This is an archive of past discussions with User:NapHit. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Users are always welcome to help us with this newsletter. If you are interested, please leave a message on an existing editor's talkpage or sign up on the "Contributors" list of the central newsletter page, and we will tell you everything you need to know and answer your questions.
Below is the F1 Picture of the month (found here). The picture has to be one uploaded in the last month and only from the current season.
It is exclusive to the Newsletter. REMEMBER, YOU CAN VOTE.
Sebastian Vettel during practice for the Spanish Grand Prix. Vettel won all three races to be held during the month of May; in Turkey, Spain and Monaco, to extend his drivers' championship lead yet further.
New images
2011
Article of the month – Brabham, featured on the main page (May 2)
Motor Racing Developments Ltd., commonly known as Brabham, was a British racing car manufacturer and Formula One racing team. Founded in 1960 by two Australians, driver Jack Brabham and designer Ron Tauranac, the team won four drivers' and two constructors' world championships in its 30-year Formula One history. Jack Brabham's 1966 drivers' championship remains the only such achievement using a car bearing the driver's own name.
In the 1960s, Brabham was the world's largest manufacturer of open wheel racing cars for sale to customer teams, and had built more than 500 cars by 1970. During this period, teams using Brabham cars won championships in Formula Two and Formula Three and competed in the Indianapolis 500. In the 1970s and 1980s, Brabham introduced innovations such as the "fan car"—which won its only race before being withdrawn—in-race refuelling, carbon brakes, and hydropneumatic suspension. The team won two more Formula One drivers' championships in the 1980s with Brazilian Nelson Piquet, and became the first to win a drivers' championship with a turbocharged car.
British businessman Bernie Ecclestone owned Brabham during most of the 1970s and 1980s, and later became responsible for administering the commercial aspects of Formula One. Ecclestone sold the team in 1988. Its last owner was the Middlebridge Group, a Japanese engineering firm. Midway through the 1992 season, the team collapsed financially as Middlebridge was unable to make repayments against loans provided by Landhurst Leasing. The case was investigated by the United Kingdom Serious Fraud Office. In 2009, an unsuccessful attempt was made by a German organisation to enter the 2010 Formula One season using the Brabham name.
I've removed this nomination and deleted it as it's much easier than archiving a blank nomination; please focus on existing FLCs you've nominated and make sure they stand a chance of passing before nominating new lists. If you need to notify various wikiprojects or interested editors to come and review your existing FLCs, so be it, there's no issue with that as long as you don't canvass for support. Contact me if you'd like to discuss this more. All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 21:17, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
I was about to do a check of the Grand Tour winner list, but I saw it has already been promoted, well done. I corrected two things myself. I didn't have time to check all the names and years in the table, but I trust that you made no mistakes. (A featured lists should be verified for unintentional errors and typos, I think.)
Following the Vuelta winner list review, you no longer link to the countries but to the organisations. I started a [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cycling#Template_to_replace_flagathlete_for_cyclists|discussion at the Cycling WikiProject about this, and consensus there was that this was not to do this. I'm not saying you should change anything, but only want to make you aware that the Project has thought about this. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 19:16, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the fixes on the list, just read that discussion, from now on I'll link the nationality instead of the organisation per the convincing arguments about riders having affiliations with certain organisations despite being a different nationality. I would change the links back in the other two lists but that is a lot of work which I can't be bothered to do right now! NapHit (talk) 19:54, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Users are always welcome to help us with this newsletter. If you are interested, please leave a message on an existing editor's talkpage or sign up on the "Contributors" list of the central newsletter page, and we will tell you everything you need to know and answer your questions.
Below is the F1 Picture of the month (found here). The picture has to be one uploaded in the last month and only from the current season.
It is exclusive to the Newsletter. REMEMBER, YOU CAN VOTE.
Jenson Button celebrates, after winning the Canadian Grand Prix, his first victory of the 2011 season. The race set numerous records, including the records of both the longest Grand Prix, in relation to time elapsed, and slowest, in relation to average speed, since the World Championship began in 1950.
The 1995 Brazilian Grand Prix (formally the XXIV Grande Prêmio do Brasil) was a Formula One motor race held on March 26, 1995 at the Autódromo José Carlos Pace, São Paulo, Brazil. It was the first round of the 1995 Formula One season. The race, contested over 71 laps, was won by Michael Schumacher for the Benetton team after starting from second position. David Coulthard finished second in a Williams, with Gerhard Berger third in a Ferrari. Damon Hill, who started the race from pole position, spun out while leading on lap 30 with an apparent gearbox problem, which was later found to be a suspension failure. Schumacher's win came despite Benetton encountering steering problems with his car during Friday practice, leading to him crashing heavily and necessitating steering component changes for the rest of the event. Despite Schumacher's victory, Hill proved to be faster during the race, and seemed to be on course for a comfortable victory before his sudden retirement.
