User talk:Soccer-holic

For older posts, see User talk:Soccer-holic/Archive

Well I haven't heard anything, and I couldn't find anything digging around the internet. I'd say keep reverting those edits until someone puts up a reference. Aheyfromhome (talk) 20:28, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Booyaa http://www.rr.pt/bolabranca_detalhe.aspx?fid=73&did=96536 Aheyfromhome (talk) 19:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re [1]; I've been busy recently, but just to let you know that I have read your proposal and will comment when I get chance! Knepflerle (talk) 12:08, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#CONMEBOL tables and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Requests for Arbitration;
• Wikipedia:Arbitration guide.

Thanks, Jamen Somasu (talk) 14:13, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to help consider a common template policy for all WP:SPORTS biography articles at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Sports#Template_policy_discussion.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:55, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That was me who did that edit. I forgot to log in. I'm not going to create a new article just to put 1 table in. So, until there are such articles, I think it should stay in that article. And another point is that I was not going to include any -non-Bundesliga teams in such a table since it is not relevant to the article. Kingjeff (talk) 16:17, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why are most of most of the Austrian Bundesliga articles neglected by WP Football? Kingjeff (talk) 16:29, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It should be discussed here since such articles are as of low importance to WP Football. Kingjeff (talk) 16:33, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've put two templates up for deletion. Be advised that they are being used in a couple articles, so an alternative (read adjustment to the main fb cl header) should be made before the disappear. Thanks. Digirami (talk) 18:15, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 21:22, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The trade between Chicago and ATL (and ATL and SJ) officially happened early Thursday morning 6/24/2010. I fixed it in the main season trade article. You might want to fix that anywhere else you put it. ccwaters (talk) 16:04, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for cleaning up my edits in 2010-11 NHL Transactions. Much appreciated :-) 24.8.208.72 (talk) 22:47, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I normally like a table, because it is more comprehensive and easy to understand. But as long as the assists are displayed with goals, I don't care how it is done. I just like the table better, and I see your point about not giving assists a fair share - but that can obviously be added. Laserinfantry44 (talk) 19:22, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the article 2009-10 La Liga someone has added a new section showing the results of each team week by week. This does not appear in any other article (not even in the Premier League). What should be done? He thinks that as he has worked on it for more than a day that he has the right to leave it as it is. I disagree with this, but I would like to ask if this section should be kept, and if so, then it should be used in the rest of the articles. I personally think that this section must be removed. Qampunen (talk) 13:48, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Shall I remove it then? Qampunen (talk) 14:10, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a user Mltinus who is reverting my edit and putting back the week to week results. What shall I do? I keep explaining to him why I it has been removed, but he/she ignores me. Qampunen (talk) 10:29, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but the fact that you tell me "It has been decided" doesn't count as a reason for me. I still have not heard a reason for deleting it, other than "it does not appear in any other article". I don't mean to be rude, but if we could only add things that are in other articles, we wouldn't get very far with Wikipedia. Mltinus (talk) 11:09, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the discussion of the week-by-week results at WT:FSATF. Mltinus (talk) 11:52, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why not? I thought it looks better and it's a real table then... TRBP (talk) 13:29, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's okay with me I just weren't aware of this. I'm not going to make any more changes like that :) TRBP (talk) 13:40, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind it's good you told me. TRBP (talk) 13:50, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know, new season will be in same format as last year excep with one Big difference: Championship Group is going to include points from first round. --NovaSkola 19:32, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

• I also want to ask you, short question as you are also promoted to reviewer like me, what it gives us??? basicly how we can review latest changes?--NovaSkola (talk) 19:40, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Urgent, just to let you know. Azerbaijani league apparently did not changed any format, it will be exact same format as last year. Even golden points will be same--NovaSkola (talk) 03:50, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Referring to [2]. Is it possible to be considered sourced if they do a separate list of the assists, individual for each one, with references (video or written) on the talk page, or on a new page? Catabv23 (talk) 21:46, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sorry :) He's doing a good job, then! Thanks. Qampunen (talk) 11:28, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[3] Man, I suck! :-) Jmlk17 19:22, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for your comment and work on the table at 2009–10 Serie B. i'll try to fix up the lower league tables in the same way over the weekend. —Ed Cormany (talk) 01:41, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, where is the other information that was on the article? After your edit it´s gone... Kante4 (talk) 20:16, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for putting it back! ;-) Kante4 (talk) 20:31, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Super League Greece has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 10:57, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article GNF 2 2009–10 has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. CJISBEAST (talk) 15:48, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are we talking about the average capacity or the average attendance? In the article about Premier League, both the current combined capacity and the the current average capacity (simply based on the combined capacity divided by the number of stadiums) are written out. Why can not the same thing be done in the article about the Bundesliga?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_league#Stadiums

Best regards

Erik 109.58.44.127 (talk) 16:03, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Indonesia note 21 suggestion - might be of interest, or not SatuSuro 11:52, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, no official ranking exists yet. Both the players currently mentioned are considered by several hockey followers to have performed superbly well for their age group up until this day, though. Ho-ju-96 (talk) 07:45, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Soccer-holic! as you can see yesterday, I make two lists: one for official goalscorers and one for Pichichi according to Marca, I make this solution to avoid war edits, but I'm surprised that people continue editing the two lists and entering into edit wars, not realizing the difference between the two lists. The debate is very stupid and most people (who don't know that means each list) changes it into its criteria. Please contact an administrator or you to block both lists. I'm tired of having to find collaborations that are only for this absurd dispute and later to reversions. --Raul-Reus (talk) 07:18, 25 November 2010 (UTC+1)

