User talk:Oldelpaso

Please post new messages to the bottom of my talk page. Thank you.

Archive
Archives
  1. 2005 – April 2006
  2. April – August 2006
  3. August – December 2006
  4. January – April 2007
  5. April – August 2007
  6. August – November 2007
  7. December 2007 – April 2008
  8. April – August 2008
  9. August 2008 – January 2009
  10. January 2009 – June 2010
  11. June 2010 – January 2011
  12. February 2011 – December 2012

William Smith (footballer)

Hi mate, I saw your note on Talk:William Smith (footballer) and I've tried to sort out the content so that it's just about Stockport Smith. Since we don't know enough about either player to disambiguate any other way, do you think it's worth moving this article to Stockport Smith and creating one for Buxton Smith? – PeeJay 19:45, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I haven't got a birth date for Stockport in any of my Man Utd books, so sorry I can't help there. And I think, because he spent most of his pro career with City (as far as we know), it would be fair to say that Stockport Smith is his most common name. Add to that the fact that it's a pretty good disambiguator, I think we could go ahead and move the current article to Stockport Smith. – PeeJay 23:45, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Derek Kevan

I should be able to add a few bits and pieces to the article. Will have a look at books over the next few days. --Jameboy (talk) 23:03, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know I have more that I can add but I'm taking a break from editing at the moment and not sure when I will be back. Will try to do more when I return. Thanks. --Jameboy (talk) 01:47, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Match-fixing in English football, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Round-robin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 00:37, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

IFFHS World's Best Goalkeeper

Saints FA cup matches
Hello, Oldelpaso. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

-- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 06:53, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bobby McAlinden, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mike Doyle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:30, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1930 World Cup

I send picture of the official medal to Fifa, it would make sense because you can't have bronze medal and made it 4th place. I know that issue. USA doesn't show it her medal and official page of Fifa can be fixed to opposite side. It will be responded in day or two in witch case it would make some serious changes here. Snake bgd 20:38, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok lets edit with official Fifa results with exception that bought national teams have bronze medals and that means that are bought 3rd. Snake bgd 22:06, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you are interested in those newspapers i can translate you any section, tell witch one you want. Snake bgd 22:10, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is. Politika is oldest Serbian (then Yugoslavian) newspaper founded in 1904. You translated that good. Snake bgd 22:31, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here is some intresed part form newspaper: "First column of the victorious Yugoslav tricolor flapped the first time, too, our country entered the front lines of the strongest and most powerful representatives footballing. It is an honor that many states have experienced. Let all our players affects the lofty beautiful thank you for the tremendous reputation that they obtained their homeland, the great reputation that made the Yugoslav football, the sincere and profound happiness that we create. (...) To meet the United States - Yugoslavia is not held, it is the third took into account the outcome of the match Uruguay - Argentina. That the outcome of this game turned out more favorable to Argentina, and it would be her semifinal opponent came from outside Yugoslavia. Since, however, there is a way around it awarded Yugoslavia third place after Uruguay won the victory over Argentina, regarded as a stronger and better team than Argentina. Our will play a few more games in South America, but not as a national team, but under the name B. S. K.-a." Snake bgd 22:33, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Upgrade to City season articles template

Hey OEP. I've been doing a bit of work (or rather, have only just started with doing a bit of work) to the early end of the City history articles and season articles and considering the situation, am thinking of updating the template for the season articles. I've done a mock-up of what I'm thinking of and it looks a little like this. I've already sampled PeeJay's opinion and he seems broadly in favour, but I wanted a few more opinions before blindly rushing in and changing something as drastically as this. Also I won't be rolling it out until every season article from 1880-81 through to 1889-90 has been published, which is something I'm working through at the moment, so no hurries for you or me to sort this/critique.

In case it's not immediately obvious, the colours represent the main shirt colours worn by the teams in question. For St Marks, AFAIK there is no information in existence for this, so I used a default white/black pairing.

