User talk:MDM/Archive 4

3rr
hey i just noticed you broke the 3 revert rule. I already got blocked once for it. So I'm not going to revert your edit but please revert you own edit or you'll be blocked. Reason being- values looks better this way. I just want it to be fully flexible. And it looks way better that way then now just compare it now after you revert it and before. Looks a lot better. Look man i added most of the things you had and it basecally have some extra value options and two extra pics option so please revert you edit back.--Thugchildz

award
If you haven't noticed yet you have recieved a trophy for you work. I already placed it in your award section, please dont take it as vandalism.--Thugchildz

POTY 2006
Your vote was not considered because it was unsigned. Please come back and try again until 2400 14 Feb. Alvesgaspar 12:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

re. Article Improvement Drive
I am absolutely 100% behind you on this one. My working knowledge of clubs outside the Dragons (and St George and the Steelers before them) is limited, however I feel I have enough backing to contribute usefully.

I've found, particularly on my work on WP:THOMAS (what can I say, I go on with things I start...) that I'm always editing with the reader in mind - Does the reader *really* want or need to read this? "Is this just info for the sake of info? Trivia for the sake of trivia?" As well as the relevance of the info, the user-friendly nature is important to me (One of my recent edits was editing the unnecessarily long section titles to just state "Round 4", etc) As well as this, I am generally considered to be somewhat of a Stats Man (some of my work can be seen now and then on the Dragon Army Forums...), so I'm more than up for cross-checking info by whatever is available to me.

In short - Yes. I'm with you. :)

Gonzerelli 06:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey md, great respect for your work on the Roosters article so am happy to support your efforts. my abilities are greater in copy than in art direction so given you've got your look and template sorted I am happy to help with content. my own project goals are articles on legendary players past & present so I could modfiy my plans to work on player articles linking to the club under focus at the time but I can help with other historical content too. you say alphabetical order ? why don't you run chronologically from foundation forward so at least then you can be surely certain that all the foundation clubs wil have great articles by the centenary year. presumably we'll leave the defunct clubs till last ? so yes, I'll get involved Sticks66 11:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC


 * Excellent initiative Manser! To be honest, I can't do too much to help until early November for reasons you obviously know of. I will try to remove blatent garbage on the NRL club pages though. Speaking of which, I think every "Famous Fans" section should go per WP:TRIV and WP:V. It is a fairly unencyclopedic section.


 * Another point. Wouldn't it be extremely difficult to FA the Gold Coast considering that even by the end of this year they would have only played for one season. After their second season, half of the page will have to be updated! GizzaChat  &#169; 07:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

so md, Rabbitohs it is 1st then. Will you tell the others on your hit list ? I'm already stuck into it. 2 questions if I may. 1) I gather that having the breakout articles "History of..." and "Records of..." fully comprehensive and good looking is an important part of main article qualifying for featured status ? and if so do we need stubs in place for every player mentioned on those pages ? and 2) from the NPOV perspective I have a bit of a problem with the Privatisation of the Club bit of the main article. I have no particular view on the matter but it reads like some spin written by a PR person. do you think that could restrict us getting the article over the line and if so how can I help deal with that problem ? Sticks66 11:54, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: WPRL Article Improvement Drive
I'd love to help, when do we all start.

Tiburon 04:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey md are we done yet on these Rabbitohs ? what needs doing to get this one finished ? Sticks66 12:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sydney_Roosters_2007.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Sydney_Roosters_2007.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ↔NMajdan &bull;talk 20:01, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Roosters_1967.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Roosters_1967.png. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ↔NMajdan &bull;talk 20:01, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!
Happy Birthday and all the best! --Bhadani (talk) 14:23, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Souths FA
Hey Md, how do you think the Souths article is looking. Do you have a view on what needs doing to get it to FA stage ? Sticks66 14:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Well I have to say it's looking fantastic. Sattlersjaw has done a great job throwing those citations into the article - that part should pass the FA department. But if I had to make any comments it would be that the Culture and Statistics section need to get rid of the subheadings like that. I would think split the Culture section and make the Statistics section into mroe consolidated paragraphs like you see at Sydney Roosters. Small things like that cause a big uproar at WP:FAC. I wouldn't nominate it just yet because Sattlersjaw looks busy updating a few things, but it looks presentable. One more thing - we need an independent copyeditor to get the grammar and prose up to top standards - the guy who helped me on the Roosters article may accept another invitation if I ask him to help out. Keep in touch with me and Sattlersjaw as things progress. All the best. --mdmanser 13:18, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Thx for the comments. I'll see if I can help on the section headers. Can I ask for a pointer from you. It's real basic I know but I can't work out how to create a Category. How do you create a Category ? I'm 4 Articles away from having artciles done for all 64 Kangaroo Captains & would like to create a Categ for them Sticks66 13:33, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

It's been a while since I did Categories but if you scroll to the bottom of any categorised page in editing mode you'll see a few boxes showing: or something to that effect. When categorising things, make sure you group the cateogry with the rest of the existing ones down the bottom of the page. This will make them easier to manage. Hope that helps. mdmanser 13:45, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Few weeks back I created  on the bottom of that article. But it's just a redlink still and doesn't seem to have created a valid category. Have I missed something ?Sticks66 13:49, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure why, but categories stay redlinked until you edit that redlinked category and add another category into it (i.e. the St. George players category should link to "rugby league players" or something). Check out how other similar categories employ hierachy and do the same thing I guess. The linked articles to that category should already appear in that category if you check - when you click it you'll get an edit page but if you scroll down I think it should list out all of those players already put into there. Test it out. Good luck. mdmanser 13:57, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

hey
hey, how do create a template???

