User talk:Aleenf1/Archive 10

May 2013
Please do not assume ownership of articles such as List of UEFA Champions League broadcasters. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you. ViperSnake151  Talk  16:27, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I assert this because you are failing to work with other editors, and you're showing a heavy bias towards your own version, and reverting any edits that are not "approved" by you. ViperSnake151   Talk  17:57, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Quota
OK, let's see if we can agree on how to treat this matter. I agree that the invitational shouldn't show any wuota, I only did that so the quota assigned to Africa wouldn't show 1 with no team to the right to it as South Africa withdrew. In my opinion quotas assigned to each federation, that is quotas awarded by each tournament, should appear, that way it is clearer what is explained in text above the chart. About the long dash, that means another should have been there but for some reason they are not (they qualified as host nation for example, therefore the second one qualifies). I think that should appear but, but if it is too confusing we can leave that out. But I still think the quotas should appear. Look here 2010_FIFA_World_Cup. They show it, quotas for each confederation. Taking into account that in hockey the federations get one quotas and the rest are awarded by ranking one person that doesn't know this wouldn't understand why Europe gets so many and others don't. It is clearer if the numbers appear. --M&#38;m89 (talk) 12:53, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013
Please do not assume ownership of articles. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you. ViperSnake151  Talk  14:42, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Four Provinces Flag2.svg and Flag of Ireland hockey team.svg
Hi, I'm someone who contributes to the Dutch Wikipedia, and I saw that Caomhan27 has been updating these two flags for over ten times in the last few weeks. I'm really astonished, because he's making a mess of these flags and nobody does anything. I don't have an account on Commons, so I can't intervene. I asked on his Users Talk to stop doing this, but he just deleted my reaction, as he did with several others. So my question is: can you stop him, can you change the hockey flag back into (you can check www.fih.ch, where you can see this is the only correct flag), or if not, who should I contact to do so? 87.64.182.28 (talk) 18:14, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your message I took it on board the previous versions were due to my unfamiliarity with software, I also created the flag your link shows the one you liked so much and asked to revert to, I am in process of updating the quadrants to the new versions which took a while to get right, perhaps instead of attempting to knock someone elses work you should make an account and make and upload your own version, very easy to complain. Also what exactly is your issue with the four provinces flag2 I created the pages detailing the history of each provincial flag and every version since 2007 the current version is historically accurate and much improved detail wise, what exact details in my previous inferior versions are you nostalgic for. Caomhan27 (talk) 19:29, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

The Four Provinces Flag isn't my biggest concern, it's the hockey flag which was correct and now isn't anymore. I repeat my question: change it back into the old version, which was correct, as it sill is being used by the Fédération International de Hockey. 87.64.182.28 (talk) 19:50, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Not exactly a question, I would say that the federation are simply currently utilizing the flag which i created, however I understand your "question" as i said prior and will shortly upload a version in my old format however with the updated correct updated crests of each province. I hope this will help make your day a little better.Caomhan27 (talk) 20:00, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm assume this issue solved and can remain discuss in the future if have any dispute. --Aleen f 1 09:53, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

WL Final Ranking
Check it out for yourself: this and this--M&#38;m89 (talk) 04:26, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Badminton history
The 1800's is called the 19th century in English, as you have to account for the years 0-99 (1st century) in the order of centuries... I changed it to 1800's to make it more clear for you. Jmansker (talk) 18:44, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

How competitions are related to BWF World Ranking
In the competition section of “Badminton”, it has stated how BWF categorized international competitions into four levels. Well, while such categorization is indeed made by BWF, it’s also a simplification of how BWF grades international tournaments. Based on the number of points awarded to participants and winners of different tournaments, there are actually 8 categories of tournaments. Because only the 10 highest points scored in tournaments count, you cannot get a higher rank by only winning the competitions of lower levels. While the winners of World Championships can be officially called “World Champion”, a player can only be World No. 1 player if he does well in Superseries Premier and Superseries; sometimes even competitions of lower levels help. The points awarded to Superseries Premier winner is close to World Championship or Olympic Games winner, with the difference of 1000 points. However, there are 5 Superseries Premier events and 1 Super Series Finals but only 1 World Championship. That’s why although the long-time World No. 1 men’s singles player Lee Chong Wei never became a World Champion, still remains World No. 1 for most of the time from August 2008 – August 2013.