Hello Soccer-holic. I wanted to ask for your opinion regarding several templates. The thing is that I expanded the Template:Serbian SuperLiga same way as many other similar templates of leagues of other countries, so that includes now the former teams and former seasons, all in one (exemples, Slovenia, Croatia and many others). The reason I did this is because previously the Serbian SuperLiga template was focused only in the recent seasons, since Montenegrin break-away (2006), and there was an agreement that the Serbian SuperLiga article should include its predecessor leagues since 1992, as well, having been the articles of the First League of FR Yugoslavia and First League of Serbia and Montenegro merged into it. The problem was that since those articles existed before, the Serbian SuperLiga article just as all related templates were focused only in the recent period. Well, completing the article so it includes the period since 1992 will be a task to do in the near future, but in the meanwhile I did the update of the template. Now, the thing is that I noteced that you have donne one very helpfull template related to the 1992-2006 period, the Template:Serbia and Montenegro top football league seasons. On one hand, it is good to have the seasons only template, but also there is the Template:Serbian SuperLiga seasons where basically now we have all the information repeated. Would you agree to the merging of these last two templates into the Template:Serbian SuperLiga? Is the template OK? Would you have any recomendations on how we could improve and facilitate them even further? Sorry to bother you with this, but I will greatly appreciate your opinion on this. Best regards, FkpCascais (talk) 05:38, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanx for your help. Yes, I know the result was a bit complicate. :) I´ll check out everything regarding templates, see all the posibilities and I´ll try to do it as you said. I´ll let you know about the difficulties I found and the result. Since I don´t have much experience with templates it may take me while... maybe not. FkpCascais (talk) 00:48, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One thing is however giving me some hard time... It has to do with the fact that it was decided that the First League of Serbia and Montenegro (which already included the First League of FR Yugoslavia because it was just a name of country change) is merged into the Serbian SuperLiga. It happend some time ago and I didn´t even knew about it when it was decided. Regarding this issue I am still not decided which option would have been better. On one hand they shouldn´t have been merged, because the ligue had beside the clubs from Serbia, the ones from Montenegro. On the other hand, the merge makes sence because in the period they were together, the Montenegrin participation was minor (they never won any chapionship and usually had only 1, 2 maximally 3 clubs in a 12 to 20 clubs league). The merge also makes sence because Serbia was declared successor of Serbia and Montenegro, however, Serbia was also declared successor of the old big Yugoslavia, but we don´t usually include that period just because that (succession). Why basically makes sence is because the league was the same, meaning the same clubs competed for the title, and many clubs, even minor, are still in the same league, so it is basically the same league.

Funny is tha beside this mess, we also have a club from Bosnia that competed in the first season of the FR Yugoslavia league, but the reason because that happend was because the club moved to Serbia because the war had begin in Bosnia, and they participated in that season in the league together with Serbian and Montenegrin clubs, and also because Bosnia didn´t had their league formed.

Well, resumingly, I´m saying this because if I make a collapsable template, the main title would be the same as the first collapsable one, being only the secod different... FkpCascais (talk) 01:25, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks once again Soccer-holic for taking care about this issue. It seems that people started changing the league tamplates where they started including the former clubs without any agreement or discussion first, right? Since I saw many league templates being changed that way, I (wrongly) supposed an agreement existed... Well, regarding the SuperLiga article, if there isn´t much feedback on the project in next days, I´ll include some basic info (like list of champions, topscorers...) regarding the 1992-2006 period in the history section of the SuperLiga article. FkpCascais (talk) 01:17, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I started changing the fb r header to fb r2 header but the league table in the 2007 Torneo Descentralizado I see that the abbreviations row spell out the team name completely for almost all the teams. --MicroX (talk) 02:29, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An IP editor recently deleted your prod on this article. As such, I've moved to AfD as I support your prod. Just an FYI. Here's the link to the AfD. Have a great day!--Gnowor^T_C 08:30, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

is lit up with your reverts - trust you are having fun - I despair at ever getting the Indonesian enthusiasts to ever understand WP:ABOUT - so thanks for whatever you are doing - cheers SatuSuro 12:39, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man - no need to worry about that - I think I probably need to check conventions at the project - I simply see everything from the perspective of seeing the gems:

• 2010_Indonesia_Women_Football_Tournament
• 2010_Indonesia_Premier_League_Pre-season_Tournament
• 2011_Indonesia_Premier_League

(in process of adding some more in a moment) SatuSuro 12:48, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I get so frustrated - they just plod on ignoring messages and they are times like a machine with flag icons, formatting gear, and english comprehension that leaves me gasp9ing - using Indonesian spellings and grammar to the point some stubs are almost unreadable :) SatuSuro 12:54, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for venturing in anyways - it is something like a glimmer of hope shining through the morass of one liner barely notable blp stubs for impossibly named inconsequential soccer players from outlying regions, and all the rest of the astonishing architectural constructions of the ones I have linked to on your talk - cheers - thanks again - and have a good new year! SatuSuro 13:02, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please feel free to drop by whenever you have the time - I try to keep away from the new stubs when they get through - however I cannot avoid them when http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AlexNewArtBot/IndonesiaSearchResult is working - it can be a horrible sight - one line stubs with no refs of blp another soccer play or dubious notability - thanks anyways - cheers again SatuSuro 13:10, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

omg - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2010–11_Indonesia_Super_League&action=history - we are but pimples on the posterior when you see this sort of obsessed overlinking - bet they dont have english even  :( SatuSuro 12:35, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I say - google translate says: DELETE OTHER PEOPLE GOALSCORERS, Bego GAK HAVE BRAIN. Already tired-tired PEOPLE THAT NYETAK GOL NYATET even in the DELETE, BRAIN LO where the hell? - I have my doubts it is of any use - I am checking with someone who might offer what the untranslated part really is - my Indonesian is slowly disappearing from lack of use SatuSuro 11:45, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bah - I am thinking editing in wp commons has a less brain taxing exercise compared to watching the Indonesian soccer material - maybe even flickr - I think only on certain days I can cope with what must be the equivalent of the claustrophobic sense of the crowd in a soccer stadium in indonesia when the score is nil all around :( SatuSuro 13:17, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Soccer-holic. Thank you for your work on patrolling pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I just wanted to inform you that I declined the CSD A7 on James Wood Middle School, because of the following concern: the criterion you used does not cover this kind of page or the reason you specified is not a valid reason for speedy deletion. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion and especially what is considered non-criteria. Schools are exempted from CSD A7. The usual procedure is to redirect empty or very short pages to the school district (USA) or town. Cheers,Kudpung (talk) 14:03, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He did write to the RFEF, but they won't reply back. Qampunen (talk) 09:04, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To have created multiple articles about the same things

