Revision as of 09:06, 28 January 2015 editRichie bedfellows (talk | contribs)66 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 13:30, 15 February 2023 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB | ||
(148 intermediate revisions by 45 users not shown) | |||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
#] | #] | ||
#] | #] | ||
#] |
#] | ||
#] | |||
#] | |||
#] | |||
#] | |||
#] | |||
#]}} | |||
== :) == | |||
Thank you for welcoming me, i hope i can give more information for all the wikipedia users, have a nice day buddy, greetings from Indonesia. --(User : FredericoHibertus95 => ]) (]), 11:35 ], 15 December 2014-- | |||
== Admin?== | |||
I think the ] page needs to be semi-protected. Thanks! --] (]) 20:58, 1 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
== |
==NYCFC== | ||
Shouldn't the team nick name come from the fans? Because that's how teams get their nick names <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 18:27, 7 January 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
Please assist cleanup of: | |||
:True, but the smurfs did come from the fans. You don't get to pick your own nickname, someone gives it to u. The surfs was given by all the other mls teams, because of their light blue smurf like shirts. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:28, 9 June 2015</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> | |||
http://en.wikipedia.org/Yishayahu_Yosef_Pinto | |||
::@{{u|Leeds Unit|}} Wherever it came from, it needs to be ] with an independent, reliable secondary source. And we generally don't include pejorative nicknames, like the one included, in the infobox. Please remember to cite sources for your edits. ] (]) 19:35, 9 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
Propoganda and other useless materials - Whitewash many negative truths. | |||
His role in the death of Obstfeld not mentioned despite countless media references | |||
Lebron paid $1 Million for meeting - Whitewashed <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 13:17, 24 October 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Reference Errors on 26 January == | |||
== Hangon to image deletion of Kalimati station.jpg == | |||
kindly see the talk page of File:Kalimati station.jpg to see why it should not be deleted.--'' <span style="background:#FFFF66">''']''' </font>]]</span> 18:10, 5 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
] Hello, I'm ]. I have '''automatically detected''' that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. {{#ifeq:1|1|It is|They are}} as follows: | |||
== Re:Merge suggestion for ] and ] == | |||
*On the ] page, caused an ] <small>(])</small>. ( | ) | |||
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a ], you can . | |||
Thanks, <!-- User:ReferenceBot/inform -->] (]) 00:24, 27 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
==Liverpool FC== | |||
It seemed to me to be a lot of OR there as well, but I thought that if any of the "jinxes" were salvageable, it would be best to at least get them on the proper page. The author ought to have added them to ] instead of creating a new page; I would guess that s/he simply didn't know about the existing article. I suggested the merge as part of routine categorization maintenence. If you feel that most of the content does not belong, as an editor with an interest in the article you're probably justified in making that decision. ] (]) 13:08, 14 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
Hi Mosmof, Could i just inquire about the reasons as to why you constantly remove my contributions to the 'rivalries' section Liverpool FC page? You did say it was my POV but It's actually a factual account complete with (though incorrectly inserted) cited reference. The overall section on the rivalries is miss leading to the casual reader as it is, as there really should be a 'citation needed' insert at the end of the "rivalry intensified after Manchester Utd became the first English team to win a European cup" line. To say Liverpool's four European cup wins coincided with their domination of English football is a fact bore out by their Honours list in the same article aswell as my referenced add-on. I do think the overall section is miss leading to the casual reader without it.] (]) 09:06, 28 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Hi, thanks for leaving a message. My thinking is that "domination" is a little bit of a ] and the reader would be served better by simply stating the numbers (and looking at that passage again, I should probably edit the part about Manchester United "dominating" English football as well. | |||
:FYI, broke the formatting on the page - when you have a line break followed by a period, it messes up the rest of the line. | |||
== Sports jinxes == | |||
:Again, thanks - let me know if my latest edit works for you. ] (]) 16:28, 28 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
I saw that you had PROD'ed the above. Rather than delete it I redirected it to ]. ], waits for audience ], not a ]. 05:48, 21 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks. i think that's a sensible option. --] (]) 01:29, 22 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
Hi, thank you for the prompt response and the appropriate re-editing.Also apologies for the mix-up with the format. Just one more point, i do also feel the line mentioned about the rivalry intensifying in the 60's after Manchester Utd's European cup win is also a little dubious and slightly miss-leading to the casual reader. I do feel if this is the case then it either needs a citation or i could reference claims that the rivalry actually intensified in the 1970's after Liverpool started their successful period with their first of their eleven league titles in that period. | |||
==5W Public Relations== | |||
thanks <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 18:52, 28 January 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:I have no idea what you're talking about. --] (]) 04:12, 5 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
== |
== Coop City == | ||
Coop City is not a police force, just look at their own website. <small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 19:48, 28 January 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
Sorry, please try it again. ] (]) 04:26, 5 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
:There's nothing indicating they're ''not'' a private police force. In fact, their badge features the words "N.Y. POLICE" and their is titled "Co-Op City Police" and its website features a logo with the word "community policing at its finest". So yeah, if we go by their own description, CC Public Safety is indeed a police force. ] (]) 20:27, 28 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks, working now. --] (]) 04:30, 5 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
== Question regarding citing sources == | |||
== Steven Gerrard England 2-1 Hungary section in International career == | |||
What is the best way to cite information if it is from a book, which I can't find as an e-book to be read online? Is it better off just to leave off wiki if that's the case? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:36, 31 January 2015</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> | |||
:Books are certainly welcome - you can read more about citing sources at ] (] will show you what information to include), and the {{tl|Cite book}} template is useful for organizing the source information. Also, sometimes (but not always), you can use books.google.com to link to specific pages in books. Hope this helps. ] (]) 04:55, 2 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
== ] == | |||
Hello mate, | |||
Hi there MOSMOF, from Portugal, | |||
There are three reasons why you shouldn't have deleted the section on Steven Gerrard I added yesterday: | |||
I have started a WP:FOOTY I discussion, I am 99,99999999999% sure that what you and the other user are doing in this article is wrong (if you link a WP article more than once it's overlinking, period), but let's wait for more opinions. | |||
1. It isn't my fault if there isn't enough detail about the rest of his international career and thats probably because people didn't used to use wikipedia so much in the past, but don't you think people will want to read about this? I think a player of Steven Gerrard's calibre deserves a little more description than he currently has. | |||
Also, if you two were correct, why wikilink only River Plate and not the other club from Malaysia? And I don't see the need to write "free agent" in the introduction because the box will already tell you that. Don't worry I won't remove it again, a bit tired of pointless edit wars, it stays your way. | |||
2. You say that I use too much 'flowery' language but I'm just trying to to portray a vivid image of the goals in the mind of the viewer! If I'd just said '20-yard strike' instead of 'sublime 20-yard half-volley' it would not have had the same effect. The usage of words such as 'sublime' and 'danced' adds flavour to the text and I personally don't think it should be discouraged. | |||
Attentively --] (]) 04:33, 3 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
3. You call it an 'inconsequential match' but firstly the player in question captained the team, scored two brilliant goals, played in his favoured position under Capello for the first time and it was the first match England had played since the 2010 World Cup and therefore the 2-1 win was a much needed morale-booster and restored some fans faith in English football. How is this inconsequential? It was an important match for both the player and the team as a whole and I feel that it deserves a mention. | |||
:Turns out you are right about ], though it's a guideline that seems to be rarely put into practice. As for your point about "free agent" not being needed because it's in the infobox, the problem is that if you apply your logic, we'd be removing a lot more information from the lede that's redundant with the infobox - name, date of birth, clubs he's played for, etc. That the lede duplicates a lot of the information isn't a problem - the point of the introduction is to summarize the content in the article body, and the infobox just gives an overview of the player's career. They serve different, albeit overlapping, purposes. ] (]) 05:32, 3 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
== February 2015 == | |||
] Hello, I'm ]. I have automatically detected that <span class="plainlinks"> to ] may have broken the ] by modifying 2 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .</span> | |||
And one last proposition for you if you still don't see where I'm coming from: Would you mind not deleting it if I improved the rest of the 'International career' section to match the level of description in my segment? I could include more detail about his international tournaments and perhaps the other significant goals he has scored for England in the past. | |||
:List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page: | |||
*<nowiki>Total titles won (1871–present)]] have won more European trophies than any other English team</nowiki>{{red|''']]'''}}<nowiki> with five ], three ] and</nowiki> | |||
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow ]. Thanks, <!-- (0, -2, 0, 0) --><!-- User:BracketBot/inform -->] (]) 13:42, 5 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
==Disambiguation link notification for February 7== | |||
Thanks for reading and please consider my words carefully. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 08:59, 12 August 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ]. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small> | |||
== My Changes == | |||
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 09:26, 7 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
Dear Mosmof: Please let me know what I can do to improve my changes to this article. Every time I make changes to improve the way the article sounds my changes keep getting reverted. Please advise what i can and cannot do. I would like to have something up that is allowed. Thank you. --] (]) 16:42, 17 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
== |
== February 2015 == | ||
This is despite me clearly putting in a credible independent source that contradicts him? ] (]) 05:10, 12 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
Hi! Is (and ]) a case of ]? If not, then why? /]] (]) 09:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
:You read the message and understand how ] works, yes? And your source and the IP's source aren't necessarily contradictory. ] (]) 05:26, 12 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
:I'm still wondering the above. /]] (]) 18:07, 23 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
::Of course I do. But I don't consider his source a credible source. ] (]) 05:27, 12 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Sorry, I thought I'd responded to you, but it looks like my reply got lost in the shuffle somehow. Anyway, I think the use of the broken stick image is fine. ] covers image galleries, and since the broken stick screencap is used in context of the discussion of the broken stick feature, I think you're fine. Apologies for the belated response. ] (]) 19:05, 23 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
:::Then you have a disagreement that's not going to be solved by edit-warring. ] (]) 05:29, 12 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::That was actually going to be my next post on the ip's talk page. Since, you're online, do you mind if you look at ]? ] (]) 05:30, 12 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::I've made an edit which uses both sources - ''Bild'' (or at least people translating from German) calls it "demotion", HSV says "he's getting extra match action". The truth is likely somewhere in the middle. | |||
:::::As for the AfD, yeah, I think it's a clear delete, though it looks like whoever edited tried their best. ] (]) 05:45, 12 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
== |
== Stoudemire == | ||
Stoudemire has been officially waived, so everything is changed in the article – just like every other case. We don't have to wait until he "clears waivers". Once the team announces it, thats it. He is no longer with the Knicks. ] (]) 02:15, 17 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
Hi. I have reverted to the ] article. Other Spurs players' articles include the full name of the club and I don't see why Gallas should be any different. ] (]) 22:23, 22 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
==Mike Wallace== | |||
:That's fine by me. I know we generally go for brevity in the infobox, but consistency is probably more important. Thanks for letting me know. ] (]) 22:59, 22 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
I made the changes to the ] page because someone vandalized it. An unregistered user changed a bunch of stats along with his 40 yd dash time. The career stats that I put in were accurate according to NFL.com, Yahoo, ESPN, etc. I'm going to undo your changes because his career stats are no longer correct. ] (]) 01:25, 19 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Okay, I couldn't tell that you reverted all of the IP editor's vandalism so I went back to the last version by an established editor. Sorry if that was in error. ] (]) 02:00, 19 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
== |
== A beer for you! == | ||
{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
Your to ] broke the infobox image. I don't know where the new image is located you're trying to use, so you'll need to fix it or I can revert it. --]<sup>'']''</sup><sub style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">'']''</sub> 02:09, 23 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thanks for being so reasonable at ]. For that, you get the official sign of American soccer friendship. ] (]) 02:25, 26 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
|} | |||
== Nomination of ] for deletion == | |||
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ''']''' is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ]. | |||
The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. | |||
== Synthesis? == | |||
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.<!-- Template:afd-notice --> ] (]) 14:15, 26 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
Regarding , I'm amazed that you're claiming this is synthesis. There are 3 sources cited, and one of them actually uses the word "iconic" in it. Please explain? On a side note, I think it's very underhanded of you to remove this sentence ''on the day'' that the image review hits 7 days and admins will try to make a decision on the picture. I'm not going to stoop to this level and revert it until I've given you 12 hours to explain how this is possibly synthesis. If you want to regain a shred of decency out of this, you can revert it yourself until we can discuss it. --]<sup>'']''</sup><sub style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">'']''</sub> 16:32, 28 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
:Because you're not really paraphrasing what the source actually says. You're making your own conclusion, that images from the match are "historic" or "iconic", because someone who's selling pictures online said that particular image was iconic. And I wish you'd have the decency to ], since that paragraph has jack all to do with the image in question (and I honestly didn't know we were hitting the 7-day milestone - I didn't realize it was such a big date). I nominated the image for failing ], and the paragraph doesn't add any critical commentary of the image. Hell, the image in question isn't even ''mentioned'' anywhere. Unless you're somehow trying to claim ALL images from the historic season are iconic, which seems a tad bit insane. | |||
:And "3 sources cited"? Really? You added an auction site for an autographed photo, another for an artist who's selling a montage of, in the artist's words, "iconic ''moments''" (emphasis mine), and a photo gallery. Yes, the word "iconic" is used. You're absolutely correct about that. But nowhere in the three links is there a mention of iconic ''images''. So your claim that the images are iconic are unsupported by any reliable, independent source. | |||
:Anyway, thanks for the chance to regain a shred of decency. That's extremely big of you. I'll sleep on it. --] (]) 18:17, 28 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
::First, sorry for the "shred of decency" comment. I was beyond annoyed and didn't get calm before I posted that. I made the mistake of expecting you to understand how I percieved your actions. Clearly that's not possible. Frankly I think you're way past good faith on this one, and much closer to my just ]. | |||
::Second, if I'm to summarize what you're saying above, it basically boils down to something along the lines of: "iconic moments" does not equal "iconic images". You're saying I can't make that conclusion. Since all of the sources are talking about (or selling) artwork, I would have thought it was obvious we're talking about images, but you've got your technicality, so good for you. As I said in the review discussion, I didn't like the sentence I added to the article much anyways. It's unecessary because it points out the obvious. However, as you seem determined to demonstrate, even obvious stuff like this can have chinks in their armor such that you can prove, or disproove, almost anything. | |||
::Therefore, I congratulate you on your "contribution" to the encyclopedia. --]<sup>'']''</sup><sub style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">'']''</sub> 19:37, 28 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
:::See, that's unfair, because I've been trying to explain ], since you seem to be unfamiliar with image policies and the usual issues that come up in these deletion discussions, and you've only been combative (or at least passive aggressively combative) from the start, so I'm puzzled at what point it became clear that I'm this awful, awful person not deserving of the assumption of good faith. | |||
:::Anyway, to address your points: | |||
:::* ''"iconic moments" does not equal "iconic images"'': Exactly. Many, many photos of iconic moments are not necessarily iconic, and conversely, many, many iconic photos are not necessarily of iconic moments. You simply can't extrapolate iconicness. | |||
:::* '' You're saying I can't make that conclusion.'': Again, yes. That's what ] and ] are about. | |||
:::* "Since all of the sources are talking about (or selling) artwork, I would have thought it was obvious we're talking about images'': Yes, I think? We are talking about images. We're just not talking about the image we're supposed to be talking about. | |||
:::I know you've been reaching out to other editors, and that's great. But you need to stop taking this personally. Consensus changes all the time. Featured article reviews aren't infallible. Maintaining civility shouldn't be that hard. ] (]) 00:01, 29 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
