Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:57, 20 February 2008

User	Talk	Contributions	Awards	Articles	Sandbox

Archives

October 2006 – August 2007 August 2007 – November 2007 November 2007 – January 2008 January 2008 –

Welcome

Hello Woodym555! Welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! Budgiekiller 16:05, 23 October 2006 (UTC) Getting Started Misplaced Pages Tutorial • The five pillars of Misplaced Pages How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Misplaced Pages is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Build consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Useful templates • Categories • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Tools • User scripts

Transfers Winter 2007-08

Yeah, sorry about that. I must've accidentally deleted some stuff from the article. I was only trying to revert Egghead06's edit. – PeeJay 14:29, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIII (January 2008)

The January 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:33, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Notability of footballers

Hi, you contributed to the discussion about football notability criteria in November, so you will be delighted/appalled that I have restarted the discussion here. Please give your opinion so that we can move towards formalising the criteria. Regards, King of the NorthEast 15:06, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you spam

		My RfA
		Thank you very much, Woody, for your nomination and support in my RfA which I really appreciate. It closed at 83/0/0. I was surprised by the unanimity and will do my best to live up to the new role. All the best, --ROGER DAVIES  16:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC) The patio at the Partal Palace in the Alhambra, Andalucia.

Lead coordinator

Hey Woody, I have asked you a question at the nominations page. The peer review dept. in wiki as a whole is in poor shape I feel (at least I myself have never had a good experience with it) whereas the WPMILHIST specific peer review system has always impressed, I've just asked you on your thoughts about improving WPMILHIST's PR dept. further.

Good luck! SGGH 17:46, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou, your answers were very helpful and you clearly know your stuff and you are curteous to questions. I will take a look at new and improved WP:PR and particularly Misplaced Pages:Peer review/volunteers which I had not seen before. SGGH 20:43, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

James Milner

Do you have anything more to add to the PR? Buc (talk) 19:43, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I pretty sure I've addressed every issue raised either in the article or with a reply in the PR. Buc (talk) 22:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Can't really do much until RM replies. Dweller just gave some advice, he didn't give any feedback about the article. Buc (talk) 22:10, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Unblock? Update?

Please see: Diffs.: a act of vandalism at Heath Ledger apparently committed by a user that you have recently unblocked. See Talk:Heath Ledger for context. Thanks. --NYScholar (talk) 21:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you again; was just about to add the template, but I see that you have done so. --NYScholar (talk) 21:14, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Unblock

No idea where that came from, they were doing alright AFAIK. Major mistake on my part, unblocked, etc. Thanks for telling me.Keilana| 23:11, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem, thanks again for letting me know. Keilana| 23:15, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Recent Villa history

Hi Woody, just saw you added a {{fac}} to the Villa recent history article. I'll get round to reviewing it tomorrow with luck. You may have noticed ITFC stats article at FLC right now, and I'm working hard on ITFC history to complete the topic... All comments welcome as ever! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:15, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Villa FAC

No worries about the decades - as long as it's consistent that's fine, though I'm not a big fan or going against the MOS. As for other points, I've got a couple - one on the specifics of the references and secondly about images. Though I realise it's damned annoying not being able to use the images we want. I'm sure you have a list of images you'd like to use but can't. Anyway, I'll get back to you (on the FAC page) as soon as I get chance, perhaps later today. Peanut4 (talk) 22:12, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Villa 1961-

Just a quickie. In the lead, your note #1 doesn't reference the sentence it's attached to. Would have changed it myself, but can't make head nor tail of the "new-look" history section on avfc so can't find anything to change it to, cheers, Struway2 (talk) 14:28, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

sorry to be picky, but it still doesn't explicitly mention them being in Europe by 1977, which is what the sentence says. Presumably this is via winning the League Cup? you could always add a bit to the note to say so. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 14:59, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandal

Woody, can you have a look at Oddball600 (talk · contribs)? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:47, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks; when do I get to practice rollback? Seems all of his/her edits have been attended to. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:52, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Ronald Reagan protection

Perhaps you could revisit the idea of semi-protection. The edits by established editors is usually sound, and not a drive-by vandalism by anonymous contributors. Full protection is too much, but I think that semi-prot might allow for a better use of editors' time. When you factor out the anon vandalism, the remaining edits are far more manageable (and a lot more sane). Thoughts? - Arcayne () 18:52, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Footy!