I do think that Wikipedia article is necessary to be concise and accurate at the same time. That’s why I think the simplified categorization of tournaments makes sense in the article of “Badminton” but the reader has the right to know more detail on how BWF specifically classifies each tournament. For the sake of simplicity, you can call both Superseries Premier tournament and Superseries tournament as level-2 tournaments; but winning Superseries Premier event is obviously different from winning Superseries event as the ranking points awarded as well as prize money are different. As a matter of fact, even within all 5 Superseries Premier tournaments, they are not considered equal. The All England Open Championship is considered the most prestigious even though they all give the same ranking points but different prize money.

The same can be said for BWF World Ranking; it’s also a simplification of how BWF compares the strength of each player for the past 52 weeks. It does not tell how much difference the ranking point earned by each player. The World No. 1 Player and World No. 2 Player can have very close ranking points or a huge difference in ranking points. It’s related to BWF World Ranking because in there we can know how BWF specifically classifies tournaments of different levels. Thljcl (talk) 00:29, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * After refer to other sporting article, i don't think the link should belong to badminton. World Rankings are introduced by BWF, where more related to BWF article. Wikipedia is not a place for collection of links, and no rationale that a general sport article must include a World Rankings link. --Aleen f 1 02:54, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

What about tennis? It does have a section of best male/female players according to World Ranking. In the case for male tennis players, the ranking is made by Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP); other rankings do exist but ATP rankings is generally considered official ranking. In the case for female tennis players, the rankings is made by Women’s Tennis Associations. I don’t think we can have a section of best male/female players in the history based on World Ranking because of the lack of data. The official web site of BWF only has the data from the year 2009 onwards. BWF World Ranking actually exists since 1980s. Before that no official ranking exists. The ATP rankings begins since 1973. There are many similarities between ATP rankings and BWF rankings. The “Grand Slam” gives the most ranking points but there are more lower-level tournaments; only the six best scores in the tournaments are counted. Unlike BWF rankings, Olympic Games actually gives fewer ranking points compared with other higher-level tournaments. I would like to have the “best male/female players” sections but there is insufficient data currently. The reasoning behind World Ranking is that you need to do well consistently in many high-level tournaments to be considered “World No. 1” if you ever get the No. 1 rank. Why do you compare it with soccer and hockey? They are totally different games. Tennis is different from Badminton as well, but they are both racquet sports. One of the best players in the history “Morten Frost”, who is former World No. 1, has consistently remains at top 3 for 12 years. He won 4 All England titles but not World Championship. He has been induced to the Badminton Hall of Fame by BWF. But I do not know how his ranking or ranking point changes over his career. Clearly, with the help of computer and hopefully rising interests toward Badminton in the future, the next generations would be able to have “best male/female players” section. As I said earlier, referring to BWF World Ranking is also to give more information about how BWF categorizes international tournaments. If you think it’s more related to BWF but not badminton, perhaps you should remove the categorization of international tournaments to “level 1, 2, 3, and 4” from “competition” as well. Thljcl (talk) 05:33, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't want to heard your thesis. The main point is "Badminton" is a generic article, from history to how to play and the equipment. Tournaments are illustrate the article how the badminton world now. About greatest player, is BWF label Lee Chong Wei or Lin Dan as greatest one? Don't make any assumption about who is the greatest all time. --Aleen f 1 06:08, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

I did not make any assumption on who is the greatest player; it is not my theory either. I merely try to include World Ranking just as the article of “Tennis”. It’s a pity that badminton has not gained much popularity compared with tennis. Don’t get me wrong. Tennis is certainly an interesting sport to me.

