User talk:Boyceboye

Beckham and LA Galaxy
Please do not re-add LA Galaxy to the list of Beckham's clubs. He isn't, and never has been, a LA Galaxy player, and will not be until his contract with Real Madrid finishes on 30th June 2007, and until that point he remains a Real player. thanks, Darkson - BANG! 21:10, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Pliz stop accusing other Editors Or else you would be Banned..Thank You..--Cometstyles 05:33, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Welcome
I never claimed that the two sites you mentioned weren't reputable. The personal website which was trying to be used to claim that Beckham might play in the all-star game is the only one I said wasn't reputable. It shouldn't be deleted JUST because it's obsolete, it should have been deleted for all the reasons I gave and for failing miserably to meet WP:CITE. Batman2005 20:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Beckham - sections
Why do you insist on reverting my changes to the sub-sections? It is consistent with the formatting of the article, see "Winning over the England fans" and "World Cup 1998", international events are included under the club headings. Also please use edit summaries, it makes it easier for people to keep track of your edits, thanks. Dave101 →talk  19:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Ref: David Beckham
I point you to WP:ENGVAR. The article was a) started using UK-english, and has continued using UK English throughout it's uses, and b) about a British person, so it spelt using british English. Just because he's now playing in the US, doesn't mean that the US-spellings should be used in that section. The article should continue to be written in the style of English it has always used.

As for bringing up the "current club" thing again, that's a joke, right? At the time, you, and other editors, were in the wrong by changing Beckham's current club to LA Galaxy, as was pointed out by many editors, myself included. Since his contract came into effect on 1st July, no-one, including me, has even mentioned it, and it certainly hasn't been editted out. To try to get me banned for that is simply ludicrous, especially as I never broke the 3RR rule, and you were the one that was adding factually incorrect information to the article.

I really don't see what your problem is. Apart from the fact you've tried to use US-English a couple of times, the edits you've made to the article have been good, and I haven'yt touched them.Darkson (Yabba Dabba Doo!) 23:57, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * If that's a quote, why isn't it in quotation marks? At the moment, it reads as a normal sentence, not a quotation.  If you rewrite it as a quotation, fine, leave the "u" out, but as a normal sentence, which it is now, it needs a "u".Darkson (Yabba Dabba Doo!) 00:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Becks-galaxy-kit-back-promo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Becks-galaxy-kit-back-promo.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 07:06, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Undeleting talk page
I undeleted content of your talk page. Please do not take any offence, but in Wikipedia it is not considered polite to do it. You can create archive page and move your old talk there, but you should not delete any comments left on your page. The only exception are insults and vandalism. However especially critical comments should be preserved. --Jan.Smolik 16:07, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Your reversions of David Beckham (been here before?)
Hi. I noticed that you have reverted all of the changes made to the article David Beckham to a much earlier version, marked them as "minor" edits, and not discussd them on the talk page. As there was recently a large dispute over this very article, I feel that doing so was probably inappropriate. I would question why you reverted the article, when there was clearly no vandalism, and why you have not included, yet again, an edit summary toexplain your edits. It seemed that the disputes over the article had been solved following admins agreeing that the warring was inappropriate. I would urge you to consider being less confrontational, valuing other users' edits, and perhaps dicussing more of the major changes you make, especially reversions as major as you have made. Cheers Toon 02:00, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I do agree that dismissing mentions of Beckham's move to Galaxy in the opening para would be obviously wrong, but I did notice that you simply reverted back to an old edit, removing a lot of the changes. I think that the editor was right to remove a lot from the section on Beckham's move to Galaxy, as it was disproportionally long! The guy hasn't done anything yet, even kick a ball fr you guys! Also the removal of the england flag from the player's infobox was probably right, as none of the other footballers have a flag there. I think that perhaps "evolution" of the article, as opposed to massive reversions or deletions is a more apt move if we are to improve the article. Also, I'm glad you're using edit summaries!! Well Im off to sleep nw, it being stupid o'clock in the morn. All the best improving the article. Toon 02:38, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Simplifying?
Why are you simplifying the sentences on David Beckham? This is not simple english wikipedia. Also, you are doing minor edit followed by minor edit, making it difficult for other editors to see what you are editing. Please make all the edits you wish in 1 edit, not many minor edits. Jackrm 19:47, 20 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Again, PLEASE stop making many minor edits at once, as it makes it difficult for other editors. It results in edit wars, and gives editors problems, making them have to check what you changed etc. Please take account of this, and make all your edits at once, rather than 5+ minor edits in a row. Jackrm 03:46, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:2007-aug-w-cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:2007-aug-w-cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:23, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)