Hey, Woody! I've tentatively returned to editing articles within the scope of WP:FOOTY.....OK, related to Liverpool F.C. One question: does the project maintain a formal system for the promotion of articles to A-class, á la MILHIST? I've identified an array of neglected articles that I'm resolved to ...."improve" ;-). If you're ever inclined to assist such efforts, I'd happily welcome that support!*hint hint* I really shouldn't allow myself to be so distracted from Charles Harington Harington. Regards, SoLando (Talk) 14:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah, that's unfortunate. I've become so accustomed (in the project space) to the extensive, meticulous structure of MILHIST. Perhaps Footy should employ the service of yourself and/or Kirill to effect project transformation? ;-) I can't fathom why/how I neglected to tag Harington. Thank you! I urge you, nay insist, that you select the Irish VC list for your next project - I'm of Green heritage! Admittedly, I'm a veritable mongrel but I qualify for Guinness ;-). Regards, SoLando (Talk) 15:26, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Over the weekend? That's impressive. Alas, my approach would have been to sporadically edit the article/list, perhaps encompassing many months, until I either relented and completed the article or relegated it to very low priority! ;-) FOOTY appears to be exceptionally active so presumably MILHIST's system of internal content review could be successfully adopted...? Were a policy-compliant image was available, I'd expand the lamentably maligned Stig Inge Bjørnebye‎ beyond the current projected length/standard and nominate it as an FAC. GA will probably be a practical compromise. My next victim is Patrick Berger's article - it's concise and has excellent potential! Regards, SoLando (Talk) 15:51, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps a movement within FOOTY will gain momemtum? I suppose MILHIST's structure is essentially representative of its scope ;-). There was a failed FAC for a VC recipient whose name I cannot recall. It was insufficiently referenced and impeded by an unencylopedic tone, but it wouldn't be that time-consuming to improve it to FA standard. And yes, Berger - the Czech maestro! SoLando (Talk) 16:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Optimus91

I see you tripped over it too. What do you think? I don't see what Ryulong was thinking on that one, but he may have some reasons we don't know about. If we don't here from him shortly, I am inclined to seek community input on an unblock at WP:AN... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:33, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

No

I am NOT the only person and seems that just two of you thought this thru and maid the compromise yourselves. PPNjegos (talk) 12:48, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Cyclin-dependent kinase 5

When you moved over redirect Cyclin-dependent kinase 5, Anthony.bradbury (talk · contribs) accidentally deleted it, I think by following the {{db-move}} in the original page. I have reported the problem to Anthony, but he seem busy at the moment. Can you undelete this article? —Banus (talk) 09:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! It's ok now —Banus (talk) 11:52, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Villa history

I will get around to reviewing it properly soon (poke me with a stick if I don't), but one quick point I noticed. Mercer is described as resigning, but I have three different sources which say he was sacked. Oldelpaso (talk) 16:37, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Right, I've sobered up after yesterday's celebrations. In a narrative club history in Manchester City: The Complete Record Gary James wrote "Unfortunately Mercer became ill, suffering a stroke while still at Villa, and appallingly he was dismissed while still trying to recover." A profile of Mercer later in the book says "Mercer's career changed direction in 1963 when pressure increased at Villa. The Villa fans were desperate for 1910. His relatively young side were still not ready for that, and, as a result of the pressure, Mercer became ill. Eventually he suffered a stroke. (Two sentences about the scope of Mercer's role at Villa)...while he he lay at home ill the Villa board decided to terminate his contract."

Ian Penney's Maine Road Encyclopedia uses the phrase Villa relieved him of his post after mentioning the stroke. David Clayton's take is "He recovered but when the doctors gave him a clean bill of health, the Villa board sacked him. He decided to retire and many thought they had seen the last of "Genial Joe". But Mercer's love of the game pulled him back and in 1965..."(rest of career)

So we have Villa-centred sources which tend to portray Villa in a favourable light, and City-centred sources which tend to be sympathetic towards Mercer. It seems to me that he did retire, but only once he was no longer Villa manager. James has also written a biography of Mercer - Football with a Smile - but it is long since out of print. I'd class him as the most reliable of my three sources, I've always found his books to be very well researched. Oldelpaso (talk) 19:39, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Just this remaining really before I support, I may do some further copyediting at some point. I've just noticed that the manager history on the Villa site says Mercer today lives in retirement on Merseyside, when he died 18 years ago, so I'd take that one with a pinch of salt. Oldelpaso (talk) 21:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Villa stats