Other notable performances came from Berger, who took the final podium position despite being delayed during one of his routine pit stops due to a problem with a loose wheel nut; Mika Häkkinen, who finished fourth for the McLaren team despite its new car proving to be uncompetitive in pre-season testing; and Mika Salo, who drove strongly in the first half of the race to run third in his first Grand Prix for the Tyrrell team, only to suffer from cramp and drop back to seventh place at the finish. Behind Häkkinen, the other points-scoring finishers were Jean Alesi in the second Ferrari and Mark Blundell, who drove the second McLaren. Blundell was standing in for regular driver Nigel Mansell in the second McLaren until the team could produce a wider chassis in which to accommodate him, as the car's initial cockpit design had proved to be too narrow for him to drive comfortably.
Several hours after the conclusion of the race, Schumacher and Coulthard were excluded from the race result as the chemical "fingerprint" of fuel samples from their cars taken after qualifying and the race did not match the specified sample lodged with the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA) prior to the event. Berger was thus declared the winner, but the race stewards' decision to exclude them was overturned at an appeal hearing on April 13. Schumacher and Coulthard were reinstated in first and second places respectively, but the two teams did not receive their respective constructors' points. The Ferrari team was unhappy with the decision made at the appeal hearing; Berger called the sport "a joke". The rule concerning the legality of fuels had been changed for the 1995 season, as had the new standardised equipment used for refuelling during the race, the drivers' weighing-in procedure and the conditions of the drivers' racing licences; all of these changes produced controversies which at times threatened to overshadow the race, as did the excessively bumpy condition of the track. The race also marked the first Brazilian Grand Prix to take place since the death of Brazilian triple World Champion Ayrton Senna the previous year; his passing was commemorated in various ways throughout the event.
* Heidfeld and Sutil recorded no time in Q3 as they did not attempt a run. Heidfeld started ahead, after leaving the pits during the session and Sutil did not.
Thanks for all the work you did in making Anfield a Featured Article! Your work is much appreciated.
In the spirit of celebration, you may wish to comment on another Featured article candidate... or perhaps review one of the Good Article nominees, as there is currently a backlog. Any help is appreciated! All the best, – Quadell(talk)
If you want to incorporate various colours then fine, but in a section about Liverpool FC, to not have the colours which the club is world famous for and is predominant throughout its history, in a section that largely deals with the manager and the change in question, any image other than all red is not reflective of the text and is terribly confusing. If there is only one image in a section about Liverpool colours then all red is it.Chryed (talk) 17:56, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
I understand your point but to me it seems a bit pointless to have an image of an all red kit two paragraphs below the infobox where there is an all red kit. Not many people will know that Liverpool have not played in red throughout the club's history, that is why I think it should be the old kit. NapHit (talk) 16:41, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
The reworded part i restored was yours; "Unlike other rivalries, there is no political, geographical or religious split between Liverpool and Everton". The others were mainly unclarified parts i had trimmed for the sake of tidiness (leaving it free to be expanded). As we know the Stanley Park project is still up in the air and nothing is definite on that one. We also don't yet know the conclusion of the damages claim (whether Hicks "sought", or is "seeking" to claim). I had added in the February court ruling which blocked Hicks from suing in the US over the sale of the club.[1]MusoForde (talk) 18:56, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
Users are always welcome to help us with this newsletter. If you are interested, please leave a message on an existing editor's talkpage or sign up on the "Contributors" list of the central newsletter page, and we will tell you everything you need to know and answer your questions.
The 2011 British Grand Prix was a Formula One motor race, held on 10 July 2011, at the Silverstone Circuit in Northamptonshire and Buckinghamshire, England, and won by Fernando Alonso. Changes to the circuit mean that the race was previously classified as being in Northamptonshire, but the movement of the start-finish line means that the race is now officially classed as being in Buckinghamshire. It was the ninth race of the 2011 season, and saw the introduction of a ban on off-throttle blown diffusers, the practice of forcing the engine to continue to produce exhaust gasses to generate downforce when drivers are not using the throttle.