thanks,

- ₪Patelco☻ 00:00, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * That depends what type of template you are trying to create. If you leave me an example of an existing template you may want to base yours on, I can help some more. But basically any template you make should be created in template namespace, that is, the article name should be something like Template:Example . All the best, mdmanser 06:01, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Brisbane Broncos
Why'd you move the season summary to the history page? I think it's not too detailed and sums up the club in a nutshell, so should stay on the club's page. Don't you think history pages are for detail, not summarisations?--Jeff79 05:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure, the table is a good summary of the club's performance but ironically I believe a bit too detailed to be left on the main page of an article. All of the important points of the club's history are already summarised in the main history section of Brisbane Broncos. I don't think having games won, games lost and ladder position are a major priority for readers, and from my experience with other editors tables are not encouraged unless they significantly improve the article or are absolutely essential. I'm happy to discuss this with other editors and change my mind if there is a general consensus to leave it where it is. But what I'm doing to the article at the moment will, in my opinion, make the article look and read better. Cheers, mdmanser 05:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the invite. I've also made lots of suggestions on the Talk:National Rugby League page on how to improve that article in case you can help.--Jeff79 20:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi. As you can tell from the Broncos nomination page, my time has been limited to providing feedback for FACs and FARs because of end-of-semester work. That should change by next Friday. &mdash; Deckiller 06:27, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Userboxes
I honestly didn't think I was doing too much. I started by changing a few userboxes that I use so they look a bit better, while I was at it I thought I might as well change a few more along with them. Feel free to revert them, I checked out that link but I'm still not sure what I did wrong. Bongomanrae 11:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

SpecialWindler
Thanks for the offer, I just do little bits for rugby league but big bits for anything related with Queensland Rugby League especially (as you noticed with Broncos). But I am glad to help. I like finding references so if on Parramatta or Brisbane Broncos or the article of the fortnight if you put a  behind an unreferenced sentence and notify me on my talk page i'll be glad to find a reference for that source. SpecialWindler 06:44, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

ICC Umpiring Controversies
Thank you for your comments on my mark-up to the ICC article which I found to be helpful. I am fairly new to Wikipedia so cannot pretend to be familiar with all of the protocols. My drafting of this section was intended to be explicitly NPOV, although it seems that this may not be the case. What I observe in reading the entire article was that it seems to be very "sanitised" and looking back through the history pages it has had many references of contemporary events removed, including many by Thugchildz. The difficulty that this creates is (i) that the deletion of such events is an act which in itself represents a POV and (ii) in taking responsibility for organising international cricket, the ICC also becomes responsible as an ambassador for the game of cricket as a whole - in the current climate all sections of the print media have commented that the ICC's handling of certain matters reflects badly on the game. Of course this in itself is a POV. But the fact that the POV is widely held (and very topical at the current time) makes it a fact in itself. I wonder how you would handle this? Kind regards --Calabraxthis 07:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I noticed that when you reverted my changes on this template you mentioned that you were working on creating a new template to use specifically for Rugby League. I'd just like to say I'd be happy to help if you need it. Bongomanrae 14:05, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Souths FA opposed
Hey md disappointed to see that the article has been opposed for FA. I didn't realise the proposal would only stay up to 10days before the opposers would rule. But the article looks great anyway of course. I suppose this must have happened to you on the Roosters ? What did you do next ? Sticks66 14:42, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

New RL team colours
Thanks :) I didn't over-write any of your images because I didn't want to step on anyone's toes. I'll go ahead and do it now though. Bongomanrae 14:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

fb templates
Are you sure? I'll stop making them but they just seem to be perfect for the smaller templates that don't hold too much information. Bongomanrae 14:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Noa Nandruku
I thought it was Nandruku with two 'n's, not Nadruku. Could be wrong though.--Jeff79 01:22, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Re:Hey
Hello, long time no see. How did you know the half-yearly exams finished today? Well, I don't think performed that well in the Chem and Phys pracs :), but I think I went alright. As for now, I'm not really sure what to do. I'm planning to take it easy for the next couple of weeks but pretty quickly the Trials come and apparently the lead up towards the Trials is the most stressing part of the year. If my marks aren't as good as I want them to be I may have to study earlier on this time, but right now I've never been so mentally tired in my life! And for some strange reason, Spider-Man 3 drained me out even more. Apart from the visual effects, the movie wasn't worth watching.

In the meantime I have some unfinished Wiki-tasks that I need to clear up. How are you doing? What course are taking at Uni again? You might have told me but I forgot. All the best GizzaChat  &#169; 09:08, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Sydney Roosters
Sorry for my mistake, I should have been more careful. ffm ✎ talk  15:05, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Colours
I'm just wondering if you could create a team colours square that has three strips for colours (like this ) but with the centre strip smaller than the other two strips (similar to the size of one of the strips on a box with four colours ala ). Thanks. Bongomanrae 13:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Karmichael Hunt
Do you have a free image of Karmichael Hunt or can you get one.

I am trying to get Karmichael Hunt to Featured Article status and need a free image of him.

Thanks

SpecialWindler 05:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Goldcoast 1988.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Goldcoast 1988.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 16:59, 4 June 2007 (UTC)