) 16:19, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oscar Page
List of People who have won a Academy Award with a 100% record
This a list of People who have won a Academy Award who have never lost a nomination.
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.
When you move a page, please could you always complete the edit summary, to let other users know your rationale for making the page move? Regarding the play-off final page moves, there was previously a consensus for the format to be of the form 2007 Football League Championship play-off final, but I see your point about capitalising "Final" as per 2007 FA Cup Final and 2007 Football League Cup Final, so I think it is worth discussing again. I intend to raise a discussion shortly at WT:FOOTY in order to agree a naming convention once and for all for play-off final articles. Please can I ask you to contribute to this discussion and not to make any further play-off page moves until a consensus is reached? Thanks. --Jameboy (talk) 14:39, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --Jameboy (talk) 14:05, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
FA Cup Final articles
Please can you stop removing sort keys from FA Cup Final articles (e.g. 1888 FA Cup Final) - they are needed to sort the article alphabetically within categories (i.e. FA Cup Final is sorted under 'F'). Thanks. --Jameboy (talk) 13:03, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on 1992 Football League Third Division play-off Final, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing no content to the reader. Please note that external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article don't count as content. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Unscented (talk) 21:06, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting 1987 Football League Third Division play-off Final, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click hereCSDWarnBot (talk) 01:40, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You should also include the referee and the attendance. What's the point in having the parameters there if you're not going to use them? Also, I don't see the need to include the image of the stadium. – PeeJay21:02, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can I make a suggestion? Please work on your English. It's very difficult to understand what you're trying to say sometimes. – PeeJay21:08, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, it shouldn't. It looks totally unprofessional to have blank tables and templates on a page, as it makes it look like we just haven't been bothered to fill them in. Rounds should not be added until the draw for that round has taken place, or at least until the announcement about the draw has been made. Please be aware that you opinion is not always the correct one. And also, please remember to sign your posts with the four tildes (~~~~). – PeeJay19:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on Category:Events at Wembley Stadium (1923), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
This category was created in order to circumvent the CfD on Category:Matches at the Wembley Stadium (1923). That category was subsequently deleted, and since the two categories effectively serve the same purpose, this category should be deleted too.
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on [[Talk:Category:Events at Wembley Stadium (1923)|the article's talk page]] explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting UEFA Europa League 2009–10 group stage, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click hereCSDWarnBot (talk) 17:10, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I should first ask why those articles need the Man Utd template adding to them. None of them have anything to do with Man Utd, so that doesn't make sense. Nevertheless, as much as I would like to help, I'm fairly swamped with projects of my own right now, so I don't have time to lend favours, willy nilly. Sorry. – PeeJay18:46, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Alternate version of AVFC seasons
Hi, I've removed your alternate version of the Aston Villa seasons list from Talk:Aston Villa F.C. seasons#Alternate version, because the Talk page is for discussion about improving the article, not for maintaining 28kB-worth of alternate version of it. It is now temporarily in my userspace, at User:Struway2/AVFCSeasons. You are welcome to move that page into your userspace, or if you don't need it any more, or if you haven't moved it after a few days, I'll request it be deleted. Even after deletion it would still be extractable from the page history of Talk:Aston Villa F.C. seasons. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:19, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is verified by the definitive statistical source on the club, and the differing status of the war leagues was clearly marked. The list is a featured list, during its nomination and preceding peer review the format which included war seasons was not brought into question. Putting gold and silver introduces accessibility issues, and loses the information about promotions. Oldelpaso (talk) 12:29, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mr Hall I very much appreciate you showing me this and seeking my opinion. What a lot of work this was for you. My own preference I must say is for the horizontal small font team list as currently on the article - that's primarily because I am always one who will favour copy and text and the story that's told by a match report that I am for lists of information. I like the small font because the team list therefore doesn't dominate the page and each match line-up is dealt with overall in four lines. The match reports already have some "list" section in the score detail and the venue, attendance and referee detail to the right. So my vote would be against extending each match report by 21 lines, which would of course extend the article by 84 list lines. However I see no reason why the state of birth flags couldn't be included as another column in the touring squad table. Regarding the positions played - my own view is that this is superfluous since the team list left to right is always in strict a positional order that enables a knowledgeable rugby reader to deduce the position of the the starting 15 at least. Though I recognise this view could be challenged.However if you feel strongly about the proposal why don't you submit it for a vote on the page Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Rugby_union ? Or if you would like, I could submit it and get some views. Let me know if you would like me to do that. Rgds -Sticks6612:27, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'll add them to the table with a note, but I'm having difficulty understanding the scores (too many numbers!). We should cite a source for these if you have one. dramatic (talk) 21:16, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-Finals
Hello. I don't think you should change the format used in the list. The format with "Semi-Final 1" etc is fine and has been in place for over two years. I don't have access to any other sources than footymad.net. If you really want to improve the list you should add scorers and attendances. Regards, Tryde (talk) 16:33, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that there is confusion here, which is why I've asked for some additional input.