Currently, BWF web site has only the World Ranking from the year of 2009 onwards. To be honest, World Ranking does not indicate who will win the match or is the “greatest player” in the absolute sense per se. Judging from ranking method, which is similar to ATP rankings, it’s fair to say that BWF makes its ranking based on the overall performance in 52 weeks in a series of tournaments of various levels, rather than a single tournament. I just want to make my points here and try to be objective as I know Wikipedia is not the place for original research. It’s true that “Badminton” is a generic article. Then how on earth that the world of professional badminton players is somehow unrelated to “Badminton”? Judging from your attitude, it’s perhaps not surprising to me that you are not exactly open-minded. It’s also strange that you say that BWF is unrelated to badminton; when the rules of badminton are actually made by BWF. As a matter of fact, BWF has published “Handbook II – Laws of Badminton and Regulations” on an annual basis at http://bwfbadminton.org/page.aspx?id=14915. This handbook has 12 sections. In particular, “Section 1A” tells how badminton should be played. That said, of course you have your own rules when you play with your friends. “Section 1 B Appendix 6” tells how the World Ranking System works. Realistically speaking, any competition can has its winner but there could be somebody of higher level who does not compete in that competition. While it’s not wrong to determine the world’s greatest players according to BWF World Ranking, such ranking, in fact, can only tell the best players who actually compete in BWF-graded tournaments. Likewise, the “greatest male tennis players” are also for those who compete in ATP-graded tournaments, such as “Grand Slams”, “ATP World Tour Finals”, “Masters 1000”, etc. I welcome healthy and constructive conversation to make the Wikipedia article better. Please don’t get emotional. Thljcl (talk) 17:17, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm insist again, World Rankings belong to BWF, not badminton article. All the links added must related the title. Simply add a link then get the job done will only degraded the article. --Aleen f 1 06:09, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't see G8 as applying, am I missing something?
Talk:Citizen of Czech Republic doesn't look like a talk page of a non-existent article, it look like an article created by an IP who doesn't quite understand the article creation process. I think it should be move to an AfC address, but I'm not sure. (It isn't the talk page of a deleted article, if my search of the deletion log was done correctly.) -- SPhilbrick (Talk)  14:36, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I see you are continuing to tag articles as G8 which don't look like they qualify. In many cases, they deserve deletion on other grounds, but I'd be interested in your feedback.-- SPhilbrick (Talk)  14:32, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'm not the one who judge this, I'm brought the orphaned talk page for your judgement as you have privileges to do so. If something that is qualify as article, why should be create in talk page at first?! --Aleen f 1 14:51, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The problem is that many are not orphaned talk pages. In some cases, they are attempts to create an article by an IP. An IP is not allowed to create an article in article space. While I cannot be sure exactly what happened, if an IP tried to create an article, and failed, and then tried to create one in talk space, such as Talk:Citizen of Czech Republic, they might think the Wikipedia process is to start on a talk page and move to article space when ready. Or they might be vaguely aware of AfC, where articles are started in talk space. However, it is clear that some are not material which one would expect on a talk page, so I am not comfortable deleting it as a G8. I tried raising this at AfC talk, but that discussion fizzled without a resolution.-- SPhilbrick (Talk)  15:48, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I raised the issue here.-- SPhilbrick (Talk)  16:16, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I see in the past some admin move the page to article where they judge it was an article created in talk page. So, i can see that is no issues over this. --Aleen f 1 11:29, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013
Your recent editing history at 2014 Asian Games shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. ViperSnake151  Talk  05:14, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

2014 Asian Games‎
Hello, I'm Wooccu. I noticed that you made a change to an article, 2014 Asian Games‎ I use styles that are usual, but I cannot provide of source article, but it is true. I'm Korean so I know many thing about 2014 Asian Games‎. Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, as you did at 2014 Asian Games, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you. Wooccu (talk) 06:08, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. ViperSnake151  Talk  05:16, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I've declined to block you, but please take care not to edit war in the future. Even if you don't break 3RR, there's still a chance you may be blocked. Try to take it to the talk page instead. Thanks Mark Arsten (talk) 01:41, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

You have broken the hyperlink by changing "Superseries to Super Series"
I personally don't care about the Super Series or Superseries. If you want to use "Super Series", that's fine with me, please do not break the hyperlink.Thljcl (talk) 11:46, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Can you please read...
Can you please read Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation

