User talk:Kevin McE/Archives/2009

January 2009

Your recent edit to the page Andy Barcham appears to have added incorrect information, and has been reverted or removed. All information in the encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable published source. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/articles/barchammovemadepermanent020109.html Govvy (talk) 20:31, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I had posted correct info: I have now changed the reference on that article to direct to it. Kevin McE (talk) 21:02, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Andy Barcham. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Permanent means Permanent deal, He is no longer a Spurs player. Govvy (talk) 21:02, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Tierney

To be honest, I probably have to apologise more than anything else. I knew Tierney had played for Ireland, but until you reverted my edit I didn't realise there was no evidence of such in the article. Hence my edit summary, although correct for the reasons you have given, were presumptious and to the average reader made no sense. I simply thought the article already said he had played for Ireland. Sorry to have caused such a minor little dispute. Peanut4 (talk) 18:37, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree that nationality should first be according to place of birth unless there is something to indicate otherwise. Also, with the likes of Paul Tierney, Irish is merely, well certainly predominantly, a sports nationality rather than perhaps his actual nationality. I've also just noticed Marc Tierney. It's a difficult one - I'm unsure whether he has played for Ireland. If he hasn't, I would leave him as English in the asbence of any more evidence. Peanut4 (talk) 18:51, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Ecuador

Kevin,

Why have you gone to a page (Ecuador's) of a country you are not even part of, and preach your mind about what's appropriate and what's not. Keep your ample wisdom, for something you know better. People that come to places like this, like comparisons, so go fly your kite somewhere else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Svillasis (talk • contribs) 02:30, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

re: Blue squares

My apologies. I will attempt to follow the standard convention in the future. Best regards. Jogurney (talk) 16:28, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Obama on MoS

I would not have reverted your edit to MoS, which i found to be unnecessary but harmless, and i have threatened with blocking the editor who reverted you. On the other hand, i urge you against a potential edit war, and hope you will recognize that the moment has passed when you were the right person to take care of that. (I predict someone else will do, perhaps without noticing you did, that same edit; it'll be interesting to see!) Thanks, and keep cool.
--Jerzy•t 21:35, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Scally's birthday

Unfortunately I don't have any programmes from that era, nor do I remember the match you refer to, as due to the evil machinations of a woman, I spent the 1995-96 season in exile in Scotland and made it to not a single match all season.... :-P -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 22:05, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

First match

The reference to the game v Arsenal reserves being the club's first competitive match is wrong, it was definitely a friendly. I'll correct that and check what the first competitive match actually was (the team played in four cups this season, I'd need to look at the dates......) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:44, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

iraq biggest soccer win

Soccerfanplayer (talk) 23:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

dude, chill. i cited it, okay? Im new in wiki so give me a break. it aint easy to learn how to cite in a jiffy. i think i know the history of my country's soccer playing. later

Egypt

I don't check the common's talk regularly, so thanks for telling me. Interesting stuff, too bad I spent an hour getting those stripes to work. Bugger. I'll get around changing the map tomorrow.--Patrick «» 23:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Query

Kev - can you email me at zurich_gill@hotmail.co.uk as i do think i may know you Dribblingscribe (talk) 22:15, 25 February 2009 (UTC) ta

Indonesian footy teams

Hey you scratched the surface there - almost every article has either spurious sources or none at all - problem is where to end or start with the lack of WP:RS SatuSuro 12:51, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Exeter City F.C. former players list.

I don't know why it was removed before because no explanation was given (that's why I reverted it), now I still don't know what you are referring too, can you please tell me what conversation it was for removal of such lists, because if this is so, then I know over 50 clubs these lists would have to be removed from!! Govvy (talk) 13:36, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Notable -> List of

Any chance of instead of just clipping other folks efforts you might consider converting notable/famous player sections into simple list pages? You're aware the subject is a source of continual debate and creating list pages might just contribute to furthering the football project in general. Its a fair bet that folks who are interested in this sort of thing will be back to restore the deleted sections and it might be useful to have a neutral place to have them pursue their interest. The approach is being applied to many English clubs and there's no reason not to encourage the adoption of a similar approach by others. Wiggy! (talk) 18:28, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm trying to work toward a compromise situation and would appreciate some positive input rather than being put under the gun to immediately come up with comprehensive lists. What for? Part of the nature of this place is how it evolves. So give it a chance, let people wrap their heads around the idea and lets see where it goes. We may end up with something cool. Wiggy! (talk) 00:59, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Colchester united