::::''you need to stop taking this personally'' and ''Maintaining civility shouldn't be that hard'' - I'm really bummed I included that "shred of decency" comment here, because other than that, I think I've conducted myself in a pretty rational manner. I've tried to make a clear case and respond to rebuttles with a fact based approach. I did more research when necessary and tried to provide many reasonable examples to back up the claims I was making. I wonder if I hadn't included the "shred of decency" thing above if you would have had the same conclusion about my approach. While I admit I am super frustrated with how the Misplaced Pages process seems to destroy article quality rather than encourage it in this case, I don't think I'm taking it personally. That just seems like an easy way to dismiss some inconvenient truths I've pointed out. | |||
::::''Consensus changes all the time.'' - That's easy to say generally, but the difference between consensus among 4 editors on a file deletion page and an order of magnitude more editors on an FAC review is something that's completely overlooked in that statement. I don't expect you to understand that as you've never been involved in an FAC review yourself (you'll probably just think I'm taking this personally again here). The problem I have with the file deletion process is the attitude of "anything nominated is a violation by default unless proven otherwise". The nominators seem to take a lot of pride in that when objections are raised. For most of the uncontested stuff that goes through there, this is a fine policy and makes cleanup of many parts of the encyclopedia very straight forward work. However, I think when its used as a tool to destroy featured articles piece by piece, it misses the point. --]<sup>'']''</sup><sub style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">'']''</sub> 01:21, 30 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
:::::I don't know, you seemed really defensive from the start and you seemed to take the mere nomination of the image as an affront. I've been involved in ]s for some time now (you're free to look at my ), and I can tell you that this particular deletion was pretty routine and uncontroversial. I think your perception that "anything nominated is a violation by default unless proven otherwise" is a case of sample bias - I wouldn't nominate an image without good reason and I doubt too many editors do (although the burden of proof falls more heavily towards keeping ], with good reason). I looked at ], and it seems the image came up, but the discussion was never truly fleshed out. I get that it's frustrating and ] can seem convoluted if you aren't familiar with Misplaced Pages's policies and practice with non-free content. But you seem resistant to any sort of guidance on the issue, which I've found frustrating. --] (]) 01:50, 30 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
::::::It's a weak argument to now blame this on my not being familiar with Misplaced Pages's policies and practices. ] does not seem convoluted. It's pretty clear cut. Unfortunately, ]#8 gets contentious because some editors see an image and think "this isn't a significant image for me" or "this image didn't help me understand the article" and therefore think this applies to everyone. Unfortunately, it's hard to object rationally to such an irrational conclusion. I guess another point that frustrated me was that I also pointed out a lot of related Misplaced Pages policies and practices and they were all but ignored (especially by you). Is that also routine? I've already reviewed your edit history which how I know that you've never been involved in a featured article review. What a shame. I encourage you to try it some time. I assure you it's a lot harder than ], but the productive value to the project is far greater. I admit this is my first time being involved in ] though. Therefore, I indeed was unfamiliar with how a small set of editors goes about this destructive work. For the most part, this is a simple process with cleanliness as its goal. But as I learned, disagree with them, and prepare to be buldozed and expect them to tell you something like "it's only because you don't understand." --]<sup>'']''</sup><sub style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">'']''</sub> 03:06, 30 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
== |
== Jonas Jensen == | ||
Is it OK to create a article about for example Jonas Jensen goalkeeper at Esbjerg fB? Ha has played several matches in the danish 1st division, and is currently playing for at team in the danish superliga, but hasn't played any matches in the superliga? ] (]) 21:51, 26 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
I suppose I should assume good faith with too? From where I'm sitting, it looks to me like you the image for deletion, , and then took it upon yourself to delete the image by other methods. Rather than reporting you for trying to circumvent the process (which is known as disruptive edits), I'll assume good faith and leave it be. Gotta say though, this pretty much fails the ] for me as well. --]<sup>'']''</sup><sub style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">'']''</sub> 20:16, 28 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
:I'm sorry to disappoint you. I thought a non-free photo of the bleachers helped the article far more than a non-free image of a book cover that's not discussed or mentioned in the article. How awful of me. --] (]) 00:02, 29 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
::The book ''is'' discussed in the article and the book cover image is shown in that section. I agree that the picture you were trying to add does improve the article. Did you consider replacing one of the other more low-quality images in the article rather than the one you failed to have deleted? --]<sup>'']''</sup><sub style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">'']''</sub> 06:23, 29 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
:::Here's the deal - the book isn't "discussed" in the sense that people independent of the book or the subject are expressing their opinion or analyzing the book. It's just an explanation of the book and a couple of pullquotes from the author and the writer of the foreword. But we can disagree on that. No big deal. | |||
:::The issue though, is that the cover art is neither discussed nor mentioned, and therefore adds nothing to the reader's understanding beyond providing a nice visual on the page. Any information that's critical to understanding the article is already in the article, or can easily be added without using non-free content (for example, Misplaced Pages has this nice handy feature where the ISBN number will create a hyperlink to pages that will give full bibliographical details). | |||
:::Anyway, the decision wasn't a "keep" - It was a "no consensus" with marginally more !votes for "delete". I figured I'd be ] and removing the image wouldn't do any irreparable harm to the article. ] (]) 16:07, 29 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
::::Can you point me to the policy which states that the cover art itself ''must'' be discussed. I've only read that critical commentary of the work itself (not necessarily the cover) is what's necessary. | |||
::::The decision was the keep with the previous consensus regarding the image and not delete it. It's easy to hide behind statements like "consensus can change" when it's convenient for you, but in this case, it didn't change. You're actions following that result were questionable at best. --]<sup>'']''</sup><sub style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">'']''</sub> 01:21, 30 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
:::::Again, ] is not a blanket allowance for all non-free book covers as long as the book is discussed. They must still pass ], and the cover image itself must have some sort of contextual significance. Also, there was no "previous consensus", just someone who uploaded an image and placed it in a relatively low-trafficked article. Consensus didn't change because none existed. --] (]) 02:16, 30 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
::::::Dude, you're talking is circles. It does have contextual significance. It's included in the context of the section that discusses the book. Consensus did exist, as explained ], by the fact that nobody has discussed this image since it was to the article over 3 years ago. The fact that you're the first person to object to the image in 3 years indeed means you were trying to change consensus which is fine, but it didn't change. When you then go back and delete the image yourself not one day after consensus remained consistent (rather than the change you proposed) you crossed an obvious line. --]<sup>'']''</sup><sub style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">'']''</sub> 03:06, 30 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
. At this point, I say "]." Damn the review process. --]<sup>'']''</sup><sub style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">'']''</sub> 08:08, 1 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
:Thank you for finally seeing the light. It was an incredibly frustrating process so I appreciate you backing off from your stance. ] (]) 13:53, 1 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
::Sure. Congratulations, you wore me out. The only light I've seen is that I'm giving up. I still believe you're wrong about this picture and many others. Did it ever occur to you to research the meaning of the conent on the cover and mention that in the prose rather than just deleting the picture. I consider your contributions in this manner destructive, not constructive to the overall project. Regardless, since you kept at it and I don't have time (or care enough about this particular article), you win. Bravo. --]<sup>'']''</sup><sub style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">'']''</sub> 16:48, 1 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
:::Boy, do you lay on the passive aggressiveness thick. Your judgmental wag of the finger is duly noted. And yes, I did look at the prose. I have yet to find anything that discusses the cover image that makes the image essential to the article, but I'll look again. ] (]) 16:56, 1 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
== |
== Hypocrisy == | ||
I was just going to warn User talk:208.81.212.222 and User talk:Mikemor92 about the edit warring that they've engaged in. I see that you warned the anon but not Mikemor92. At best, it's quite bias of you. At worst, shows a complete lack of integrity. ] (]) 04:36, 27 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
My bad. I intended to just remove the extra one tag. ] (]) 03:02, 6 September 2010 (UTC) | |||
: |
:Whoa, easy there. As far as I could tell, only the IP editor reached 3RR, and Mikemor was still at 2. If I counted wrong, then you can feel free to tag the other user as well. Though it would behoove you to tone down your rhetoric a notch. ] (]) 04:58, 27 March 2015 (UTC) | ||
== Proposed deletion of ] == | |||
==Ronn Torossian== | |||
I have contested your prod of ] and redirected the article to ]. While I agree that the subject does not warrant an independent article, I do believe that it is a plausible search term. If you disagree, feel free to list at RfD, or at AfD if the redirect gets reverted. —<span style="color:#808080">]</span><sup><span style="color:#008080">]</span></sup> 14:16, 20 September 2010 (UTC) | |||
The topic has been discussed on the talk page and a consensus has been reached. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:35, 23 April 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:That's actually a pretty sensible solution. Thanks for doing that. ] (]) 14:45, 20 September 2010 (UTC) | |||
::I got the user page message. I will modify it.] (]) 01:49, 24 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Explain why you disagree with my changes? == | |||
:::Thanks for your response! ] (]) 02:03, 24 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Broad Channel == | |||
Don't just revert. --] (]) 03:29, 29 September 2010 (UTC) | |||
:Fair enough. The series of edits was based on a bogus claim of consensus. There. --] (]) 03:46, 29 September 2010 (UTC) | |||
::Sir, there was more than consensus (other Anti-Rubashkin editors seemed to have conceded that he was not CEO), there was clear evidence that you nor your cohort have responded to, what motivated you to change it? | |||
Oh, and I like the latest trick up your sleeve, we will see how far it goes. --] (]) 04:44, 29 September 2010 (UTC) | |||
I was being "unnecessarily hostile"? Yeah right. The 168th Street image is quite shaded in parts. The Broad Channel and the Far Rockaway image are more clearer and neat. I don't know what the hell you're talking about. Think before you speak. ] (]) 21:57, 8 May 2015 (UTC) | |||
==Ryan Giggs== | |||
Pity you. ] (]) 23:42, 8 May 2015 (UTC) | |||
Hello mate, | |||
I really like the clean-up you did on the "post-career" section of Ryan Giggs. I am new to wikipedia, and I appreciate all the constructive criticism. I thought that section would be an important add to Giggs' profile, and I am glad that you agree, and did not just delete it. | |||
Take care. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:44, 5 October 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
Another random member who doesn't even edit any of the New York City Subway articles, nor knows nothing about the New York City Subway itself. Yeah, thanks for your "unnecessarily hostile" comment at that sockpuppet's page. Sit down and watch how I myself edit. ] (]) 09:15, 9 May 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Athletic logos == | |||
:Why are you bugging me repeatedly over a single comment? Just chill and leave me alone. ] (]) 10:55, 9 May 2015 (UTC) | |||
::You're pathetic. ] (]) 15:19, 9 May 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::This is my final request - please stay away from my talk page and hounding me through edit summaries. Thanks ] (]) 15:06, 15 May 2015 (UTC) | |||
==here is your source== | |||
] (]) 23:43, 8 May 2015 (UTC) | |||
== My fault for the block evasion, editing warring, personal attacks and harrassment == | |||
As far as the Kent State University-related articles go, the script "K" logo ''is'' an "official" logo, but it is by no means a principal or even common alternate logo. The point of a logo in an article is to make that visual connection with the subject since many people see the logo in various media outlets (TV, newspaper, Internet). That's why articles about athletic programs, teams, and specific seasons all have places for the logo. The point of NFCC#1 is more for instances like photographs where an image can easily be obtained of a building or individual rather than using a copyrighted image from a website. With logos, you generally stick to the principal logo, which is also the most recognized. Being a KSU alum and living in Kent, the simple "K" is not that widely used. Its main use is merchandise and is most often found on hats and a few varieties of clothing. In other words, it's an alternate logo (conversely, the university also has an alternate logo that just features the eagle head and lightning that wraps around the K in the main logo). The athletic uniforms, website, and publications use the actual logo and all outside media sources (like ESPN.com) also use the full logo. The only major use of the "K" was in the recent attendance campaign that used the "K" as part of a larger logo (see http://www.90ksu.com). Even there, though, you'll note the use of the main logo is far more prevalent. Also, the file itself is a .gif file. It should be a png file at least. .gif files don't look good when they're resized. --] (]) 01:20, 22 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
:Here's the thing. These aren't articles about entities. These articles are about seasons, and seasons don't have logos, so ] doesn't apply, and these uses fail ]. A reader is not going to have any trouble understanding the subject matter if the primary logo isn't there. So the choices are to either not use a logo at all or use a {{tl|PD-text}} version that's shows up in the school's guidelines, thus no less valid than the primary logo. --] (]) 01:39, 22 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
:::This is an issue you need to take up with the wikiprojects (] and ]) that deal with the season and team articles since the current standard for all season and team articles is to include a logo in the infobox where available. Simply going on a personal interpretation of the rule is just going to get people upset at you. I would argue that while not having the logo isn't detrimental to understanding the subject, including the logo on a season page is part of giving a fuller picture since the logo ''is'' something that identifies a specific team and makes that visual connection. Using the text logo wouldn't be very accurate IMO. It should be noted that for season articles, the logo used is whatever logo was in use ''that season'', not simply the current logo. So, for Kent State, any season articles from before 2000 wouldn't use the current logo (see ]). --] (]) 02:29, 22 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
:::On a related note in regards to the use of the logo at ], I went through several university articles that are FA status and some of them do include the athletic logo in their athletics section while others do not, meaning it's a matter of preference, not of policy that they are included or not (see ], ], and ]). Of those that do include the logo that I read, none had any discussion of the logo within the body of the text. The only "discussion" is simply the basic caption "The athletic logo for..." or some variant of that. It is worth noting that two of the logos have copyrightable elements (i.e. not just letters like Texas A&M). Basically, the logo is an expected visual element of the athletic department. --] (]) 02:50, 22 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
::::I wouldn't characterize it as "a personal interpretation of the rule" - as I said in the WP:CFB discussion, it's what I've observed to be the common practice for college sports articles, whether it's actual policy or not. | |||
::::As for university articles, I'm happy to concede that using sports team logos in athletic teams is acceptable use. It doesn't bother me that much since the use is pretty limited. I think the season and rivalry articles are where we should be concerned about overuse. ] (]) 03:20, 22 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
:::::I definitely agree we need to be concerned about overuse; I obviously don't think this is a case of that. Seeing that season articles have achieved FA-status with copyrighted logos (see ]) in the infobox leads me to believe that the policy, at least now, is acceptable outside of the projects themselves. I can't say that for rivalry articles, though I think based on the following discussion that they could be permissible in the infobox. Here is where it was discussed back in 2007: ] --] (]) 03:43, 22 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
Look, I apologizes for all of my previous outbursts towards you and everyone else in general. I should have never been so incredibly aggressive and rude. I should have just solved things peacefully in the staff thread as well. I personally think that a New York City Subway image should show both front and side of each train line for the New York City Subway service articles, as I agreed with another remember of Misplaced Pages. Once my ] account is unblocked, I promise to be civil and helpful and finally, stop edit warring and just simply take disputes to a talk page or the staff from now on. I also think the quality of the aforementioned images needs to be clear-looking quality too in addition. I'll talk more about that with the staff. Anyway, I'll return to honoring the terms of my block and I also promise I won't ever fight back again. I also just wanted to remove all of my outbursts so I myself don't look bad. That's why I wanted my previous conversation to be deleted in your talk page as well as the IP's talkpage in general, so that way, I don't look bad. It's fine if you don't forgive me though. I promise to change my behavior and treat everyone equally as a whole. ] (]) 23:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Iverson == | |||
Also note that this is my only IP address, as well as JB being my only account. I'm not going out of my way to abuse any multiple IP addresses and accounts. I've already undid the changes in the aforementioned ] articles. I promise. I'll now return to honoring the terms of my block. ] (]) 23:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC) | |||
it should be in the article. If you want to word it that Yahoo reported that a deal was agreed to, fine, but it definitely warrants a mention since the report has made the rounds. ]<sup>]</sup> 23:04, 26 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
he already has signed photo is here http://ntvspor.net/haber/basketbol/26075/iverson-imzayi-atti | |||
:plz cite if u can find and eng source. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:25, 29 October 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
::Yup - I've included an AP article as source. ] (]) 19:43, 29 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks for the message - I know it's easy to take things personally and get our emotions get the best of us (I've done it myself), and it's not easy to come out and say you were wrong, so I appreciate this. We're both here for the same reason, to improve articles, so no hard feelings. Cheers. ] (]) 23:24, 18 May 2015 (UTC) | |||
== |