Hello, I see that you have changed the template and made it better (for Slovenian clubs). I am guessing that you are the author (you made it)? Well done. I would, however, ask you for a small favour regarding the template when SVN (Slovenia) is used. Could you change two small things in the head of the template (like you did with "League cup" -> "Slovenian Supercup")? I would like if its possible, that you change "Pokal Hervis" into simply "Cup" for the Slovenian Cup. The reason why is that Pokal Hervis is a sponsorship name of the cup, however, the name is used only for the last couple of seasons and was not used during the 1990s. So I think it would be better that the section would just be named the "Cup" (or "Slovenian Cup" in the worst case), since the name could change in the future due to sponsorship rights. Also, I think instead of "Slovenian Supercup" it would be better if the name in the head section would just be the "Supercup". Personally, I believe that there is no need for "Slovenian" before Cup and Supercup. Anyway, the latter isnt that important, but I believe that the Cup name in the head should change. Anyway, thanks for your help and I will probably use the template for all Slovenian teams currently playing in the top division.Ratipok (talk) 17:11, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for your help. I have figured it out on how to edit the template and have added former SFR Yugoslavia (YUG) there. I do have a question though. Is it possible to simply remove the second cup (in this case "League Cup")? The reason why is because former Yugoslavia football system had only League and Cup competitions and didnt had League cup or Supercup as the third one.Ratipok (talk) 00:46, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Not sure what you could do is just have one table and then some footnotes explaining the switch from Yugoslavia to Slovenia I think that would be the easiest solution. NapHit (talk) 12:33, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
I was thinking the same. However, I still have a slight problem. If I use template for Slovenia (SVN) i have Slovenian Cup and Slovenian Supercup in the head of the table, yet the club played in Yugoslav football system for the first thirty years. If I use a neutral table, then I have a problem because I would again have "League Cup" at the head, yet neither country had one. The solution for my problem would be if a neutral table with "Supercup" implemented would exists, but I tried and dont believe it can be made, or at least I dont know how to make one.Ratipok (talk) 00:01, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
I'm very sorry for what happened with your copyedit request today. As you can see, I'm still very new to copyediting, and to Wikipedia as a whole. Please forgive me, I think I still have a lot to learn before going back to copyediting. Thanks, Nathan2055talk - review02:52, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Its fine but the skills necessary to copyedit do take a while to develop, and I see that you're a new editor so perhaps you should have waited a while longer. At least your enthusiastic and willing to take on the burden. I would advise to look into the copyedit backlog as a way of honing your copyedit skills there are over 3,500 articles that require copyediting and I think copyediting a few of these will help your skills develop. NapHit (talk) 11:19, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I'm not knowledgeable about these things, but as far as I can see your latest edit to Talk:Liverpool F.C. makes it refer to the 2008 peer review rather than the recent one. Good luck for the FA. --Stfg (talk) 14:05, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Sorry for not being on the review for a while I have been a bit busy recently. I will try to get it finished off later today. Adam4267 (talk) 17:04, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Liverpool's FAC
I know that this is Liverpool's fifth FAC. Despite being a Manchester United supporter myself I recognise that Liverpool is also a great club that deserves the best Wikipedia article it can have. So please don't be discouraged by my observations so far; I'll very likely have many more to make before the FAC is over, but I'll also help where I can, as I'm sure will the other reviewers in due course. My aim is to help you get it through FAC this time around, not to criticise all the hard work you've already put in. MalleusFatuorum00:34, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
I appreciate the comments you've made, after all if the article is not up to scratch then it should not pass. Your comments so far have been very helpful and have been better than in previous FACs were the prose was deemed awful. So at least I know the article is one the right tracks. NapHit (talk) 12:04, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
The image that was in the lead was fine just leave that there. Infobox's are more for articles. Images are generally required for featured lists, the reason I removed the other ones was because they were comprising the aesthetics of the table. I'll put the image back in the lead, it looks much better than the infobox. NapHit (talk) 20:58, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
When the article got promoted to a featured list three years ago, those were the images in the lead. I think the reason I put Hagen in the lead was because he won his titles first. Look I think you've got the wrong end of the stick from my edits yesterday I was clearing up the areas round the tables so it make the table better and the information easier to read. Images in the lead are encouraged. NapHit (talk) 21:09, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I agree! So, it is also the same way with infoboxes can be used in place of images in a lead section to summarize the article in question. I disagree with you that we have to remove the images because they impede the table, which they don't. Differing monitors display the text and tables differently based on resolution and size fo the screen.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 21:17, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
I can't be bothered debating this any longer it really is trivial, just leave the lists the way they were before I removed the images yeesterday. NapHit (talk) 21:25, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