The episode seems frequently referred to as being called "Sand Trap", as well as "A Fishy Return" - both of which titles can be sourced through the internet (as is the case with the currently restored version which I restored purely as it is web sourced). As there appears conflicted information on the title, I'm moving towards dumping the title of the episode from the MNR entry's section as it is not really required in this context; perhaps leaving just the series and episode number. Neither title seems to be displayed on the actual program. DiverScout (talk) 17:01, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
The only information that I have to hand is the test resutls - which are also available at pick and go: [1]. (My two almanacs give list all All Black games overseas, but not visiting touring teams). dramatic (talk) 19:17, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any point in having a specific article for Lions games in New Zealand? There is an article for each Lions tour which should have all the games listed - it certainly does for every post-war tour at least. This article seems to be a duplication to me.--Bcp67 (talk) 19:36, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Re: 1981 FA Charity Shield
Hi. Ordinarily I'd help and I'd get the page made pretty soon. But right now I'm working on my Dissertation which is due in a fortnight. If the page still needs doing when I've finished (and I remember) I'll get doing it. Aheyfromhome (talk) 13:37, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1963 League Cup Final
And the 1994, 1995, 1997, 1998, 1999 and 2000 League Cup Final articles have the other format... The point is, we're writing these articles for the general reader to read. It's a lot easier for people to read if the information isn't cramped up into tables with small font size. And it's a lot easier to understand if each round for the first club is on the same line as that same round for the other club. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do you intend to finish off changing the Players and officials section to your preferred format soon? Because it isn't really fair to the readers if you leave it half done while you go off and do something else... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:44, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The problem was that the team lists worked in IE but looked a mess in Firefox. I've fixed them (I hope). But if you don't know the kit colours to go on the bodies, I'll comment them out until you can find out what they should be. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:55, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Page moves
Hi I was wondering what the reason for these moves were? I only ask because I was about to move one of them to (lowercase) "final", when I had found they had been moved to (uppercase) "Final" by you. So I just thought I'd ask you if there was a reason before I attempt to move any of them back. Best, Rambo's Revenge(talk)22:05, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that per this discussion, awards succession boxes are deprecated for actor project articles. Also, per MOS:APPENDIX, when they are on an article, they should always go at the very bottom of the page, below the external links. Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 14:32, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
NZR Union Colours
Sorry mate, but I don't know what those colours were.
Marlborough was red with white. Nelson Bays was blue with white, but I'm guessing you mean the Nelson union that merged with Golden Bays-Motueka to form Nelson Bays.
It's nice to see you: Sorry for my late reaction. I haven't visited en.wp for several days. How did you notice my name? New database website opened "Grand Slam Tennis Archive", all events of men's singles. [2] Click "U.S. OPEN ARCHIVE" from toppage -> all events of each year. 1930 and 1931: 1930, lost John Van Ryn at the 4th round: 1931, lost Ellsworth Vines at the semifinal as "the Foreign No.1 seed". --Hhst (talk) 13:39, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Good luck with starting those articles. As a friendly word of warning, I'd make sure you get some meaningful content into them fairly quickly, or you can bet that someone will be looking to stick a "speedy" on them.--Bcp67 (talk) 20:39, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I see you've started an article - I have some info in the Rothmans Yearbook and maybe we can work together on this one?--Bcp67 (talk) 05:55, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I have just written a short lead section and also put an "under construction" template on to avoid anyone putting it up for deletion. I will start doing the matches section.--Bcp67 (talk) 19:49, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi I was wondering the reason behind changing the name. The new name does not make sense as British Isles includes Ireland. Either the previous name should stand or it should be 1984 Australia rugby union tour of the British Isles. noq (talk) 14:55, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can you also check for redirects when you move a page name. You ought to fix any pages which link to the moved page - particularly double redirects where a page has been moved previously; a redirect should never link to another redirect.--Bcp67 (talk) 07:54, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In general terms too I think there are too many page moves on these rugby tour articles. You need to find a page name policy which is acceptable, maybe by discussion on WP:RU, and then stick with it.--Bcp67 (talk) 07:54, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please respond to why you changed the article name of this and others to use the incorrect form British Isles and Ireland? As stated above it simply does not make sense and should either be "Britain and Ireland" or "British Isles" not a compound of the two. It makes no more sense than saying "Britain and Scotland".
