Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:28, 26 August 2007

For older comments, please see:

• Archive 1 (16.12.2005 ~ 18.5.2007)
• Recent Archive (27.5.2006 ~ )

Nani cat

I know it still turns up in the cat, but with using DEFAULTSORT the (footballer) tag is removed from the sorting - its only there for Misplaced Pages purposes in the first place, and using DEFAULTSORT its as if the "(footballer)" isn't there, so in theory its sorted more accuratley. Mattythewhite 15:24, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

Figure you deserve this. Gran 20:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

		Football (soccer) barnstar
		For keeping List of English football transfers 2007-08 fully referenced and up to date as best as is physically possible. Keep it up! Gran 20:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Sam Hewson

Deleted again -- the consensus here has been that youth and reserve players aren't notable. As soon as he gets into a first team match, feel free to repost. NawlinWiki 14:52, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

ECL 2nd Qualifying Round draw formatting

I agree, it's best thrashed out on the talk page rather than a minor edit war. I just can't see why you want it that way. The third qualifying round is already Team x/Team y format, and for working out potential opponents the "Winner Match 1" format forces users to have to look back up to see what Match 1 actually was. Actually, if you want it your way it should read "Tie 1" as it is the results of two matches which go to deciding which team progresses. - fchd 20:16, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Squad Numbers for 1991 UEFA Cup Winners' Cup Final

Where did you find the squad numbers for this final, because I can't find a site anywhere which has the squad numbers available NapHit 15:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I have a DVD of the 1991 Final, and the players' numbers are listed on there. - PeeJay 03:18, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Premier League 2007-08 article

I have again removed the paragraphs about teams "looking to do this", or aims and asperations in general, and whether or not signings are "astute" etc. This is mostly POV and speculation, and does not deserve a place in an encyclopaedia. Let's stick to the facts please. - fchd 20:35, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

British Isles naming dispute

As an American with Irish blood (yes, don't hold it against me :D ) obviously I'm sympathetic to the Republic. I'm also a Republican (not the U.S. type) and anti-monarchist. I think Great Britian and Ireland doesn't favor one side and is a simple solution to, like you say, a trivial issue. I see you're from Wales. I visited England and Wales in December. I got to attend, with a Mancunian-born friend, the Champions League match versus Benfica. Of course that was my favorite part of the trip, but my second favorite was driving through North Wales and Conwy in particular. I didn't care for Southern England or the Midlands much. Anyway can't wait for August 12th to roll along! - Tocino 20:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Your right about the term Great Britian and Ireland... it leaves out the Isle of Man and etc. however until United has a captain from the Shetland Islands or wherever we won't have to worry about this problem. I really don't mind the term, British Isles, but this is wikipedia and I think we should obey the strict non-POV guidelines, and since there is a small controversy about this, I think we should avoid using the term. As for Wales, yes we drove around the small roads around the shores of Anglesey and it was great. We made it all the way up to Holyhead and then went back. You'll love OT. Maybe it was because it was an European night, but we had seats in North Stand tier 2 and that's an area in the stadium that has a reputation for not singing as much as the other parts of the ground.... well it did not disappoint... the atmosphere was great. However it could be a bit different with you going to an exhibition match. - Tocino 21:39, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Recent Anderson edit

Ok, so maybe I should have checked before cleaning up what was incorrect info (not posted by me btw), but don't you think your "get your facts straight" comment was slightly out of line? Darkson (Yabba Dabba Doo!) 01:06, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

No worries - I guessed it might be directed at the original poster, but after the shit I've been taking on the DB talk page... Darkson (Yabba Dabba Doo!) 01:13, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

RE:FCK-Beitar dates

Hi. I cannot see why they should be removed as there is a reliable source. I could if necessary insert a reference note. kalaha 12:02, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Premier League fixtures

That article got speedied as a copyright violation. I'm confused, though--what rationale does the Premier League use to copyright its schedules? Was wondering because an American sports league would find it hard to copyright its schedules. Blueboy96 00:33, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, such a claim would get thrown out in the States ... it's established precedent here in the States that you can't copyright facts. That said, I don't think that article belonged here in any case, per WP:NOT. Blueboy96 14:32, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Player categorisation

See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football/Archive_9#Categorizing_players for the most recent discussion of this issue (it comes up fairly often). Consensus is that anyone who has had a contract with the club is professional. ArtVandelay13 21:59, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