== Hello . == | ||
Why dont you review that page since you seem to watch Rabbis closely <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 14:54, 6 November 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:I ''don't'' watch rabbis closely, so I decline, but thank you for thinking about me. ] (]) 15:20, 6 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
Hello bud, look at this .. | |||
Am listening to you and have now contacted said individual a 3rd time. Am willing and want to compromise and hope sockpuppet will also. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 04:53, 10 November 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
==Orphaned non-free image File:Hack Wilson 1930.jpg== | |||
* ] | |||
<span style="font-size:32px; line-height:1em">''']'''</span> Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently ], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. ] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]). | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
they are all wrong by listing Bale most expensive player over Ronaldo..your link seems more updated so we need to change them I think . | |||
'''PLEASE NOTE:''' | |||
I already suggested to move two of these articles to one article and we can work on it if you want . | |||
* I am a ], and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. | |||
* I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again. | |||
* If you receive this notice ''after'' the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click to file an un-delete request. | |||
* To opt out of these bot messages, add <code><nowiki>{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}</nowiki></code> to your talk page. | |||
*If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off ] and leave a message on ]. | |||
] | |||
thank you. | |||
Thank you. <!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> ] (]) 05:34, 11 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks - this might actually be a better discussion on ]. I can start a discussion there if you're not getting traction on those articles. ] (]) 18:00, 26 May 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Did you get my email? == | |||
==David Yates Image== | |||
Fair enough. You know what you're talking about! I'm sorry I still don't understand, so I'll leave the image be deleted. Unless you can upload an image of Yates (I'm a big fan of his!). ] (]) 14:38, 12 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
I sent it a few days ago, but you never acked. If not, I will send it again. --] (]) 11:23, 30 May 2015 (UTC) | |||
==Los Angeles Times Blog== | |||
:I didn't. Let me check my settings to see if my email is correct. ] (]) 14:00, 30 May 2015 (UTC) | |||
I see comments on an archived page and I am not sure I may comment there, so, please allow me to comment here. | |||
:Okay, try now. ] (]) 14:13, 30 May 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Take a look now.--] (]) 14:36, 30 May 2015 (UTC) | |||
Here is the issue in question: ] | |||
== Hi == | |||
Here are the comments I would add: | |||
can you please tell us your opinion about this topic : | |||
Oh my. Hipocrite brought an issue here and did not inform anyone (at least not on the relevant Talk page that I noticed), especially me. I only learned of this after having to search for it, in the archives, no less, after someone complained. The problem is the LA Times reports the map is the work of the ] (ALA), but the ALA plagiarized the map from an unreliable source and the LA Times reported it as if the ALA wrote it since the ALA made it appear that way. "We're smack in the middle of Banned Books Week, an event sponsored by the American Library Assn., the American Publishers Assn. and others. This year, they've launched an interactive map that shows which books were officially banned or challenged, and where, in 2008." No, that is false. Some unnamed and unreliable source launched it, admitted so on a blog of the National Coalition Against Censorship that now claims ownership, but the ALA plagiarized it and presented it as its own. That's the problem with the LA Times source, namely, it repeats the ALA fraud through no fault of the LA Times. And plagiarism is fraud. And the ALA has plagiarized a number of things in my opinion, this map is just one. So the question really is, can you use a source as a reliable source when the information contained therein is proven to be false because someone else claims ownership and his claim is more believable. I say no. | |||
https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football#Thomas_Vermaelen.27s_page_question_please_: | |||
I see you active in sport pages so thought you might have an opinion about this . thank you ] (]) 14:15, 31 May 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Not sure what more I can add beyond what you've laid out here. This doesn't seem to be a ] issue, and there doesn't seem to be any question that ALA/BBW is republishing the map, whatever its origins. --] (]) 20:20, 16 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
::Thanks. --] (]) 21:30, 16 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
== Thank you + invitation == | |||
==Re: File:Humphreyspenaltycheltenham.jpg listed for deletion == | |||
I haven’t been on Misplaced Pages for some and the rest was due to frustration due good content being deleted. | |||
{{Template:WPFOOTY-women'sfootballtaskforce-invite}} ] (]) 01:12, 4 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
I’m not bothered but in response… | |||
== Cada mori == | |||
File:Humphreyspenaltycheltenham.jpg | |||
Our boy seems to have disappeared. Perhaps this is the time to restore the deleted section to the RT article? --] (]) 05:54, 9 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
As clearly explained in the article. Humphreys missed a penalty against Cheltenham. This was a major moment in his career. | |||
:Hobestly, I don't know where we stood in the discussion, but I think it was still contested. Maybe reopen the discussion? ] (]) 10:59, 9 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Go for it/ --] (]) 17:31, 9 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Great Logic ! == | |||
“Humphreys' first season at the club would end in disappointment as he missed the decisive penalty in the play-off semi final defeat to Cheltenham Town, which cost Hartlepool a place in Division Two. The penalty struck the woodwork twice and stayed out. Humphreys' miss would send him to tears and he was photographed by Frank Reid, a photograph that would prove to be one of the most memorable images of Reid and Humphreys' career.” | |||
{| style="border: 1px solid #999999; background-color: #FFFFFF}; width:100%;" | |||
File:Humphreystrancele.jpg | |||
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:middle;" | {{#ifeq:{{{2}}}|alt|]|]}} | |||
|rowspan="2" | | |||
This was a case of exercising demons. It was a major moment in his career. One of the defining moments in his career. | |||
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em; color:#9D741A; font-family:Comic Sans MS, Arial, Helvetica;" | '''The Socratic Barnstar''' | |||
“In the 2004–05 season, Humphreys helped Hartlepool once again make the play-offs. During the play-off semi-final against Tranmere, Humphreys had the task of taking a penalty for Hartlepool in sudden death. This was the first time Humphreys had taken a penalty since his crucial miss at Cheltenham. This time he scored and sent Hartlepool through to the play-off final against his old club Sheffield Wednesday. This helped to erase the memories of Cheltenham” | |||
So to say those were “Decorative image, no discussion about the image” is wrong. But you’ve got what you’ve wanted. This has proven my point. ] (]) 23:43, 17 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
:Your point was? In your comment above, you make a claim about the photograph, but that claim of significance isn't attributed to anyone, and the deleted image is not the one discussed in the article. I'm not sure how this is a case of "good content being deleted" and I really don't appreciate the petty, passive aggressive "you've got what you've wanted" line. ] (]) 00:07, 18 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
The deleted images signified memorable moments in the players career that were in the article. It was like a real life movie. Guy misses penalty, guy has regrets, guy writes a book about it "From Tears to Cheers", guy erases the bad memories and scores a sudden death penalty in the same situation. The two images are linked and capture defining moments. The significance of the photo was attributed to Ritchie Humphreys but there you go. ] (]) 18:33, 18 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
:So the image is significant according to the photographer and the subject of the photo. Huh. ] (]) 04:21, 19 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
::In the most simplest of English. The image is significant as it depicts a significant and important moment in the history of ] and ]. ] (]) 19:29, 19 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
:::And in a nutshell, you've articulated the most common misunderstanding of ] and ] that I encounter. Showing a historic and/or significant event does not necessarily make the image itself historic or significant, which is one of the criteria for fair use under Misplaced Pages's non-free content policies. --] (]) 19:49, 20 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
== Nokia image == | |||
It is subject to deletion on Commons due to strict codes, they can't find the source. It should be kept on Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 15:10, 2 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
:I looked at the Commons image. It seems that the rationale for deletion would be as valid here as it is there. I'm wondering which specific Commons policies you're referring to. --] (]) 15:12, 2 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
:Oh, and I noticed you changed the notice. Yeah, kinda confused why it would be A.O.K. here but not on Commons. --] (]) 15:13, 2 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
''Updated message:'' It is subject to deletion on Commons due to strict codes that they cannot '''verify''' the source. The uploader appears credible, so in good faith, it should be kept locally on Misplaced Pages. I've since changed the template. ] (]) 15:18, 2 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
::Well, we always assume good faith. But acting in good faith doesn't necessarily mean doing things correctly, and assumption of good faith doesn't preclude asking questions and for verification. It seems best to let the Commons deletion process take its course, and THEN we can talk about putting it up here. But if it comes to that, I'll probably end up putting the image on PUI, just to get a few more eyeballs to look at the image. --] (]) 15:26, 2 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
True, but really, who knows how many images are on Misplaced Pages from authors who upload and ''claim'' they own the work, however, that may not be the case, but it cannot be proven otherwise.. point is, this follows the same principle, the user ''claims'' they sourced it from such and such, but it cannot be proven. We assume good faith and if it can be proven that it was sourced from a copyrighted domain - then we can throw out good faith.. but for now, lets assume good faith. Take a look at the original image , and I've since edited it with noticeable improvement. It's a poor image. If you're going to source a Nokia N8 image from somewhere and claim it's from such and such, then why not pick a better image.. good faith and reasonable doubt.. it would be great if we didn't bring in the eyeballs, and say we have reasonable doubt and good faith to prevent any course of action for review.. Commons? Different story, they assume no good faith if you're claiming another source, it must be verifiable, and fair enough, it is dedicated to free media. ] (]) 15:42, 2 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
:You should take a look at ]. Verifiability is very much a requirement for images here on English Misplaced Pages, regardless of the level of enforcement. And while we may not be able to verify a lot of the PD claims on images here, but because they're personal snap shots or come from established users or whatever the reason, we generally have good reason to believe the claims are valid. In any case, this amounts to an ] argument. | |||
:But this isn't just a random picture with a simple "I own this work" claim. It's a high rez photo, and you might think it's a shitty image, but it's not that easy to get a clean product shot. And if a government agency is really the source, then it shouldn't be hard to find the exact source and copyright details. In any case, I don't see the issue with bringing in more eyeballs to review the image. That's the whole point of a crowd-sourced encyclopedia, to avoid and correct mistakes and to gather more information by bringing people together. ] (]) 16:08, 2 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
-*sigh* bring in the clowns. ;) ] (]) 16:15, 2 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
:I noticed "restoring original response for the sake of logic" and I take offense to that, as I'm not illogical. Perhaps I don't have excellent Talk page format and took me a while to work out how the heck to put up a Deletion review, even putting it on the articles discussion page, but that's because I don't spend much time, no, as little time as I can on Talk, and as much time as I can on articles. If you look at my contributions, I've managed to avoid Talk since June, where I had another dispute. It's too bad I can't put my activity on private, it was one of the clowns from June that listed my image for deletion, because he "monitors my account periodically".. I couldn't care less what others are doing, but it appears I have more monitors after this second dispute.. I may have to create a new account periodically.. point being, I think you can excuse my imperfect Talk page etiquette based on I don't care for Talk. ] (]) 16:30, 2 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
::That wording probably wasn't the best - I just did it so I could see what my response was to when I came back later. You've been perfectly civil with me here and no offense was intended. ] (]) 16:33, 2 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
==License tagging for File:Sunkist logo 2008.jpg== | |||
Thanks for uploading ]. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Misplaced Pages uses a set of ] to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from ], click on ], then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Misplaced Pages. | |||
For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on ]. Thank you for your cooperation. --] (]) 07:05, 5 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
==Rabbi Pinto== | |||
We have rarely if ever agreed but you seem to be interested in these issues. Spend 5 minutes would you and review ] page. Is it not possible you once in your life can agree with me ? Surely items like the most expensive synagogue in the US, the fact that he's not well known in Israel and death curses which are mentioned in all their sources are relevant, no ? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 04:17, 8 December 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:I find it hard to sympathize with either side on this edit war. It's not that I don't think you're right - you don't seem interested in actually finding a middle ground with your fellow editor. --] (]) 04:35, 8 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
When you say that, have you actually read the materials ? What have they given in on ? Am absolutely willing but they consider him a gd like figure. Whats so hard to understand even about the bottom items ? | |||
Lets say I accept not listing the other stuff - is the bottom not relevant @all ? Thank you: | |||
Rabbi Pinto Prominence: | |||
The page is biased and whitewashed. How can he be such a great worldwide leader if the sources cited say the following: | |||
The Forward article says http://www.forward.com/articles/128944/#ixzz17UWltlMZ | |||
Pinto, an Israeli-born rabbi of Moroccan descent, is little known in the United States. | |||
The Haaretz article says: | |||
“Pinto is not well known in Israel.” | |||
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/a-rabbi-not-afraid-to-deviate-1.265442 | |||
Should these not be added ? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 04:37, 8 December 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:That's why there's a talk page, and both sides could probably tone down the rhetoric. --] (]) 04:41, 8 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
If you wont help so say so but I know you are good at this and know that you view your form of justice as fair. If you read the issues and stories here you will see I am right and being bullied and know you dont give in to that sort of thing. We have gotten along well online lately, no ? How about simply reviewing it ? Read the talk page - They added spiritual leader 2x in 2 paragraphs and I am the irrational one ? They think this guy is the Messiah and their sources say exactly what I do but they wont include it. The guy has a $30 Million building and thats not relevant ? Take a look ? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 04:46, 8 December 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:{{TakeNote}} This user has brought this up at several noticeboards and user talk pages. ]<sup>]</sup> 04:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
Gahhh... he is posting at every other noticeboard. ]<sup>]</sup> 04:54, 8 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
You are really really good at pushing your political agenda and simply opposing me. as a rule i say black and u say white without even reading it. You mean to tell me you will accept Arutz 7 as a source on other issues across the board ? Did you bother to actually read the Pinto piece ? ] (]) 13:55, 11 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
:What's my political agenda? I didn't realize I had one! Let's not distort facts here - you lied and said the source was an "obscure blog". It | |||
Is neither obscure nor a blog, and you know it. ] (]) 14:22, 11 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
== Philip McCluskey== | |||
Hi MosMof - I noticed the tags you placed on the Philip McCluskey article and wanted to discuss with you. I noticed that you flag things or make changes but have not yet entered into a discussion, so would appreciate a two-way conversation if possible, in the spirit of collaboration. I did contest the third party source tag because the article does, in fact, include third-party sources (not self-published) and the only first-person information comes from the source of the article himself, which is definitely allowed under Wiki guidelines. As for your other tags, some questions: | |||
1. How short do you feel an introduction needs to be in order for you to not deem it "too long"? I've noticed many different intro lengths on Wiki, without this tag. | |||
2. How many additional references would satisfy? I was not aware that there was a quota for references, as long as valid third-party references were included. | |||
3. Please give specific examples in the text that you feel are written like an advertisement; the tone is as neutral as possible. If you disagree, then you are welcome to make edits that will make it sound more neutral. | |||
Thank you, MosMof. If you cannot give specific answers to the above questions, then please consider removing the tags you previously put on the article. I do want to have a high-quality article up here and appreciate your help, but also need guidance and a helping hand from the community, which includes you. For us newbies, it goes a long way if you back up your tags with some additional reasoning. Thanks! <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:25, 21 December 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
*** I really appreciate the response to this post, MosMof. Thank you. Your suggestions make sense; I'll try to keep adding to the article as I find more sources. You're also welcome to make additions as you think are necessary, of course. I have a question about these tags: if I improve upon the article in response to a tag, what's the tag removal etiquette? Is it OK for me to remove it, is it something you remove, or is it simply open to the community to remove? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 04:33, 22 December 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Picture on Kaká page. == | |||
I say the picture on the Kaká page needs to be changed. I can get you one if you need it. Just tell me how I can give it to you. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 12:54, 28 January 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Incorrect info about international goals on Kaká page. == | |||
Most of the international goals on the Kaká page have something wrong in them. Either it's the date, the opponent, the competition and some of the goals didn't even take place! Please correct them using this - http://soccernet-assets.espn.go.com/scoreboard <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 13:11, 28 January 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Update on 5wpr == | |||