Hi, I noticed you removed parts of my article saying "It is farcical to have more text about a band than 40 years of club history". Firstly ColU has been going since 1937, thats 70 years of history, more than 100 if you include Colchester Town. Secondly it just shows that we need to write more about the clubs history (possibly my next job). But the fans ARE the history of our club. They've lived and breathed the club all their lives. Thirdly, bands might not be fans but their members are. Martin Williams sang "Up the U's" in the centre cirlce of Layer Road with all his heart wearing his Blue'n'Whites with pride. And you cant tell me a band records three songs celebrating their club and its members arent fans. I just think youre wrong removing the text. DarthJoeyJoJo (talk) 21:24, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments and sorry if i sound a bit angry. Just found some Sarfend fans vandalising the ColU page. The fiends!!! DarthJoeyJoJo (talk) 22:17, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Non-FIFA Template

Hi, you mentioned that you used to dip your toe in the murky waters of Non-FIFA football so I was wondering if you could give me some advice. As a way of teaching myself to edit navboxes I thought it would be a good idea to have a mess about with this template because it's a mess of so many different types of entities. So far I've come up with this. I was wondering what you thought, is it too messy? Would you make each subsection collapsible? Is it worth the effort? Thanks Stu.W UK (talk) 00:26, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Ecuador project.

Hey Kev (I'm assuming),

I recently started a discussion in the talk page of WikiProject Ecuador to come up with a consensus on naming conventions for cantons, parishes, cities/towns in Ecuador. Since I noticed you are often involved in a lot of edits on articles that deal with Ecuador, I would like you to put in your two-cents on the matter. Thanks. Digirami (talk) 09:47, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

AFD comments

The point is that you are moaning about how I did it, when you agree with the end result. I don't know if this is because you have backtracked on your original comments and want to deflect this by complaining about how I made the change, or whether you just are a bit pedantic about these things. Either way there does seem to be some kind of code of conduct that you expect people to follow, which I don't understand. It is nothing to do with the policies you quoted, because the end result doesn't violate any of those. If all you were worried about was the name of the heading and whether there was source, then you should have done it yourself, rather than moan about my actions. Over The Desk (talk) 10:03, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

You did backtrack, after I pointed out that AFD is for suggesting deletions rather than merges. If you want to try and revise the history, fine, but I am not interested. Yet again you are banging on about trivial points where I seem to have violated your codes of conduct (which, even more confusingly, seem to differ depending upon editing experience - apparently you can criticise me, but I can't criticise you). You agree that the current version is good, well I started the process of getting to this point. Other people helped. All you have done is bang on about who should have done what, again in line with your own personal code of conduct, without actually doing anything yourself. Maybe you can stop harrassing me, and use your vast experience to actually create some content. Over The Desk (talk) 12:57, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

No, I do onsider myself constrained by Wikipedia policies, but I do not consider that I have to follow you bizarre code of conduct, even if I did understand it. Your ego seems to have been hurt by having to backtrack against a less experienced editor (your words not mine). Perhaps this is why you are still harrassing me, when you claim to want no further correspondence, because you need to have the final word. If that is the case, please try to put your ego aside and simply do not engage me in further discussion. Over The Desk (talk) 13:34, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

GFC 4 TFA

Hi Kevin

Just thought I'd let you know that I'm planning on nominating Gillingham F.C. for Today's Featured Article for May 18th, the 116th anniversary of the meeting in the Napier Arms at which the club was formed. The downside of making it to the front page, of course, is that a short-term avalanche of vandalism usually follows. Anyway, just thought I'd let you know, and I'll keep you posted as to how the nomination proceeds.....

Cheers and UTG! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:49, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Estonians under Soviet Union?

No, their place of birth WAS Estonia, it was occupied by the Soviet Union. The fact that it was occupied is not relevant in every article, except when the person has competed in f.e. Olympic games, where I tried make it clear that they took part of the games as Soviet athletes. The Government of Estonia never legally recognized the Soviet Occupation and they were born in Estonia. For example - were the French, who were born under Nazi occupation, called Nazis? Or were they born in Germany? Perhaps no..H2ppyme (talk) 04:23, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually you are wrong about countries not recognising our independence. (well, of course we weren't independent, but Estonia was recognised as a state) See this for international non recognition of the occupation. And one thing is nationality. It is wrong to say that Ivar Stukolkin was a Soviet swimmer, because he was an ethnic Estonian (despite his Russian surname, Ivar is a completely Estonian name) and the word Soviet would be rude, since the entire nation was under occupation. Other thing is birthplace. If a person was born in Estonia, under whatever occupation, he would still be born in Estonia. If you really want to (which I don't mind) you can add Russian Empire after Estonia for pre-1918 births, but not USSR, since Estonia wasn't legally part of it. If there is a need to mention that at the time of someone's birth, the country was occupied, we can add it, but I don't think it is necessary for athletes, maybe politicians, writers etc. And in these sportspeople articles, I've tried to leave some note that the person took part of some event under the Soviet flag...Also, in regart to Ivar Stukolkin, the patronymic name in the middle isn't necessary, since it was used only by the Soviets/Russians. The Republic of Estonia doesn't put father's name in the middle, not even for ethnic Russians. H2ppyme (talk) 13:30, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Not always is the birthplace the "country that controlled the territory at the time". It doesn't always matter, since firstly they might have had nothing to do with that country (like someone born in Estonia in 1990...- ME), and secondly one's doings have nothing to do with any particular country (for example a scientist who discovered something "not so important", but was born in Russian Empire, in the Governorate of Estonia) - then, we can just write that the person was born in Estonia, whether it was independent, uninhabited, under Nazi or Soviet rule doesn't matter. Therefore I suggest leaving Estonia for these athletes, because Estonia can also mean a territory, a Swedish or Russian province or an SSR...We have no need to write under what system he was born. Another example - does it matter wether a French was born in the French Empire, Kingdom of France or in the Republic of France, or perhaps in France, occupied by Germany? Why not write, that he or she was born "in France"?H2ppyme (talk) 14:30, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

