Talk:Andrew McLeod

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

“Stalinising History”[edit]

Who edited his infobox to remove his Port Adelaide career (1994), so as he now only apparently played for the Darwin Buffaloes and Crows? Petty. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8004:1340:8132:948A:F624:B78A:CF42 (talk) 03:04, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Bias"[edit]

I've marked this page for Neutral Point of view, and outlined a few specific statements, mainly for their purely opinion based use of superlatives. I've also sought citations for a number of factual claims.

For example, statements like "McLeod kicked an unbelievable left-foot goal" are pure opinion. My instinct is that this article was written largely by supporters of the team, and the bias is too obvious. Pedleyr (talk) 12:06, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Sacred"[edit]

The phrase "sacred" video footage doesn't seem to make much sense. Are they part of some religious cult? --rossb 05:35, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Aborigines have "sacred" land. Rogerthat Talk 12:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Assessment completed for Andrew McLeod[edit]


As per either a recent request at section for assessment requests or because this article was listed as fully or partly unassessed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/Assessment I have just now completed a rating of the article and posted my results to this page. Those results are detailed above in the template box. Unfortunately, due to the volume of articles that need to be assessed, I am unable to leave detailed comments other than to make the following brief observation: high level start article

However if you have specific questions, please write to me on my talk page and as time permits I will try to provide you with my reasoning. Please put my talk page on your watchlist if you do ask such a question because in the case of these responses I will only post my answer underneath your question.

ALSO if you do not agree with the rating you can list it in the section for assessment requests below, and someone will take a look at it.--VS talk

Unspecified source for Image:Adelaide90s.png[edit]

I found Image:Adelaide90s.png and noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. Someone will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If it was obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If there are other files on this page, consider checking that they have specified their source and are tagged properly, too. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 16:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Adelaide90s.png[edit]

Image:Adelaide90s.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:McLeodAlphaCover.jpg[edit]

Image:McLeodAlphaCover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Andrew McLeod. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool. Perry Middlemiss (talk) 21:29, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:27, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Andrew McLeod. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:53, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]