No, you're not paying attention - whether he has played yet is irrelevant. The fact that he is (or has been) contracted and registered as a Man United player means he qualifies for the category. If you were to describe Hargreaves, you would describe him as a 'Manchester United player', therefore he goes in the Category 'Manchester United players'. The same goes for (say) Ben Collett - during the time he was at Man U, he was a 'Manchester United player', regardless of whether he made the first-team or not, so he fits the category. Honestly, what is gained from omitting Hargreaves from this category? ArtVandelay13 22:10, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

But 'played for' doesn't necessarily mean 'played in the first-team', in this context it's taken to mean 'was a player for'. Put it this way: Owen Hargreaves currently plays for Man United, i.e. they are the club he is at. And it's that meaning that's what the categories are for - the clubs a player has been at. ArtVandelay13 22:17, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, playing in a competition is a different thing from playing for a club - more of a status issue, and you have no real attachment to a competition (apart from in MLS) as you do with a club. To take a parallel issue, in the World Cup players categories, non-playing squad members are listed, because they were registered players for that tournament.

The WP:FOOTY discussion is perfectly acceptable - I would say Hamann at Bolton is a debatable case (much more so than a current player who hasn't made their debut, or a former reserve), but the point of a category is an exhaustive list of everyone that's been a player for a particular club, and failed youth team players, reserve goalkeepers and new signings are part of that. I struggle to see what is gained by leaving out Owen Hargreaves. ArtVandelay13 22:38, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Response

I am perfectly civil. The category says "Manchester United Players" not "people who have played in matches for Manchester United." Regardless of whether or not Hargreaves EVER plays a game for Manchester United, he'll always go down in history as a Manchester United player. Batman2005 20:29, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

United Home Kit

I bought it yesterday, and noticed the "stripy" pattern is slightly different to the one on the wiki. The stripes fan-out at the bottom of the shirt at about 15 degrees, rather than following straight down to the bottom of the shirt. Hope you can edit the wiki image to match this. Diolch Vycasio yhn Honór - Cräiteland 12:11, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

HP character infobox colours

I would direct your attention to the HP project page, where this matter has already been discussed and decided in favour of removing the colouring. Please revert your colour changes. - Arcayne () 14:58, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Access dates

Hi there, do you know where's the Misplaced Pages guideline/policy page which says that the access date is the date first accessed? I was looking at this guideline and noticed that it doesn't say access date equals first accessed. My view is that for websites with content that is periodically updated, the "last accessed" principle will tell which version was looked at. Thanks. Chensiyuan 13:31, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Manchester United squad numbers

Did you even watch the Community Shield yesterday? Gerard Pique is now #19, and Lee Martin is #30. - PeeJay 14:41, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Nothing is definite until SAF makes the official announcement later this week. Both Eagles and Pique have worn #19 this pre-season. Manutd.com was JUST updated earlier today to show Lee Martin as #46, so we can't be publishing contradictory information on the wiki page. Misplaced Pages is for publishing definite information, not speculation. User:dsapery

46 is the number Martin wore last season. The ManUtd website is known to be very slow when it comes to updating the squad list. - PeeJay 14:51, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not trying to argue with you. Yes they wore those numbers yesterday. Yes manutd.com is slow in updating the squad list. But the Community Shield squad numbers are not definitive and can change before the end of this week. Just be patient. With the league starting this upcoming weekend, the OFFICIAL squad lists will be announced this week.

What makes you think the numbers worn in the Community Shield are not definitive? It is a competitive tournament, for which the players use the same numbers that they wear in the Premier League and other competitions under the Football Association banner. - PeeJay 14:56, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

We're going back and forth, and keep changing the squad numbers around. I give up and will simply wait until it's officially announced.

I've just heard from a friend of a friend of someone who works at Carrington. Hargreaves will definitely be #23. Pique and Martin are likely 19 and 30, but not definite yet. Press release will be coming out this week.

_

I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but I just heard back from an official at the club. Q: "Are the squad numbers worn by the players on Sunday confirmed now for the Premiership season?". A: "Not yet... confirmed list for Premier League numbers is due later this week, Thursday I believe."

Personal attacks

Hello. Please refrain from making personal attacks on edit summaries, such as this one. Personal attacks are disruptive and in no way contribute to the resolution of a disagreement on Misplaced Pages. Thank you. Regards, Húsönd 02:37, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Owen Hargreaves

I got it semi protected. I hope we can relax a while now. Kingjeff 02:41, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Carlos Tevez

My mistake, I assumed Man Utd were only playing either Dunfirmline or Glentoran, not both. sepmix 23.39, 7 August 2007

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Valencia CF.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Valencia CF.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 orphaned, 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. 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 01:05, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

What's your problem, men?