which would explain the message: The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. Please choose another name, or use Requested moves to ask an administrator to help you with the move. SatuSuro 11:46, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I keep saying for an easier life I would take all the Indonesian soccer pages off my watch list - it is stressful seeing the daily atrocities SatuSuro 11:47, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anjur Osmanovic. You attempted to nominate Anjur Osmanovic for deletion, but you skipped step II at WP:AFDHOWTO, which means that nobody knows yet why you wanted the page deleted. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 19:16, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the revert in your sandbox. I made a mistake.Metiscus (talk) 21:18, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I wanted to let you know I contested this proposed deletion. Much to my surprise, this club has participated in two fairly recent editions of the Polish Cup and appears notable. Best regards. Jogurney (talk) 23:27, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Most, if not all, of the football clubs I was talking about have already been prod'ed. They are: Czarni Wierzchosławice, Gopło Kruszwica, Kujawiak Kowal, Kujawianka Strzelno, Kujawy Markowice, Sadownik Waganiec, Sparta Janowiec Wielkopolski, Tarant Wójcin. I'm sure that particular user has made others, these are just the ones I noticed as they flooded the New Pages. --Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû _(blah?) 01:03, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, was too quick with removing the category. Kante4 (talk) 01:06, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	The Working Man's Barnstar
	Thanks for fixing the name at 2010–11 San Diego State Aztecs men's basketball team. An article I created. I had been trying to figure that out for a while.Jojhutton (talk) 01:31, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I just wanted to inform you that I found a source that you requested for the positions-by-round table of 2010–11 A PFG. But that source can't be classified as perfect, because there they have been paying very little attention to tiebreaking teams with equal number of points and seem to have been doing it arbitrarily. Moreover, the source forgets that some games were postponed, and calculates points therefrom as if they were earned on the regular dates when these games had been originally scheduled - for example you can see that Beroe Stara Zagora are, in the source, positioned at the top of the table after 4 rounds completed, where they have never been during the current season.

It seems we will have to get rid of the table. After a previous discussion on the topic, I am aware you dislike tables of that kind, but I still consider them interesting and valuable for articles documenting football seasons - for instance, in the table one can see that once Chernomorets Burgas were near the top and CSKA Sofia were among the last, but now the two teams are ranked next to each other. --Theurgist (talk) 11:40, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It sounded like it early on. I was waiting to see who the owners, coaches and players were. Regardless, it might be worthwhile combining them and just make mention of the ownership changes. Former chairman named as co-coach? I suspect some of the players will be the same. The season will start soon (May) maybe make the call a little later? --Coppercanuck (talk) 20:46, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think about adding the CSL II to the main 2011 CSL page? --Coppercanuck (talk) 20:48, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Soccer-holic. Was just enquiring as to your hiding and then unhiding of the content on the 2011–12 Premier League article. I can't say I disagreed with your original edit, though I personally thought that the article could have been allowed to stay up at that point - I made special care to wait for four teams to be mathematically safe, AND waited longer in the year than the time other similar articles (i.e. 2010–11 Premier League, 2009–10 Premier League) were created, but I had to admit that some might think that it was too early, so I didn't respond with a revert. However, you then undid your own actions after less than two weeks, when a single extra team had been confirmed. I was just wondering where you draw the line, because to me that seems a very minimal difference and still is a long way from what you stated on your edit summary - that it was "Still a little early for an article on its own" and that we should "wait four more weeks when the majority of teams and possible managerial changes are known".

I should reinforce here - I am an inclusionist and would personally revel in this article being created as soon as even a single team is confirmed, though I am careful to restrain my actions as mentioned above. I am not going to oppose you restoring the article, under any conditions. However, I am struggling to see the line you drew - why five teams makes the article OK, but not four.

Posting in good faith here, I'm sure there's a logic and I mean no disrespect. I just thought I'd ask to get your perspective. Falastur2 ^Talk 13:05, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, do we really need citations for the longest trends in the infobox? I keep track of this myself and update after every matchday since there are no official statistics available for trends. Trends can be figured out by looking at the official site so why is there a need for citation? It would be a shame to remove it just because there's no official statistics. Let me know what you think! --Reckless182 (talk) 16:22, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks for your reply. I'll try to find sources but most likely with no luck. --Reckless182 (talk) 12:51, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! I would like your opinion, would this source suffice for the infobox? --Reckless182 (talk) 20:22, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! --Reckless182 (talk) 20:31, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this edit I apologize for making you go through that effort, I honestly was intending on keeping it in alphabetical order, I just umm... slipped there. I need... more sleep. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:41, 17 April 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Figured I'd create it. It's not like the thing is going to get canceled, and I'm pretty sure it's notable. Can you give it a once over and make sure that everything that should be in it at this stage is in it? I'd appreciate it. Sven Manguard Wha? 09:42, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're right again on the Italy stuff. I was going from 20 instead of 18, so a full ten point difference. Thanks. Sven Manguard Wha? 09:56, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"the higher-placed team of Stoke City and Birmingham City will enter the playoff round as well, with the lower team going to the third qualification round." You mean according to EPL position? Do you have a source? From my understanding, the cup runners-up always enter the lowest possible place, so if MCFC win FA Cup and qualify for Champions League, BCFC enter the play-off round and SCFC enter the third qualifying round. This is a source I find that "confirms" this. [4] Chanheigeorge (talk) 17:19, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pal, Ceahlaul has mathematical promotion because, the 2nd an 4th team are unable to promotion to Liga I.

The two teams are unable to promotion for a period greater than three years of competition since the club membership that the Romanian Football Federation. Viitorul Constanţa was affiliate in 2009 and Săgeata Năvodari in 2010.