Hey Woody, I saw you're pushing to FLC now, but you didn't transclude the nomination so I've taken the liberty of doing so. Hope you don't mind! The Rambling Man (talk) 08:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Silly billy. No harm done! The Rambling Man (talk) 09:21, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I just noticed that it was me that welcomed you to this place back in Nov 2006. Has it really been that long?! The Rambling Man (talk) 09:23, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

You're quick!

Thanks for adding the block template. I edit conflicted with you to add it msyelf. Cheers, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 15:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Orphaned non-free image (Image:Target alternatecover.jpg)

I'm aware of that. That's why I requested speedy deletion, because it wasn't used in any pages and there was no use for it anymore as the cover turned out to be fake - but you declined it. Save-Me-Oprah 16:30, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Category:All lonely articles

You might want to take another look at this. It appears to me that this category is likely to stay empty. The preferred term now seems to be "orphaned" rather than "lonely" articles; {{lonely}} redirects to {{orphan}}, and there is a separate Category:All orphaned articles. Category:Lonely articles and all of its subcategories, including this one, now appear to be empty. --Russ (talk) 16:55, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

new user name

When and why did you change usernames. You almost got spammed with my monthly WP:LOTD notice.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 18:33, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Notability of non-playing footballers (AfD:Paul Rodgers (footballer))

Hello! You contributed to AfD:Paul Rodgers by voting to keep him. As you may know, WP:FOOTY is currently working to finalize a Notability criteria. One of the points of the current suggestion that are still being debated is more or less a translation of AfD:Paul Rodgers. I'm now trying to come up with a suggestion that summarizes this AfD, and would like you to comment on my interpretation of your arguments, and perhaps even discuss a suggestion. Thank you! Sebisthlm (talk) 20:27, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Villa

You've addressed all my issues. I'll wait for Oldelpaso to go through the text until I update my own comments. No rush yet I hope. If I forget just get back to me. Peanut4 (talk) 01:02, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Milhist

Oops, brain fart, thought it was the 15th >.< You'd think I'd notice this stuff when everything is time stamped. Narson (talk) 15:49, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Inter-Cities Fairs Cup

Hi, it probably escaped your notice that Blues represented the city of Birmingham in the first Inter-Cities Fairs Cup (or even that such a thing existed). I've always believed that we were entered because Brum wanted to put in a combined team, as London did with the London XI, but your lot weren't interested, whether in the competition at all, or whether in mixing with the small-timers, I don't know. If you have a minute, I'd be grateful if you could have a look see if any of your books shed light on the matter. Absolutely non-urgent, just if you have the time. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 18:00, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for participating in my RfA! It was closed as successful with 58 supporting, 0 opposing, and 2 neutral. I hope to demonstrate that your trust in me is rightly placed and am always open to critiques and suggestions. Cheers. MBisanz 04:19, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Doczilla's RfA

.: Oh, no! There goes To-ky-o! Admin Doczilla! :.

File:Godzilla(01)reverse.jpg

Thanks for !voting! Thank you for !voting in my RfA which resulted in the collapse of civilization with 92 (94?) support, 1 oppose, and 1 neutral. Blame jc37 and Hiding for nominating me, everyone who had questions or comments, everyone who !voted, everyone who tallied the numbers correctly, and WJBScribe who closed without shouting, "No mop for you!" Seriously, your response has overwhelmed me. I am deeply grateful.

