User talk:82.46.127.205

Welcome!
Hello! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. You are welcome to edit anonymously; however, creating an account is free and has several benefits (for example, the ability to create pages, upload media and edit without one's IP address being visible to the public).

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Happy editing! I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 18:08, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Warning
Your edits at Bromley F.C. are clearly in bad faith. If you continue, I will be requesting your are blocked from editing. Number  5  7  21:20, 12 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Haven't touched Bromley F.C., get your facts right for a start. 82.46.127.205 (talk) 21:21, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Boreham Wood then. You know what I mean. Number   5  7  21:22, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I spend a good amount of time keeping the Dulwich Hamlet page up to date. Your approach to policing good faith edits that are factually correct but perhaps not to your liking is dispiriting and puts me off wanting to be part of this community. As is threatening to get me blocked, for exercising the same approach to editing that you do. I'd ask that you support people trying to keep pages up to date, not bully and threaten them because the updates aren't fully to your preferences. 82.46.127.205 (talk) 21:30, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry you feel that way. However, firstly the phrasing you are insisting on using is not consistent with the rest of the article (there is no need to say how long they were in the NLS for – the length of stints in any other league isn't mentioned), and secondly, it makes no sense to have a separate paragraph for a single sentence. I have not bullied you – you have repeatedly revert changes without explanation and then deliberately followed me to another article in violation of WP:HOUND, hence being warned about your conduct. Number   5  7  21:36, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * But is it really a problem to give that context? Reading that sentence in isolation in the way you want it doesn't make it clear what League they were relegated from. It reads badly. The context is intended to help the reader. Applying rules to your preferences to the detriment of the clarity of the information is surely not in anyone's interest. 82.46.127.205 (talk) 21:42, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The problem is with the inconsistency – this is a challenge for a lot of Wikipedia articles with history sections, when editors add recent history details, they often go into more detail than for earlier coverage, which makes the history section unbalanced towards more recent events. I have a couple of hundred non-league clubs on my watchlist and see this on a regular basis, so attempt to moderate this impact by trying to keep details of recent history additions in line with the existing text. I also disagree strongly that there is any issue with context. Literally two sentences before is a reference to the club being promoted to the National League South, so it should be obvious to a reader what division they were in. What's unhelpful at the moment is that we still don't know which division they have been relegated to – that can be added shortly and will be useful context.
 * If you insist that the division is needed, then perhaps the text can be reworded to "In 2022–23 the club finished fourth-from-bottom of the National League South and were relegated [to XXX]" (with the [to XXX] added after the FA announce the league allocations. Number   5  7  21:52, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, that makes sense - with confirmation that the club will be in the Isthmian Premier yesterday, I'll make that update now. 82.46.127.205 (talk) 07:43, 16 May 2023 (UTC)