http://www.frf.ro/sectiune/stiri/articol/aplicarea-articolului-5bis-roaf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.25.235.96 (talk) 22:25, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know, so far nobody knows about format of 2011-12 of Azeri league as it could remain as same as this season, or it could be 14 teams. In May, hopefully we'll know.--NovaSkola (talk) 14:46, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Soccer-holic. Just for curiosity, why are the starting rounds no longer included in the infobox for European leagues? Qampunen (talk) 16:02, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong to assume that that 2nd round will have 31 picks. The default (and most expected and obvious result) is that there will be 30 picks in each round, with the exceptions (i.e., 3rd round with 29 picks) to be referenced with a verifiable source. Please show me a source that states there will be 31 picks in the 2nd round. If there is no source, then picks should be properly numbered to 30 picks per round. Dolovis (talk) 18:27, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Per past season, Hoffenheim was sorted in the H section, not the numbers. same as the 1. FC and FC's ones. See the Personnel and sponsorships and Results in the 2010–11 Fußball-Bundesliga. Unless you wish to change past seasons, we need that in the 2011–12, Augsburg will be listed first.
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 18:39, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the navboxes, I was looking for them but for some reason couldn't find them. In case you were wondering, I'm getting all the results up and running at User:Sellyme/2011 Girabola, but as it's late at night where I live, I'm going to get some sleep before editing it in tomorrow so I don't make any mistakes. (At the moment it's all copied from the 2010–11 Albanian season). Sellyme^Talk 12:43, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not overwrite my changes for inaccurate ones. If You need any proof of what and why i did this, go to 2010–11 Serbian SuperLiga page and check results, in results section. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bora83ns (talk • contribs) 20:29, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes its a two-legged playoff, I was edited pages so I could have it ready after Friday, I was to revert it and save the revision.
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 17:50, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, referring to Gaz Metan Mediaş taking the vacant place in the 2011–12 UEFA Europa League; being a first timer in a European competition (Gaz Metan) isn't it going to be in fact an unseeded team in the second qualifying round? ...where it took the place from Dinamo Bucharest, who advanced to the next qualifying round, following the denial of Poli Timişoara in Romania. I saw you did the edit on the page, but I'm not completely sure about it, that's why I'm asking. I know the reference at kassiesa is not yet updated with this fact, but neither they have in their database Gaz Metan. I know personal research is not allowed on Wikipedia, but I was thinking if it is correctly listed in the seeded group. It looks like Shakhtsyor Salihorsk would somehow benefit from this change. BaboneCar (talk) 20:18, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If there will be a decision regarding the number of teams we'll find out tomorrow. BaboneCar (talk) 22:25, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The decision was delayed for June 20. BaboneCar (talk) 07:54, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for my mistake, i didn't know this format was used in these cases of relegation. Aparently, things are much worse in Romania, lol. Kosm1fent (talk) 04:49, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Fb team Vestmannaeyjar has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Oddbodz (talk) 17:32, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is no information in that article to justify its existence. Your edit summary seems to indicate that you agree to an extent, which begs the question of why you bothered to revert. Do you deny that there is insufficient sourced information in that article? – PeeJay 23:54, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for its existence is that there are currently 43 leagues in the 2011–12 stage that link to that article, and readers will need to know what it is. Although the information there can not be specifically sourced, it should be easy to find sources for a general overview of the Champions League explaining the qualifying format. Sellyme^Talk 03:23, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for butting in, but the format for the 2012-13 Champions League hasn't been confirmed yet, so it will not be easy to find sources for it yet. In fact, I very much doubt that there will be any for at least the next couple of months. Probably by the start of the 2011-12 season, but not now, which is the point I'm making. – PeeJay 12:02, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the problem, the article says it hasn't been confirmed, so there's no need for sources regarding it as of yet. Tomorrow I'll try changing the prose somewhat and adding a few general sources (not season specific) that mention that layout, but as it is, there doesn't need to be a source for something that isn't there. Sellyme^Talk 15:28, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How can there be an article for something for which no details have been confirmed? Sure, it's assumed that the top four clubs in the 2011–12 Premier League will qualify for the top European competition in 2012–13, but we don't know the structure of that competition or if it will even be called the UEFA Champions League yet. Until it's confirmed that this competition will go ahead, what's wrong with having the page as a redirect to the main Champions League article? – PeeJay 22:03, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for replying that late, but I needed/were forced to take a day off yesterday.

That being said, I'm 100 percent with Sellyme and Chanheigeorge at this moment. There are various reports on Germany, Russia Denmark and Scotland having changes in their number of spots for the 2012–13 season, plus we have a official UEFA report from an Executive Committee meeting in which an explicit deal "for the marketing of commercial rights for the UEFA Champions League, UEFA Europa League and UEFA Super Cup" for the 2012–13 through 2014–15 seasons has been made.

All of the above (with one exception) does not officially come from UEFA, but nevertheless satisfies WP:RS and hence WP:V, so this is more than enough to rectify the stand-alone article. However (as I can also understand your point), if you are still unsatisfied, I would suggest to take the case to either a discussion at WT:FOOTY or an AfD discussion in order to get more input. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 12:27, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion now at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012–13 UEFA Champions League. Chanheigeorge (talk) 09:02, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed your reversal on 2011 NHL Entry Draft. Wondering if it would be proper to keep the "from Atlanta" bits, as at the time the team made the trade of picks, it was Atlanta, not Winnipeg as it is now. For example - when Tim Thomas was drafted, he was drafted by the Quebec Nordiques, and that doesn't get amended to Colorado Avalanche. Echoedmyron (talk) 20:30, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't rushed. It was announced on twitter by the same TSN sources that announced the trade itself. It just came out a little slower. Either way, point taken. I actually waited just FYI. Could have did it earlier. One95 (talk) 20:36, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Typically we just wait for the media to report done deals or for "official" from teams/league? One95 (talk) 20:57, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, normally I do too. I did for the Carter trade and made sure to use league official news. One95 (talk) 22:24, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• NHL's official order, last updated on Wednesday, does not show it. In addition, if you go to the NHL Entry Draft's front page here, you'll see that the ticker on top shows the CBJ->PHI pick move for Round 1 due to Carter deal, but fails to declare which pick was moved in Round 2. I am going to restore my ambiguous wording for the time being (and, let's face it, we'd know for sure within 24 hours...) - Penwhale | ^{dance in the air and follow his steps} 07:39, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Both teams are confirming it here (Ottawa) and here (Chicago). Especially the Ottawa source is more recent than the updated official NHL order, plus explicit in its wording (see the third-to-last paragraph), so it can't be any clearer than this, can it? ;-) --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 11:29, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Let's hope they actually made sure to submit the trade, as the ticker (which I assume was updated as of Thursday afternoon) still isn't showing that move. - Penwhale | ^{dance in the air and follow his steps} 17:08, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While on that topic, I don't think this was vandalism, as it has been confirmed that they are going to be named the Winnipeg Jets. Please be careful next time when labeling other edits as "vandalism". –MuZemike 23:08, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but it's a little hard without a working stream to follow every development. If the name "Winnipeg Jets" has been confirmed by a Winnipeg official on TV in the meantime, okay. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 23:14, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just heard the news on ESPN about an hour ago, and the media is already reporting it widespread. –MuZemike 23:16, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, the media is reporting that "Jets" will be part of the team name. However, a slight uncertainty that the name will be "Manitoba Jets" remains. Otherwise, User:Resolute or another WP:HOCKEY admin certainly would already have made the appropriate moves to move Winnipeg NHL team to Winnipeg Jets. Anyway... things will soon start to get very messy at 2011 NHL Entry Draft, so I switch back to clean up mode... for now. ;-) --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 23:21, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a compliled list of 2013 picks traded? Philly got one for Darroll Powe. I'll start a page, but I don't now of any others yet. TerminalPreppie (talk) 17:18, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The source doesn't specify regular season games although it wouldn't surprise me if that is the case. And since we are talking about the Maple Leafs it's probably a safe assumption we're just talking regular season :P One95 (talk) 18:25, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I hadn't had a look on which source you added. I went with the one from User:Karoline Stöhr, who used the description from the Nashville Predators when adding the trade to 2011–12 NHL transactions; it explicitly states that the games in question are regular season games. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 18:55, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't remove a gibberish comment made by me in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football you removed a gibberish comment made by a IP USER so don't give the wrong impression in edit summary. Thank You. (DUCKISJAMMMY (talk) 14:39, 30 June 2011 (UTC))[reply]

OK I dont want to start an arguement but you removed a comment "up da villa" written by a ip user 82.1.234.88 in the Cannanore United FC section you didnt actually delete any I wrote.