If you have a solution, I'd like to hear it, but in my opinion, these articles are being deleted inappropriately. That's ultimately on the admin who makes the deletion, but I think the nominations should cease. Please. We are being extremely rude to editors attempting to contribute.-- SPhilbrick (Talk)  14:40, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Olympic Games
Please do not revert my good faith edits. WP:TVINTL says to list English speaking countries. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. This is the English Wikipedia, and other channels can be found at the respective language Wikipedias. Finealt (talk) 20:18, 7 February 2014 (UTC)


 * That is sport broadcasting contract. All the details are references, so it is not indiscriminate.--Aleen f 1 03:33, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: File:BWF Super Series Premier.jpg
Hello Aleenf1. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of File:BWF Super Series Premier.jpg, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:44, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: File:BWF Super Series.jpg
Hello Aleenf1. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of File:BWF Super Series.jpg, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:45, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Stamps
I hope you does understand how the 2010 Asian Games "organisation", China Olympic Committee will not organise stamp from foreign country to celebrate the events. So, please do mind what you add is notable. --Aleen f 1 11:55, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * OK. But I did it on the example: 2014 Winter Olympics. Best regards, --► Cekli    829   12:10, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Talk:Mount Kaba, Ibaraki
Hello Aleenf1. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Talk:Mount Kaba, Ibaraki, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: An article created by an IP editor on a Talk page. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 16:28, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2014 Hockey India League, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gagandeep Singh (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) 10:41, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2012 World Series Hockey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mario Almada (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) 08:49, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Fieldhockeybox
Hey, I've seen you are making some modifications on this template. I thought maybe you could see of doing something I don't know how to do it. When the AET is used, it appears at the right side of the score, example:

1 – 1 (a.e.t.)

Report

I thought it might look better like this, so that everything is centered:

1 – 1

(a.e.t.)

Report

What do you think?--M&#38;m89 (talk) 16:41, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2018 FIFA World Cup, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ITV (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) 08:47, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Editing conflic
This user Ohconfucius is changing absolutely everything in the hockey articles, without reason from my point of view. Do you think those changes make sense? Flags and links to countries make sense to me, they are quite useful and they are used in most sport events' articles. I seeked your opinion and Kante4. Can something be done? Report him?. Thanks. --M&#38;m89 (talk) 14:02, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Can´t a flagicon template be created without the flag having a link to the country? This way the overlinking problem would be solved, and we could use the flag without problem, as we think it is needed. The template flagu exists, it is this one:, but the name of the country appears. If we want to put the city, for example for the qualifying tournaments, we can´t. So that is why I thought of making a template for the flagicon but without the link to the country. What do you think? --M&#38;m89 (talk) 15:43, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * You may be used to seeing the articles that way... Just because they can be seen in other sports articles does not mean they should be that way or that they are policy-compliant. They are not. I tried making the edit summaries' rationale clearer, but I see that you are still reverting, mostly blindly. The problem you guys don't see is using title case in your table headings whereas we use sentence case throughout (except citation titles). Overlinking is another one – it includes having links in close proximity to each other. Linking " Osaka, Japan " is a clear example of overlinking. It's probably bad enough that people might jump to Osaka from the sport article in question, so we don't want to distract them with a country link too. And where I see them, I unlink one of them, usually the country – as the city link is more proximal/relevant. A third issue is the flags, they should only be used to indicate "representative nationalities". If we look at this revert, the flags relate to the nationality of the club where the squad member plays, and are thus inappropriately used – their use does not indicate any nationalistic representation permitted by the guideline. They certainly ought not to be used to indicate locations, as they are here. I believe that my changes are policy compliant. If you have any issue with these points, you should raise them at the relevant guideline talk pages. Regards, --  Ohc  ¡digame! 14:22, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, exactly. The ILIKEIT argument doesn't go far when something has been left without proper justification for far too long. May we please think about the readers and not about ourselves? Why these flags are thought to convey useful information, rather than postage-stamp decoration, I've never understood. What is wrong with simply writing the name of the country? M&M, perhaps I'm thick, but could you please spell out exactly which bit of MOS:LINK, MOS:CAPS, or MOS:FLAGS supports your block reverting of OC's edits? He is a very experienced editor, and his work partly reflects a strong move on en.WP over the past five to seven years towards not only plain English, but plain information. For the readers. I think the case to make is yours, not his. I've watchlisted this page to wait with interest for your justification. It is, BTW, through watchlisting OC's talkpage that I've become aware of this fracas. We should all be on the same side here, not adversaries talking in terms of "report him": for what? Tony   (talk)  14:50, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Perfect, then apply those policies to everything, because almost every article I see of major sporting events go against them and appear ar this ones in conflict did before all of these (in terms of linking and flags). I would love to see you editing similar articles like FIFA World Cup or Olympics. Apply it to one, then apply it to all. Let me know when you finish . BTW, I don't see why you mention and editor's experience or amount of years dedicated to editing, I thought we are all equals in this collaboratively edited, multilingual, free-access, free content Internet encyclopedia. Cheers --M&#38;m89 (talk) 15:02, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Template:Infobox hockey
In attempting to correct breaches of WP:Linking and MOS:FLAG, I attempted to edit the template to remove the styling, which seems to have been achieved by using flag. However, as an undesired side effect, the "host country" parameter now disappears entirely. I would appreciate it if you could make the necessary fix to render it compliant. Regards, --  Ohc  ¡digame! 04:06, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Look what I found Examples of acceptable exceptions (of when flag icons CAN be usen in infoboxes) include military conflict infobox templates and infoboxes that include international competitions, such as FIFA World Cup or the Olympic Games. Source. Doesn't this mean the link to the host country and the flag can stay? What do you think? --M&#38;m89 (talk) 13:44, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Photo of Badminton
Thank you for your message. I've finished uploading pictures of the quarter-finals of the 2013 French Open. I'll start uploading pictures of the eight-finals. I didn't covered the semi-finals and finals.