Seriously though, I will take any ideas and if you think it's an abomination I'd be happy to simply leave the old one alone, but any opinion is a welcome opinion. Falastur2 Talk 17:51, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I also wrote this a week or so ago. Feel free to give it a read and tell me if there's anything I should improve or alter if you have the time and inclination. Again I don't want to publish before I've turned those red links blue - I'm kind of thinking I'd like to offer it up as a Did You Know candidate and so I don't want to leave anything like the red links out as an eyesore. I know that I probably need to write an introductory paragraph or three but other than that I'm not immediately sure what else to add. I don't really have the free content images to add any graphics, for a start.
Anyway, no obligation to read that, but just thought you might be interested. Falastur2 Talk 18:01, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fair points, and not ones I was entirely unaware of. I've always been an inclusionist at heart, so I naturally instantly favoured adding an article for each season as soon as I knew I had the material for it. But the issue of plagiarism or of simply over-using Toovey had crossed my mind, which is why I had resolved to add, if I got round to it, little more than a one-paragraph filler for each article at the start describing the circumstances and in no place to do anything on the season articles which gave any more information about results than opponents, dates and scorers. You'll notice that the locations for the games appears on my season articles also but Toovey doesn't actually tell you them in his book, I had to do my own research to find that stuff out. I appreciate it's a sensitive subject but I liked to think that my season articles might in fact be a facilitator for the handful of people who read up on this stuff - and let's be honest, not many people are ever going to read these articles, they're on the very niche side of niche - to then go and read Toovey's book because they want to know more. It's a good point, though - to that end, I should really add a bibliography section for his book on each article.
On a related note, the issue of plagiarism first came into my mind when I did a fair bit of bulking out on the first section of the History 1880-1928 article and I've now been deliberately reading through Gary James' book thinking about how much I would want to include on Wikipedia, and deliberately "cutting out" large sections which aren't immediately important to the topic but which books can go on about at length. The 1889 benefit match for the mine workers against Newton Heath for example - I've noticed that a lot of places talk about that game, but I intend to ignore it completely on Wikipedia. Admittedly when I wrote up the filler on that History article I included a little more info than I might now like but you will notice far less incidental information making it into future edits, and I might even go back and retrovert the article a little by removing some of those incidental facts. I feel a little more secure on this issue than others, of course, because Gary James' book is a 300-ish page tome and even though we have four Wikipedia articles on City's history instead of the one, anything I (and others) write up in those articles is never going to come close to rivalling a 300 page study for content and interest factor. I also feel more secure on adding extra info on the Early Grounds article because, frankly, AFAIK James has never tried to present a "here's a history of the early grounds and only the early grounds" text so it's untrodden ground. It's because Toovey's book is far less weighty and almost entirely just match reports that I am going to so studiously refuse to add what information on each season that Toovey provides to the season articles. In line with your suggestions, I'm also heavily considering simply not adding any more season articles, at least pre-1887 (and possibly at all, I'm not sure). As I say, as an inclusionist I want to make one for each of them but I'm not so idealistic that I can't see the truth of what you say.
Incidentally I've spoken to Gary James a few times on the Bluemoon forum. Perhaps it would be worth actively seeking his advise on what he considers to be "too much", and perhaps even what he thinks of Wikipedia full stop? By private message of course, not as a thread.
I did try to quote James and Toovey as much as I could in both my Early Grounds proto-article and the History article, but you're right in that more references are needed (I think DYK asks for one per paragraph, anyway) so I'll work on that later. I'll also check out that Signpost thing you linked, thanks.
Final comment - I'm still not 100% happy with the "Early Grounds of Manchester City F.C." title. I didn't want to use "Stadia" because in pretty much all of the cases here, they didn't build actually stadia there - at least not as far as I have seen reference to. I thought about "pitches" but that seemed a little too low-tech and inelegant, even though it's not entirely inaccurate. Do you have any thoughts? Falastur2 Talk 09:10, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've responded in kind. Falastur2 Talk 20:48, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keith Fahey GA

I haven't addressed everything yet, but could you go back and check what I have done please? Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 19:52, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reviving Eurohockey.net discussion