Because the New Zealand tours have the British Isles and Ireland. Mr Hall of England (talk) 20:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Those articles are named wrong then. The geographic area the British Isles includes the island of Ireland, the original article name is more correct than the one you changed it to. noq (talk) 06:56, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going ask for a discussion on this on the project discussion page to (hopefully!) try to establish some sort of policy.--Bcp67 (talk) 07:23, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to move these articles back as they are completely incorrect naming. British Isles (like it or not as some may do) includes Ireland. Naming it British Isles and Ireland is completely incorrect phraseology and tautological. Just because the New Zealand tours made an error, doesn't mean we should propogate it. And Britain Isles? Both articles moved to Britain and Ireland. Canterbury Tailtalk19:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, i already found one piece just in the last 5 years of Top Scorers, Hume was on 11 for last season when according to the Official Site he only scored 10. --MIR17 (talk) 18:42, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Cut and paste moves
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give War Medal 1939–1945 a different title by copying its content and pasting it into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other articles that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. Woody (talk) 22:15, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You appear to have done this with the Dad's Army template as well. This should not happen, as it goes against the licencing of the site. You should use the move button instead, which retains the history. Bobtalk09:07, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Filmographies 2
Actually, we don't make articles as tributes. Spinning off a second page is based on page size and need and is decided by discussion and consensus on the main article talk page. Hepburn's main article is 41kb, with the filmography page at less than 15kb, so there is no compelling reason based on article size that would compell the filmography to be spun off - the entire article would come in at less than 60kb and that is adequate. Thus, I'm not convinced Hepburn's filmography should be on a separate page, and that is something that WP:ACTOR will be addressing in the near future - for all spin off filmographies, not just Hepburn's. However, Hepburn's was spun off before the filmography was tabled. Spencer Tracy's filmography was not tabled on the main page until January 2009, as part of WP:ACTOR's ongoing drive to get all Academy Award winners' filmographies tabled. Even with the tabled filmography, Tracy's article is only 23kb, woefully less than average for major film stars. Since the filmography already exists, there is really no valid reason to create a separate page that also tables the filmography. If it were removed from the main article, the article would be even smaller. What Tracy's article truly needs is expansion in the text area, to fill out details of his career. Wildhartlivie (talk) 21:05, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please see Talk:Spencer Tracy#Filmography regarding the removal of the filmography from the main article and discussion regarding no need for spinning the filmography into a separate article. Please take no further action regarding this filmography until discussion has concluded. Wildhartlivie (talk) 21:22, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Talkback
Hello, Mr Hall of England. You have new messages at Dabomb87's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Yeah, I tried to do a couple of weeks a go when I made the 96 play-off final page. I couldn't find any sources, I got lucky with 1 newspaper article to the 1996 Play-Off final, but on 92-94 I could only do what I know, which is mainly the results and general ebb of the games. I suppose i could dig out my dad's old VHS's on those seasons as a source but it won't be for a couple of weeks. I might be able to do a little on the 94 Play-Off final though, about the iconography off it. Basically there's a picture of Steve Walssh called "The Silence of the Rams" which is basically Leicester's equivilent of "Tardelli's Scream." Such an iconic image that it's currently blown up to 20ft on the outside of The Walkers' Stadium. So I'll do a bit about that later. --MIR17 (talk) 14:19, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
hiya, could you please let me know when you create new pages for Tottenham Hotspur as I love to add them all to my watchlist and work on them when I can ect. cheers. Govvy (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have added the list of players down for ya and the goal total includes the FA cup goals in that list. I didn't have assists, yellow or red cards in the book. The book is Tottenham Hotspur The Official Illustrated History 1882-1995 publisher Hamlyn, author Phil Soar. Also some of the attendances are different to what you have down in the book. I wrote about it on the talk page. Govvy (talk) 20:45, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I added the two kits, but because the infobox became much bigger the results table became distorted so I moved the final league table above the results so the page stays looking as good as it does, cheers Prem4eva (talk) 20:03, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop adding tables that only deal with the Academy Awards that an actor has won or for which he or she received nominations. WP:ACTOR has specifically determined that Academy Awards tables like this are undue weight on one award and are therefore not appropriate. In addition, the table you added to Mickey Rooney titled "Could of been Nominated" was speculative at best. Please work withWP:ACTOR for consistency of articles and not against the project. Wildhartlivie (talk) 23:28, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Proposed deletion of 1945 Dynamo Moscow tour of the United Kingdom
Re: your edits to the UEFA Champions League and UEFA Cup season categories: you should have taken those categories to WP:CfR before unilaterally moving the articles around yourself. – PeeJay17:13, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
HTFC Stats
Hello, Mr Hall of England.
