User talk:Trödel/Archive 15

Carnival Cruise Lines Edit: Can you please put it back in ship categories like every other wiki cruise line page thank you.

Suppressing the Truth
Why are you hellbent on censoring the truth. The world needs to know FIFA for what it really is. Perhaps you're a demon from hell yourself.--2600:1006:B14D:55DD:402D:624:E0B5:124E (talk) 17:54, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * My personal opinion regarding Seth Blatter and the FIFA Congress is much closer to yours than you might think. However, Wikipedia is not the place for it. I would suggest making constructive edits regarding the controversies generated from the expansion of revenues overseen by Blatter and Havelange; and how they have used Swiss law and the power of their positions to prevent the full Garcia report from being released. -- Trödel 18:01, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Edits in question: Havelange, Blatter, and FIFA Congress -- Trödel 18:11, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Edits to Edward Snowden
Hi, the content you try to add to the ES article is already added. However, always if you add something especially in such a high profile article, it requires sourcing. Thanks. prokaryotes (talk) 17:49, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * As you state, that information is already in the article; the new information is a significant new development, and lede sections summarize the material in the article. Therefore it should be in the lede - I also note that references are generally omitted from the lede (you should review WP:CREATELEAD). I also agree that a lede should not be changes on a whim, the information that came out this weekend regarding the withdrawal of agents by the British government is a significant new development that should be included. Knee jerk reactions to remove because the lede has been stable, or, now, that it isn't properly sourced (which you admit is already in the article - but you omit that it is sourced) are not persuasive arguments to rebut the change - see talk. -- Trödel 18:07, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * If you insist, someone will certainly add another statement about doubting that claim based on an anonymous source. There are various sources who are skeptical about this claim in reliable sources. Thus, this will eventually lead to an even bigger lede. So let's just keep it as it is now i suggest. Wikipedia is not a place to collect every single opinion, and especially so if it is very vague (anon) sourced. For instance see this article here (German) prokaryotes (talk) 18:17, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * And the source coverage you want to extend, has itself begun to retract parts of the story ... see prokaryotes (talk) 18:25, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * So your objection (that it isn't sourced) is really that you don't believe the source - you knew when you reverted that it was sourced - doesn't sound neutral to me -- Trödel 18:36, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * If you want it read at that way, i just tried to explain to you that your addition doesn't meet Wikipedia standards and that extending the content will increase the lede. Anyway if you want to continue use article talk page. Thank you. prokaryotes (talk) 18:38, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Exactly - you made a claim that is not true: "lacking reference reliable source" what other way am I to read that? The Sunday Times is a reliable source so you object to its content?? or what?? However, I agree that increasing the size of the lede with back and forth that has erupted since the Sunday Times article was published shouldn't be done. Therefore, the best solution would be leave out the the description of the material as "about secret mass surveillance programs" - which existed prior to my edit yesterday and just saying that classified material was leaked (as it is now). Personally, I hate this gamesmanship on Wikipedia where experienced editors try to use the rules "not a reliable source" to object to changes of people they perceive to be new or weaker - why not just make that statement to begin with "the lede should summarize and if we add this we'll need to add the counter argument". -- Trödel 18:52, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Do you want to add the counter argument to the lede too? prokaryotes (talk) 18:56, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * No - see bolded text above -- Trödel 18:58, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, well then we disagree. Let's discuss at talk page. Let's see what other editors think. prokaryotes (talk) 19:01, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Second anointing
Could use your input/experience. Tom Haws (talk) 22:35, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2015 PDL season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yarmouth High School. 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) 09:30, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rio Grande Valley FC, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Monitor. 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) 09:26, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Please do not unbold teams
Please do not unbold teams eliminated from league playoffs. It's not done on league pages such as MLS, NASL, USL, EPL. It shouldn't be done for the PDL page. We need to stay consistent. It's alright to unbold on elimination tournaments like the FA Cup and the US Cup.GrouchoPython (talk) 16:39, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I understand why you wouldn't do it for normal league games, but for the elimination part of the playoffs - it makes sense to unbold the eliminated teams - since they are eliminated, just like in elmination tournaments. -- Trödel 18:00, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited United Soccer League, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jake Edwards. 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) 09:32, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Merging of page histories
Hello, Trödel! Since today is August 1, I have implemented onto the Area (LDS Church) page and List of general authorities of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints those changes in area leadership and other changes that are effective today. For some strange reason, my changes to the Area page are visible, but they aren't showing up on my watchlist. Also, if you are able and willing to do so, I need your help to merge the page histories on the List of general authorities page and my subpage for this year. Thanks for taking care of this ASAP. --Jgstokes (talk) 23:49, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Trödel! To have this change made is fantastic! I greatly appreciate your willingness to handle the change where I cannot. Thanks for all your great work! --Jgstokes (talk) 07:00, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * You're welcome - thanks again for getting all these changes made in a timely manner. -- Trödel 14:58, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * My pleasure. I am no longer permitted to edit Wikipedia while at work, so my editing during the week will be restricted to late nights or before work as time and circumstances allow. IMHO, you did more work in merging the page histories than I ever did in making relevant changes to the list. Thanks again to you for that. --Jgstokes (talk) 05:17, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cincinnati Saints, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Major Indoor Soccer League. 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) 09:27, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * FC Cincinnati
 * added a link pointing to NPSL