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Simion Eugen-Andrei, Bucharest, Romania (talk • contribs) 09:26, 9 August 2007.

Valencia logo

Ief has been consistently trying to remove the Valencia CF logo and replacing it with a false or outdated one he apparently uploaded; you can see the history page for his revisions and further details. I've left a warning on his talk page but I don't know if he'll continue. ···巌流 10:12, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Warning about your comments at User talk:Batman2005

Comments like "You seem like a very bitter person. Were you abused as a child?"() are unacceptable. Please try to be more civil towards other editors and not resort to making personal attacks. Adambro 22:26, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I dont understand your rational

And that's in gentle terms speaking. This image is good for real Madrid basketball page? If so, its good for anything else(If you haven't noticed, the team that won both competitions is.... real). --ArnoldPettybone 23:06, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

nonsense. article 3 of the fair use explains why is it ok to to use it under bb european cup pages. its not "decorative", and the fair use doesn't states such use as this as "breaching", anything, anywhere. It does "illustrates the team in question", such as the fair use (does) states --ArnoldPettybone 00:03, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

well, if its only a guideline it doesn't obliges anything, does it?.

as long as it doesn't breaks any low of wikipedia written code or standard, it should be capt. Oh btw, the flag of Spain has even less "entity connention" to the article then Real coat of arms. should we delete all national flags from sport competition winners articles? I'm game. --ArnoldPettybone 00:37, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Man Utd Transfers In/Out

Man, why did you delete this section I spent time creating? It's worth it for new members and people who need to know transfer details!

Need your advise

Hello! I hope you are feeling great. I need your comments on this issue with regards to grammar here. Your comments would very much be appreciated! --Siva1979 12:02, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Unblock

PeeJay (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am not requesting to be unblocked, as I feel the punishment is fair. However, I do not believe the length of the punishment fits the misdemeanour. Surely two days is a bit much? Would one day not be more prudent? I will respect your decision, whatever you decide, but I just thought I'd let you know that I feel a bit aggrieved by the length of the "sentence".

Decline reason:

Procedural decline; seems to be dealt with already. — Kurykh 16:51, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I asked the blocking admin to review your block, keep in mind that this might take a while since he seems to be offline at the moment. -- lucasbfr 13:28, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

As it is your first i'd be reducing it to 24h. From you message above i understand that you acknowledge your wrongdoing. I would only ask you to avoid it in the future. In case you're confronting a delicate situation please always think about WP:DR. Always, please understand that "edit summaries" are used to briefly describe changes you have made. It is in no case dedicated to attack other people. Thanks you. -- FayssalF - 13:52, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for being so understanding, man. I appreciate it. I'll try to keep a cool head in the future and not respond to people baiting me. - PeeJay 15:54, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Need your comments

Hello! I hope you are feeling fine. I would like you to view and read this page carefully. This is in regards to the Manchester United F.C. article. As this subject is dealing with English based articles, we should follow the usage of British English so as to be more consistent with grammar. Moreover, British English has to be used here as per consensus in the Talk and FAC pages. Your understanding of this issue is crucial as well. --Siva1979 13:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Notable players

In All Blacks and France national rugby union team which both passed WP:FAC it's stated as Notable players. The fact they are past players is redundant. In the interests of consistency the Welsh page should be the same. - Shudde 00:19, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Of course that was not the reason it passed; you know thats not what I mean't. But clearly it was acceptable. If you look at both those articles then you will see that it's not a list, the list is on most national team pages are WP:OR anyway, and I've slowly managed to delist them (still going though). The point remains that it is redundant - if people add names who cares? But having all the articles the same seems like a good idea to me. - Shudde 01:29, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

2007 Rugby World Cup squads

Hi! See this, please. --necronudist 19:00, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Stretford End.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Stretford End.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Misplaced Pages:Image use policy
• Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 11:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Premier League Results Table 2007-08

If you want to keep that table, please make the BLACK future fixtures sqaures, white, because otherwise it looks hideous El-Nin09 18:47, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

For the 2007 Rugby World Cup WikiProject Rugby union is launching an Improvement Drive for national rugby union teams; specifically those participating in the Rugby World Cup.

We need your help! Here is what you can do:

• Adopt a national rugby union team article and collaborate with other members to improve it.
• Find, create and upload free images that will help improve these articles.
• Copy-edit, reference, and expand articles when and where you can.
• Promote the project and encourage others to join.

The World Cup is fast approaching and these articles are going to get a lot more hits during the tournament. It would be great if we could have them at a high standard!

For more information see the discussion on the WikiProject Rugby union talk page here.

Shudde 05:39, 24 August 2007 (UTC)