See this would impact my ongoing FLC right now List of LPGA Championship champions that I corrected to make to the modern FLC standards. The men's images need more work in terms of alt text and other accessibility measures, so these had to have scope rows, scope columns, and yet to be done is alt text. By the way, I would say look at my work on List of Kraft Nabisco Championship champions, List of U.S. Women's Open (golf) champions that are FL now. Before I got to them fixing what Bluedogtn created it was a mess like these. All articles now must be able to meet the access standards even FL, which these were promoted three years ago many things have indeed changed. I fixed these to make all the table access friendly to match the women's because if I had not done so these could have been nominated for FLC removal, which is not what I wanted to happen to your hard work. You did great, but things have moved on to meet a high standard.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 21:51, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Not sure what verification measure you are on about, but I'll try and explain. Firstly I removed the notes which stated that golfers such as Francis Ouimet were amateurs, the key explains the representative colour means this so the notes were redundant. I removed all those references because they were not needed. The general references do their job, so there is no opint in having extra references when they are not needed. NapHit (talk) 22:31, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
You took out the notes column, which [[1]] it is in an old revision, so you took and put the playoff by the golfer, which should be done in a notes column to make it cleaner and be Access friendly to users with visual readers. Plus, you delete the references for each individual years tournament so now it violates the verification measures to insure consistancy.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 22:44, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Yes I took out the notes column because its redundant without the refs for every year. I have recently had lists promoted to featured status using this method so it not being access friendly doesn't wash, the reader can easily access them. As far as I'm aware you don't need references for individual years for consistency. If there is guideline I'd like to see it because I don't believe there is one. If that was the case then most of my recent nominations would got to featured standard. There is no point in having over a 100 individual refs when two can do the job. NapHit (talk) 22:51, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
I am going to see if you are right or wrong because golfoberser is wrong some of the time like the 1953 U.S. Open. See you have to have each year cited by individual sources see 3-over 283]. Golf Observer cannot always be relied upon to provide the to par correct source. This means each year needs to have their own verifiable information. This is just one mishap that I found making leaderboard, which I hope to find no more, but I am not hopeful!SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 23:19, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Why if you were the one adding the references are you now deleting them? I would have been glad to find the others, but you did not give me a chance to do so. Would you be mad if I put them back in so all the golfing list articles are the same or do you want me to delete them all?SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 03:43, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
When I made the lists in 2008 and I stress 2008 that was the protocol. As time moves on so does protocol, general sources for the whole list are now used more widely. I think your making a mountain out of a molehill here. If you have one reference that covers the whole list then there is no point in using multiple references. I don't want you to anything I don't understand why you keep badgering me about this. I'll find sources which verify all the information in the table. OK. NapHit (talk) 12:46, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
I just want Wikipedia to be accurate and verifiable in all, sorry for being a hard ass about sources, but Golfobserver from time-to-time gets things wrong! I believe in the quote "Trust but Verify", but I forgot who actually said the quote.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 17:53, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
I agree that if all the information can be attributed to a single, reliable general source then additional sources are not necessary. However, if a disparity of information occurs between sources, then others need to be brought in to clarify that information. If there are no differences between the given source and other sources, then one will suffice. SFB17:58, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
Nope I have better things to do than go around deleting see also sections if uniformity between all forms of golf lists and other lists bothers you then do it yourself. NapHit (talk) 17:34, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
In regards to your comment earlier today, I have updated it to be in line with similar featured articles, such as NBA Most Valuable Player and J. Walter Kennedy Citizenship Award. I have expanded the alttext, but since those articles use left-aligned years rather than center-aligned years, the precedent seems to be for left-aligned years. If you want it center-aligned, I can just turn off "plainrowheaders" and that'll do it (more on that at the review page) Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈18:46, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Did you even look at the list before you nominated it. Most of the problems you cite have recently been addressed since I recently changed the table. The fact that you nominated the list regardless proves your actions are based on WP:POINT.
Hi there, I'm semi-randomly asking users if they would be interested in helping me with my research on Wikipedia. I am writing a dissertation on Wikipedia as part of my undergraduate course at the University of Cambridge. The results will almost certainly not be published to the public, and participants will be anonymous if requested. What I am asking is for you to complete a questionnaire with a number of general, subjective questions about your experiences working on Wikipedia, for example concerning Wikipedia's culture, your motivation in participating and so on. It should take 10-20 minutes. Much more information is available if you are interested. Please reply here or on my talk page. Thanks! I really appreciate any time you can give! Thedarkfourth (talk) 07:00, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for all the work you did in making Liverpool F.C. a Featured Article! Please accept this barnstar. Your work is much appreciated. – Quadell(talk)
A barnstar for you!
