Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:06, 29 July 2014

Welcome to my talk page. Please adhere to the talk page guidelines and particularly the following: Please post your new topic at the bottom of this page. Please sign and date your entry by inserting "~~~~" at the end. Please specify a descriptive subject or headline for a new topic and separate subtopics by ===heading=== lines, if needed. Please indent your posts with one more ":" than what you are replying to, i.e. begin with ":" if replying to an existing topic and "::" if replying to a reply. I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your Talk page (or the article Talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or specifically let me know where you'd prefer the reply. ⇒ Start a new Talk topic.

• User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 1st year on Misplaced Pages
• User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 2nd year on Misplaced Pages
• User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 3rd year on Misplaced Pages
• User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 4th year on Misplaced Pages
• User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 5th year on Misplaced Pages
• User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 6th year on Misplaced Pages
• User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 7th year on Misplaced Pages

This user is one of the 400 most active English Wikipedians of all time.

Disambiguation link notification for May 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Newcastle rugby league team, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Australian Imperial Force and Distinguished Service Medal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:50, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox NRL Team Season

Template:Infobox NRL Team Season has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:14, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Australia national association football team lead

I noticed your recent change to the lead in Australia national association football team. Bolding "Soccceroos" and bringing it to the second sentence in the articles lead seems very pointy. It is specifically done to clarify the terms intended use through the article, which I have argued against. In good faith could you please revert the this while we are discussing the issue on Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (Football in Australia)#Changes from "Socceroos" to "Australia national association football team".--2nyte (talk) 03:59, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

You appear not to be aware of WP:BOLDTITLE.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 04:01, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:South sydney rabbitohs logo 1988.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:South sydney rabbitohs logo 1988.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:48, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

File:South sydney rabbitohs logo 1988.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:South sydney rabbitohs logo 1988.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. 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. Stefan2 (talk) 20:29, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

1972 NSWRFL season (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to John Wilson (rugby league)

Marcelo Vieira (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Bernabéu

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:51, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

June 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of Parramatta Eels players 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:

• |}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:45, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Height

Relevant discussion started at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Football#Height. GiantSnowman 08:26, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm not particularly interested in soccer, but thanks.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 10:23, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

If you're not interested in soccer why do you continue to edit soccer articles and introduce height formats against that WikiProject's consensus? i.e. Jiang Ning‎ earlier today - the discussion above showed there was most support for 'm' to be used as a standard. GiantSnowman 12:07, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Will you please grow up? Please. national-football-teams.com is not a better source than goal.com. --Gibson Flying V (talk) 20:46, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

AN notification

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. GiantSnowman 20:59, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Vox3000

Hi. I, like many others are very grateful for your work on all Rugby League orientated sites. Thanks you. (vox3000)

As am I for yours. I left a message on your talk page the other day about sources. The stuff you add appears to be accurate, but it would be great if we could reference it as well. The older the information, the more details in sources tend to conflict. So it's helpful if we can know what the sources are to compare them and choose the most reliable.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 23:16, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

331dot (talk) 22:23, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Community imposed topic ban

Per a discussion on the administrators' noticeboard you are subject to the following sanction:

Indefinite topic ban from anything height-related on any article related to association football.

You are also reminded that harsher sanctions were suggested in this discussion and it is very likely that the community will impose them if your are the cause of any further disruption. Please review the topic ban policy before making any further edits, as violations will lead to a block. Appeal of this sanction should be made to WP:AN, though I suggest you wait at least three months before doing so. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:13, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

User:Callanecc, can I seek clarification from you here on your reasoning for agreeing to this ban? The accusation of disruption seemed to rest entirely upon me being aware of a consensus that cm were unacceptable in soccer-related articles. I maintain that no such consensus ever existed and I want to be assured that you did not close it based on a quick perusal and vote-count. Thanks.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 21:13, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Imposing it wasn't agreeing to it I was assessing the consensus of editors who believed it was it was necessary along with their reasons. Based on the arguments which were made the main reasons were that you were failing to drop the WP:STICK and walk away which had reached the point of being disruptive. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:17, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for replying, User:Callanecc. It's much appreciated. ...the main reasons were that you were failing to drop the WP:STICK and walk away... What does this mean? Can you tell me "where I went wrong" and what exactly should I have done differently?--Gibson Flying V (talk) 05:22, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

No worries. When you've got a number of people, particularly when they are not involved, telling you (or reverting you, or discussing your edits) that there is a consensus against what you're doing or that you need to stop doing something then it can be disruptive to continue doing it and you are liable to be sanctioned to prevent it continuing. Not sure if that makes sense? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:28, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