I read the talk page but couldn't quite understand who was against whom in the 5WPR Agriprocessor story. I see it has been downplayed in the article, which now reads like a panegyric. | |||
Do you feel, as I do, that this story should be in the lead? --] (]) 16:11, 24 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
== Edward Mermelstein == | |||
I have renominated ] for deletion, and have gone about it completely wrong. I have written my arguments in the discussion, where it certainly does not belong, and don't know exactly where I should have put it. You have a lot more experience at this. Can you straighten things out for me? You may also want to participate in the discussion. Thanks, --] (]) 11:05, 30 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
:It has been straightened out, thanks to Pgallert. is the discussion. I am guessing you want to take part. --] (]) 08:52, 31 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
== Files by Zwilson14 == | |||
Hi Mosmof, I notice that you marked several images by {{user|Zwilson14}} for speedy deletion as copyright violations. I have deleted them and I also notice that this user has also had a bunch of other images previously deleted as copyright violations. I think it is therefore likely that other images he has uploaded are also copyright violations. Any chance you could take a look at to determine if they are also copyvios? -- ] (]) 12:26, 19 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
:I did a few quick searches on other pictures, and I couldn't find matches for them on the web. But I think the fact that they're all low res, PNG (instead of JPEG) files of dramatically varying qualities tells me they should go up for ] as a group. As far as I can see, the user has given no indication of ownership beyond the generic "I, the creator" tag. At the very least, we should ask the user to provide more complete source information and to replace the PNG uploads with the original high-res JPEGs (if they exist). Is there a way to do batch nomianations for PUI, or do they go to ]? ] (]) 14:24, 19 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
::I listed the images for deletion at ]. I don't deal with image deletions very often, and haven't done this kind of mass nomination before, so hopefully it's done correctly. Your input at that discussion would be appreciated. Thanks for your help. -- ] (]) 14:51, 19 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
== Deletion tag of ] == | |||
Could you be more specific with why you believe the image is replaceable? I have disputed the tag on the talk page of the article because the image is of a historical event which cannot be replaced.<tt> </tt>] ] ] 01:51, 20 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
:I've responded at ]. --] (]) 04:29, 20 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
== "Most successful" subjective? == | |||
There is no subjectivity about the claim that Manchester United is the most successful club in the history of English football. They have won the most trophies out of any English club, therefore they are the most successful. Same goes for the description of Alex Ferguson as the most successful manager. – ]] 23:08, 1 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
:But that's "successful" as defined by your set of criteria. And who is to say a manager's success is judged by the number of trophies? Why rely on an adjective that doesn't have a set-in-stone metric when we can just say "Manchester United has won the most titles" and avoid it altogether? I don't see the need to complicate matters, even if ever so slightly. --] (]) 23:14, 1 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
== Battlestar Galactica: Blood & Chrome Concept Art Images == | |||
Can you tell me, or perhaps show me what licence template is needed to fix these issues? The images are obviously promotional material, so this should be quickly adressed with the right template. The problem is, I don't know which one. Since you seem to know, what template is the right? ] (]) 22:23, 24 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
:It's not so much a licensing issue as it is not meeting ] (a non-free image has to meet ALL the non-free content criteria). Specifically, the image isn't a subject of critical (sourced) commentary or discussion, so the article doesn't really suffer if the image isn't included. --] (]) 22:28, 24 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
== revert ] and ] == | |||
I reverted the image change on these two articles because the images, although non-free, have historical value and cannot be duplicated. It's not just a "placekick" on a field goal, but the ''first'' placekick of a field goal by a female in college football at that level. | |||
I searched and could not find any reference to not using non-free images of historical value in policies. I of course could be wrong (and often am) so if I am, please let me know and show me the source. It might be worth some discussion on the non-free image use pages if the subject hasn't come up before.--] (]) 14:42, 13 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
:Couple of things. "Historic" thing seems to confuse a lot of people. It's not talking about images that show events of historic value. It's about cases where the images themselves are of historic value, like the V-E Day kiss or Robert Capa's fallen soldier, where the photographs are subjects of extensive discussion and commentary. There's no such historical commentary of these women kicking footballs. Also, these uses fail ], since you stuck them in the infobox and there's no discussion, or even mention, of the images. If you still disagree, I'd be happy to discuss the images at ]. --] (]) 01:11, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
::No need, it's not a big deal for me. It would be nice if we had a photo for the page, but there's more critical work to do methinks.--] (]) 15:30, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
:::K, thanks for the note. --] (]) 15:55, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
==REEBOK REVISION, IVERSON, DARIUS MILES, STEVE FRANCI, BRUCE JENNER== | |||
You stated that the links i posted as a source for reebok's endorsers were non-notable. How is it non-notable if the actual advertisement is at the link SHOWING the athlete/ entertainer endorsed the product? | |||
Then you stated that my other post was spam because I noted that they had a past endorsement and showed proof of it? Then you call one of my links a "vanity link to a sneaker blog" ? So one minute its spam then its a vanity link? All the links provided are proof of the endorsements, all the links provided are from a site that reputable, all the links support proof of the endorsement. -- <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 16:59, 17 November 2011</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> | |||
: I'm saying that the publication is non-notable, and the way you're flooding the articles with defynewyork.com makes it spammy and apparently vanity (though in retrospect, I should've ]. It's mostly an issue with ] - we want sources to be established, widely recognized publications, and defynewyork doesn't seem to have that level of notability or traction that we like in our sources. --] (]) 17:04, 17 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
You said you want the source to be established and widely recognized well complex magazine (complex.com) had no issue citing me as a source http://www.complex.com/sneakers/2011/07/fila-the-cage-retro | |||
sole collector had no issues either http://solecollector.com/Sneakers/News/FILA-The-Cage-2012-Retro/ neither did highsnobiety.com http://www.highsnobiety.com/news/2011/01/07/nike-air-presto-anti-fur-sneakers/ and countless other sneaker sites. Your obviously not familiar with the sneaker culture because my website has a large following of senior editors for major publications, footwear designers, store owners, etc. I think its safe to say that my website is widely recognizable. The reason my site was linked as a reference to Arnold. Paula abdul, Darius Miles etc. is because I'm the only sneaker site with these photo's (if other sites had better coverage on these topics then i would have cited them as references as i have in the past.) And if you think that the sneaker community is small and the information not valuable then you are very very wrong. Every day there are people researching the history of these brands with the most important info being who were the endorsers of their product. Not only does the consumer want to know but the brands themselves as some of these advertisements are very very rare. Also, I'm widely respected in the shoe community. If you google trethousandgt you would see that. And yes I do consider myself an expert on the subject but not sure if I should waste my time posting on here anymore. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 17:51, 17 November 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
I'm still waiting for your rebuttal. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:00, 17 November 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
I would appreciate you letting me know what the deal is, I don't want to waste my time posting information only to have someone delete all my work again. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 05:31, 18 November 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:A few things - I'm not always going to respond to messages immediately. Even if I make minor edits, I don't always have the time to give detailed responses. There's no need to keep bugging me - I see when you leave a message. | |||
:Anyway, I think you're being pretty presumptuous about what I know or think. Straw man arguments are unhelpful. I don't doubt you when you say your site is respected. I use to run my own site myself and it got occasional mentions in larger publications and had (and still have). But that doesn't make my site notable enough to be a source, especially since I wasn't putting myself through a rigorous editorial process. | |||
:Also, since it's your own site, anything there would be considered ] - you want information that's been covered and reported by other (reliable) sources (also see ]). | |||
:Finally, a good source is one that says "Person x did y in year z". Pointing to an old ad and using it as "proof" that an athlete endorsed a product amounts to ]. If a piece of information is notable enough for someone other than you to care, then you should be able to find someone other than you (who's also notable) reporting it.] (]) 05:13, 19 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
In the case of Arnold Schwarzenegger for Reebok I stated he endorsed Reebok Shoes (agreed, I should have stated more info). However, the back link to the article clearly stated the year and also displayed the original commercial in addition to the original advertisement. How exactly does that add up to "synthesis." I didn't take the commercial and the advertisement and say Arnold wore Reebok's and performed better during his workouts, all I stated was that he endorsed the product which is what the advert and commercial clearly show. That is not synthesis. Also, you say "if a piece of information is notable enough for someone other than you to care, then you should be able to find someone other than you (who's also notable) reporting it." That doesn't hold true if this "notable person" doesn't knows its existence, and then, what happens if they cite me as the source when they finally do report it? Does that person then become someone who is no longer notable? If I understand you correctly, the bottom line is that my site is not reputable enough and therefore cannot be cited as a source for anything "new" that hasn't been seen before (to any Wiki pages that is) because my site is not a widely known publication such as the New York Post or LA Times (which is known in the industry to cross check facts)? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:41, 19 November 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:To respond to your questions one by one: | |||
:* In the case of Arnold's ad, you're conveying information or a point that wasn't made by any other reputable source. That would be a textbook case of ]. | |||
:* If a publication that qualifies as a ] cites you as a source, then awesome, cite that publication that cited you. I don't see how that would be a problem. That means the information was deemed notable enough AND passed through the editorial layers of a more notable publication. | |||
:* Well, I wouldn't say "reputable". It's just that WIkipedia's process prefers information that's passed the muster of editorial oversight, hence more mainstream publications are preferred over ]. | |||
* Anyway, the bigger issue here is that it's *your* site which also happens to be a ]. --] (]) 05:19, 20 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
Ok, I get it. I'll abide by Wiki's rules and appreciate your attention to all my questions <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 17:26, 22 November 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Out of curiosity... == | |||
...what made vandalism? --]<sup>]</sup> 23:29, 3 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
:That was by error - I was going to do a standard revert with explanation, but hit the vandalism button by accident. My apologies. --] (]) 02:43, 4 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
::That makes sense then, I thought I was missing something. --]<sup>]</sup> 16:10, 4 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
==Orphaned non-free image File:Florida State Seminoles helmet.png== | |||
<span style="font-size:32px; line-height:1em">''']'''</span> Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently ], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. ] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]). | |||
'''PLEASE NOTE:''' | |||
* I am a ], and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{tlp|helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message. | |||
* I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again. | |||
* If you receive this notice ''after'' the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click to file an un-delete request. | |||
* To opt out of these bot messages, add <code><nowiki>{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}</nowiki></code> to your talk page. | |||
*If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off ] and leave a message on ]. | |||
Thank you. <!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> ] (]) 18:43, 4 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
== Chris Paul == | |||
You mad son? CP3 is a Laker. I'll hit you up tomorrow to prove your revisions are foolish. GO LAKERS :p ] (]) 00:05, 9 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
:a) I am not your son. b) I understand enough English to know the difference between "is" and "will be". kthxbye. --] (]) 00:07, 9 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
:: | |||
They JUST SAID it's official on TV. ESPN '''NEVER''' acknowledges moves as '''OFFICIAL''' ''UNTIL'' they actually are. He's a Laker. I'll hit you up tomorrow and clown you. GO LAKERS ] (]) 00:08, 9 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
:So you're saying the trade isn't official. That means the trade isn't done. Thank you for confirming what we already knew. --] (]) 00:09, 9 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
:::I ain't worried. CP3 is a Laker. What's your team? Miami? Lulz. Nah, but for real you know it's legit, however I know Wiki's rules. I'm just pumped. ] (]) 00:11, 9 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
::::I'm glad you're not worried! Whew! I'm a free agent - my team left town long ago and haven't picked up a team, so I'm pretty neutral about all this. And yes, I am well aware that shit be legit.--] (]) 00:12, 9 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
==Hoodie article== | |||
Just so that I don't just revert your reversion of my information regarding hoodies worn by university students and have you revert it back could you explain why you got rid of my comments? Seemed like reasonable information to me! ] (]) 07:56, 16 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
:Ah, scratch that, you're playing the original research card. Yawn. Fair point but very pedantic. Guess I ought to try and find some references. ] (]) 07:59, 16 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
==Question from User:TomParry123== | |||
Why did you change it? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:36, 22 December 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:Change what? --] (]) 20:41, 22 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
== don't be retarded == | |||
stop being an asshole. the dude who does the rap/hip-hop section on About.com is legit. don't be stupid <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 05:54, 26 December 2011</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> | |||
:Oh, for sure, I'm sure he's totally legit. The problem is that an About.com ranking isn't that notable. It's a ranking that other notable sources discuss extensively, like the Billboard charts or the AP ranking. It's a ranking that nobody outside of about.com and its readers care about, and not considered a definitive ranking. --] (]) 12:55, 26 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
== Photos == | |||
Yo, undelete the photo for Venable Hall "Venable2.jpg" | |||
It is a picture I took myself, so I definitely have free reign to distribute it. I will put the correct licensing thing in the image. | |||
Please put it back on because I have deleted the original. | |||
Thanks ] (]) 15:17, 15 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
:I don't have the power to actually delete or undelete photographs. You'll have to take it up with the closing admin or (possibly) at ]. If I remember correctly, the photograph also appeared on the university website, and there was no indication that anyone other than the university held the rights to the photo. And you also had a photograph from The Plains Dealer that you claimed as your own, which didn't reflect well on your claim of ownership on other photographs. --] (]) 15:54, 15 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
::I did some side work for both the school and Plain Dealer while I attended College. I took the pictures and they used them for promotional stuff on their website. I listed the correct licensing originally (my own work), so what else should I have posted in there besides that? ] (]) 22:48, 24 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
:::That's something you should mention when you post your WP:DRV entry. Of course, depending on how you worked out your rights with the Plain Dealer and HSC, you'll probably have to show some sort of evidence that you, and not the publishers of the images, own the rights. Also, it might help to upload the original, high-res photo straight from the camera, not the scaled down versions that appear on the websites. --] (]) 02:21, 25 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
==Iverson== | |||
Dude, just undo my edit and that's cool. I don't even care that much. I just saw a report on NBA.com, but yes you're right he isn't even joining that team anymore, so it's all good man. ] (]) 07:42, 23 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
==Thomas Robinson== | |||
I put this in my edit summary when I redid my revision but I will post it here too. | |||
Athlete pages point to the university page throughout wikipedia. Examples, ], ], ], ], ], among many many others which means ] on Misplaced Pages seems to be it should be the school page. I would hate to sound cliche, but he is a student/athlete, student comes first. Do not change it back without requesting a new consensus.--] (]) 02:20, 31 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
:A couple of things: I think you're being a bit silly with the "student-athlete" label, which is the NCAA's branding tool and not how the public sees these athletes - you and I know that as students, they are nobodies. The only reason they meet Misplaced Pages's notability criteria is because they are basketball players. Also, listing articles don't tell us much since I can just as easily list examples of athletes whose colleges are mentioned by team, not school, articles: ], ], ], ], ], ]. There is no consensus on this issue. And I have trouble believing that you think where they took classes is more notable than whom they played for. | |||
:But I think there's a simple compromise - mention both in the intro. Does that work? --] (]) 04:10, 31 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
::That's just basketball. ], ], ] just to name a few for football. It doesn't matter if their notability is as athlete or not, they are enrolled at University of __________, ____________ University, _______ College and the pages say "played college ________ at __________ (school)" and the page link should read such. Mentioning both is unnecessary because the infobox contains it--] (]) 04:29, 31 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
