User talk:Luxic

adel
Hi, could you explain to me, why did you reverted my edits in Ac Milan? if you take a look to the article here. It mentioned The first statements from Adel Taarabt as an AC Milan player.. thank you.--Bo hessin (talk) 18:20, 30 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi. I reverted your edit because Taarbat has not yet signed the contract. ACMilan.com often reports new players' statements as soon as they get off the plane and speak to the media at the airport, but the transfer is not official until they later release a formal announcement. For example, when Michael Essien arrived in Milan last Friday, his first words were promptly reported on a note (here). However, the official announcment of his signing was not made until Monday (here) after he passed the medicals and actually signed all the papers. I hope this clarifies your concern. Should you have any more doubts, feel free to tell me. Luxic (talk) 19:44, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Crystal clear, thank you :)--Bo hessin (talk) 21:41, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

AC Milan
Hi Luxic, As I have said earlier to another editor also please dont remove the middle names in the squad. The reason for this is that the source includes the middle names of some players that is why it should be included. Also the same reason why Kaka is considered as a forward (though he is a an attacking midfielder). Thanks! RRD13 (talk) 03:47, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi, Roy. I'm sorry, but I disagree. ACMilan.com is a perfectly fine source for the squad composition (i.e. team members, shirt numbers and positions), but it cannot set new standards for names of well known players. In fact, WP:COMMONNAME clearly states that Wikipedia prefers the name that is most commonly used and MOS:PIPE suggests that wikilinks should be as intuitive as possible. That's why we don't need middle names for Muntari and Silvestre, regardless of what Milan decide to do on their website. Luxic (talk) 19:21, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks. But, then I also think that Kaka and Adel Taarabt should not be called a forward but be written as midfielders, as all sources other than the official website state Kaka being an attacking midfielder and the latter as a winger. RRD13 (talk) 07:29, 12 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I think we could go either way in this case. Positions are a much more questionable matter, since different sources may consider the same player differently or even define positions differently. My personal preference would be to stick with the official website and the reason is that, unlike their name, a player's position does depend on the club (for example, when Kévin Constant joined Milan he was a midfielder, an attacking one by the way, but then manager Massimiliano Allegri moved him to left back and now everyone considers Constant a defender with full rights). However, I'm open to add other sources if you think it's better. In this case, the official Serie A website might be a good one: it lists Honda and Taarabt among MFs, though Kaká is still considered a FW. Luxic (talk) 10:54, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Why did you revert my change (nothing personal, I just don't understand)? Mastour has a name, like everyone else. P. S: I have been a supporter of AC Milan for 25 years, so I guess I know what I'm doing. -- KWiki (talk) 20:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Sub-subject


 * Hi, KWiki! My bad for not adding an edit summary to explain my action. The reason why I reverted your edit is because red links should be avoided when the subject is not notable enough to have his own article. In other words, a red link means "this article does not exist, but it should", while having no link at all stands for "we don't need an article about this subject (or we don't need it yet)". In this case, since Hachim Mastour has yet to make his professional debut, he is not considered to meet the notability criteria for footballers to have their own article (see WP:NFOOTY). So we don't need to insert a red link either. As soon as he makes his first professional appearance, we will be able to create an article about him and put the relative link in the template. If you have any more questions or doubts, feel free to reply. :) Luxic (talk) 21:25, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of A.C. Milan players, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Allison (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) 09:16, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