If you plan to revert these edits, please inform me first. I don't think anyone else has a problem with only Estonia written as birth place. By the way, as much as I have seen other biography articles about Estonians, mostly only athledes had Estonian SSR or the Soviet Union as birth place, others had simply Estonia, and/or more specifical place names. And every policy has its exceptions. They are guidelines more, not laws.H2ppyme (talk) 15:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Logic

Normally people vandalise my userpage for me and I then update the tally. It was certainly unusual for someone to update the tally on my behalf without having the imagination to do some vandalism as well :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

2009 in road cycling‎

Hello. I'd appreciate your input on the matter of where to place La Flèche Wallonne on the 2009 in road cycling article. I've made a comment on Talk:2009 in road cycling. Thanks much. Malo0178 (talk) 13:43, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Wembley?

Careful Kevin, don't start doing a Stoke City circa 2000 and making plans for Wembley this early :-) As for the player lists, I'd rather amend those players' status and do all the appearance/goals updates in one fell swoop, to keep things completely consistent and accurate, I may do that today if I get a spare half hour. Oh, and I believe Clohessy is still technically a Gills player until the end of the season...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:23, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Giro

I'm stepping away from editing any cycling-related articles at the moment, but I've noticed you've been the one adding a little prose to the Giro recap pages. You need to add (or at least change) a source - the existing sources link only to previews of each stage, not the results. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 03:20, 13 May 2009 (UTC) This was a stupid idea, and I'm not adhering to it. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 04:53, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

And there is a "combination classification" in the Giro, but the name is kind of misleading - it's not like the combination classification that exists in the Vuelta, it's actually more like the Tour's "most combative rider" award. Riders get points for time and distance they stay away in breakaways. I think it's a fairly insignificant classification that we don't really need, but it does exist. Just FYI. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 23:45, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

There are two awards that you seem to be confusing: the Most combative classification, which gives points for position at crossing finish line, KoM lines and intermediate lines, which has a similar score structure to that of the table I deleted, but is not called a combativity award, and is not lead by Scarponi, and the Trofeo Fuga Cervelo classification, for which one point is awarded for each km that a rider is in a breakaway. The Giro has many different (unjerseyed) awards: maybe there should be discussion of which should be included, but none should be included without explanation (thanks for your explanation of the two team awards: that ought to be shown on the article) Kevin McE (talk) 06:54, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Bleh. Perhaps that goes to show how insignificant the classifications are. It's UCI rules that there can only be 4 competitions that award a special jersey, and the Tour and the Vuelta don't go over that, but goodness the Giro does. We should probably nail down what we should include on the Giro pages, and how deep to go (I'd say the jersey classifications should go to 10, but anything else can go to 3 or 5 or not even be included as far as I care). Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 07:50, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I have revised User:Nosleep/Style guide/Short stage race with additional questions. Please give 'er a look. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 04:53, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

More Gills players

Much poring over my prized copy of HotSM has produced this. I plan on merging it in with the existing player list as soon as I figure out which of the players marked with a ** played league football and are therefore notable...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:41, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Worcestershire County Cricket Club - quite right

Thanks for tagging the "Notable past players" section. It's left over from much earlier versions of the article, and most certainly needs to be redone with proper criteria. It's been on my to-do list for a while, but the tag might give some impetus actually to do it now! I might well get rid of the "Worcestershire Facts and Feats" section at the same time, since some of it is unreferenced and the rest isn't that interesting. Loganberry (Talk) 12:28, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Template:Famous players

I seriously don't know what your problem is but I am about this close to just putting it up for deletion if you continue to edit war over it. MickMacNee (talk) 18:46, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Gills