Here is what you undid [5] Is clearly shows its not written by myself. Hope that this puts an end to the matter look forward to working with you in the future, Regards (DUCKISJAMMMY (talk) 16:02, 30 June 2011 (UTC))[reply]

I don't see how the change I made confuses people - when the points don't match the wins/draws, I think that's confusing without an explanation of some type. Perhaps a footnote on the points explaining that points were deducted by the league would be appropriate. But I find it much less confusing to included it. (Additionally the tables I've seen include the point deduction by the team name.) Can you point to some example where it confuses people? Thx - --Trödel 18:56, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

UserAsdfgtre4532 Hello Soccer- holic please look this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011%E2%80%9312_3rd_Liga 4.6.7.10.14.6 teams 94.236.133.5 (talk) 14:34, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Soccer-holic! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only.  If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:21, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

As a Season article task force member, you might be interested in the Deletion review for 2011–12 Hannover 96 Season redirect. The history of the debate is that the article was a duplicate article of 2011–12 Hannover 96 season. The difference being is that the s was capitalized in the duplicate article. So, I put the article up for deletion. Here is the afd page for your reference. It would be good for you to, irregardless of which side you may be on, to comment and to cast endose or overturn vote. Kingjeff (talk) 04:27, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good work! (dif). :)  -- WikHead (talk) 21:13, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Soccer-holic. Many thanks for all your hard work. Your recent change to the title of the 2012 Finnish Cup has prompted me to drastically reconsider the issue of page titles. If you are able to contribute to the debate it would be greatly appreciated. You will also notice that I am using the issue to generate interest and familiarity in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Finland task force. The standard notification follows below:

I am making contact with those Editors that take an active interest in Finnish football on English Wikipedia.

For a long time I have been happy to work on Finnish football on Wikipedia without making contact with other Finnish football enthusiasts - basically I like preparing articles / undertaking tasks that interest me and contact with others has not been important. However recently some of my work was changed by a Wikipedia Reviewer and this has led me to question what approach I should be following and indeed what approach would other Finnish football enthusiasts wish to adopt?

The current issue I face is the naming of Finnish Football League and Cup pages. I have adopted the approach that we should always be using the Finnish name in the title, for example 2007 Ykkönen and 2001 Veikkausliiga. However, I am aware that words like Mestaruussarja mean very little to most English speaking Wikipedia users. I therefore have included the English name in the title as well in recent pages, for example, 1936 Mestaruussarja – Finnish League Championship, 1938 Suomensarja – Finnish League Division 2 and 2000 Kakkonen – Finnish League Division 2. I thought that this approach might be a suitable naming convention until the Reviewer changed "2012 Suomen Cup - Finnish Cup" back to 2012 Finnish Cup.

The basic question I am asking is whether Finnish League and Cup articles should have a Finnish or English title or some form of hybrid?

I provide examples below:

Finnish Title English Title Hybrid Title 2012 Veikkausliiga 2012 Finnish Championship 2012 Finnish Veikkausliiga 2012 Kolmonen 2012 Finnish Division 3 2012 Finnish Kolmonen 2012 Suomen Cup 2012 Finnish Cup 2012 Finnish Suomen Cup 2012 Suomen Liigacup 2012 Finnish League Cup 2012 Finnish Liigacup 1938 Maakuntasarja 1938 Finnish Division 3 1938 Finnish Maakuntasarja 1954 Suomensarja 1954 Finnish Division 2 1954 Finnish Suomensarja 1970 II divisioona 1970 Finnish Division 2 1970 Finnish II divisioona 1986 III divisioona 1986 Finnish Division 3 1986 Finnish III divisioona 1997 Ykkönen 1997 Finnish Division 1 1997 Finnish Ykkönen I have read Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) and Wikipedia:Article titles but have not reached a firm conclusion yet on the best way forward in establishing a consistent approach. The issue does matter with respect to the corrections I must make to existing pages and the tens of pages yet to be prepared. It could also carry implications for some of the articles that you currently contribute to. I think that the matter would best be addressed on a proper basis and encourage that the issue is considered on the Talk Page of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Finland task force. If the matter is of concern to you as well, please add your name to the list of participants on the main page. You may also wish to comment on the project structure that I have prepared. Kind regards - (Finnish Gas (Finnish Gas 12:58, 23 February 2012 (UTC)).[reply] Disambiguation link notification [edit] Hi. In your recent article edits, 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. 2012 NHL Entry Draft (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver) added a link pointing to Stephane Veilleux 2013 NHL Entry Draft (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver) added a link pointing to Mike Connolly It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply] Edit Warring [edit] This issue is currently with an administrator due to other issues with Carroback. Quentin X (talk) 08:47, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply] FB cl template help [edit] Thank you so much sir. I didn't realize the syntax allows adding rowspans at the end of the row. Cheers! Geregen2 (talk) 18:24, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply] Rangers [edit] I think it is best to wait until they are 100% certain to be unable to play in 2012-13 European competitions, i.e. either they do not apply/are refused a UEFA license, or are explicitly banned by UEFA. Although they are very likely to not fulfill the criteria to play, adding information now may be considered speculation. The license deadline is March 31st so we should know the decision soon. Chanheigeorge (talk) 19:20, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply] Nomination of 2011 President Cup Malaysia for deletion [edit] A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2011 President Cup Malaysia is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted. The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012 President Cup Malaysia 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Cloudz679 12:55, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply] Proposed deletion of List of Malaysian football transfers 2010 [edit] The article List of Malaysian football transfers 2010 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: Wholly unreferenced list, has existed for two years, linked from only one article. While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons. You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Cloudz679 12:46, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply] Turkish Regional Amateur League [edit] Thanks, I've asked all three for help. GiantSnowman 19:23, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply] {{Fb cl team 2pts}} [edit] As I just wrote at WT:FOOTY#.22fb.22 template system, would it also be possible to convert {{Fb cl team 2pts}} to use simple text instead of the Fb team templates? If we could tweak the template to allow both, then it would give us a chance to directly replace the team templates within the league articles to the team name texts. Since the 2-points-for-a-win seasons are, what, almost 20 years old, the articles don't have so much traffic and this task could be done slowly, but surely. Category:Fb templates still has a lot of mess which I'm happy in helping clean-up for the project. Jared Preston (talk) 17:45, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply] La liga 2011-12 [edit] Since clasico is not played yet, we are not assuming who is gonna win and who will be number one then. This is because anyone can say anything about future matches. We work with the present maths here not future speculation. please do not revert further, try to contribute in the talk.HasperHunter (talk) 22:52, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply] 2011-12 Serie A [edit] I saw that you reverted my edit. Can I ask why are not used the "on next matchday" in league season articles? Where can I put it? --Stigni (talk) 15:24, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply] You said it is unverified but it isn't about Lecce-Genoa fight we can find a lot of article that said: "Genoa need a point to remain in Serie A"; for CL fight I found an article in italian: [6] For the 8th position, I don't find any article because no one care about 2012-13 Coppa Italia.--Stigni (talk) 16:12, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply] Atlético position and their spot [edit] If is qualyfied for GS, the colour is incompatible, colour and position indicated must be coherent, the same. The position is always temporary, they must qualify for UCL, but at this moment is qualified for UEL GS, the colour does not indicate this, you may change this to the correct in this moment, not incoherent because it's not definitive, Mallorca is not qualified for europe and has its corresponding spot and colour, for this reason, neither Mallorca, Málaga and Atlético has the (Q) tag, and this is good explained in the note, the colour for Atletico temporal spot must indicate the correct~User:tot-futbol 2012 May 10, 20:04 CEST Thanks for accurate explanation, I understand perfectly the colours, but I understand what are in your mind with 2011-12 LA Liga's UEL berths, you don't like to change colours for confusing people with original spots, but it's incoherent that Atletico takes the colour for PO and has the GS secured, as its specified, as I said before, the spots may reflect the temporary situation, it's not definitive, as this, there's no "(Q)" tag, but if Atletico is qualified for UEL GS must takes the corresponding colour as Mallorca is temporary in the spot for UEL QR3 and has the corresponding colour.~User:tot-futbol 2012 May 10, 20:30 CEST There is no problem for understanding English, I have probles to express in English but not for read. Atlético Madrid has entered definitevely to Group stage phase then, Atletico Madrid colour cannot be the same that Play-off round entry, Didn't you see the incoherence?? You say there "the shades of blue are NOT BOUND to any specific round", then the colours is for decorate? A completely stupidity seeing the colour for each phase in all domestic leagues. There is no discussion, you don't accept you are saying a completely incoherence.~User:tot-futbol 2012 May 14, 17:40 CEST UCL edits [edit] could you put some security or restrict the access to 2012-13 UCL?, because there is an anonymous editor who is editing and vandalizing that page. cheers--Scoelho86 (talk) 18:51, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply] 2010–11 Primera Catalana [edit] This is an interesting one - please refer to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football. I think that it would be appropriate to move the nomination for deletion to AfD and will set this in motion. League Octopus (League Octopus 09:45, 17 May 2012 (UTC)).[reply] 2012–13 UEFA Champions League and potential title holders [edit] Hi, Ok, I understand! Scooter20 (talk) 14:54, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply] 2012–13 Sunderland A.F.C. season [edit] Done! Cheers, GiantSnowman 19:51, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply] reverted draft edit [edit] No problem. I was just reverting an unexplained edit from an IP. As an aside: do you have any traded picks in 2014 yet? I know there's one late round conditional. If you have any more, we should start the article up. Thanks. TerminalPreppie (talk) 17:21, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply] Thanks. Darren Dreger tweeted about an hour ago that SJ should announce a deal with Stuart today or tomorrow, so expect that condition to be met soon. TerminalPreppie (talk) 18:17, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply] Bobrovsky trade [edit] The draft picks PHI acquired for Bob have been passed around alot. Do you want to sort out the syntax on the draft page? It looks like its OTT's 2nd, VAN's 4th, and CLB's 4th in 2013. TerminalPreppie (talk) 17:24, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply] Next year 4th is from Phoenix. TerminalPreppie (talk) 17:36, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply] Disambiguation link notification for June 28 [edit] Hi. When you recently edited 2012–13 Austrian Football Bundesliga, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wolfsberg (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) 15:19, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply] 2011–12 Liga I [edit] Please edit all ninety-fourth Liga I season, not only 2011–12 Liga I. 12:20, 16 July 2012 (UTC) Conditional 2013 seventh round pick [edit] I was digging around and I noticed a minor omission from the conditional draft picks for the 2013 NHL entry