:::And I could also list arbitrarily chosen articles: ], ] and ]. Again, let's not confuse inconsistency with consensus. And why shouldn't notability matter? Notability is the very currency that governs Misplaced Pages. And enrollment is a trivial detail compared to what they actually do to become notable. --] (]) 04:41, 31 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
::::It makes absolutely no sense to refer readers to a team page for a statement that requires the name of the school then turn around and show the name of the school as the display for the page. I have reverted to version prior to either one of us touching it. I will submit consensus request.--] (]) 04:59, 31 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
:::::Sure it does - the team is the most notable way in which the athlete is affiliated with the university. People interested in KU through Robinson most likely couldn't give a crap about the endowment or the student body size or the concentrations offered, but would care about the university basketball team. But sure, seeking a third opinion is probably the best. --] (]) 05:10, 31 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
::::::Thanks for the understanding and willingness to compromise. I submitted it here: ]--] (]) 05:13, 31 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
:::::::Thanks for doing that. I've responded, though haven't added much. --] (]) 05:16, 31 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Lamar Odom == | |||
Hey. Sorry about that, I jumped the gun a little and thought he'd been released. Thanks for pointing it out. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 23:25, 9 April 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Thanks for the new word. == | |||
Learned a new word because of you: listicle. Never heard it before today at ] Thanks for teaching it to me. :D -- ]]. 18:27, 10 April 2012 (UTC) | |||
== re: Craig Bellamy == | |||
Regarding your message - first, please don't tell give users vandalism warnings when they aren't actually engaged in vandalism. I have no earthly idea why you thought my edit was vandalism. | |||
Second, please refer to ] - articles shouldn't be linked to more than necessary - once in the lede, once in the infobox and once in the body are enough. --] (]) 20:01, 24 April 2012 (UTC) | |||
:This does not apply to Biography Infoboxes. --] (]) 21:04, 25 April 2012 (UTC) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 20:05, 24 April 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
::Yes - but it's already linked inside the infobox. Why would you repeat the same link in the same ''section'' of an infobox? --] (]) 20:11, 24 April 2012 (UTC) | |||
::: ] ] ] ] ect. - consistancy is vital --] (]) 21:04, 25 April 2012 (UTC) | |||
::::So I should edit those articles too? :D --] (]) 21:49, 25 April 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Image deleting == | |||
I am really not that into all this "new" image upload stuff, anyways, I had permission for these images (haven't asked one for Ben Wallace though) but if you have certain pleasure in removing every single image I ever uploaded feel free to do so. Nobody else ever had a problem. As for Mirko Malez picture, I made it myself, he's my relative, but never mind, my motives are merely to improve the articles... Much respect.<small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 18:50, 25 April 2012</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> | |||
: Yes, I get that you're trying to improve the articles, but so am I - let's ] and all that. But I don't take "pleasure in removing every single image I ever uploaded feel", so no, I won't be doing that (and haven't done that). If you have permission for using those Croatian footballer images, please ask the Croatian FA to send in a note to ] stating they're forfeiting all copyrights on those images - they don't work as ] because they don't meet ] or ]. And what do you mean "I made it myself"? Do you mean you took the photograph yourself? Again, if you have permission, don't upload it as a non-free image. --] (]) 19:27, 25 April 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Raúl (footballer) == | |||
Yes, I really wondered how it is possible to bring the wiki software to accept these edits. In most cases there would have been only edit conflicts. --] (]) 21:33, 30 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
== My Changes/Maria Kirilenko == | |||
I saw your note that said not to use words such as "currently" and to avoid using Youtube links. I corrected these things and yet my changes were still deleted with a message that the information added was trivia. I am now very confused because I thought that Misplaced Pages information was "trivia" and that is why people use it. I know that is why I use it and I know that when there is a change in a person's status, people are quick to want to correct it on here. So please, help me to understand why people would not want to know the information I added. It is very confusing to understand because what I added was fact (as I had two sources for it). Thanks. --] (]) 04:01, 1 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
:Her relationship status isn't that important to understanding her importance. We've already established that she and Ovechkin entered into a relationship - if it changes, we can update it, but that hasn't happened. ] (]) 14:20, 1 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Marvin Williams?== | |||
You made an edit to revert my edits on Marvin Williams. The information is correct. Please undo your changes because they are correct. Thanks. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 16:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:What was correct about them? ] (]) 16:55, 3 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Sergio Agüero == | |||
I do like a good edit summary and your recent one on this article was excellent. This project can be very po-faced at times so well done. ]_] 22:03, 6 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
== ] == | |||
Hi there | |||
Can you tell me why you keep reverting my IPA edits of the article? ] (]) 21:24, 14 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Misuse of revert tool (Twinkle)? == | |||
appears to be a good faith edit, yet I see that you reverted the edit without any explaination shortly after? I'm not trying to hastle you or anything, but what gives? Could you not have asked for a citation? Regards, ] (]) 03:21, 16 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
:It's a pretty clear case of both ] and ]. I don't think any sourcing or fleshing out would've made the edit any better. The user's made similar edits with mostly meaningless plaudits, and after reverting a couple of those, I guess I got tired of leaving an edit summary. I know, poor form, so that's my mea culpa. FWIW, I get the impression that the editor isn't particularly serious about improving Misplaced Pages: . --] (]) 03:33, 16 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
::Woah! I see now where you're coming from - fair enough indeed! Take care and happy editing! :) ] (]) 03:38, 16 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
:::No worries, happy editing to you as well! --] (]) 03:39, 16 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
==Disambiguation link notification for July 16== | |||
Hi. When you recently edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] (] | ]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small> | |||
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 11:53, 16 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
==Regarding my own edits== | |||
I just started and someone keeps deleting my edits. Weird. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:26, 19 July 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:Have you looked at the edit summaries to see why your content was edited? --] (]) 01:47, 20 July 2012 (UTC) | |||
What are you doing??? I put a considerable amount of work to contribute to the Carmelo Anthony article to provide further informationa dnthen you just delete it. Before you delete something, you should do your own research to determine if it is incorrect and then make corrections or deletions where you deem fit. But to just completely delete my work and then claim it is based without research. It is through knowledge from reading and following the sport. Come on.... <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 07:37, 2 August 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
::But that's not how Misplaced Pages works. A couple of things - there's a reason why, before you submit an edit, you see this notice: ''If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.'' Because there's ], you should expect your contribution to be dismissed or heavily edited by other editors. That's part of the collaborative process. Second, Misplaced Pages does not allow ] or ]. That means that anything you include needs to come from a reliable, third party source. And specifically in the case of coincidences like teammates in prep All-Star games or arenas they played in, it amounts to synthesis. If a ] has noted that coincidence, then that's great. But if it's your own finding, then don't include it. --] (]) 04:50, 3 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
Ok I understand your response but its not entirely accurate. First, you mention that I can expect my contributions to be dismissed but I would think it would be done for the better interest of readers in mind. My contribution provided further and recent information about Carmelo experience with New York Knicks. Right now, the article is lacking information on this past 2011-2012 NBA season. Therefore, it is not up to date and I took care of that. Next, you indicated that Misplaced Pages does not allow original research. THat is not true because there is originaly research all over the place on this site and its not deleted. I also did cite references in my contribution. Lastly, I included references about teammates in prep All Star games because it was very unique. Carmelo, Raymond Felton and Amar'e Stoudemire all played in same 2002 McDonalds ALl Star game on the same team. That is one thing. Easily, one of them could hav eplayed in a different year or not all play in that game. Then as another part of it, the McDonald's ALl star game is hosted in a different city pretty much every year but that year, it took place at Madison Square Garden in New York City. That is the same arena that the New York KNicks play in and that the team where they all reunited. So for all of that to happen is very unique and worth noting. I also have a reliable source to note that coincidence. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 16:58, 3 August 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:* The problem with your Carmelo Anthony edit about the 11-12 season was that it was ''your'' commentary, or your synthesis of other people's commentary. All opinions, analysis and commentary should be attributed to a reliable source. | |||
:* If there is original research, then point it out or delete it. It's not a reason to have ''more'' original research. | |||
:* Yes, it's unique for three teammates to have played in the same all-star game, but that doesn't mean it's notable enough to include in an encyclopedia. If a reliable, third party source makes a point of noting the coincidence, then great. Otherwise, it's just trivia. --] (]) 18:00, 3 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
* It wasn't my commentary. I am reporting what other major media news organizations is reporting. I am just reporting facts and providing a summary. NOne of it is my comments. | |||
* Also if we or me is going to delete original research, that would pretty much be the end of Misplaced Pages. Most articles contain a huge portion of original research. Thats the foundation of this site - original research. | |||
* ESPN and youtube has noted the coincidence. I also firmly believe that it will continue to be noted once the NBA season starts. In addition, when I made my first ever contribution, you indicated to me taht you liked my contribution. THerefore, to now state that you don't like it is contradictory to what you originally believed. | |||
Thats it for now. I just wanted to communicate my feelings on the whole thing. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:08, 4 August 2012</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> | |||
:*Fair enough. But you should still attribute those commentaries to reliable sources. | |||
:* I think we have a fundamental disagreement on what ] and ] mean. | |||
:* I believe I thanked you for your contributions, but I don't think I ever expressed that your edits were beyond reproach. --] (]) 01:25, 5 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
Ok thanks for your input and suggestions for editing and making contributions. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 05:56, 6 August 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Courtesy == | |||
Dear Mosmof, | |||
I appreciate that you are trying to help, however if you do look at the bottom, I have a section full of resources, that if you actually read my article, you could see where they came into place. Another thing, I am new to Misplaced Pages, so I am not familiar with all the controls, that being my article is not a complete masterpiece. I am focusing on one thing, giving valuable, accurate information. Another thing, I know my references are not in top, midterm paper like condition, however they can be read and understood. If you think you can do better, than you find information on Pedro the Donkey, and reply back. I gladly except info. One more thing, about Joe Paterno, is that my statement was correct. On Sunday, July 22nd, work crews gathered at Beaver Stadium, and took his statue down. Check your response again. I'm afraid you were wrong about Joe Paterno, not me. Thanks! | |||
- Reporter 22 <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 02:43, 26 July 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== A barnstar for you! == | |||
{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar''' | |||
|- | |- | ||
|style="vertical-align: middle; |
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | well said, you have really explained it perfectly ] (]) 18:49, 9 June 2015 (UTC) | ||
|} | |} | ||
==Orphaned non-free image File:New Minnesota Stadium logo.png== | |||
<span style="font-size:32px; line-height:1em">''']'''</span> Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]). | |||
Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> --] (]) 17:27, 17 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Amare Stoudemire == | |||
==File:Johncooper.jpg== | |||
Hello- | |||
Thanks for the housekeeping at this file; it was late at night when I noticed the previous version was a blatant copyvio of press photography at Cooper's trial and so I didn't use my commonsense and mark it for speedy then upload to a different file name. Sorry for creating extra work for you, but at least we will still get to the desired outcome of removing the non-free image. ] (]) 10:08, 23 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
:@{{u|Keri}} No worries - the image happened to come up on my watchlist. ] (]) 13:35, 23 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
== July 2015 == | |||
I represent Amare Stoudemire's digital platforms. I have reverted back to my original changes to the first couple lines of his biography to be synonymous with his official website bio. Please let me know if you need reasons of why we consider Amare to be known for more than just a pro basketball player (author, motivational speaker, etc.) | |||
] Your recent editing history at ] shows that you are currently engaged in an ]. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's ] to work toward making a version that represents ] among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See ] for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant ] or seek ]. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary ]. | |||
'''Being involved in an edit war can result in your being ]'''—especially if you violate the ], which states that an editor must not perform more than three ] 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—'''even if you don't violate the three-revert rule'''—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> ]<span style="background:#BB8D0A; border:1px solid #231F20">]</span> 07:10, 16 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
Thanks! | |||
:{{ping|Corkythehornetfan}} The user is engaged in clear vandalism (replacing "Linsanity" with the hoax "Fieldsanity") with a misleading edit summary - 3RR doesn't apply in cases of obvious vandalism, does it (I could be wrong about this, obviously)? And it appears that the user is a sockpuppet of blocked user {{u|KO.2}} (see edits , , ). ] (]) 07:14, 16 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Sorry about this, you can remove it. You're right, per ] (socks) and ] (vandalism). I just noticed an edit war going and I was tired of seeing it. If they are a sock, I hope they get blocked, or at least for disrupting Misplaced Pages. is a bit concerning, wouldn't you say? It shows they just go blocked, too. ]<span style="background:#BB8D0A; border:1px solid #231F20">]</span> 07:25, 16 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::No prob, thanks for the response. I probably should've just started a sock investigation. I'll put up a request anyway, since the block is only temporary. ] (]) 07:27, 16 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
== clearly doesnt meet criteria for deletion == | |||
== Amare Stoudemire == | |||
the article ] substantially differs from that which was previously deleted.--] ] 01:39, 22 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
Hello- | |||
:{{ping|Jumplike23}} You're right (I think), though the issues from the last deletions are still there, i.e. dependence on non-independent and self-published sources (the Forbes "contributors" are not subject to Forbes' editorial process). ] (]) 01:45, 22 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Florida Gators women's soccer players == | |||
I represent Amare Stoudemire's digital platforms. I have reverted back to my original changes to the first couple lines of his biography to be synonymous with his official website bio. Please let me know if you need reasons of why we consider Amare to be known for more than just a pro basketball player (author, motivational speaker, etc.) | |||
Hey, MOSMOF. I saw that you were chewing on the Kat Williamson article, and then noticed that she was a University of Florida alumna -- and that she was mis-categorized under the generic parent category, ], and not the sport-specific subcategory, ]. I'm not a huge association football/soccer fan, but I am a University of Florida alumnus and I do try to improve, maintain and protect all of the articles for former Florida Gators athletes regardless of what sport they played. If you come across any other mis-categorized Gators soccer players, I would be grateful if you bring them to my attention. Cheers. ] (]) 18:13, 22 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
Thanks! <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:06, 23 August 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:Yeah, I realized seeing your edits I didn't do a thorough job of going through the article. Thanks for catching that (and other issues). ] (]) 18:17, 22 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Hello mosmof == | |||
Do you have an e-mail where we can talk more extensively? I am somewhat confused on the changes you made and would like to educate myself on what is considered correct and incorrect in regards to edits. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 18:57, 24 August 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
Hello mosmof! | |||
== Harry Redknapp == | |||
Hope you are doing fine . I am asking you if i can make changes to leo messi's article. I am a great fan of him and believe have alot of valuable information that I can add! | |||
If you're going to make a revision to an edit, at least bother to explain why........ <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 23:05, 2 September 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
Feel free to contact me here or through my email : koko10_77@hotmail.com. | |||
==Wikimedia Commons== | |||
Thanks, ] (]) 07:24, 28 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
Unfortunately I no longer have access to Wikimedia Commons, but if you could transfer the images of the A.C. Milan players that I have uploaded to English Misplaced Pages to Wikimedia Commons I would be grateful. ] (]) 05:52, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
:;Can you stop uploading low-res files? | |||
:Please upload the original from Flickr, not the thumbnail. Just use . It's super easy.--] (]) 02:49, 1 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Alex Morgan == | |||
::Thank's Mosmof, for showing this tool, I will use this tool next time to upload the original size of a image. Thank's again. ] (]) 03:29, 1 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
Why do you keep erroneously editing Alex Morgan's Misplaced Pages page? The statistics for NWSL are clearly available on their website, and Morgan has neither played in 48 games nor scored 30 something goals. Get your facts straight. ] (]) 20:44, 14 August 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Gary Gait == | |||