But doesn't the point of contention get examined to see whether the editor(s) or the reverter(s) has policy, sources and/or consensus on their side?--Gibson Flying V (talk) 05:31, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but those who continue to push their side either while that discussion is on going or after it has been closed is being disruptive. The editors in the AN thread decided that you were being disruptive and needed to be prevented from continuing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:15, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Ok. ...those who continue to push their side either while that discussion is on going or after it has been closed.... Could I ask you to be more specific about how this applied to me? What constituted "pushing my side" and which discussion?--Gibson Flying V (talk) 06:59, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

The comments by Bagumba and Walter Görlitz (among others) show that pretty clearing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:50, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

The comments or the diffs? Which part of Walter Görlitz's comments specifically? And which comment or diff given by Bagumba? And again, which discussion? The one at the Administrator's noticeboard? Or the one at Wikiproject Football?--Gibson Flying V (talk) 08:11, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, in the AN discussion where they both started with Support. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:25, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

OK. And as for: The comments or the diffs? Which part of Walter Görlitz's comments specifically? And which comment or diff given by Bagumba? Also, I don't think I edited a single soccer-related article during the AN discussion (or did I?)--Gibson Flying V (talk) 08:29, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

At this point, this discussion doesn't look like it's going anywhere constructive from now (especially considering your "or did I?" comment). The reason for the ban is the consensus in the AN discussion, for the reasons the users have argued there. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:26, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

The "or did I?" just meant that if I did, I've forgotten about it. Not at all an attempt to be cheeky or anything. I'm still genuinely baffled by the outcome of that discussion. Of course you don't have to respond helpfully. I just would have appreciated it if you did. I'm not silly, y'know. I'm aware of how that discussion looks to someone who just comes along and peruses the arguments in favour of the ban. But I thought that my responses to those arguments would be read and that the "evidence" of my disruption would be evaluated critically. You say "for the reasons the users have argued there". I'm seeking assurance that those reasons have been duly examined as per Misplaced Pages:Consensus#Determining_consensus. I apologize if this is annoying for you. I'm sure you can appreciate how frustrating it is for me too.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 09:41, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes I looked at your replies however I found that given editors continued to support the ban (whether new editors voting or after them discussing with you) they didn't find them convincing enough. Nor did I find your replies adequately refuted the reasons and evidence commenting users had supplied. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:52, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

For there to be what you describe as a situation in which someone continue to push their side either while that discussion is on going or after it has been closed, there must be some diffs that show this. Could you just give one an example?--Gibson Flying V (talk) 10:09, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm not having the AN discussion with you again. You were banned because there was a consensus to impose the ban. End of story. Appeal is to WP:AN. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:13, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't necessarily want to appeal it. I just want to understand it. It seems that the sole reason it resulted in a block is because a number of editors voted support and zero editors voted oppose. I didn't think it was that simple. I thought that having examined the discussion carefully you'd have ready at hand an explanation for why my defence arguments were not convincing.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 10:25, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

...and that was your mistaken belief about the process of a topic ban. Topic bans occur in part when people refuse to drop the stick. Nobody was required to go back and read the previous discussions, because the Topic Ban discussion was more of a "fuck it, he won't stop arguing whether he was right or not". It also became a new-trial on whether you were doing the right thing or not, and the consensus was that no you were not - which now can over-ride any previous discussion. Yet, so many people tried to tell you all of this during the AN discussion - but instead of shutting up, you railed against them ... when ensured more "Support" !votes. Again: no need to review previous discussion; your behaviour in that thread alone ensured you were doomed the panda ɛˢˡ” 16:28, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

If you're interested in having a reality check (though that seems doubtful), see User:Gibson Flying V/Sandbox.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 19:48, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

...and that's how you wish to obtain your first block for violating your topic ban? I warned you once on T13's page ... yet you persist? Do you not get what a topic ban is? (hint, it's NOT an interaction ban as you suggested earlier) the panda ₯’ 21:41, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

More vague threats. You might want to go back and read what I said about topic vs interaction bans. The wording of my topic ban is pretty unambiguous. Not my talk page, nor anyone else's, is under the scope of Wikiproject Football. Either explain how I'm violating my topic ban or shut up about it. You're not doing yourself any favours by carrying on about an obvious non-issue like this.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 22:21, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

So to be clear, User:Callanecc, the reason the proposed topic ban was carried through was not because I'd edited disruptively as claimed, but because some editors supported the ban at the AN discussion whilst none opposed it, and because I did not stop arguing against them there?--Gibson Flying V (talk) 03:57, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Melbourne Storms first mascot (is on his last legs litteraly)