I came across the discussion about Eurohockey.net that you commented on, which I missed out on. I re-opened it here: 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Reviving_Eurohockey.net_discussion

. . . because I have some information about the site--namely that it's inactive. I think that's evident from visiting it and seeing that the latest updates were in March 2011. I know the creators of the site and they no longer have anything to do with it. They now operate Eurohockey.com, its successor site, which I mention in the re-opened discussion. Just thought I'd let you know. Cheers. Djob (talk) 16:39, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish Challenge Cup

Hi Oldelpaso. Thanks for your GA review of the article I nominated. I will try and see to the points you mentioned on the talkpage as quickly as possible. Thanks, Cal Umbra 23:54, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for your assistance. Cal Umbra 17:12, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New York City FC

Worth suggesting as a DYK, do you think? Bit more publicity if nothing else... Falastur2 Talk 16:46, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seems it's already been nominated. I don't much like their pull though - just using a line about the Mets opposing the Flushing Meadows stadium. Falastur2 Talk 23:11, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Incidentally, I finally got round to making those improvements - mainly the in-line citations - to the "Early Grounds" article. If you give your consent, I think I'm ready to publish it. Falastur2 Talk 00:09, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article published, references made in the Hyde Road article, and the new article nominated for DYK. If you wanted to mozy on over and add a review, I would be obliged.
Cracking match against Chelsea, by the by. Did you watch it? Falastur2 Talk 01:04, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's all good. I'm hard enough on myself - I may not like admitting that people need to correct things of mine but I'm never brash enough to believe that my work can't be improved, and I take no offence for the way you did it. I've always had a bit of a problem with inserting over-long sentences into text anyway; it's one of my most annoying flaws. Probably derives from the way that I often find it hard to filter between important bits to add to the text and circumstantial or unimportant details. To me it's so crucial to know absolutely everything about something if you are to truly understand it. Anyway, thanks for the assistance, just hope it gets reviewed soon. How did the GNR go, by the way? Falastur2 Talk 09:27, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ouch. Though only one second out isn't bad at all - once you've gotten over the initial disappointment then you can surely contend yourself with knowing that a one-second gap is, in terms of effort and performance, essentially nothing at all. Congratulations on your PB. And yeah - it's funny. Academically I come from a mathematical background, but I am much more of a literature person in actual fact. I often read through novels thinking about how I would've altered the paragraph I just read or this and that. Eh, I'm a man of many contradictions in truth. Falastur2 Talk 10:08, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship co-nomination

Hi, I've agreed to be nominated for adminship by Mr. Stradivarius, and I'm wondering if you and/or Struway2 would be interested in co-nominating me? Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 10:58, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the fact you'd previously mentioned running for RfA came to mind when I thought of asking you. I'll let you know when I've formally accepted. Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 19:40, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Now live. Please be gentle :-) Mattythewhite (talk) 20:35, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Manchester City F.C. ownership and finances, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages David Bernstein, His Excellency and John Wardle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:23, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Early ground DYK nomination

Hey OEP. I made my nomination live a few days back but it seems to have fallen by the wayside. Don't suppose you might drop over there and give it a very quick review? Only if you have the time/inclination, of course. Falastur2 Talk 23:13, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It was my main page debut. I'm not sure how much credit I feel entitled to though - I wrote pretty much the entire article, but I didn't nominate it for DYK and I didn't provide the first review, I only commented on it. I wasn't sure if I was entitled to claim review credit, but...I did. So it's all good.
As for the Early grounds DYK, I also spoke to PeeJay and he wrote a rather gushing review praising my efforts, which I also thought was a little more praise than I deserved, but it has been reviewed now. I don't fully understand the DYK process, but I think it still needs someone to OK it and queue it. I'm not really sure who does that or how though, so I guess the waiting game begins? Anyway, thanks for your advice on improvements all the same - if I do get another DYK credit for the Early grounds article then you are entitled to part of the credit also. Falastur2 Talk 11:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Denis Law