:{{ping|Nd2323}} Not sure what you mean by "keep", since as far as I can tell, I've only edited her stats once (and sorry about the error). The page does attract a lot of vandalism, so when I see an empty edit summary with an edit that seems off (and a mobile edit to boot), I kinda assumed it was more of the same. Not an excuse, but that's my explanation. Anyway, thanks for pointing that out. ] (]) 18:11, 15 August 2015 (UTC) | |||
== ] == | |||
I'm wondering about your change adding the "weasel words" and "peacock term" templates. There are four different references on that sentence alone and they all clearly state the same thing - that not only do the authors consider Gait to be one of the best, if not the best, but many other share that opinion. The weasel words template says "The examples given above are not automatically weasel words, as they may also be used in the lead section of an article or in a topic sentence of a paragraph, where the article body or the rest of the paragraph supplies attribution." I think there is plenty of attribution already. I suppose the "best player of all time" could be reworded, but all four of those references specifically state that opinion. --] (], ]) 04:22, 17 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
:The problem is, the rest of the paragraph does nothing to support te "widely believed" claim. Sure, "it's supported by the cites, but it's sort of synthesis/original research to take those sources to say, "See, based on these sources I've collected, it's ''obvious'' he's widely considered to be the best." The reason we try to avoid "widely believed" and the like is because to the uninitiated, it's pretty meaningless. It's much more preferable to talk about awards or hall of fame inductions or even quote an authority figure. --] (]) 05:16, 17 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 16:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Patrick Patterson == | |||
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692054221 --> | |||
== Your edits == | |||
You sure ] is ]? is an image of Patterson from NBA.com. ]''']''' 06:22, 23 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
The stadium capacity is NOT original research. Just because I moved the citation to after the sentence I added, the reference worked for the whole paragraph. Also, the '']'' does require a subscription once you've visited so many pages per month. I believe it varies in November I viewed many, now in December I'm already being hit with the paywall, though you can still scroll and see the article behind it. ] (]) 03:32, 5 December 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Olympic Games scandals and controversies == | |||
I see you switched it to a cite news, this would override the subscription, but did you first check to make sure this was in the print edition? ] (]) 03:35, 5 December 2015 (UTC) | |||
The photos you are deleting from ] all contain the same copyright notification: | |||
:{{ping|B137}} Actually, the point made in the article in the capacity isn't that there's a gap in what the two parties are looking for, but that they're both looking at a lower capacity than Sun Life Stadium. Check it out: | |||
::''Miami is therefore looking for a venue that can hold 40,000 to 44,000 fans, according to the Herald, while the MLS and Beckham's group prefer one that seats approximately 25,000 patrons.'' | |||
:So to turn that into ''However, UM's target size of 40,000 to 44,000 seats is much too large for the MLS proposal.'' is very much ''your'' interpretation of the information that's not apparent in the source. Plus. it's really beside the point because the proposal never got beyond the discussion phase (assuming it was anything more than a ploy to get more leverage from lawmakers), so that statement I think gives ] weight to a plan that never came to materializing. So I'm going to go ahead and take the text out again - feel free to discuss in the article talk page if you want to discuss further. Thanks. ] (]) 16:22, 5 December 2015 (UTC) | |||
== A kitten for you! == | |||
"This image is a faithful digitisation of a unique historic image, and the copyright for it is most likely held by the person who created the image or the agency employing the person. It is believed that the use of this image may qualify as fair use under United States copyright law. Other use of this image, on Misplaced Pages or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement. See Misplaced Pages:Fair use for more information. | |||
Please remember that the non-free content criteria require that non-free images on Misplaced Pages must not " used in a manner that is likely to replace the original market role of the original copyrighted media." Use of historic images from press agencies must only be used in a transformative nature, when the image itself is the subject of commentary rather than the event it depicts (which is the original market role, and is not allowed per policy)." | |||
] | |||
There is a clear rationale. They are significant historical events. The exact same historical event that cleared them for usage on their individual articles associated with the same involved individuals for the same reason; because they were Olympic Controversies. Deleting them from one place for a proper associated usage . . . an incident that happened before millions at the Olympics . . . but allowing them in another makes no sense. This is not an "other" usage, it is the same usage categorized from the opposite perspective (where it happened). | |||
Thanks for fixing the infobox on the page for Mark Dougherty! And a question for you: is it possible to cite to a physical object, like a trophy/ plaque/ ring/ jersey? ] (]) 20:10, 5 January 2016 (UTC) | |||
<br style="clear: both;"/> | |||
:{{ping|SweetJane930}} Hey, sorry for the slow response. I'm not sure what you mean exactly, but generally, I wouldn't use a physical artifact as a source. What you want is a published book or newspaper magazine (you can see ] for more). I think citing a source would be considered ] and discouraged. Hope that helps. ] (]) 01:06, 14 January 2016 (UTC) | |||
== PUF discussion == | |||
I see your history of deleting photographs from many articles based on WP copyright policies. Destructive as your work is, I can't argue with the legal points most of the time. In this case however, the policy you are following is playing games with semantics. There will never be an improvement in the copyright paperwork for these images and you know it. If there is an issue with some phrase in the wikipedia application to use the image, you as the expert, are far better qualified to FIX the clearance issue within the wikipedia system (however that is done) rather than to find excuses to damage public content. | |||
Hi Mosmof. I pinged you in a ] discussion ] since the file being discussed is one that you previously tagged with {{tl|di-no source no license}}. Any comments you might have would be most appreciated. -- ] (]) 01:01, 9 February 2016 (UTC) | |||
I'm rolling it all back. ] (]) 17:20, 2 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
:Please take the time to read ] - there's a reason Misplaced Pages has a strict application of copyright laws, especially when it comes to using non-free images. These images do not have proper rationales attached, and as a list-like article, it's inappropriate to include non-free images here. I'm going to go ahead and remove the images again - please don't reinsert them without providing proper rationales. 17:41, 2 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
== File:Kansas University (logo).gif listed for discussion == | |||
==Sigh== | |||
] A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. 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. <!-- Template:Fdw --> ] (]) 20:57, 5 June 2016 (UTC) | |||
...] <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added 15:36, 9 May 2013 (UTC)</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Christian Pulisic == | |||
==]== | |||
] | |||
A tag has been placed on ], requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under the ], because it is a redirect to a nonexistent page, or a redirect loop. | |||
I changed the image for Christian Pulisic, and now it is a different photo uploaded from Flickr, and it is from the Creative Commons. <b>] ]</b> 21:38, 14 November 2016 (UTC) | |||
If you can fix this redirect to point to an existing Misplaced Pages page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you also fix the redirect. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.<!-- Template:Redirnone-warn --> - ] ] 12:30, 19 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
:{{Ping|Spike789}} Hi, thanks for changing the image. Unfortunately, I see that the license is "All Rights Reserved", not Creative Commons, and cannot be used on Misplaced Pages. And non-free pictures of living people are generally not allowed on Misplaced Pages either. ] (]) 23:59, 14 November 2016 (UTC) | |||
== Whisperback == | |||
==Disambiguation link notification for May 20== | |||
{{talkback|Spike789}} | |||
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] (] | ]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small> | |||
== ]: Voting now open! == | |||
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 00:01, 20 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
{{Ivmbox|Hello, Mosmof. Voting in the ''']''' is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016. | |||
== ] == | |||
The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. 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 ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. | |||
Hi Mosmof, be well. I wonder if it is possible to move the entry ] to a shorter and better searchable 'name' ? I may suggest '''Ahmadiyya - Jewish Relations''' or even '''Ahmadiyya and Judaism''' or anything brief and easily remembered ? sincerely . --] (]) 08:40, 22 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
:Honestly? I have no expertise on the subject and I have no idea what the standard format is, or whether there's any consequence to dropping the "Muslim". ] (]) 14:58, 22 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review ] and submit your choices on ''']'''. ] (]) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) | |||
|Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}} | |||
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52 bot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52_bot/spamlist/23&oldid=750589496 --> | |||
==Orphaned non-free image File:Neckface Begins.jpg== | |||
<span style="font-size:32px; line-height:1em">''']'''</span> Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]). | |||
Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> --] (]) 17:42, 28 June 2017 (UTC) | |||
:: Thank you for the kindly response. ], ], ] or ], ] all the same. Using the briefer term and making the heading short and direct would do good and improve the Article. ] (]) 16:16, 22 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
==Orphaned non-free image File:PFT commenter with Flacco sign.jpg== | |||
<span style="font-size:32px; line-height:1em">''']'''</span> Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]). | |||
Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> --] (]) 18:22, 6 July 2017 (UTC) | |||
==Elie Hirschfeld page== | |||
Hi, thank you for your suggestions. The reason I broke down the page is that there is way too much going on with Elie's recent art aquisitions and real estate transactions, that I felt they need separate sections so it would be easier to contribute/edit. Please do not roll "controversy" under "Personal" section as most of this is under the development and papers are styill in front of the judge. Once this case is resolved, we will have a better idea where to file it. Thank you so much <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:29, 22 May 2013</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> | |||
==Request for comments regarding Cristiano Ronaldo article== | |||
==DYK for New York City FC== | |||
{{tmbox | |||
|style = notice | |||
|small = | |||
|image = ] | |||
|text = On ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ''... that ] franchise ''']''' is co-owned by ] and the ]?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ]. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page <small>(], )</small> and it will be added to ] if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ]. | |||
}}<!-- Template:UpdatedDYK --> ] (] '''·''' ]) 08:05, 29 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
Hello, I noticed in the past you have commented on this, so I thought I would bring it to your attention. There is an ongoing dispute regarding the sentence 'regarded by many as the greatest of all time' on the Ronaldo page. There are three users who are defending this claim, and all are refusing to openly address any criticisms from a growing number of objectors. The matter is open for comments at the moment, so perhaps you would like to contribute? Thanks. ] (]) 15:21, 10 July 2017 (UTC) | |||
== Brandon Bass == | |||
==Orphaned non-free image File:Mercedes-Benz Stadium interior bowl rendering.jpg== | |||
<span style="font-size:32px; line-height:1em">''']'''</span> Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]). | |||
Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> ] (]) 17:04, 5 September 2017 (UTC) | |||
No worries. ]''']''' 16:37, 30 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
== Replaceable fair use File:New Atlanta Stadium MLS configuration.jpg == | |||
== June 2013 == | |||
] | |||
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of ]. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the ]. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have ''no free equivalent''; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Misplaced Pages. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please: | |||
# Go to ] and add the text <code><nowiki>{{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}</nowiki></code> '''below''' the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <code><your reason></code> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable. | |||
] Hello, I'm ]. I have automatically detected that to ] may have broken the ] by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on . | |||
# On ], write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable. | |||
{{{!}} class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left; border: 1px solid silver; margin-top: 0.2em;" {{!}}- | |||
! style="background-color: #FAA;" {{!}} <div style="font-size:112%;">List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page<span style="font-size:88%;margin-left:3em;">(Click show <span style="font-size:130%;">⇨</span>)</span></div> | |||
{{!}}- | |||
{{!}} style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white; " {{!}} <div style="font-size:112%;"> | |||
*<nowiki>and the portrayal of Paterno in his findings, calling the Freeh report a "rush to injustice".<ref></nowiki>{{red|'''{'''}}<nowiki>{cite news|url=http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/9322779/joe-paterno-family-join-</nowiki> | |||
*<nowiki>'We Are Penn State!'' by Joe and Sue Paterno. Mascot Books (August 1, 2007). ISBN 978-1-932888-49-2</nowiki>{{red|''')'''}}<nowiki>]</ref> which takes place during a typical Penn State homecoming weekend.</nowiki> | |||
</div> | |||
{{!}}}Thanks, <!-- (0, 0, 1, 0) --><!-- User:BracketBot/inform -->] (]) 04:20, 1 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, ], or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject). | |||
==Disambiguation link notification for June 1== | |||
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on <span class="plainlinks"></span>. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the ]. If you have any questions, please ask them at the ]. Thank you. <!-- Template:di-replaceable fair use-notice --> ] (]) 19:45, 10 September 2017 (UTC) | |||
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] (] | ]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small> | |||
== ArbCom 2017 election voter message == | |||
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 12:12, 1 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
{{Ivmbox|Hello, Mosmof. Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. | |||
== Neymar == | |||
The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. 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 ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. | |||
You are 100% correct so my apologies. As per Tello, he's a first team player but does not have a first team number (in Spain, all first team players are number 1-25). Can we change that now or does the July rule also apply? ] (]) 15:08, 6 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks, no big deal. I'm not sure how to deal with Tello, since he did make first team appearances even though he wasn't listed as a first-team member. ] (]) 17:29, 6 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. ] (]) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
== Speedy Deletion of Images == | |||
|Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}} | |||
File:Romneycare.jpg + File:Obamacare.jpg | |||
<!-- Message sent by User:Xaosflux@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2017/Coordination/MMS/07&oldid=813406947 --> | |||
Since I can't tell if their respective talk pages are the right places to bring it up, and I'm not sure where else to ask, I figured I'd ask you if there's any way, given appropriate attribution, the images can be used under fair use given the relevance to the page (such as 'historical importance')? And/or where/how acceptable images can be sourced? This was a mistake out of ignorance but it'd be a shame if there's not some way to preserve relevant image contact. Thank you ] (]) 07:00, 11 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
== ] of ] == | |||
:Are those photos from the federal government and therefore in the public domain? In any case, I'm not very impressed, Mosmof, that you didn't try to be gentle with a new user and instead went the easy route of a quick template that looked all scary with a bolded block warning. It's no wonder Misplaced Pages active editors keep declining. ] | (] - ]) 02:50, 12 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
] | |||
::They were both agency photos - one was a and the other was an . I think we would have had a hard time arguing that they were acceptable non-free images because of ], and for an image to be considered historic, it can't just be one that shows an important event - the photo itself has to be iconic, and I don't think we could make a good argument for that. | |||
::II, I'm all for civility and gently guiding new users, and I'm happy to inform users who have questions (and I have no intention of scaring away new users), but those particular images were obviously copyrighted photos. I didn't mean for the tags to be big and scary, but I don't think the speedy delete was unjustified. ] (]) 18:57, 12 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::Thanks for responding. The template is a little overly blunt in my opinion, so don't take it personal. I usually follow-up a template with a short personal comment afterwards. It's more work but I think it is worth it. ] | (] - ]) 05:40, 26 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
The file ] has been ] because of the following concern: | |||
== Hull City A.F.C. == | |||
<blockquote>Unused logo with no article used, it's also can't move to commons because of an unused logo will be deleted as of out of project scope.</blockquote> | |||
While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ]. | |||
Hi, some of the content you've added to ] isn't covered by the reference you've used. For instance, ''The Guardian'' do not explicitly mention the club being re-registered as 'Hull City Tigers Ltd'. Cheers, ] (]) 21:28, 15 August 2013 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks - I added the Daily Mail link as source for re-registration. Is there anything else that needs citing? --] (]) 23:43, 15 August 2013 (UTC) | |||
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ]. | |||
==Disambiguation link notification for November 15== | |||
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> ] (]) 05:07, 29 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] (] | ]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small> | |||
==Orphaned non-free image File:John Profumo 1960.jpg== | |||
] Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]). | |||
Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> --] (]) 18:46, 22 January 2021 (UTC) | |||
==Orphaned non-free image File:Sunkist logo 2008.jpg== | |||
== January 2014 == | |||
] Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]). | |||
Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> --] (]) 17:32, 15 June 2021 (UTC) | |||
] Hello, I'm ]. I have automatically detected that to ] may have broken the ] by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on . | |||
:List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page: | |||
*<nowiki>TFC TRANSFER|publisher=]|first=Luke|last=Wileman|date=8 January 2014}</nowiki>{{red|'''}'''}}<nowiki></ref> The transfer also includes an agreement between Tottenham and Toronto's owners, [[Maple Leaf</nowiki> | |||
Thanks, <!-- (0, 0, -1, 0) --><!-- User:BracketBot/inform -->] (]) 14:28, 10 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