Hi my name is Chris and here is the story of the Storms first mascot. When the storm first started to train at Gosch's paddock back in 98, Ben Anderson began to bring his staffy cross puppy "Jake" with him to training. Jake took a back seat but loved every minute (he told me so) and spent many sessions with the team, those boys will remember. Jake was shall we say was the unofficial mascot. 98 and 99 were amazing years for that young squad under the great Glen Lazarus as we know... Here's where Jake's value becomes apparent. Ben got a contract in the UK and left for greener pastures, Jake had to stay home with Grandpa (Chris Anderson) Melbournes coach and legend in his own right, we all know that. Anyways- Chris gets a new contract (let's not go there)..Jake, he gets a new home with Ben Roarty (99 across the line.. greatest try ever etc), anyhow JAKE is doin just fine with Roarts and his new mum- cheerleader Sonia, when guess what?! Roarts gets a contract with English team Huddersfield, up and leaves to seek his fortune, leaving Jake where? With Darren McIntosh, former AFL reserve player at North Melbourne and brother in law to Roarts. Jake has been responsible for some SERIOUS cattle deals! Back to reality. Jake loses a leg in a ball chasing incident around 2003 and becomes a tripod, this only increases his intensity at the ball and a year later due to unforseen circumstances, Jake changes carers for a fifth time and ends up with my family (I'm Roarts and Maccas other brother in law). Now let's get to the guts of the story. Jake has instilled in him EVERTHING that the first Storm team was all about. Tough? It's not the size of the dog. Determination? Try 11 years one leg down. You want hard? This dog carries 10 inch logs for the fire on three legs and goes back for more... I don't know Jakes exact age or all the details, but there are stories that should be told and his is worth telling. Jake is 16 as far as I can gather, he is almost blind and almost deaf and still as enthusiastic as that first team made him as a pup. Anyone who wants to catch up with Jake, boyd.christos@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.219.32.83 (talk) 11:54, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Most watched sport on TV in Australia??!!

How can you say that when I provided three links to show otherwise?! Links from the Bureau of Statistics and Roy Morgan. Rugby League is NOT a national sport in Australia and it is hardly an International sport.

Stick to the facts and be honest.

RL is popular in NSW & QLD.

Kara Teh (talk) 09:16, 16 July 2014 (UTC) Kara Teh

As I said in my edit summary, you don't appear to have read the body of the article, incuding the sources. The sources you added are useful and should be incorporated further into Rugby league in Australia (if they're not already). Statements like the above indicate that you're driven by opinion rather than by sources, as is the Misplaced Pages way. Read more carefully before you edit and your contributions will be taken seriously.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 09:30, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

You don't provide any data to support your statement and accuse me of opinion over facts?! You agree that my sources are useful, so you agree they are correct? The line reads quite clearly that RL in Aus is the most watched sport on TV which is incorrect. I came to this Wiki as I was interested to find out which year RL was created and I trust that the info is correct but when I read a claim like that I got my back up and made the change. All you have to do is to do is adjust the line to make it more accurate and it will be a fine page containing alot of great info on the Great Game of RL. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kara Teh (talk • contribs) 09:45, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Since you refuse to go read for yourself, I'll do you a favour and provide the sources here just this once:

• Newstalk ZB (2009-12-21). "League becomes Australia's top sport". TVNZ. New Zealand: Television New Zealand Limited. Retrieved 2009-12-24.
• Masters, Roy (1 October 2010). "NRL races ahead in TV viewers stakes". The Sydney Morning Herald.

--Gibson Flying V (talk) 10:08, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

You have got to be joking??!! ONE five year old article from a NZ TV website....... Was RL the most watched sport before? NO. Is it still the most watched sport in AUS? NO. Your Wiki says that RL 'is' the most watched sport in AUS... Wrong! RL is popular in NSW & QLD... Fact! Australia is much more than just NSW & QLD (hard to believe I know)... Fact! Don't demean RL by over stating it's acheivements, it doesn't need it as it has a fine history and place in AUS as it is. People reading Wikis looking for facts and accuracy deserve better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kara Teh (talk • contribs) 10:23, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

The entire WP:Lead of history of rugby league is written in the past tense.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 10:41, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

A very nice side step there! Well done.

Might be written in the past tense but people are reading it today.

RL 'became' the most watched...

Bye bye...

Go Storm! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kara Teh (talk • contribs) 11:36, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Height in sports, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Jay Cutler and Steven Finn. 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) 08:53, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Disruption by User:2001:8003:440F:9B01:223:32FF:FE9E:4B9F

Hi, please reframe from deleting my changes to the Rugby league page. I made my reasons quite clear and by definition there fact, unless you can explain that there not I will keep on changing it back. If you wish to explain that they are not correct please do so on here, thanks.2001:8003:440F:9B01:223:32FF:FE9E:4B9F (talk) 03:18, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Please read full-contact sport. I trust that my next reversion won't be undone again by you. Thanks.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 03:23, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Rugby league. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. —Bagumba (talk) 04:06, 29 July 2014 (UTC)