Cheers for making all the necessary end-of-season updates. I went literally straight from Wembley to a little mini-break holiday and have just got back and am ploughing through my watchlist. To answer your queries, there really isn't any clearly thought-out reason for the arrangement of players on the same apps totals. When I get round to merging in the list of players who played for the club during its non-league days, I'll try to put them all into some sort of sensible order. As to your other question, it's a bit tricky, as obviously we know the contract end dates of the likes of Crofts, but who's to say that someone like Trevett Read didn't remain under contract for another five years after his one and only first-team app? For old-timey players, last app is all we have to go on. Having said that, I guess we ought to use the best info available to us, and for modern players that would be the contract end date........... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:36, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

California Vehicle Code - Bicycle Relevant Sections

Hi. I tried to address the concerns you posted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/California Vehicle Code - Bicycle Relevant Sections in favor of deletion. Would you please reconsider? Thanks! --Born2cycle (talk) 01:01, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

New style guide first draft

User:Nosleep/Style guide/Grand Tour. It is mostly built off the first one, though there is a little still to decide. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 08:36, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Giro 2009

Please make football club, not bicycle race, becouse you not mak good page, the oldest better than you make. 20:22, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Jackson's international goal

I believe Big Mama scored one international goal while with the Gills, but I may be wrong............. -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:31, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Barryfullerliftingtrophy.JPG

An image which would fit brilliantly in a number of articles, but unfortunately our old friend Andysteve has not bothered to add any licensing info, so it's probably going to be deleted on Monday......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:58, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: redirects

Sorry, I read your comment but then forgot about it - thanks for reminding me. The reason I did that is that the Dauphiné Liberé is just a French regional newspaper that sponsors the Critérium du Dauphiné Libéré, you don't call the Premier League the "Barclays" just because Barclays Bank sponsors it. Any link the Barclays Bank when talking about the PL would be removed strait away, so I did that. I now realise however that I should have used AWB to change the links, not just remove them. I admit my error and am extremely thankful that you undid it in my place. ChrisDHDR 18:52, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

	The Working Man's Barnstar
	For painstaklingly undoing my own mistakes, all 117 of them. ChrisDHDR 18:52, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

European Team Championships 2009

I've added a section about the implementation of the rule changes. Your thoughts would be appreciated! Cheers. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)^{WIKIPROJECT ATHLETICS NEEDS YOU!} 02:32, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Hatnotes

Basically the short of it is that they go on the pages which don't have an ambiguous name. Someone searching for The Gill's Kevin Maher, won't get to Kevin Maher (U.S. soccer player) by mistake. The point is at WP:NAMB. Hope this helps, --Jimbo^[online] 07:54, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Cycling pages

Ok, I have seen the discussion on the cycling portal, but I don't understand why the nationality is irrelevant. It's a pleasure for me to edit the palmares of cycling races, I can do it without any problem. Can we reconsider the situation about the flag-icon of the team nationality? I notice that another user disagrees with that change. Sorry but sometimes Wikipedia is a bit confusing for me and so I didn't notice the discussion on the cycling portal. LegendK (talk) 12:07, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Cycling pages

What are you doing on the cycling pages? Why have you eliminated the team nationality from the tables? I work everyday to complete the palmares of every single race, so please respect my contributions and bring the flag-icon back. LegendK (talk) 12:48, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I didn't post 3 times in any given day, so you are wrong about the rule-breaking. In any case, I'm just going to be the bigger man and leave it alone, since you insist on changing the article back every time I correct it. Darktower 12345 (talk) 08:12, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

New style guide (need help on it)

User:Nosleep/Style guide/One day race Let me know if I'm babying you with these individualized notices (since I also left note at WT:CYC), I just want people to see it and give their input. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 01:27, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

FIFA updates

Thanks. I saw that only a few teams were updated before I did it, so I decided to update a few teams that particularly interest me, and then once I got going I just ended up doing the top 100. I was going to go the bottom 100 but I never got around to doing it. --Tocino 16:24, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Tour de France

Why did you remove the link in the See Also section for the 2009 Tour de France race? I think that many readers would be unaware that there is an article for the current race on Wikipedia.  uriel8  (talk) 02:46, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Peloton

I noticed your edit summary on the Tour stage recaps page suggesting the word isn't used in a non-competitive context. If that's the case, you'd best edit peloton, which currently includes the text

More loosely, "the peloton" can also refer to professional cyclists in general: "LeMond joined the European peloton at a time when few Americans could.

Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 15:19, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

sock?

