Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:03, 23 May 2008

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Misplaced Pages better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:32, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 14th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:15, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Template

I've temporarily solved it by moving the parameters around, though I don't know if this will be to the liking of the MLS people. However, it seems to have been caused by having parameters below the kits - if you have any idea how this might be fixed, have a play with {{Infobox Football club3}} and its effects on User:Number 57/Bury Town F.C.. Thanks for alerting me. пﮟოьεԻ 57 22:58, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Request for your help

Could you take a look at this (trivial) debate and close it up please, so that people can get on with building an encyclopaedia rather than bickering and edit warring over trivial issues like whether British clubs should have F.C. after their names in the infobox. All the best. English peasant 20:50, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Alejandro Carrusca

Hi, sorry to keep bothering you, I wonder if you could find any information on this player, he doesn't seem to have played for Estudiantes, and no longer plays for Treviso. Perhaps you could find out what happened to him, it's pretty misleading as is, (I couldn't find much about him in English or Spanish and my Italian isn't up to much). Regards English peasant 23:48, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

This suggests that he has played 24 times, but his lack of profile at Futbol XXI suggests that none of these games were with Estudiantes in the Argentine Primera, so it seems he's only ever played for Club El Porvenir, they may have been professional in 05-06 but I'm not sure the whole league was, this kind of information is not the kind of thing that is easily obtained, hence my WP:FOOTYN suggestion that notability should be determined on a club by club basis, with the emphasis on the protectionists to provide reliable proof. I'd AfD it, but its much better that the majority of the misleading junk that anti-deletionists have fought hard to keep, without doing anything to improve so it would probably get kept anyway. I just get sick of maintaining articles about such non-entities. Regards English peasant 19:11, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:AS Roma.png

Thanks for uploading Image:AS Roma.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Misplaced Pages's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

The following images also have this problem:

• Image:Albinoleffe logo.png

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. --20:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:12, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Advice

I advice you regarding violation of user:DIREKTOR for this restriction. Always DIREKTOR persists in several edit wars pushing his POV statements. Articles involved:

• Republic of Ragusa
• Albania Veneta
• Dalmatian Italians‎
• Josip Broz Tito
• Foibe massacres‎
• Istrian exodus‎
• many others.

You can control history of these articles for evidence! Inoltre questo tizio manifesta un odio anti-italiano proprio offensivo e contrario alla policy: wikipedia:harassment. Ossequi e buona fortuna. Nemo, 1 May 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.84.15 (talk) 14:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:10, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Current squad and Navbox

Hi Angelo, I have been thinking about how frustrating it is to update player articles on wikipedia. The process takes a minimum of 5 steps to be done properly:

1. Remove from old team Navbox
2. Remove from old team current squad
3. add to new Navbox
4. add to new current squad
5. Update player article

I have thought of an idea to make the process quicker for people like me who process hundreds of player transfers per transfer window.

The idea is to combine the functions of the current squad used on team articles and the navbox to make a template that can switch displays between something very similar to a current squad when you include something like club article=yes and as the navbox on player articles.

So the club article would have {{Argentinos Juniors current squad|club article=yes}} and the players would have {{Argentinos Juniors current squad}}. It would obviously be neccessary to put the gubbins at the top of the club article template to make it easily editable.

The main benefit of this change would be to reduce the number of edits per transfer from 5 to 3, an additional benefit would be to make it impossible for the current squad and navbox getting out of sync, which is a constant problem in South American football articles.

I don't have the programming skills to design this thing, I hope you understand what I'm getting at and agree that this change would save a lot of editing time. Could you look into the possibility of doing this, I would be extremely grateful, and willing to do the edits necessary to roll these changes out for the Argentine Primera as a testing ground.

I raised this issue at Wikiproject football, where it got largely ignored, raised it with an experienced editor, who eventually tired of trying to work out how to do it. I am really hoping that you can help me with this, or at least point me in the direction of someone who can. Please let me know what you think, EP 00:34, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I take it you mean you don't want to see further proliferation of navboxes on player articles for minor teams, in which case I fully agree. Could you have a think about how we could code the new template, I know it needs switch functions, and some way of making the navbox ignore the {{fs mid}}. Perhaps you could work on a prototype, (my efforts have been futile) then we can take it back to WP:FOOTY and discuss restricting the use of the new template to fully professional teams? All the best EP 16:15, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Protection

I am concerned about some of the pages you have protected recently. Initially my cocern was in relation to the John Terry article, which I feel is experiencing a fairly standard level of vandalism for a high-profile article (about 15-16 vandalism edits in the 8 hour between my unprotection and your re-protection). The discouraging effect on potential new contributors visiting Misplaced Pages to view the article, would seem to outweigh the small reduction in vandalism, which can be easily handled via the usual means. Having looked at your protection log, my greater concern is your protection of Juventus F.C., which you seem to have protected following a content dispute that you were involved with . The edits that you reverted do not seem to have been vandalism or to be otherwise disruptive, and there seems to instead be a disagreement between you and at least one other editor over when it would be appropriate to add Mellberg to the list. It this was a content dispute, then it would be highly inappropriate for you to use to protection to prevent the other party from editing. I would be keen to hear your thoughts on this. Best Regards TigerShark (talk) 22:03, 23 May 2008 (UTC)