The Original Barnstar
Thanks for all your excellent work on the Liverpool FC article; it wouldn't have got to FA without you! YNWA! GedUK18:37, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
List of Vuelta a España general classification winners
sry mate but I've never heard of "MOS" before. If you could give me a link to where is says that the exact change i made was "against" the MOS, it would be great.
i made that change because it look much better, and its not relevant to link to the nationality to the athlete when your just reading results. If the reader don't understand which country he/she is from, its just to take the mouse cursor over the flag, and see where it leads you...
MOS refers to manual of style its how articles are supposed to be written and laid out and articles mist follow these protocols. The Mos for flags is here and it clearly states that flags should be accompanied with the name of the country as not all readers now what country the flag represents. The rule affects all articles although the Liverpool article doesn't have the names due to a debate which reached consensus just to have the flags. Hope that clears up the issue. I would advise you look over the MOS so you know what the guidelines in future. NapHit (talk) 14:44, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
I have reviewed this article at GAN, and placed it on hold pending the resolution of a couple small prose concerns and a few references that require updating. Otherwise, it is very close to a pass. Cheers, Resolute00:45, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Users are always welcome to help us with this newsletter. If you are interested, please leave a message on an existing editor's talkpage or sign up on the "Contributors" list of the central newsletter page, and we will tell you everything you need to know and answer your questions.
As a consequence of the race, Vettel extended his lead in the World Drivers' Championship to 112 points over Alonso, who moved up to second place in the championship. Button moved into third place in the championship, five points behind Alonso, and level on points with fourth-placed Mark Webber, but ahead on countback. In the World Constructors' Championship, Red Bull's championship lead was cut by McLaren to 126 points, with Ferrari a further 71 points behind in third position.
This newsletter is being delivered to you because you signed up to this list. If you wish to stop receiving it, please remove your name.
Apologies for the rather long delay in posting this issue; it appears that the bot just missed the request... Bad bot. Craig(talk)21:34, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Users are always welcome to help us with this newsletter. If you are interested, please leave a message on an existing editor's talkpage or sign up on the "Contributors" list of the central newsletter page, and we will tell you everything you need to know and answer your questions.
Hi NapHit, I am trying to get the 1967 European Cup Final up to GA status. I know you have done quite a few of these so I was wondering if you have come across one where a team had to play a play-off match to decide one of their ties. The reason I ask is because Inter had to play one in the semi-final and I am not sure how to put that in the table. Thanks. Adam4267 (talk) 17:42, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks fur correcting the table. To be honest I'm not sure about that way though, something just does't look right about it. I think I'll manage to get the article done on my own, I'm really just copying the layout you've used on the other articles. But if I do need any more advice I'll come and ask you if that's ok. Adam4267 (talk) 18:24, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
I'd simply rather not vote on various criteria; I simply read it through for completeness, thoroughness and depth of focus, all of which I felt were good. Brad78 (talk) 22:59, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Users are always welcome to help us with this newsletter. If you are interested, please leave a message on an existing editor's talkpage or sign up on the "Contributors" list of the central newsletter page, and we will tell you everything you need to know and answer your questions.
Below is the F1 Picture of the month (found here). The picture has to be one uploaded in the last month and only from the current season.
It is exclusive to the Newsletter. REMEMBER, YOU CAN VOTE.
As the result of his fifth-place finish in Brazil, Felipe Massa became the first Ferrari driver to complete a full season without finishing on the podium since Didier Pironi in 1981.
Sebastian Vettel, in a Red Bull-Renault, had been in pole position, but retired after a puncture in the first lap, near the second corner, which was his first retirement since the 2010 Korean Grand Prix, where he encountered a problem, with his engine. As a result, this prevented him from equalling Michael Schumacher's record of 13 wins in one season, but Vettel did equal Nigel Mansell's 1992 record of 14 pole positions in one season. This was also the first race of 2011 in which neither Red Bull finished on the podium, as Vettel's team-mate Mark Webber finished fourth.
Orphaned non-free media (File:1973_uefa_cup_final.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:1973_uefa_cup_final.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 01:13, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Gladbach subs
I can't remember the URL of the site unfortunately, but I did look at all the other European finals and 1973 wasn't there. I've spend a large amount of time trying to find unused subs on the web but haven't found this one yet. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 16:24, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
.jpg)
){kind=link}