draft. The trade in question was between Calgary and Anaheim on June 30, 2010 for Jason Jaffray and Logan MacMillan with conditional seventh round picks that could go to either team. I have not been able to find what the conditions would be to exchange any of the picks in question. Deadman137 (talk) 06:54, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply] I finished the updating the conditions, it should be noted that Anaheim has already traded a seventh in this draft so maybe the condition is already resolved, though I can't prove that at this time. Deadman137 (talk) 03:31, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply] Nostalgia Night in Uruguay [edit] Hi, I'm the one who added it, I'm taking it as a valid observance since it's sanctioned as an official holiday as per law 17.825, this holiday was officially named "Nostalgia Night", adding in its second article: 'The Ministry of Tourism will include the events that are tourism-related to the "Nostalgia Night", promoting the same abroad through embassies, consulates and commercial business venues.' It's an important holiday in Uruguay, albeit it being a touristic and night-life one. Sadly, I'm unable to provide proper sources other than the Spanish entry for the article, so I can't really help on adding more information to its English article, which lacks a lot of it. 186.52.201.63 (talk) 23:12, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply] Categories: A-League seasons [edit] Please see my proposal to rename Category:2005–06 A-League to Category:2005–06 A-League season and Category:2008–09 A-League to Category:2008–09 A-League season Hugo999 (talk) 13:19, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply] Nomination for deletion of Template:2011 League of Ireland Premier Division table [edit] Template:2011 League of Ireland Premier Division table has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Kingjeff (talk) 17:46, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply] Speedy deletion declined: Category:2013–14 I-League [edit] Hello Soccer-holic. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Category:2013–14 I-League, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Category is not empty. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 12:37, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply] Geylang International FC [edit] The editor's persistent (and incorrect) page moves are becoming disruptive; I've left a final warning. GiantSnowman 13:04, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply] 2014–15 Bayern and BVB articles [edit] I find it easier to add info little bit at a time. The empty could be comment them out if you want. Kingjeff (talk) 17:34, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply] Where were you last year when this season's article was created under the exact same way? Kingjeff (talk) 14:30, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply] Well, simply put, I had to master some significant personal life changes between mid-2012 and Dec 2013 which made (among other things) contributing to this wonderful encyclopedia impossible. --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 14:53, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply] And will you significantly participate in editing in the remainder of this season's German club season articles and next season's German club season articles? I currently have 1094 edits for this season's Bayern's club season article. You are currently at 0. Kingjeff (talk) 21:27, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply] *smiles* These last two sentences somehow read like "My **** is bigger than yours", among other things. Wikipedia is not about the quantity of someone's edits on a certain article. Wikipedia work, if executed with a halfway decent sincerity, is a quality affair, a mixture between community work and service. Creating articles where the only tidbit of useful information is hidden between a plethora of empty tables does not resemble quality work, because a reader will simply go "Eeek, what is this for a mess, this is not readible at all". We should all try to aim for readable articles instead of going for the quick and dirty article creation. --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 22:58, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply] P.S.: To answer your initial question – my focus on content improvement usually rather lies on the competition season articles section. But perhaps I will give 2014 Albirex Niigata season a try, just for the fun of it. The point was not about the exact number of edits. The point was you are interfering with an article you really have no interest in editing. So, why are you interfering with articles that you have no interest in? Kingjeff (talk) 23:33, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply] Oh look [edit] Do you see Chinese football league system? Just a table. No text. Or how about Hong Kong football league system and Football League system in Saudi Arabia? No citations. If you tag Qatar, why don't you tag everyone else breaking the rules. Thanks --weka (talk) 17:13, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply] 2014–15 club season articles [edit] Do you realize that every 2014–15 club season article I've created, there have been sources available and used? Kingjeff (talk) 15:50, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply] Yup. But as you already correctly analyzed on the WP:FOOTY talk page, the actual problem is WP:CRYSTAL. The problem can be pretty much reduced to a dilemma between WP:V and CRYSTAL. (Let's hope it is not NP-complete...) --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 22:58, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply] And what part of my edits on these new club season article fall under WP:CRYSTAL? Kingjeff (talk) 00:18, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply] Disambiguation link notification for March 5 [edit] Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2015 NHL Entry Draft, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mike Weaver (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) 09:13, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply] Re: Temporal home for traded picks from 2016 and 2017 [edit] I already have a word file to store 2016 picks and I will likely bring them out around the third round of the playoffs this year. I'm not worrying the 2017 pick as it is conditional at this time. Deadman137 (talk) 19:33, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply] Disambiguation link notification for July 9 [edit] Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ivan Lučić (footballer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page FC Bayern. 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) 09:56, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply] Assistance on creation of missing Cupa României seasons [edit] Hy, do you wanna help adding the rest of editions of Cupa României please ?? Alexiulian25 (talk) 16:37, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply] Hi Alexiulian25, thank you for your request, it is very appreciated. However, I might not be the right person for the job. My knowledge about Romanian football is pretty limited and definitely not sufficient for this rather large project. Aside from that, I am now far away from the time I used to contribute to Wikipedia a few years ago, for different reasons. However, I might be able to assist on the formalities like infobox, Navboxes, categorization, and all that secondary stuff if needed. Sorry if that is not much, but it is all I can offer at the moment. Are there many sources available for the Cupa seasons (not necessarily only internet pages, a good book on the subject would be very handy as well)? --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 20:02, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply] Alexiulian25 (talk) 22:16, 10 July 2015 (UTC)Do you know a book with all the Cupa matches? I do not think exist. The best reference is http://www.romaniansoccer.ro/. and http://www.rsssf.com/. It is already edited in romanian wikipedia and in german wikipedia, and I checked and it is correct the informations. But is better to have in this pages in English because majority of people speak English and because English football data base has more teams created then in romanian, that means not so many "red" teams after you edit. How we can transfere fast the matches from romanian / german wikipedia ? One season per day if you edit is ok, it does not take much time.