Hi mate, thanks for the info on Denis Law. I'm still at a loss as to whether those matches should be included in his stats table though. Was the Texaco Cup official enough to be included? I suppose if it is the same competition as the FL Trophy, it should be, but some competitions have waxed and waned in importance over the years, so I'm not sure. – PeeJay 01:03, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OSC membership

Thanks. I'm not a member so I didn't have that luxury, but I suspected that there wouldn't be a citable figure for actual membership anyway, which is why I didn't bother trying to find one after a peripheral glance at their website. The number of branches I got from counting up all the individual branches on their website though. Hopefully that bit isn't out of date too... Falastur2 Talk 10:25, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Airdrie

Ive answered your question re dates.[1]Blethering Scot 18:34, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of players

I'm sure your prediction will be correct; "B", "C", and "M" are going to be brutal. It's enough of a challenge making sure all of the statistics are correct, then you've got to make sure every player is included and in the correct order. Walls of Jericho (talk) 18:57, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kinkladze

That's a surprisingly great article on him. Any idea why it failed FAC? I can spot a few minor glitches but in my opinion it is a worthy candidate and I think it could get there with some work.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:12, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'll open a peer review on it, get some wider input. I really think it deserves to be brought to FAC and this time attract more attention and comments. In the meantime if you could check to see that there's no dead URL links and that the translated Russian content is accurate I'll begin looking through it again within a few days. It could also be updated a little, what has he done since 2011/2?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:51, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Andy Holden (athlete), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Leyland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nominations/2014 Football League Cup Final

Since the semi-finals are over, new hooks have been made at Template:Did you know nominations/2014 Football League Cup Final. Can you give it a re-review? The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 20:05, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you re-review it? The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 16:49, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Andy Holden (athlete)

Materialscientist (talk) 13:18, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Peru national football team FAC review

Hello Oldelpaso. I hope to find you at a good time friend. It has been some years, but the Peru national football team article is still in the FA review process. The article underwent a thorough copy-edit and now is significantly different from the last time you reviewed it. Since you provided helpful reviews to it in the past, your comments (and oppose/support vote) would be much welcomed. Thanks!--MarshalN20 Talk 01:22, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Manchester meetup - location

Hi Simon, I spotted your comment on the Manchester meetup talk page. Very good point, thanks! The Waterhouse is clearly not a good location on the 18th. Rather than cancel or postpone, I think we should find an alternative venue, probably on the other side of town, but still within striking distance of Victoria and Pickledwilly.
What do you think about the Jolly Angler on Ducie Street? Do you know it? I don't, but reviews I've read seem favourable (it might not have wifi, but we can cope without that I suppose). Or do you have another suggestion?
Cheers, and I hope to see you there - it's been a while. Bazonka (talk) 16:38, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lescott - Reply

Hi there ODP, AL "here",

thank for your kind and in-depth message in my talk page. Also, sad to hear DK is leaving, but guess what? So am i after eight years, it was a good run overall, but it's not very fun anymore, will edit to the best of my abilities until the end of the 2014 FIFA World Cup, then "make way for the newer wiki-generation" :)

That "slower than a pint of milk" really brought a smile to my face. Yes, undoubtedly Lescott is quite "challenged" technically, and Demichelis is more evolved in that department, but i'll NEVER understand teams that play with two, one or zero national players, and that's a reality in both the Premier League and the Primeira Liga, just to name the examples closer to us. I'll be rooting for Sevilla FC in the 2014 UEFA Europa League Final, don't support any club in my country, but if i did it would never be S.L. Benfica, F.C. Porto or Sporting Clube de Portugal. Pellegrini seems like a polite and courteous human being, so i'm glad his team took the title over this guy - i'm Portuguese but i'm not blind - but his squad approach, unfortunately, is that of 99,999999999999999999% of the managers in the world, "the more (foreigners) the merrier". Stoke City, one of the teams (i read that last year, can't remember where) with the lowest budgets in the PL, never played with more than TWO (!) English players ALL season, last game against Fulham they fielded zero, talk about a tight budget... Maybe i'm seeing things wrong, but if i am, would like to know where in your opinion please.