     "The bad news is time flies. The good news is you're the pilot." - Michael Althsuler

Doczilla RAWR! 07:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Advice

After your block, may you insert in correct manner with English language grammar this source and other source from this edit in introduction of association football? In first linked site you read section Australian Rugby Union and you read sentence the 2003 Rugby World Cup was the fourth largest sporting event in the world behind the Olympics, Soccer World Cup and the World Athletics Championships: Olympics is most followed sporting event in this source. In other source volleyball is most participated sport and Formula One Racing has the largest television viewing audience in the world. I would like insert other sources which consider various sports are most popular in the world but not soccer: sure several sources consider soccer most popular in the world but other sources no!!!! Regards,--PIO (talk) 16:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Villa stats & records

Hi, I've just stuck a load of comments at your FLC. Noticed you've been busy recently, so if it'd help if I sorted out some of this myself while you get on with more important things, just copy the comments over to my talk with ticks against what you'd like me to do, and I'll do my best. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Running Man Barnstar
		Awarded jointly to ChrisTheDude, Mattythewhite, The Rambling Man and Woody for producing quality articles at such a prolific rate that I can no longer keep up with reviewing them all. Oldelpaso (talk) 12:04, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

PROLIX

See here; I never saw whatever you deleted, but this may be more of a spam issue than a copyvio concern. Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:37, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Your edit at List of Victoria Cross recipients by nationality

Hello! i just want to say that i added that link as a Heading in that list because those recipients aren't English, they are from British India. So can i know what was your concern about that edit? Thanks! --SMS 12:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry! i did it all wrong! Well i just wanted to mention that these are the British Indian recipients and the link to British Indian VC recipients redirects to the same VC list. I think you got my point and if you can do that it will be a great help!--SMS 12:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

You're back !

Darn, I had to fail your FAC when it hit three opposes while you were "at sea". I also subsequently learned (from a different FAC) that there is an issue with plural/singular on clubs, so it seems that one is resolved. Bring it back as soon as you feel it's ready. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

My oppose is pretty much neutral on this now as well. Sorry, I probably ought to have updated my position. Everything I opposed it for has been addressed. I'm just waiting to see the outcome of OldElPaso's queeries then i will play my hand again. Peanut4 (talk) 17:00, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

See this MOS discussion; do we need a guideline? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:27, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! And thanks for understanding :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:31, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

The best place for the discussion is the one already started here, so please add that to it. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:42, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Pretty much all sorted from my point of view. If I find anything else using an extra-fine toothed comb I'll let you know or try to resolve it myself. Oldelpaso (talk) 20:00, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Woody, by the way, since I'm trying to discourage re-noms coming back before they're ready, when you re-nom, please indicate you have my permission. Hopefully, that will help forestall others (that aren't ready) from coming back too soon. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Archiving

Hello Woody! I'm the one who removed some AfD's on WP:WPF. I thought I'd just be helpful. Since it was the first time I didn't archive them. How do you do that, so I can get it right next time? Cheers, Sebisthlm (talk) 20:20, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the tutorial! I've added the articles I removed to the archive per your instructions. Sebisthlm (talk) 21:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

What about the PRODs? I removed Gary Charman and I don't see any in the archives, so I take it they're not added there. Sebisthlm (talk) 10:40, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Thought so. Thanks! Sebisthlm (talk) 10:54, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

History of Aston Villa

Hi, Woody, I have made a few edits to the article. If they are more-or-less OK, I can carry on with the rest of the article later. Please feel free to revert all or any of them if you want to. I feel guilty about the weight that my opposition seemed to have carried at the FAC - on relfection I was too quick to oppose on what now seems to be shakey grounds. Having spent two hours reading through the article, I can see that it is essentially very good. Should you re-nominate, (and I hope you do), I will support you. Best wishes, Graham. --GrahamColm 21:29, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

And I feel double guilty that I'm so self-obsessed that I didn't contribute either. Re-nom asap. Let me know asap. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:34, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Woody, Hi, I've completed the CE for you to keep or revert as you wish. Please let me know when you re-nominate. Best wishes, Graham.--GrahamColm 19:01, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Good day! I re-read the article and I think it looks fantastic. With the recent changes, I believe it is more accessible to the "layperson" if you will. I will fully support. --Laser brain (talk) 19:50, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for saving In Vento

I am documenting New York City Ballet season by season; this is their last week for this winter and there is much to enter. I will expand upon the entries after they go on tour next week. Thank you again for saving In Vento! Robert Greer (talk) 00:53, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Villa articles

Take your point entirely on FLCs becoming peer reviews; I now won't touch football FLCs that didn't have a PR first. Though there is a problem that some PRs attract significantly better participation than others. As to your history article, it now appears to have such a surfeit of goodwill I fully expect it to breeze through FAC in record time! cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:01, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

See my remarks on record time at Roger's talk page; I don't want anyone to be disapointed or to put any money on record time :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)