I've also been thinking that IP 74.192.30.231 is Grant. This IP began editing the day after Grant's sock, User:AfterMayAndIntoAugust was banned. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 11:33, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Velits brothers

Velits brothers: use Google you idiot, before deleting any contributions. Do you know anything about cycling or you just keep pressing delete button for fun? John. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.218.74.38 (talk) 10:56, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Giro

"Dalla sua nascita ad oggi, coloro che hanno rivestito la carica di organizzatore del Giro d'Italia". Thats what I tried to translate in to English on the Giro wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThurstAsh13 (talk • contribs) 20:48, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Danish anthem

Danish anthem for Contador is a historical fact that should be recorded. Leave it as it is, do not play God. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.218.74.38 (talk) 02:25, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

RTE before 12/7/2009 did not stand for Raidió Teilifís Éireann

There was no such thing as Raidió Teilifís Éireann before 12 July 2009, and any reference to the Irish state broadcaster before that date should say Radio Telefís Éireann. The current batch edits are, in the vast majority of cases, inappropriate. Kevin McE (talk) 08:04, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. OK, I guess I'll need to (at least partially) revert some of these then. I've also changed RTE to RTÉ in a lot of places, and those can stay.

So let me get this clear: {{cite}}s of specific publications/programs should use the name RTÉ had at the time of publication as the author field, right?

How about things like "Joe Blogs, a popular RTÉ presenter"? Should they use the new name or the old one? I'd guess new in those cases.

How about "Foo, a 1960s RTÉ current affairs program," or "Bar, the producer of the 1983 children's program on RTÉ"? new or old? I'm unsure with these two.

Finally how about "RTÉ's first colour broadcast"? In this case I'd guess new would do, because both new and old names refer to the same entity.

It's shades of Sophie Wilson and BBC BASIC all over again, except with the saving grace of less difficulty with pronouns!

Anyhow, thanks for the nitpicking. Cheers, CmdrObot (talk) 18:57, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

The fada (accent) on the E was always correct, and where the text states RTE, and the fuller name is piped, I guess it doesn't really matter. The situation that I think would be indefensible would be "Foo, a 1960s Raidió Teilifís Éireann current affairs program: there was no entity by that name at that date (in English Language anyway). Shamus O'Flaherty (Joe Bloggs' Irish cousin) might be a Raidió Teilifís Éireann presenter, but he joined Radio Telefís Éireann in 2003: again, initials in either case obviate the need to be worried about what the piped link says. I might have overstated it by saying that the "vast majority" of bot edits were inappropriate: sorry for that. Kevin McE (talk) 19:18, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm from Ireland myself, so I'm well familiar with the síneadh fada and all that goes along with it. Sadly, my Irish is sufficiently rusty that it took me a while to figure out why the name change was taking place. Anyhow, thanks for the suggestions, I've gone back over my edits, and fixed up 98 of them. Not the majority, but certainly not covering myself with glory either :) Thanks again, CmdrObot (talk) 22:20, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

UCI Rankings

Hi - I've restarted the debate that emerged when Allan Davis - theoretically - took the lead in the UCI rankings during the Giro d'Italia. I'm of the opinion that we shouldn't update these rankings until the UCI do, following the precedent set in other sports - but I'd like to here your thoughts (as the prime updater!) on this! Pretty Green (talk) 15:29, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

ITN for 2009 Tour de France

On 26 July, 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2009 Tour de France, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 20:37, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Toks

I misread the stats in his infobox and thought he'd actually played for Charlton. Oh well, he'll probably play at least some part on Saturday, seems pointless AfDing or PRODing now.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

From WP:ERRORS

Copied from WP:ERRORS, where the discussion will surely be cleared soon.

• Grammar issue: when I read "making her the first Hispanic named to the position" my instinct is to ask "the first Hispanic what?". The word "Hispanic" is primarily an adjective, and so the noun clause requires that which is clearly a noun. Kevin McE (talk) 12:46, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

  Not really. Yes, "Hispanic" is primarily an adjective, but it doesn't have to be. I did actually consider saying "Hispanic judge", but aside from making the sentence quite long, it's not entirely clear if there were other Hispanics of other professions named to the position. Latina would have been better for a noun, but then we run into gender difficulties. "Hispanic American" might be best, but the item is already pushing it on length; "Hispanic" can be used as a noun, and, as far as I know, I don't think it's particularly pejorative to use that term. -- tariqabjotu 13:57, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

  In UK English, at least, it is considered very rude to use an adjective as a noun to refer to people: I would not be respected much, nor demonstrating respect, if I were to refer to somebody as a female, a black, or a Chinese; an encyclopaedia, and especially its front page, should maintain a high standard of English in an appropriately formal tone. Kevin McE (talk) 17:14, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

  redacted intermediate responses

  Uh... yes, Kevin, it's not just UK English; we have decorum on the other side of the Atlantic too. But, the issue is not a noun vs. adjective thing; "American" is just as much an adjective as "Hispanic", but I don't think you'll find too many people who complain about using "American" as a noun (unless you run into someone saying there's more to America than the U.S.). So, it's really just a judgment call. Anyway, especially if the stylistic issues don't really exist (and they don't really, now that we have a longer item), as I said, "Hispanic American" is best. -- tariqabjotu 07:10, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Round and group names as proper nouns