Will now drop a message in Kangaroo's page, thanks for yours again. Be safe, "whistle" if you need anything until 12 JULY. --AL (talk) 22:14, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes indeed, i have tried to take the odd break, it has never amounted to anything though. Thanks again for your insightful message, keep it up --AL (talk) 18:02, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Errors on 13 May

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:30, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Errors on 17 May

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"A–Z of Manchester Football" ISBN

I saw on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Football/Booklist that you own a copy of "A–Z of Manchester Football: 100 Years of Rivalry 1878–1978" by Derek Brandon. I've been fixing ISBNs, and I noticed that this book is listed on a few pages as having the invalid ISBN "0-86148-001-7". Would you please verify the ISBN with your copy and let me know what ISBN it lists, if any? Thanks, {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 22:08, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just checked it , and the ISBN listed in the book is indeed 0 86148 001 7. Oldelpaso (talk) 18:21, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi am Jwale2,I am passionate about sport and i need you to help me out to improve upon my articles on sports in wikipedia projects.I know you are experienced sports writer and i believe that if you help out i would be good as you are.I have not yet started a sport article my self what i do is only edit am looking forward to your experience and direction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwale2 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Joanne Pavey

Why the move? No discussion was even initiated on the talk page, so obviously there is no consensus. You just did it on your own volition? She has a 25 year competitive history with numerous results. Yes, the redirect will find the article, but (in violation of WP:COMMONNAME I am finding about a 75% / 25% in favor of the formal name in results rather than the nickname you just redirected to. I've been linking this name for several years, the article has been in existence for almost exactly 8 years. You made your first edit (I assume your first contact) with this article in the last few minutes. How well have you researched your unilateral decision? Trackinfo (talk) 23:54, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Starting with the worldwide governing body: Joanne; the top athletics statistics site joanne; the BBC Joanne; Eurosport Joanne; her own website show the shortened name pictorial in the header but the site name is joannepavey.com Its obvious the sport statistics, the media of the world (which is largely what we report on wikipedia), use the formal name, while in person she might use the shortened version. Jo is not exactly a stage name she is out trying to sell. Trackinfo (talk) 08:58, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Little Tin Idol replica picture

Hi,,,Just to say i am using your replica picture in an article for an online magazine, which is part of my masters course at oxford. I will credit the photo to 'Oldelpaso'. the article is about Victorian Football. M Freeman

-

Next meetups in North England

Hello. Would you be interested in attending one of the next wikimeets in the north of England? They will take place in:

If you can make them, please sign up on the relevant wikimeet page!

If you want to receive future notifications about these wikimeets, then please add your name to the notification list (or remove it if you're already on the list and you don't want to receive future notifications!)

Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:35, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]


List of Non-Professional Marathon Runners

I'm reverting to the earlier references in the table. The references you edited link to the general NYRR website (I know, I tried to make it link to individual results too).

Thanks. Poggio (talk) 12:58, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

List of disputed marathon runners / Marathon course-cutting

Thanks for your comment at List of disputed marathon runners. I (now) agree with you, but hope the article can survive. I have revised it and moved it to Marathon course-cutting and invite you and others to review and edit — or delete if necessary.

Thanks. Poggio (talk) 20:01, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kelechi Iheanacho

Hi OEP. Noticed that some rookie has come along and made a handful of new articles about City youths who, while I support the effort in principle, clearly do not qualify for articles at present. Most of them seem to have been deleted already, but it seems Kelechi Iheanacho has not. It's only a matter of time until that article is deleted, but I'm pleasantly surprised at the quality of the article, so could you perhaps userify the article onto my userspace so that we have a convenient backup for when Nacho (inevitably) gets his first senior game and qualifies to be there? Falastur2 Talk 22:16, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I knew you'd been involved in expanding it. I was a bit surprised, actually, since it's pretty clear his article is for the chop. I just wasn't sure what you'd do with the article when it gets deleted. Falastur2 Talk 18:34, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The Article Rescue Barnstar
For your efforts in rescuing Kelechi Iheanacho Paul  Bradbury 22:22, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

List of York City F.C. players (fewer than 25 appearances)

Hi, when you have a spare moment would you mind reviewing List of York City F.C. players (fewer than 25 appearances) at FLC? Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 22:33, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Going AWOL?