== Juan Mata == | |||
Please stop editing the Juan Mata page, you're adding information and not providing a source. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 13:42, 22 January 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:I'm pretty sure '']'' is a ]. I'd urge you to double-check . ] (]) 21:12, 22 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
::Sorry, but I agree this should not be added at this time. Per ] we should not be including speculative information regardless of the source. This is common Misplaced Pages practice in sport related articles. We normally don't post contracts and team moves until it is officially announced. — <span style="border:2px solid black;margin-top:2px;bottom:2px;font- verdana;background:#09B9B9">]</font></span> <small>(]) (])</small> — 21:26, 22 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
:::But the provisional fee is ''not'' a speculative information. Sure, the transfer hasn't happened, but the provisional pee ''has been'' agreed to, in past tense. Whether or not the transfer ultimately happens, the fee agreement is real and seems noteworthy. ] (]) 21:40, 22 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
Hey Mosmof, just dropped in to clarify why I made the changes I did after my inadequate explanation on my edit. Whilst I absolutely agree that a fee being agreed is noteworthy the sources of the news are also important. Ultimately, all sources from news websites like the BBC and The Telegraph must be treated as rumours and as such aren't valid. We need to wait until either of the clubs make an official announcement before we can add stuff, imagine if we took every 'agreed deal' from one of these websites, Misplaced Pages would be clogged up with incorrect information. If Moyes, Mourinho or someone else of a similar standing makes a statement on the issue then we can use that information in the article, but as it stands, it's all just speculation and as such, it shouldn't be included. | |||
Hope that all makes sense, kindest regards ] (]) 15:32, 23 January 2014 (UTC). | |||
Hey again, Mourinho's confirmed that a deal has been agreed which basically verifies the information you posted before, so you can re add. It's not essential that it's added now but it should be added at some point, whilst I don't like adding rumours to Misplaced Pages, I also don't like information being missed out. There's loads of cases on wiki like Willian's transfer (where there's no mention of Tottenham) where verified information wasn't added, creating an imperfect picture of what happened. | |||
Kind regards, ] (]) 18:08, 24 January 2014 (UTC). | |||
:Yep, I've added a quote from Mourinho. ] (]) 18:13, 24 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
== What made you to delete the image File:Steven Frayne Dynamo.jpg == | |||
] Please stop your ]. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Misplaced Pages, as you did at ], you may be ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-delete3 --> | |||
Kindly let me know the reason behind removing the File:Steven Frayne Dynamo.jpg as well as give me the source(s) which indicate that the file has the copyright issue. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 12:07, 18 February 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:I didn't delete the image, but I did tag the image as an obvious copyright violation because it was from Getty Images, I believe. Why don't you ask ] who actually deleted the image. Also, it's poor form to use the level 3 template for someone who isn't actually being disruptive. ] (]) 17:43, 18 February 2014 (UTC) | |||
== Merging proposal Discarded == | |||
Hi! ], it is not possible to merge both the articles together. Well, I have left a a message at ] Please review and response for the same. I've also removed the merger tag that you have placed in the articles ] and ]. ] (]) | |||
== Thanks for advice == | |||
Although, I am not going to remove the templates that you placed under the article ] for merging it with ]. But for your knowledge let me inform you that I've started the articles ] and it is advised you to see the history of the article/ talk before leaving an message. ] (]) 15:59, 20 February 2014 (UTC) | |||
== Request for Creating a article with title "Isrg Rajan" == | |||
Hi! ], Through this I would like to request you for creating an article entitled ]. <br /> | |||
Thank you!<br /> | |||
] (]) 17:36, 22 February 2014 (UTC) | |||
== February 2014 == | |||
] Hello, I'm ]. I have automatically detected that to ] may have broken the ] by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on . | |||
:List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page: | |||
*<nowiki><ref>http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewiStockNews/articleid/2520975</nowiki>{{red|'''{'''}}<nowiki>{deadlink}</nowiki>{{red|'''{'''}}<nowiki></ref></nowiki> | |||
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow ]. Thanks, <!-- (0, 0, 2, 0) --><!-- User:BracketBot/inform -->] (]) 14:57, 24 February 2014 (UTC) | |||
== A beer for you! == | |||
{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thank you for removing vandalism from my talk page - Enjoy!! ] (]) 17:50, 10 March 2014 (UTC) | |||
|} | |||
== Links to Transfermarkt == | |||
The Transfermarkt website contains user-generated contributions and as such is not a ] for Misplaced Pages articles. The template was ] due to this reason. See also ]. Please do not add Transfermarkt links back into Misplaced Pages articles. Thanks, <font face="Century Gothic">]]</font> 20:25, 14 March 2014 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks, though I'm actually not sure how that happened - I was updating an infobox image and I apparently included the link by mistake, though I have no earthly idea how. ] (]) 20:56, 14 March 2014 (UTC) | |||
== MLS expansion == | |||
Why would you reverse my additions to this thread. Everything I added is know facts. Because you don't want to accept this is no reason to reverse the edit. Please put it back. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 00:15, 25 March 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:I've explained why I reverted it. The column (and not a "report", as you say in your edit) says ''"MLS Commissioner Don Garber is giving the impression that the two cities are essentially on equal footing in terms of their chances of securing a big-league soccer team"'', which is different from ''"Garber considers ] to be equal with San Antonio"''. The former is one columnist's opinion of the vibe Garber is sending out, which necessarily isn't an indication of what he's actually thinking. ] (]) 01:13, 25 March 2014 (UTC) | |||
== Wilpons == | |||
What is your sourcing for the Wilpons being "integral" to expansion in New York beyond Garber having acknowledged he'd had discussions with them? Also, the Cosmos section is appropriate as it stands given the fact that it's both a failed/stalled bid and a potentiality (at minimum one of more substantive value than at least three other markets listed -- including those not cited by Garber but listed anyway -- given the Cosmos bid's level of investment and attempts at a stadium). -- ] (]) 16:42, 26 March 2014 (UTC) | |||
:I don't have a source for it, but they were certainly in the picture as much as the Cosmos were. Given that MLS requires a substantial expansion fee and a deep-pocketed ownership group, it stands to reason that the Wilpons were the money guys. Plus, the Cosmos aren't actively pursuing expansion, so anything happening now is unrelated to the main topic. ] (]) 16:47, 26 March 2014 (UTC) | |||
::If we're being anecdotal, I've been following this since 2009 and the Wilpons were never involved beyond discussions about Queens property and/or their own potential bid, and certainly not with the Cosmos according to anything that can be properly attributed. As for the future of the Cosmos themselves, their owners have stated that they feel the market can "support four teams," seeks to be "at the top of US soccer," and is seeking an MLS-sized stadium, just a couple of years after stating it was their "unequivocal goal" to be in MLS. And, to be anecdotal again, national and NY-area soccer writers have openly speculated that remaining in the second division as the pyramid is currently constituted is not their "endgame." See no need to change the passage. -- ] (]) 16:59, 26 March 2014 (UTC) | |||
== April 2014 == | |||
] Hello, I'm ]. I have automatically detected that to ] may have broken the ] by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on . | |||
:List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page: | |||
*<nowiki>Redskins]] to a reported three-year, $24 million contract with $16 million guaranteed.<ref></nowiki>{{red|'''{'''}}<nowiki>{cite news|url=http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/04/02/desean-jackson-redskins-agree-on-reported-3-</nowiki> | |||
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow ]. Thanks, <!-- (0, 0, 1, 0) --><!-- User:BracketBot/inform -->] (]) 17:51, 2 April 2014 (UTC) | |||
==Disambiguation link notification for April 16== | |||
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] (] | ]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small> | |||
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 08:56, 16 April 2014 (UTC) | |||
==Disambiguation link notification for May 7== | |||
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] (] | ]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small> | |||
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 08:53, 7 May 2014 (UTC) | |||
==Disambiguation link notification for May 24== | |||
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] (] | ]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small> | |||
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 08:55, 24 May 2014 (UTC) | |||
== Michael Wilhoite 2010? == | |||
Hey there, thanks for looking out for the facticity of 2010 NFL Draft... Michael Wilhoite's wiki page says 2010 draft... Can you put him as a notable for 2010 or 2011? He certainly belongs as a notable undrafted. Cheers, --] (]) 13:40, 30 May 2014 (UTC) | |||
:You're right - I'll revert my edit and fix the name. ] (]) 13:43, 30 May 2014 (UTC) | |||
== June 2014 == | |||
] Hello, I'm ]. I have automatically detected that <span class="plainlinks"> to ] may have broken the ] by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .</span> | |||
:List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page: | |||
*<nowiki>In the ]</nowiki>{{red|''']'''}}<nowiki> 1998-1999 season, but Mourning averaged 20.1 points, a career high 11 rebounds and a career high 3.</nowiki> | |||
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow ]. Thanks, <!-- (0, -1, 0, 0) --><!-- User:BracketBot/inform -->] (]) 13:57, 11 June 2014 (UTC) | |||
== Ronn Torossian == | |||
A user named Huon thinks it needs extensive changes to meet Misplaced Pages's policies. We have been arguing very pointlessly on the talk page, and I think some other opinions might level both his and my heads. Thanks, --] (]) 13:06, 29 June 2014 (UTC) | |||
== What a whacky coincidence == | |||
You're on my case in four different places right now. ] ] (]) 02:28, 27 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
:It would help to ]. You're showing a demonstrate misunderstanding of ], so of course I'm going to check your edits on images. ] (]) 04:18, 27 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
== ] photo == | |||
Hi, I don't understand what is meant by "the original Tweet". There were photographers all around Obama at the time taking much the same photograph. Why is this tweet the "original" and not the Getty image previously used in the article? Why did you delete the Denver Post article that showed the Getty image plus had additional content? Thanks. -- ]] 16:51, 30 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
:As I understand it, there were two sources for the photos that went viral, the previous photo (AP and AFP had essentially the same shot) and the tweet from the NY Times writer. Both photos went viral and for our purposes, we just need to show that ''a'' photo went viral, so I just focused on the one that wasn't an agency photo. I can see how the "original" can be confusing, and I'll restore the other cite. 19:43, 30 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
==NYCFC== | |||
Shouldn't the team nick name come from the fans? Because that's how teams get their nick names <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 18:27, 7 January 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Reference Errors on 26 January == | |||
] Hello, I'm ]. I have '''automatically detected''' that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. {{#ifeq:1|1|It is|They are}} as follows: | |||
*On the ] page, caused an ] <small>(])</small>. ( | ) | |||
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a ], you can . | |||
Thanks, <!-- User:ReferenceBot/inform -->] (]) 00:24, 27 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
Hi Mosmof, Could i just inquire about the reasons as to why you constantly remove my contributions to the 'rivalries' section Liverpool FC page? You did say it was my POV but It's actually a factual account complete with (though incorrectly inserted) cited reference. The overall section on the rivalries is miss leading to the casual reader as it is, as there really should be a 'citation needed' insert at the end of the "rivalry intensified after Manchester Utd became the first English team to win a European cup" line. To say Liverpool's four European cup wins coincided with their domination of English football is a fact bore out by their Honours list in the same article aswell as my referenced add-on. I do think the overall section is miss leading to the casual reader without it.] (]) 09:06, 28 January 2015 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 13:30, 15 February 2023
Archives |
NYCFC
Shouldn't the team nick name come from the fans? Because that's how teams get their nick names — Preceding unsigned comment added by Only1bigc (talk • contribs) 18:27, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- True, but the smurfs did come from the fans. You don't get to pick your own nickname, someone gives it to u. The surfs was given by all the other mls teams, because of their light blue smurf like shirts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leeds Unit (talk • contribs) 19:28, 9 June 2015
- @Leeds Unit Wherever it came from, it needs to be verifiable with an independent, reliable secondary source. And we generally don't include pejorative nicknames, like the one included, in the infobox. Please remember to cite sources for your edits. Mosmof (talk) 19:35, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Reference Errors on 26 January
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the Robbie Rogers page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Liverpool FC
Hi Mosmof, Could i just inquire about the reasons as to why you constantly remove my contributions to the 'rivalries' section Liverpool FC page? You did say it was my POV but It's actually a factual account complete with (though incorrectly inserted) cited reference. The overall section on the rivalries is miss leading to the casual reader as it is, as there really should be a 'citation needed' insert at the end of the "rivalry intensified after Manchester Utd became the first English team to win a European cup" line. To say Liverpool's four European cup wins coincided with their domination of English football is a fact bore out by their Honours list in the same article aswell as my referenced add-on. I do think the overall section is miss leading to the casual reader without it.Richie bedfellows (talk) 09:06, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, thanks for leaving a message. My thinking is that "domination" is a little bit of a peacock term and the reader would be served better by simply stating the numbers (and looking at that passage again, I should probably edit the part about Manchester United "dominating" English football as well.
- FYI, this edit broke the formatting on the page - when you have a line break followed by a period, it messes up the rest of the line.
- Again, thanks - let me know if my latest edit works for you. Mosmof (talk) 16:28, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for the prompt response and the appropriate re-editing.Also apologies for the mix-up with the format. Just one more point, i do also feel the line mentioned about the rivalry intensifying in the 60's after Manchester Utd's European cup win is also a little dubious and slightly miss-leading to the casual reader. I do feel if this is the case then it either needs a citation or i could reference claims that the rivalry actually intensified in the 1970's after Liverpool started their successful period with their first of their eleven league titles in that period. thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richie bedfellows (talk • contribs) 18:52, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Coop City
Coop City is not a police force, just look at their own website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.136.236.207 (talk) 19:48, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
- There's nothing indicating they're not a private police force. In fact, their badge features the words "N.Y. POLICE" and their Twitter handle is titled "Co-Op City Police" and its website features a logo with the word "community policing at its finest". So yeah, if we go by their own description, CC Public Safety is indeed a police force. Mosmof (talk) 20:27, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Question regarding citing sources
What is the best way to cite information if it is from a book, which I can't find as an e-book to be read online? Is it better off just to leave off wiki if that's the case? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.6.227.50 (talk • contribs) 21:36, 31 January 2015
- Books are certainly welcome - you can read more about citing sources at WP:CITE (this section will show you what information to include), and the {{Cite book}} template is useful for organizing the source information. Also, sometimes (but not always), you can use books.google.com to link to specific pages in books. Hope this helps. Mosmof (talk) 04:55, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Pablo Aimar
Hi there MOSMOF, from Portugal,
I have started a WP:FOOTY I discussion, I am 99,99999999999% sure that what you and the other user are doing in this article is wrong (if you link a WP article more than once it's overlinking, period), but let's wait for more opinions.
Also, if you two were correct, why wikilink only River Plate and not the other club from Malaysia? And I don't see the need to write "free agent" in the introduction because the box will already tell you that. Don't worry I won't remove it again, a bit tired of pointless edit wars, it stays your way.
Attentively --84.90.219.128 (talk) 04:33, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- Turns out you are right about WP:OVERLINKING, though it's a guideline that seems to be rarely put into practice. As for your point about "free agent" not being needed because it's in the infobox, the problem is that if you apply your logic, we'd be removing a lot more information from the lede that's redundant with the infobox - name, date of birth, clubs he's played for, etc. That the lede duplicates a lot of the information isn't a problem - the point of the introduction is to summarize the content in the article body, and the infobox just gives an overview of the player's career. They serve different, albeit overlapping, purposes. Mosmof (talk) 05:32, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
February 2015
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Liverpool F.C. may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- Total titles won (1871–present)]] have won more European trophies than any other English team]] with five ], three ] and
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:42, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Miami MLS stadium, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Miami River. 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, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
February 2015
This is despite me clearly putting in a credible independent source that contradicts him? Kingjeff (talk) 05:10, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- You read the message and understand how WP:3RR works, yes? And your source and the IP's source aren't necessarily contradictory. Mosmof (talk) 05:26, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- Of course I do. But I don't consider his source a credible source. Kingjeff (talk) 05:27, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- Then you have a disagreement that's not going to be solved by edit-warring. Mosmof (talk) 05:29, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- That was actually going to be my next post on the ip's talk page. Since, you're online, do you mind if you look at this AfD? Kingjeff (talk) 05:30, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- I've made an edit which uses both sources - Bild (or at least people translating from German) calls it "demotion", HSV says "he's getting extra match action". The truth is likely somewhere in the middle.