Sorry that I've been a bit replying, but I'll see if I can improve the details of the matches that you requested.
Incidentally, the reason Town were never in the Charity Shields of 1924, 25 & 26 was because they had been reverted back to an Amateurs XI v Professionals XI, hence we have only been in one Charity Shield Final. JRRobinson (talk) 12:36, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For their significant contribution in bringing to the screen the spirit and personification of youth, and as juvenile players setting a high standard of ability and achievement.
Again, check the competition logos. The competition has been called the Africa Cup of Nations since 2004. Do not move the articles again. – PeeJay19:33, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Are you blind? I said the competition has only been known as the Africa Cup of Nations since 2004, so why did you move all of the other articles too?! – PeeJay20:26, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Mr Hall of England! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 15 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:
Mr Hall of England, I have removed the future fixture lists from articles/talk/user talk that you have once again re-added. All future fixtures remain the intellectual property of the respective leagues and as such fall under the copyright of that League. To add these fixtures to Wikipedia is to breach their copyright and is a copyright violation. (See [discussion]) Do not re-add these fixture lists or you will be blocked to prevent violations. If you have any questions then please leave them on my talkpage. Thanks, regards, Woody (talk) 18:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, the kits are up, using [3], for the 53-54 season, I added the home kit and put the special floodlight kit as "third colours", and for the 57-58, 58-59, and 59-60 seasons, according to that website, the kit went unchanged from 1956-1962 so that's reflected on the pages, hope that helps. Prem4eva (talk) 19:38, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Billy Wright Home Nations Matches
Scores and results list England's goal tally first.
All should be straightforward enough, the result is obviously either W, D or L and that creates the colour. The report line is simply the BBC url then type Report after it to make that word appear in the box. Any penalty goals would be 47' (pen.)
I don't disagree with your edits removing succession boxes from film articles, but I encourage you to use edit summaries explaining why. Don't be surprised if you find resistance at some point. Erik (talk | contribs) 14:17, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
Deletion nomination of Talk:Russia at the FIFA World Cup
blanked page
Hi Mr Hall of England, this is a message from an automated bot, regarding Talk:Russia at the FIFA World Cup. You blanked the page and, since you are its sole author, FrescoBot has interpreted it as a request for deletion of the page and asked administrators to satisfy the requests per speedy deletion criterion G7. Next time you want a page that you've created deleted, you can explicitly request the deletion by inserting the text {{db-author}}. If you didn't want the page deleted, please remove the {{db-author}} tag from the page and undo your blanking or put some content in the page. Admins are able to recover deleted pages. Please do not contact the bot operator for issues not related with bot's behaviour. To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=FrescoBot}} somewhere on your talk page. -- FrescoBot (msg) 23:09, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi - haven't seen you editing much rugby stuff lately, good that you have picked up again. I haven't got a huge amount of time to spare at the moment but I will help where I can. I have a set of Rothmans Rugby Yearbooks from about 1972 to 1998 or so, so if you need info about tours in those years I can give you information but nothing much before that I'm afraid. Have you got anything specific you need at the moment? All the best. --Bcp67 (talk) 18:38, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid I can't be of any help with your request. I'm from Argentina, that's right, but I don't know anything about rugby. I'm hardly even aware that's there rugby in the country to begin with. I know that in other countries it's a very popular sport, such as in the US, but here in Argentina that role (the sport played at both leagues and high school, watched by multitudes, and whose results is almost a mandatory discussion topic at social meetings) is taken by association football (simply "football" locally) MBelgrano (talk) 16:48, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
^Up until 1992, the top division of English football was the Football League First Division; since then, it has been the FA Premier League. At the same time, the Second Division was renamed the First Division, and the Third Division was renamed the Second Division.
^Up until 1992, the top division of English football was the Football League First Division; since then, it has been the FA Premier League. At the same time, the Second Division was renamed the First Division, and the Third Division was renamed the Second Division.
.png){kind=small}