I had assumed that when I changed the stats. of Barnes, Young, Oakes and Quinn to align them with their supporting M.E.N. articles you would immediately push back and dispute them the way you did with the comparable changes done for Book, Booth, Power and Rösler which allowed us to focus in and determine the actual game(s) that were causing the Apps. tally discrepancy in each case and document it accordingly with a footnote. Do I assume from the fact that you haven't done so that you simply agree with those changes or that you have gone AWOL instead?

While waiting for your responses I simply pushed on with the process of working up from the bottom of the "List of players" table and validating each player's stats. as reported by Soccerbase against multiple other sources to determine if those players could still be genuinely sourced from there (by means of editorial adjustments plus the addition of explanatory footnotes) or even moved over to being sourced from Soccerbase if they weren't already. As you can see from the current state of the article I have gone quite a bit further than the David James / Antoine Sibierski divide I had mentioned a couple of weeks ago. Most of the players I had described back then as falling into a grey area (between Sibierski and Dickov) have since been successfully sourced to Soccerbase and I am almost done with processing them all (by migrating them from the "Historic players" table to the "Contemporary players" table). Horlock, Dickov and Brown will probably be the last three players that can be sourced to Soccerbase. That will probably be a good juncture at which to leave the two tables as they are for some period while we work out what can be done next.

Beyond Dickov Soccerbase is not much use (as in the cases of Kinkladze and Rösler), which leaves only the two flavours of James - i.e., the book version of his stats. and the version of his stats. that are now embodied on Bluemoon - as viable, but potentially conflicting, data sources for the rest of the "historic players". The Bluemoon effort by Ric does mean that there is now a web-based source of all this data for virtually every player that has played for MCFC since the club's inception. The $64,000 question is how accurate that data is due to the seemingly high level of errors introduced into the raw data as it was entered into the Bluemoon teamsheet database. I would like to hear your thoughts on that issue. — not really here discuss 20:29, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

European Football Yearbook

Hello. Do you have access to European Football Yearbook from 1988 to 1995? Xaris333 (talk) 13:00, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kilchoman Distllery

I've removed Kilchoman as a redirect to Kilchoman Distillery and have therefore being patching links to the redirect. Therefore I've changed your distilleries page. HTH. Semudobia (talk) 18:09, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bosvelt cropped.JPG listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bosvelt cropped.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly hi! 11:44, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, Oldelpaso. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Invite to the African Destubathon

Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 53 African countries, so should be enjoyable! So it would be a good chance to win something for improving stubs on African sportspeople, including footballers, athletes, Olympians and Paralympians etc, particularly female ones, but also male. Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance (think Regions of countries etc). If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing a few expanded articles on African Paralympians, Olympians and committees etc, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. Thanks. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:13, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I don't know if you're still around, so I left a note about Scotland national football team over at WT:FOOTY. Wherever you are, thanks for writing this. - Dank (push to talk) 00:18, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Oldelpaso.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Oldelpaso. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

mostly football

Thank you for quality articles such as Manchester City F.C. and Georgi Kinkladze, for polishing Scotland national football team to what it became, for the hard work of updates, redirects and project tags, - Simon, here for more than ten years, you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:39, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Three years ago, you were recipient no. 1523 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:15, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67
Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
  • Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
  • The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.
Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Information icon Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. — xaosflux Talk 01:37, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Information icon Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. — xaosflux Talk 00:19, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Information icon Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. — xaosflux Talk 02:36, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Laura Muir, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daily Record. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:NF-Board football association

Template:NF-Board football association has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 18:56, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

City players articles

Hi OEP. Thanks as ever for your continuing work on updating the players articles - it really is something of a thankless task I think but I very much appreciate the edits.