Kevin, look at every reference on Wiki, on FIFA's documents, and in the media about the World Cup groups and the Confederations Cup groups, and you will see them referred to as "Group E" and "Group B" (with capitalization) invariably. I'm willing to compromise on the section headings, but some things you've done are simply not borne out by the facts. 69.135.191.49 (talk) 10:58, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Selección Rapa Nui

Good point. But they are called the Selección Rapa Nui by the Asociación Nacional de Fútbol Profesional de Chile, so the name should be mentioned I feel. GiantSnowman 11:15, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Even if it is mentioned only once, it is still a name used, albeit not a common one, and should still be mentioned on the article, would you not say? GiantSnowman 11:27, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Haha, oh right - damn semantics! Um, in that case I've only seen it mentioned on other Wikipedias (uncited), so remove it from this article unless we can find a source showing use of that name. Cheers, GiantSnowman 11:34, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Ecuador team stats.

Greetings. I can't seem to find the source at the moment. But they are based off an article FEF released prior to the Peru and Argentina WC qualifiers (and likely, the link might not work anymore). It had the caps and goals of all the players called up for those matches. After those matches, I just updated those stats accordingly, and haven't done so since then (even for the Jamaica game). I'm sure that prior to the coming matches, FEF will release another article with and updates caps and goals stats for the call-ups that should to correct. So if that user updates caps and goals and they appear different than what is actually on the national team's page (or at least this version here, plus the Jamaica caps), they are most likely wrong. Because truth be told, there is not one source that has every player's caps and goals. So when FEF releases those stats for a player at any point, you just have to update them as games go on. Hope that helps for the time being. Digirami (talk) 15:58, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

José Belman

Do you remember this guy? I sure don't...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:34, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Two responses

1. As far as I'm aware I don't have any cool tools to revert all those edits in one go. I do plan to revert them all, though, just haven't got round to it yet. 2. Various sites claim that the keeper was with us in 2000-01, but I'm sure they're wrong. Narrowing it down to sites from the UK gives just one single result, which means that if he did come to the club it got precisely no press coverage whatsoever, which seems unlikely......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:54, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I've finally got round to putting all those players back into the Squatters players category. The IP never returned to justify his little editing spree.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:47, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Harun Ahmed Mohamed

You put an AfD tag on Harun Ahmed Mahamed but did not complete the other two steps for an AfD. I shall assume it was a one-off oversight.

Re this edit: I think you may need to revert the squad a bit further - been playing in the national squad since he was 13 ?! You reverted this edit but somehow Harun Axmed Maxamed has crept back in. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 12:48, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Scott Shulton

I've edited the page so that a BBC webpage references the same information as Ebbsfleet's own webpage (1st reference) as for the 'password protected' reference I seem to be able to access it fine. Even though The Conference National is not a totally professional league, it is pretty close and Scott Shulton does play professionally. He is also a British/Jewish player which I think adds a little something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dazmundo41 (talk • contribs) 12:24, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Now listed as a 'Jewish Footballer'. Would also like to suggest that the fact that he hasn't played at a level higher than BSP is not a reason for deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dazmundo41 (talk • contribs) 13:13, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

England World Cup bid

Dear Kevin, I find your revert about the 25th of August incident in which West Ham United and Millwall fans clashed was done in error. The matter is pertinent and will weigh on the minds of those that decide which countru host the world cup. Ambrose.chongo (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:39, 30 August 2009 (UTC).

2009 Giro d'Italia GA Reviews

Hello. I have reviewed and place on hold all three of the 2009 Giro d'Italia articles submitted for WP:GAN. To review them, here are the comments below:

• Talk:2009 Giro d'Italia/GA1
• Talk:2009 Giro d'Italia, Stage 1 to Stage 11/GA1
• Talk:2009 Giro d'Italia, Stage 12 to Stage 21/GA1

Please contact me if you have any questions. Thanks. Chris (talk) 15:18, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Proper nouns

I've replied on my page to make the conversation easier to follow. Cheers. 69.135.191.49 (talk) 23:06, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I've added another comment to that page, since the conversation already started there. – Football.Fútbol.Soccer 14:31, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Team Sky

I've moved our comments to the talk page which is probably a more appropriate venue now. Adambro (talk) 11:49, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Thievery

You had your text about Hessy pinched, now I've had my photo of him pinched too...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:54, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

MFF

Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:53, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Alicia de Larrocha