I'll probably cover the next edition. So if you need of picture of a specific badminton player or something else, all suggestions are welcome ! Pyb (talk) 13:52, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Hockey at the 2014 Commonwealth Games
Hi I noticed you edited this article (hence why I am asking your opinion). Do you think the men's and women's tournaments need to be on separate articles (like the Olympics) or all in one page (which its at right now)? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 19:40, 8 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes. Pleasure of course if you can do it. --Aleen f 1 12:24, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
 * The participating nations box is necessary as it allows users to navigate to the country pages directly through the article. Please do not remove it. Thanks. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 05:19, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Duplicating, the info presents on main page of the article.--Aleen f 1 05:45, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * All the nation pages link the individual tournaments. This is a different article then the main article so thus its included. I don't see why it needs to be removed its also on the main page (I think its necessary for all three articles). Suppose you are one of the articles and want to navigate to X country at the Commonwealth Games. You are unable to without that table on the article. After all the premise of the article relates back each nation's performance at the games. Please do not remove it. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 15:26, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Disagree, you have navigation boxes around and no excuses where you can't navigate thus need to duplicating the information. Have you learn how to summarise an article? All information included, that is not why you splitting the article to 3 parts! --Aleen f 1 16:02, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Where is the navigation boxes for the nation pages? I don't think there is any. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 16:04, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Link available everywhere to main 2014 article, that is NO EXCUSES why you can't navigate it. Nonsense also to duplicating information for all around the corner without sufficient control. --Aleen f 1 16:07, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Commonwealth Hockey tournament
Hi - I was about to update the women's group A table for the IND-NZL match when it struck me that India and Canada would be tied on both points and goal difference so I was not sure who to put in front. Do India go in front because of their 4-2 win over Canada or is it a tied 3rd place for the time being? Thanks in advance. JZCL 17:00, 27 July 2014 (UTC)


 * That will go for team which scored most goals if both or more teams tied in points. --Aleen f 1 17:04, 27 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks. JZCL 17:06, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Editing regarding section 'India at the 2014 Asian Games
Hi, I appreciate your concern but I was only updating the no. of athletes confirmed till now and that only in just one sport. Their no. would have definitely increased in the future as soon as new sections and new athlete names are added or updated.

Thanks - Pratiklabhane (talk) 19:01, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Field hockey at the 2014 Summer Youth Olympics – Girls' tournament, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chen Yang. 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) 09:16, 24 August 2014 (UTC)