On that topic though, I've had a gripe for some time now with the way someone split the main List of Players article into so that "contemporary" players are separated. I have never once thought this was a good idea and every year that goes by makes my regard for it all the worse. I'm just polling you for support in finally getting rid of the distinction and putting the article back to the way it was. Thoughts? Falastur2 Talk 19:34, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, on the plus side, MLITH is long gone from Wikipedia, so at least that roadblock is gone. For the record, though, I don't believe it was him who first initiated the split.
I'll look into re-merging the two tables when I can, although it has to be said that my enthusiasm for massive editing jobs has somewhat diminished from back in the days. I'll see about how long it takes me. When I get round to it, I'll implement your suggestions though. Falastur2 Talk 16:00, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red World Contest

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Oldelpaso. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Oldelpaso. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of subpage moved

Information icon Hello. This is a message to let you know that a subpage of your user page has been moved to User:Oldelpaso/Going to the Match. This has been done since titles with consecutive apostrophes (for example, '' or ''') have been known to cause issues with wiki markup on pages if the page title is linked on other pages. Since the end of 2014, the creation of titles containing consecutive apostrophes has been restricted by Wikipedia's title creation blacklist. The page can now be found at User:Oldelpaso/Going to the Match. Feel free to contact me with any questions regarding this. Thank you. Steel1943 (talk) 23:16, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Remembered

No idea if you'll ever see this, but you're remembered fondly. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 08:28, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So happy to see your name again! --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 09:51, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi Oldelpaso, we have never met but I want to ask you something. Do you want to review FAC Burnley F.C.? (Only if you have the time and desire of course) You have a great track record in writing and reviewing club articles and it would be good to have an experienced user to look at these. If there's anything I can do in return, please let me know. Thanks, WA8MTWAYC (talk) 09:33, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive
  • On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives.
Click here to opt out of any future messages.

(t · c) buidhe 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A.C. Monza FA candidate

Hey, how's it going? I see you've reviewed football-related articles for FA in recent years. A.C. Monza has been a candidate for over three weeks, and there are almost no comments. I would really appreciate it if you took some time to leave a comment (it doesn't necessarily have to be a full review) :) Nehme1499 21:12, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FAR for 1930 FIFA World Cup

I have nominated 1930 FIFA World Cup for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 13:59, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for San Marino national football team

San Marino national football team has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:09, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Paul Dickov

Paul Dickov has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 00:27, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Elite Ice Hockey League

Elite Ice Hockey League has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:03, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Robbie Fowler

Robbie Fowler has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 21:01, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Always precious

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:51, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Diane Leather

Hello! Your submission of Diane Leather at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! RoySmith (talk) 15:38, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Google

Is it me or has Google gone way downhill in the decade since I was a regular editor?

It's not you. Viriditas (talk) 09:20, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Before I forget... Viriditas (talk) 09:27, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Paper: Is Google Getting Worse? A Longitudinal Investigation of SEO Spam in Search Engines Viriditas (talk) 09:28, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Diane Leather

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Diane Leather, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 05:08, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Diane Leather

On 19 December 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Diane Leather, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Diane Leather was the first woman to run a mile in under five minutes? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Diane Leather. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Diane Leather), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:04, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1956 cup final kits

Long time no speak indeed... Access to newspapers.com via the Wikipedia Library is a wondrous thing, wish I still had the energy to take decent advantage of it.

Per Rule 13 of the FA Cup competition at the time, "Where the colours of two competing clubs are similar both clubs must change. In the event of the clubs not agreeing upon the colours to be worn by their respective teams the association shall decide."(Western Daily Mail, 2 Jan 1953) The rule was still in force until 1989–90,(Historical Kits, scroll down to line beginning 3 March) though increasingly unenforced.(True Colours)

According to Les McDowall, when the teams played in the FA Cup the previous season there was a gentlemen's agreement that Man City would play in their first change (claret and blue) and Birmingham in white. This time, Birmingham wouldn't agree to City wearing anything blue,(Manchester Evening News, 26 March 1956) so the FA ruled that Birmingham would wear white shirts and black shorts and Man City white shorts and a striped shirt with no blue. You chose maroon and white.(Evening Chronicle (Newcastle), 28 March 1956) cheers, Struway2 (talk) 12:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]