Hi, you seem to have somewhat of a bee in your bonnet about this issue, so I thought it might help if I explain my position more clearly. I try to avoid these kind of political issues on Wikipedia and if I guessed that this item would have attracted such attention I would have left it well alone. We had a similar thing with China/Tibet a few weeks ago and it is just all so tiresome and pointless. Therefore I have decided not to get involved. I wrote the blurb myself because none had been proposed at WP:ITN/C and because the article (at that time) described her as a Catalan pianist. I see the description has gone to and fro a bit since then. Trust me that I'm not particularly a sympathiser of Catalan independence and I had never actually heard of Mrs de Larrocha before her death. I think that there was a general lack of assuming good faith in the whole thread. I note that you never threw any accusations yourself, but your last edit ("it is not a surprise if the neutrality of your edit is questioned") came rather too close for comfort. I was happy to remove mention of Catalonia after the concerns were raised, but I do not wish to get further involved. (The last thing that I would want to see is more people turning up to complain if the wording was switched.) I do not oppose the inclusion of the word "Spanish" but I'm not going to make that edit myself. There are plenty of admins who patrol WP:ERRORS so if it's a glaring omission it ought to be changed soon. Best wishes, — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:31, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Mexico's World Cup bid

Kevin, I wanted to let you know that I moved Mexico into its own "Canceled bids" section on the 2018 and 2022 FIFA World Cup bids, and removed it from the table, and was wondering what you thought of it, and especially if you had any ideas on how to note the situation on the map. I'm leaning toward just making Mexico gray like the other countries, but wish there was a way, short of adding yet another color to the map, of noting that it canceled it bid.-- Patrick {_oѺ^∞} 04:54, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

F1 results table

The Results table was actually messed up but not in the way you thought. The links at the far left are supposed to link to the overall article for the grand prix (e.g. "Australian Grand Prix"), and the reports column is supposed to link to each 2009 grand prix (e.g "2009 Australian Grand Prix"). Good eye though. Eightball (talk) 18:20, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Grant... again?

I just posted on User talk:69.135.191.49, thinking that the user could be Grant, who simply won't go away, inviting him to WP:FOOTY in an effort to determine who it was, but I see that you were already on it. Unbelievable... JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 16:19, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

No, nothing ridiculous. It's just gotten to the point that I am suspicious of every new editor who frequents the USMNT page, especially when the IP started editing after Grant's initial ban in April or around one of his subsequent bans. However, in an effort of good faith, I decided to invite this user to join FOOTY. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 16:32, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I think you're right. He just doesn't get it, does he? JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 11:36, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

65.204.116.67 is even making "witch hunt" comments in regards to Grant, quoting: "There is a broad base for this consensus on the squad, none of which is Grant.Alpaugh, the user you all seem to have a witch hunt out for." That sounds familiar. You never even suggested a name that you were looking for. LOL. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 11:18, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Icons and lists

I replied to your post at WT:FOOTY about abbreviating lists and using flag icons - I think we were at cross purposes, and actually have the exact same idea in mind (collapsing all successive non-qualified tournaments to one line, adding country names just for the qualified tournaments). Knepflerle (talk) 21:16, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Marlon King

Hey kevin, could you possibly do me a favour and change marlon king part of early career to goal scored against against Arsenal at Highbury instead of Chelsea at stamford bridge as gillingham did not play chelsea in the cup in 2002 and King has never scored against Chelsea. Could you possibly rectify this mistake for me please mate? --82.47.2.163 (talk) 20:13, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Good enough reason thanks kevin. --82.47.2.163 (talk) 20:39, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Well done with that last edit. Bold, but I think justified. WFCforLife (talk) 15:22, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

About PSO

Hi, Kevin, Have you visited FIFA website theses days? FIFA have used term Penalty Shoot-out or PSO at offical match report. So I want to change pens to PSO.

Thanks. Boojanam01 (talk) 13:27, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Category:Georgia (country) international footballers

Hi, you commented on the speedy rename nomination of the above category. I have now started a CfR to get proper consensus; the discussion can be found here. Regards, GiantSnowman 01:03, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

WP:ATH

I think this is misplaced. Please move it to whatever article or policy talk page would be appropriate. Rd232 ^talk 17:30, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Cat discussion closure

The previous speedy condition did have consensus. It was removed since it was pointed out that there could be some cases where it would allow changes that really needed to be discussed. The fact that this is no longer a speedy criteria did not affect my decision. I read the comments and while there is merit to both positions my opinion is that there was not consensus in the discussion and that neither position had made a case so strong that it clearly demanded a close one way or the other. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:30, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Fifa WC third place

Confirmation of the importance for the third-place game has been noted by Fifa's World Cup History part of the fifa.com--Finn Diesel (talk) 22:45, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Warning users

Hi Kevin, thanks for looking out for Wikipedia, and reported spamming on AIV. I'd like to ask you to give users a warning before you come to AIV. That way, we can give editors a chance to stop, before we have to enforce it. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 22:51, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Request for comment

Hi. You recently participated in a debate regarding Categories for deletion criteria G6: Disambiguation fixes from an unqualified name. Your input would be appreciated at this RFC. Thanks for your time. Hiding T 14:32, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to comment