No more transfermarkt
Ok, Transfermasrk is not a reliable sourse. Anyway those players are still property of AC Milan, even if they do not appear on www.acmilan.com (seems to be unfair for official sources to have...reserves). If any modification occurs (e.g. player transfer or contract termination), follow normal procedure: erase player from this section and report trasnfer in the "transfers" section. Do not erase all the section, only because you do not like it. ty — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riktetta (talk • contribs) 07:57, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:17, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ACM Hall of Fame
Hi, Do you think it's better if I merge the page into a section in List of A.C. Milan players? -Bijak riyandi (talk) 20:31, 9 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi, Bijak! I don't see how a merger would serve any purpose, since most of the information is already there (career span, apps and goal, etc.). Also, as I stated in the PROD rationale, the Hall of Fame itself just doesn't seem to be encylopedic, beacause it fails to meet the main notability requirement (i.e. [having] received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject). And even if it had received such a coverage, it would still probably not be considered encyclopedic, as it is a indiscriminate list, with no objective criteria for inclusion. Anyway, let me say again that I really appreciate to see someone putting such a great effort into editing, so I hope you are not put off by these 'technical difficulties' and you will keep contributing. :) – Luxic (talk) 22:50, 9 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Alright then, at least I didn't entirely waste my time: I have learned more about wiki-editing in the process. -Bijak riyandi (talk) 23:45, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Invite to the African Destubathon
Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 53 African countries, so should be enjoyable! So it would be a good chance to win something for improving stubs on African sportspeople, including footballers, athletes, Olympians and Paralympians etc, particularly female ones, but also male. Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance (think Regions of countries etc). If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing a few expanded articles on African Paralympians, Olympians and committees etc, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. Thanks. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:13, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Looked...
...like it was his name. Seemed like someone was trying to misspell Gary. Oh well, glad you knew better.--v/r - TP 18:39, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Loan expiration
You are correct, thank you. Geregen2 (talk) 10:10, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Mateo Musacchio - Medicals
Hello there from Portugal,

i've taken the question to WP:FOOTY so that you can see that most of the football editors are behind this concept (that it's customary to mention medicals in body of text whenever a transfer takes place). If it turns out i am hugely mistaken and they are not, then feel free to remove it again.

Sorry for any (possible) inconvenience, happy editing/weekend --Quite A Character (talk) 18:05, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

A.C. Milan
Hi Luxic,

No problem about your reversal of my changes. But you also removed the references sourced to substantiate the edits. See the Wall Street Journal article here, which articulate's the sale of the club to the requisite owners. This should be satisfactory to hold the changes to the article. I know you feel strongly about the team, per your talk page. But news is news and this belongs on the team's Wikipedia page, objectively. Please read the article below:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/berlusconi-completes-sale-of-ac-milan-soccer-club-to-chinese-investor-1492095744 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gnathari (talk • contribs) 16:38, 22 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, the WSJ article does not tell us much more: they do mention Arena Investors, but again only among "partners" of Elliott regarding the loan to Mr. Li. I'm still not sure where you took the 4% and 1% you originally put in the article. Luxic (talk) 08:39, 23 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi ,you make many fair and reasonable points. Thank you.
 * However, can you please give careful consideration to the story by the Wall Street Journal, which is broadly recognized as a credible source of global business news? It makes clear the sequence of events in the financing, and ascribes credit to Arena, as you note. I would suggest that you allow the following changes to be made:

That Arena be included, based on the WSJ, among the shareholders. That the sequence of events leading to the default be included. For the sake of cadence, AC Milan’s becoming a subsidiary would be have a slight syntactical reordering. And of course, the WSJ would be footnoted.


 * How does that sound?
 * Am happy to send the full WSJ text if useful to you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gnathari (talk • contribs) 15:21, 24 September 2018 (UTC)


 * , I have no problems if we mention Arena Investors in the prose, just like we mentioned Blue Skye, when talking about Mr. Li's loan. I also have no problems with including more details about Mr. Li's default in the history section (even though we still need to be concise and possibly include further details into the more specific History of A.C. Milan article).


 * However, I still don't think they should be included as shareholders. I did read the WSJ article and Arena are only mentioned in one paragraph about the loan ("In March, U.S. hedge fund Elliott Management Corp. and other U.S. partners including Arena Investors agreed to provide part of the financing in order to allow Mr. Li to proceed with the purchase."). Ever since Li defaulted on his debt, media have been referring to Elliott as the sole A.C. Milan's owner. Elliott themeselves made an official press release on 10 July (here, if you can read Italian) to announce that they took control of A.C. Milan's holding company (i.e. Rossoneri Sports Investment, which still has 99.93% of Milan's shares) through Elliot Advisors (UK) Ltd. Luxic (talk) 17:41, 24 September 2018 (UTC)


 * , Agree and agree. Will make the amendments.