- As for the AfD, yeah, I think it's a clear delete, though it looks like whoever edited tried their best. Mosmof (talk) 05:45, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- That was actually going to be my next post on the ip's talk page. Since, you're online, do you mind if you look at this AfD? Kingjeff (talk) 05:30, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- Then you have a disagreement that's not going to be solved by edit-warring. Mosmof (talk) 05:29, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- Of course I do. But I don't consider his source a credible source. Kingjeff (talk) 05:27, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Stoudemire
Stoudemire has been officially waived, so everything is changed in the article – just like every other case. We don't have to wait until he "clears waivers". Once the team announces it, thats it. He is no longer with the Knicks. DaHuzyBru (talk) 02:15, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Mike Wallace
I made the changes to the Mike Wallace page because someone vandalized it. An unregistered user changed a bunch of stats along with his 40 yd dash time. The career stats that I put in were accurate according to NFL.com, Yahoo, ESPN, etc. I'm going to undo your changes because his career stats are no longer correct. Nuttster99 (talk) 01:25, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
- Okay, I couldn't tell that you reverted all of the IP editor's vandalism so I went back to the last version by an established editor. Sorry if that was in error. Mosmof (talk) 02:00, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
A beer for you!
Thanks for being so reasonable at Talk:MLS Cup. For that, you get the official sign of American soccer friendship. Achowat (talk) 02:25, 26 March 2015 (UTC) |
Nomination of Minnesota United FC (MLS) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Minnesota United FC (MLS) is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Minnesota United FC (MLS) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
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. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:15, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Jonas Jensen
Is it OK to create a article about for example Jonas Jensen goalkeeper at Esbjerg fB? Ha has played several matches in the danish 1st division, and is currently playing for at team in the danish superliga, but hasn't played any matches in the superliga? Fodbold-fan (talk) 21:51, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Hypocrisy
I was just going to warn User talk:208.81.212.222 and User talk:Mikemor92 about the edit warring that they've engaged in. I see that you warned the anon but not Mikemor92. At best, it's quite bias of you. At worst, shows a complete lack of integrity. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:36, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
- Whoa, easy there. As far as I could tell, only the IP editor reached 3RR, and Mikemor was still at 2. If I counted wrong, then you can feel free to tag the other user as well. Though it would behoove you to tone down your rhetoric a notch. Mosmof (talk) 04:58, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Ronn Torossian
The topic has been discussed on the talk page and a consensus has been reached. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cada mori (talk • contribs) 15:35, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
- I got the user page message. I will modify it.TorossianRonn (talk) 01:49, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for your response! Mosmof (talk) 02:03, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
- I got the user page message. I will modify it.TorossianRonn (talk) 01:49, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Broad Channel
I was being "unnecessarily hostile"? Yeah right. The 168th Street image is quite shaded in parts. The Broad Channel and the Far Rockaway image are more clearer and neat. I don't know what the hell you're talking about. Think before you speak. JoesphBarbaro (talk) 21:57, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Pity you. JoesphBarbaro (talk) 23:42, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Another random member who doesn't even edit any of the New York City Subway articles, nor knows nothing about the New York City Subway itself. Yeah, thanks for your "unnecessarily hostile" comment at that sockpuppet's page. Sit down and watch how I myself edit. JoesphBarbaro (talk) 09:15, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
- Why are you bugging me repeatedly over a single comment? Just chill and leave me alone. Mosmof (talk) 10:55, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
- You're pathetic. JoesphBarbaro (talk) 15:19, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
- This is my final request - please stay away from my talk page and hounding me through edit summaries. Thanks Mosmof (talk) 15:06, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
- You're pathetic. JoesphBarbaro (talk) 15:19, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
here is your source
Skippypeanuts (talk) 23:43, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
My fault for the block evasion, editing warring, personal attacks and harrassment
Look, I apologizes for all of my previous outbursts towards you and everyone else in general. I should have never been so incredibly aggressive and rude. I should have just solved things peacefully in the staff thread as well. I personally think that a New York City Subway image should show both front and side of each train line for the New York City Subway service articles, as I agreed with another remember of Misplaced Pages. Once my User:JoesphBarbaro account is unblocked, I promise to be civil and helpful and finally, stop edit warring and just simply take disputes to a talk page or the staff from now on. I also think the quality of the aforementioned images needs to be clear-looking quality too in addition. I'll talk more about that with the staff. Anyway, I'll return to honoring the terms of my block and I also promise I won't ever fight back again. I also just wanted to remove all of my outbursts so I myself don't look bad. That's why I wanted my previous conversation to be deleted in your talk page as well as the IP's talkpage in general, so that way, I don't look bad. It's fine if you don't forgive me though. I promise to change my behavior and treat everyone equally as a whole. 68.194.61.51 (talk) 23:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Also note that this is my only IP address, as well as JB being my only account. I'm not going out of my way to abuse any multiple IP addresses and accounts. I've already undid the changes in the aforementioned New York City Subway articles. I promise. I'll now return to honoring the terms of my block. 68.194.61.51 (talk) 23:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the message - I know it's easy to take things personally and get our emotions get the best of us (I've done it myself), and it's not easy to come out and say you were wrong, so I appreciate this. We're both here for the same reason, to improve articles, so no hard feelings. Cheers. Mosmof (talk) 23:24, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello .
Hello bud, look at this ..
- List of most expensive association football transfers
- World football transfer record
- Transfer (association football)
they are all wrong by listing Bale most expensive player over Ronaldo..your link seems more updated so we need to change them I think .
I already suggested to move two of these articles to one article and we can work on it if you want .
User talk:GiantSnowman#question please
thank you.
- Thanks - this might actually be a better discussion on WT:FOOTY. I can start a discussion there if you're not getting traction on those articles. Mosmof (talk) 18:00, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Did you get my email?
I sent it a few days ago, but you never acked. If not, I will send it again. --Ravpapa (talk) 11:23, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
- I didn't. Let me check my settings to see if my email is correct. Mosmof (talk) 14:00, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
- Okay, try now. Mosmof (talk) 14:13, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
- Take a look now.--Ravpapa (talk) 14:36, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi
can you please tell us your opinion about this topic : https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football#Thomas_Vermaelen.27s_page_question_please_:
I see you active in sport pages so thought you might have an opinion about this . thank you Adnan (talk) 14:15, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you + invitation
Thank you for your contributions to women's football/soccer articles. I thought I'd let you know about the Women's Football/Soccer Task Force (WP:WOSO), a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of women's football/soccer. If you would like to participate, join by visiting the Members page. Thanks! |
Hmlarson (talk) 01:12, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Cada mori
Our boy seems to have disappeared. Perhaps this is the time to restore the deleted section to the RT article? --Ravpapa (talk) 05:54, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
- Hobestly, I don't know where we stood in the discussion, but I think it was still contested. Maybe reopen the discussion? Mosmof (talk) 10:59, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
- Go for it/ --Ravpapa (talk) 17:31, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Great Logic !
The Socratic Barnstar | ||
well said, you have really explained it perfectly Adnan (talk) 18:49, 9 June 2015 (UTC) |
Orphaned non-free image File:New Minnesota Stadium logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:New Minnesota Stadium logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:27, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
File:Johncooper.jpg
Thanks for the housekeeping at this file; it was late at night when I noticed the previous version was a blatant copyvio of press photography at Cooper's trial and so I didn't use my commonsense and mark it for speedy then upload to a different file name. Sorry for creating extra work for you, but at least we will still get to the desired outcome of removing the non-free image. Keri (talk) 10:08, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
- @Keri No worries - the image happened to come up on my watchlist. Mosmof (talk) 13:35, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
July 2015
Your recent editing history at Template:New York Knicks shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—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—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Corkythehornetfan 07:10, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Corkythehornetfan: The user is engaged in clear vandalism (replacing "Linsanity" with the hoax "Fieldsanity") with a misleading edit summary - 3RR doesn't apply in cases of obvious vandalism, does it (I could be wrong about this, obviously)? And it appears that the user is a sockpuppet of blocked user KO.2 (see edits , , ). Mosmof (talk) 07:14, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry about this, you can remove it. You're right, per WP:NOT3RR#3 (socks) and #4 (vandalism). I just noticed an edit war going and I was tired of seeing it. If they are a sock, I hope they get blocked, or at least for disrupting Misplaced Pages. This edit summary is a bit concerning, wouldn't you say? It shows they just go blocked, too. Corkythehornetfan 07:25, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
- No prob, thanks for the response. I probably should've just started a sock investigation. I'll put up a request anyway, since the block is only temporary. Mosmof (talk) 07:27, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry about this, you can remove it. You're right, per WP:NOT3RR#3 (socks) and #4 (vandalism). I just noticed an edit war going and I was tired of seeing it. If they are a sock, I hope they get blocked, or at least for disrupting Misplaced Pages. This edit summary is a bit concerning, wouldn't you say? It shows they just go blocked, too. Corkythehornetfan 07:25, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
clearly doesnt meet criteria for deletion
the article Steve Gatena substantially differs from that which was previously deleted.--JumpLike23 (talk) 01:39, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Jumplike23: You're right (I think), though the issues from the last deletions are still there, i.e. dependence on non-independent and self-published sources (the Forbes "contributors" are not subject to Forbes' editorial process). Mosmof (talk) 01:45, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Florida Gators women's soccer players
Hey, MOSMOF. I saw that you were chewing on the Kat Williamson article, and then noticed that she was a University of Florida alumna -- and that she was mis-categorized under the generic parent category, Category:University of Florida alumni, and not the sport-specific subcategory, Category:Florida Gators women's soccer players. I'm not a huge association football/soccer fan, but I am a University of Florida alumnus and I do try to improve, maintain and protect all of the articles for former Florida Gators athletes regardless of what sport they played. If you come across any other mis-categorized Gators soccer players, I would be grateful if you bring them to my attention. Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:13, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
- Yeah, I realized seeing your edits I didn't do a thorough job of going through the article. Thanks for catching that (and other issues). Mosmof (talk) 18:17, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello mosmof
Hello mosmof!
Hope you are doing fine . I am asking you if i can make changes to leo messi's article. I am a great fan of him and believe have alot of valuable information that I can add!
Feel free to contact me here or through my email : koko10_77@hotmail.com. Thanks, Markeeeto (talk) 07:24, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Alex Morgan
Why do you keep erroneously editing Alex Morgan's Misplaced Pages page? The statistics for NWSL are clearly available on their website, and Morgan has neither played in 48 games nor scored 30 something goals. Get your facts straight. Nd2323 (talk) 20:44, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
- @Nd2323: Not sure what you mean by "keep", since as far as I can tell, I've only edited her stats once (and sorry about the error). The page does attract a lot of vandalism, so when I see an empty edit summary with an edit that seems off (and a mobile edit to boot), I kinda assumed it was more of the same. Not an excuse, but that's my explanation. Anyway, thanks for pointing that out. Mosmof (talk) 18:11, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Your edits
The stadium capacity is NOT original research. Just because I moved the citation to after the sentence I added, the reference worked for the whole paragraph. Also, the Miami Herald does require a subscription once you've visited so many pages per month. I believe it varies in November I viewed many, now in December I'm already being hit with the paywall, though you can still scroll and see the article behind it. B137 (talk) 03:32, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
I see you switched it to a cite news, this would override the subscription, but did you first check to make sure this was in the print edition? B137 (talk) 03:35, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
- @B137: Actually, the point made in the article in the capacity isn't that there's a gap in what the two parties are looking for, but that they're both looking at a lower capacity than Sun Life Stadium. Check it out:
- Miami is therefore looking for a venue that can hold 40,000 to 44,000 fans, according to the Herald, while the MLS and Beckham's group prefer one that seats approximately 25,000 patrons.
- So to turn that into However, UM's target size of 40,000 to 44,000 seats is much too large for the MLS proposal. is very much your interpretation of the information that's not apparent in the source. Plus. it's really beside the point because the proposal never got beyond the discussion phase (assuming it was anything more than a ploy to get more leverage from lawmakers), so that statement I think gives WP:UNDUE weight to a plan that never came to materializing. So I'm going to go ahead and take the text out again - feel free to discuss in the article talk page if you want to discuss further. Thanks. Mosmof (talk) 16:22, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
Thanks for fixing the infobox on the page for Mark Dougherty! And a question for you: is it possible to cite to a physical object, like a trophy/ plaque/ ring/ jersey? SweetJane930 (talk) 20:10, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
- @SweetJane930: Hey, sorry for the slow response. I'm not sure what you mean exactly, but generally, I wouldn't use a physical artifact as a source. What you want is a published book or newspaper magazine (you can see WP:RS for more). I think citing a source would be considered original research and discouraged. Hope that helps. Mosmof (talk) 01:06, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
PUF discussion
Hi Mosmof. I pinged you in a WP:PUF discussion Misplaced Pages:Possibly unfree files/2016 February 9#File:Uht entrance.jpg since the file being discussed is one that you previously tagged with {{di-no source no license}}. Any comments you might have would be most appreciated. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:01, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
File:Kansas University (logo).gif listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Kansas University (logo).gif, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion 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. Cloudbound (talk) 20:57, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Christian Pulisic
I changed the image for Christian Pulisic, and now it is a different photo uploaded from Flickr, and it is from the Creative Commons. Spike789 21:38, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Spike789: Hi, thanks for changing the image. Unfortunately, I see that the license is "All Rights Reserved", not Creative Commons, and cannot be used on Misplaced Pages. And non-free pictures of living people are generally not allowed on Misplaced Pages either. Mosmof (talk) 23:59, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Whisperback
Hello, Mosmof. You have new messages at Spike789's talk page.You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Mosmof. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages 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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Neckface Begins.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Neckface Begins.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:42, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:PFT commenter with Flacco sign.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:PFT commenter with Flacco sign.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:22, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Request for comments regarding Cristiano Ronaldo article
Hello, I noticed in the past you have commented on this, so I thought I would bring it to your attention. There is an ongoing dispute regarding the sentence 'regarded by many as the greatest of all time' on the Ronaldo page. There are three users who are defending this claim, and all are refusing to openly address any criticisms from a growing number of objectors. The matter is open for comments at the moment, so perhaps you would like to contribute? Thanks. O'Flannery (talk) 15:21, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Mercedes-Benz Stadium interior bowl rendering.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Mercedes-Benz Stadium interior bowl rendering.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Ytoyoda (talk) 17:04, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Replaceable fair use File:New Atlanta Stadium MLS configuration.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:New Atlanta Stadium MLS configuration.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Misplaced Pages. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
- Go to the file description page and add the text
{{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}
below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing<your reason>
with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable. - On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ytoyoda (talk) 19:45, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Mosmof. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of File:Washington Redskins script R logo.gif
The file File:Washington Redskins script R logo.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Unused logo with no article used, it's also can't move to commons because of an unused logo will be deleted as of out of project scope.
While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
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. Willy1018 (talk) 05:07, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:John Profumo 1960.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:John Profumo 1960.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:46, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Sunkist logo 2008.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Sunkist logo 2008.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:32, 15 June 2021 (UTC)