Hi Kevin McE/Archives. I am Cargoking and you probably have seen me around ITN. I have identified you as an ITN regular, so I thought I would inform you of a discussion opened on 5 December 2009. MSGJ suggested on Arsonal's (who's fairly new to ITN) talk page, that ITN suggestions made on the candidate's page would be put on separate pages, such as Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/2009-12-05. The past seven days of discussion would be automatically transcluded. "This would avoid the need for archiving and it would also leave the history of the page intact. It might also make it easier to create new days because we can use preload templates, etc." The only disadvantage to this proposal would be that each new comment would not show up on people's watchlists. You are invited to take part in discussion here. Thanks,  Cargoking  talk  17:40, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Team Sky

Didn't we discuss pretty much this issue at Talk:Team Sky? Adambro (talk) 19:01, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

A related issue, undoubtedly, and an issue to which no-one countered my final comment. When 2010 arrives, we can, properly, state that those riders became riders for Team Sky on 1st Jan: until then, it is presumptive. This does not happen for riders transferring to other teams, there is no valid reason for it to happen with these riders. Kevin McE (talk) 19:06, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

You're final comment in that discussion seemed simply to be a reassertion of points I'd already responded to. This issue is simply a repeat of what was discussed then. Since there wasn't any agreement in favour of removing the related information from the Team Sky article I would have hoped you might have realised it could have been helpful to raise this for discussion before going ahead with it. Some of the rider articles now make no mention of their joining of Team Sky and I think that is more detrimental to our readers then any very slim risk of confusion about our ability to predict the future might be. You're edits removed useful information which isn't going to confuse anyone, no one is going to think we are making predictions. Adambro (talk) 20:42, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

In that discussion you suggested that I was removing information: I replied that I had not removed any information, only a form of presenting that information that was (and for a few more weeks, still is) presumptive. You made no reply to that assertion. I also directly challenged an assertion in you're (sic) last comment, to which you also failed to reply. On these rider articles, I have removed premature announcements. If editors previously made such edits, that was their error. If editors amended infoboxes without posting appropriate prose at the same time, that was their error. Many of the riders to join this team had no comment to the effect that they are scheduled to join Team Sky, so the actions of those wanting to post this early was scarcely consistent anyway. If you wish to add a sentence to the prose of those of the 25 contractees that do not yet have a comment on their articles to the effect that they are contracted to ride with Sky next season, that would be wholly appropriate: there are several dozen other riders who will be joining other teams on 1 January for whom you might like to do the same. I think you will find very few, if any, of those already state that they ride for the team that they have not yet joined, and that a similarly small number of them already havewhat will be their new team in their infoboxes. Kevin McE (talk) 20:55, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Less characters in the new revision = removal, no? [1]. Adambro (talk) 21:14, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Less characters can mean less repetition. That edit preserved the names and nationalities of the 6 confirmed riders at that date, while removing the names and and nationalities (+ DoB and previous teams, which are easily found on the riders' articles) of the 6 confirmed riders at that date. Previous team is not a standard part of the cycling squads template, so the only nett removal was dates of birth: scarcely key to following the birth of a team (squad templates for many other sports survive fine without it). Kevin McE (talk) 21:33, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Can you accept that "removal" wasn't a completely unreasonable description of your edit(s)? Adambro (talk) 21:43, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm struggling to see what battle you are fighting here. I never said I did not make a removal: patently that is what I had done. My point, to which you have made no meaningful response in three months, is that my removal of the presumptuous squad template made little or no removal of useful information: I even emboldened the word information to draw your attention to that.

I'm equally struggling to see why you are continuing to fight a three month old battle about the content of the team page (which I left the way you wanted, although you failed to justify your case), when you came here in relation to changes to the individual articles of riders. I proposed what might seem to be valid, without being premature, additions to those articles, since you seemed to think that the lack of notification of what team they will be riding for next season is a serious omission, but you have evidently considered this not worth doing. Kevin McE (talk) 22:04, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, please ignore me. Adambro (talk) 11:13, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Tone

No problem, but it was a pretty awful sentence, hence the resisting of urges.Stephen Hayes (talk) 09:20, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

NCL/GHEAD

If you want to change it back then I won't revert; I'm sure you also agree that its a fairly minor issue. Nevertheless, I used the bid's own website as my guide [2]; whilst others have regional aspects, this bid is explicitly differentiated as being from both cities (see the map in the background!). Whilst when describing the venue we can say 'The Sportsidrect Arena' ;) in 'Newcastle', the bidding 'city' is Newcastle/Gateshead. --Pretty Green (talk) 10:34, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Secret Tournament

Reference to Gilliam's involvement was added from a USA Today source [3]. Thanks for reminding me to get back to it. Vulture19 (talk) 01:00, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Football team infobox flags

Why did you remove the flags? How does WP:FLAG support this? Eightball (talk) 23:10, 21 December 2009 (UTC)