Invitation to talk
Hi

You are invited in 2019–20 A.C. Milan season talk about players for young rosters. As a recurrent editor, your contribution will be higly appreciated.

thank you Riktetta (talk) 18:53, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Article and category names
When a club changes name, please do NOT create new categories for the club - instead we need to rename the existing category to reflect. I am in the process of tidying up the mess you created with the A.S. Viterbese Castrense → U.S. Viterbese 1908 page move. GiantSnowman 11:34, 11 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry for causing disruption. Admittedly, I'm not well versed in category management. If I happen to move a page again, I'll make sure not to mess with categories. Luxic (talk) 12:22, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

A chance for Cooperation
Hello Luxic, I hope you are doing well. I wonder if we can contact via email or WhatsApp to discuss the possibility of making a workshop in Italy to provide Wikipedia training to a group of students in Italy. waiting to hear from you.Anassjerjawi (talk) 12:13, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

July 2022
Hello, I'm TylerBurden. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Zlatan Ibrahimović, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. TylerBurden (talk) 19:48, 1 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi, @TylerBurden. I'm a bit puzzled that you would use a template like that when I've been a contributor on Wikipedia for the past 14 years...
 * Anyway, you should note that it's common place for football contracts in most European countries to expire on 30 June, so on 1 July we usually update the player's profile without the need to provide a further reference, as long as the duration of the contract is already referenced in the article. This is exactly the case for Ibrahimović, since it's clearly stated in the article that "on 22 April [2021], he signed a new contract extension to stay with the side for another season" with a news piece form Sky Sports as a source.
 * I hope this clarify the situation. Luxic (talk) 21:01, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 * While I don't think having been an editor for a certain amount of time would exclude you from templates (not sure how I would know your account age anyway), that's a fair explanation. Just trying to keep the standards high on these articles, but sorry about the inconvenience. TylerBurden (talk) 14:44, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
 * @TylerBurden There are several school of thoughts about warning templates: some people think they should not be used with experienced Wikipedians, because they may be perceived as uncivil or patronising, others go as far as saying that templates should not be used at all. Personally, I lean towards the latter approach, as I find a short personal message to be more effective than a template, even when dealing with a newbie or a problematic user. As for assessing the level of experience of an editor, you can either look up for clues on their userpage or just check their contribution history. Luxic (talk) 20:16, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

2022–23_A.C._Milan_season#Loan_returns_2
Hi

saw that you put in comment info regarding the end of loan for Luan Capanni in the section 2022–23_A.C._Milan_season. As your comment about loan spell not to be called out befor January are right, in the section it is clearly stated that "Deals officialised beforehand will be effective starting from 1 January 2023." As the date in the table refer NOT to the officiality of the transfer but refer to the day the deal was known, I would return to my previous version. Any comment? regards Riktetta (talk) 08:52, 16 November 2022 (UTC)


 * @Riktetta Hi Rik, I think we should always refer to the date of the transfer, rather than the announcement, because that's when the player officially becomes available to the team. The only exception is when summer transfers are announced before 1 July (provided there's an official announcement by the club), since in those cases the season is already over, so there's no ambiguity. Luxic (talk) 09:50, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Venetian translation
Sorry for bother you, but I saw you knew Venetian and English and was hoping you could translate this sentence for me as there is no online Venetian translator I can seem to find. If you know one that could help as well. This was a reason for a revert on edits I made to a Venetian Wikipedia page. “(Dexaprovada ła ùltema modìfega (faxeste da PalauanLibertarian) e riciapada fora cheła prima: 1022224 de Fierodelveneto)”

Thanks PalauanLibertarian🗣️ 02:08, 29 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi, they didn't actually give a reason: the message just says your edit was reverted and the previous version (no. 1022224 made by user Fierodelveneto) was restored. Luxic (talk) 05:39, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks for the help PalauanLibertarian🗣️ 19:24, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)