 * Rob Valentino
 * added a link pointing to Orlando City

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:39, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 01:30, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. — xaosflux  Talk 00:00, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. — xaosflux  Talk 00:28, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Not hyphenating the compound modifier "light[-]rail" (something), just because "we don't do that"?
Will you please see my proposal at talk:light rail?

Thanks if so, 97.117.19.208 (talk) 19:29, 25 August 2017 (UTC) for now.

Map for US Soccer League System
Can you update this map - it is 2 years old. Hoping you see this.
 * I'll see if I can get to it tonight or this weekend. -- Trödel 00:28, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

cite template parameter and usage info
I found this Citation templates/cite template parameter and usage info page you wrote while I was cleaning up citations using obsolete parameters. This is way out of date. What do you think should be done with it? Do you want to rescue it, or delete it, mark it as historical, or some other option? Jason Quinn (talk) 20:52, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * marked for speedy deletion. I'd just delete it myself but forgot I had admin privileges taken for being inactive :( -- Trödel  15:21, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Your signature
Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated  tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors. Your signature is also causing Tidy bug affecting font tags wrapping links.

You are encouraged to change
 * : -- Trödel

to
 * : -- Trödel

—Anomalocaris (talk) 01:05, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Most users are updating their signatures as requested. We hope you will also. —Anomalocaris (talk) 23:53, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

- updated -- Trödel 16:05, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Fb pdl team
Template:Fb pdl team has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Hhkohh (talk) 13:52, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Fb pdl header
Template:Fb pdl header has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Hhkohh (talk) 13:53, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

File:LarryEchoHawkDOI.JPG listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:LarryEchoHawkDOI.JPG, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Wikiacc (¶) 03:23, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Opinion on Temple Graph
Hi Trodel, I see you have made a graph of LDS temples in the past. I have recreated the graph of temples over time that is on the main temple list page. It was last updated in 2010, so it definitely needed. I will hang on to the data so it can be updated easier in the future. Do you mind leaving feedback on the chart? It is here. I am good with charts and data, but not with design, so any comments would be helpful. Feel free to invite anyone else you think would like to comment. Thanks! Glennfcowan (talk) 02:46, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Wow - hard to believe it has been almost 10 years since I last updated that. I like the various shades of blue version best. I say Be Bold and just replace it as it is long overdue for an update. --Trödel 11:46, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 * PS I always planned to put it out on Google Sheets (or Smartsheet or something) so that one would not have to find or enter in the data in the future. I am not even sure where the spreadsheet is I used for that - it was probably originally in excel. --Trödel 11:47, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback. I agree that time passes pretty fast. I think I have been on Wikipedia for over 10 years too. I will be the keeper of the data for now. Whenever you think we need a refresh, I can update it. Glennfcowan (talk) 15:30, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Trödel 21:51, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

August 2019 Subpage History Merge Discussion
Hello, Trödel. I wasn't sure about whether or not to reach out to you about a Wikipedia matter, because I understand you, like myself, have scaled back somewhat the level of your Wikipedia activity over the last couple of years. As you may or may not be aware, I have continued to create subpages on my user page for List of general authorities of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints articles to hold changes in area leadership that have become effective on August 1 of each year. This year, given the announced consolidation of the Church's North American Areas from 10 down to 6, I also created a subpage on my user page for Area (LDS Church). With changes for this year going into effect on August 1, and since I had heard you had lost your admin status due to inactivity, I had put in requests for the histories of the two subpages to be merged with the main pages. Since those requests have been rejected, I made an additional comment on this matter, in which I pinged you and mentioned you had helped me with such merges in the past. If it wouldn't be too much trouble, would you mind weighing in on this here? I apologize for any inconvenience I might have caused you by mentioning your role in merges from prior years. That said, thanks for your attention to this matter. I am pleased to see you have apparently participated more regularly here on Wikipedia over the last little while than I might have realized. Best wishes. --Jgstokes (talk) 08:46, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Cardston Alberta Canada Temple-a.png


The file File:Cardston Alberta Canada Temple-a.png has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Conference bowl record
Template:Conference bowl record has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Izno (talk) 04:21, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of 2015 Premier Arena Soccer League summer season for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2015 Premier Arena Soccer League summer season, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Articles for deletion/2011 Premier Arena Soccer League summer season until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:04, 24 March 2021 (UTC)