[reply] Hi [edit] Can you remove please the redirect here 1954 Cupa României, I want to create a proper article about it, for the final is a separate page. Thank you. If you have time to help me improving more seasons will be good also, here is a list with missing seasons List of Cupa României finals. Alexiulian25 (talk) 18:20, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply] You can actually do it yourself, just edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1954_Cupa_Rom%C3%A2niei&redirect=no. In general, redirects can be accessed by clicking on the link in the "Redirected from <link>" line directly below an article heading. Hope this helps. – Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 11:56, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply] Thank you! Can you help me please with this articles to be accepted. Thank you! Copa del Rey Topscorers Copa del Rey Topscorers by Season CSM Suceava Alexiulian25 (talk) 22:36, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply] @Alexiulian25: After checking both the Spanish "article" (which is untrue, it is more like an annex to the main article) and the recent discussion at the WP:FOOTY talk page, there is only one way to create these articles: Find at least two reliable sources which have published the complete list (or at least a 90 percent portion of it). The absence of these complete sources is also the reason why the Spanish aricle is currently tagged. If you can find these, that article should have a higher chance to go through. The ideal source would be a book about the history of the Copa del Rey in general, but no idea if this exists. These sources, if eventually available, could also used for a topscorers by season article; however I would also add a bit of (reliably sourced) written information for each season above the tables, for example if the top scorer hit all of his goals in just three matches or if it was a close race between several players, in order to prevent the article of being a piece of WP:LISTCRUFT. Finally, I will try to take a deeper look at the CSM Suceava article during the weekend. – Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 09:17, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply] @Soccer-holic:I have found a source with the top 15 goalscorers, It is no book about Copa del Rey topscorers, are not many information about it, thats why I took each player apart and calculate how many goals scored. You have also the list of references. [7] List of European Cup and UEFA Champions League top scorers This article seems to be same with mine. I took the idea of the list from articles like this. What this article have more then mine ? Can you help me add more written information there? Here you have the topscorers by season. User:Alexiulian25/Copa del Rey Topscorers by Season and here another good sources *[8] but available just from 1995 till today.Alexiulian25 (talk) 12:00, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply] @Alexiulian25 There is one fundamental difference between the UCL top scorers list and the attempt for the Copa del Rey – the former has two independent sources for the whole list, while the latter consists of many different sources for only parts of the list. Simply put, you need two reliable sources where all the scorers are listed. Everything else will be seen as synthesis of published material, which is a form of publishing original research, a big no-go area for this site. So, sorry, but there is nothing I could do to improve this. By the way, the sportsgoogly link you posted above is not working for me, as the site seems to be down... An alternative (but nevertheless tongue-in-cheek) idea would be that you write a book about the history of the Copa del Rey yourself, publish it (for example as an e-book) and then hope that a few of the renowned media outlets (Marca, AS, FourFourTwo, you name it; in Germany it would be 11 Freunde or kicker) report about it. Okay, that approach would admittedly take quite a long time, but it might even generate a nickel or two when all is said and done, as can be seen here for the DFB-Pokal equivalent. RE Johnny Hall Football (Soccer) player [edit] Hi Soccer-holic. Thanks for letting me know. How do I do the referencing and where should I do it?? What should I put there example, should I put links to matches of his international senior career??? I know him personally and have gotten most of the information from him. Thanks, vesh88 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vesh88 (talk • contribs) 04:20, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply] Hi Vesh88, thanks for asking. You usually put the reference or references behind the item that needs to be cited. For example, you move your first reference (including the <ref> tags) in the "References" section directly behind the sentence (or part of the sentence) that Johnny made his debut for Samoa. While copying the reference as it currently is would technically be enough, the link should further wrapped into a citation template, for example Template:Cite web. Just fill in as much of the common parameters of the template (see here for examples) as possible. So, the final reference would look like <ref>{{Web cite|...<!-- Parameters with content -->...}}</ref>. The "References" section itself at the bottom of the article usually only has either <references/> or {{Reflist}} as content, in order to display the items from the <ref> tags. Hope that helps. If you need more information on the topic, take a look at the very detailed help page about citing sources. Or, if something doesn't work out properly at the article, just drop me another message. Cheers! – Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 08:13, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply] Hy [edit] I have one question, how do you revert back in Cupa Romaniei the changes made by Kopapa ? He redirected all the pages in the table. Look what he did ...Alexiulian25 (talk) 19:58, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply] @Alexiulian25 – I have done it. You usually revert things on the history page on an article. However, be sure to always give a reason why you revert in case it should be necessary. Furthermore, avoid constant back-and-forth reverting with other users when the dispute is about content. In this case, use the talk pages of either the article or the user in question to resolve the dispute instead. – Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 20:07, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply] Nomination for deletion of Template:Qadsia SC [edit] Template:Qadsia SC has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Fenix down (talk) 12:15, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply] Hy [edit] Can you help me with this table please. [[9]] To remove the sortable things from the middle and from the back.ThanksAlexiulian25 (talk) 18:45, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply] @Alexiulian25 -- done, please check the result. – Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 19:08, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply] I checked the result, very good, thanks. Do you any idea how I modify text in this kind of tables like the one from here : 1994–95 Divizia B. For example Bucovina Suceava, the fifth team in the league has the page CSM Suceava because between 1993–1997 they had this name. And I have other teams with the same problem. I should redirect somehow the page.Alexiulian25 (talk) 17:36, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply] @Alexiulian25 -- these tables still use the now deprecated fb template series, which for a time was the standard way to create both league tables and results grids. The teams were therefore put into separate templates which contained both the standard teamname and an three-letter abbreviation for the results. As you can see from the category, this resulted in thousands of small templates, often only being used for one article or two, so it was eventually decided to slowly phase them out. Hence, the tables should be replaced with instances of Module:Sports table. If you need a "live action example", I think basically each of the newer (2014–15, 2015–16) European top league articles (e.g. this instance) are using them, so just give it a look. :-) By the way, while the top leagues usually still use a single template, which allows for better embedding into all kind of league and club season articles, this should not be necessary for minor leagues, so just put the module syntax directly into the article. Cheers! – Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 19:18, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply] 2014–15 Al-Hilal season [edit] i tried to simulate some of football clubs seasons like Juventus, AC Milan, and some of Asian clubs, and i didn't see background or summary, but it's ok I will add summary soon. Thanks. حزل (talk) 14:50, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply] Hi again [edit] Can you help me with some basic things. 1. Copa del Rey - someone deleted from "Winners" - can you reverted back, the complete list. 2. 1996–97 Divizia B - here and in other seasons of Divizia B with this format - how do I change the name of teams ? For example : In Standings - Seria I - the team placed on 11th is this team : Tractorul Brașov, but in the table appears with "red" and the 10th team : CSM Suceava under the name of Bucovina Suceava. And same problem in other seasons with this format. @Alexiulian25 – sorry for the delay, but I am currently pretty busy in real life. 1. I will not revert here, because this is a content dispute between you and another editor. I would suggest to directly contact them and ask for their reasons; see also WP:DISPUTE. Furthermore, as a preemptive suggestion, please take a look at WP:CANVAS as well. 2. As these tables are using the fb template system, there are three ways to fix this. Option 1 is to take a look at Category:Fb team templates Romania, search for the template in the list and edit the tan parameter to the correct article. However, this should *only* be done if there is a red link, otherwise you might also change other articles where this particular team template is used as well. When you are in doubt, please check the special page "What links here" for the template in question, usually to be found on the left-hand side of your screen in the "Tools" menu. Option 2 is to use {{Fb cl2 team}}. It works with the same parameters as {{Fb cl team}} but allows for a plain wikilink at the t parameter. Example: {{Fb cl2 team |p=4 |t=[[Tractorul Brașov]] |w=15 |d=9 |l=10 |gf=44 |ga=32 }} would produce {{Fb cl header}} {{Fb cl2 team |p=4 |t=[[Tractorul Brașov]] |w=15 |d=9 |l=10 |gf=44 |ga=32 }} |} This option is the preferred method when *either* there is a wrong link in the team template which cannot be changed because of accuracy reasons *or* the template in the category does not exist, as no new team templates should be created. Option 3 is to convert the table to using Module:Sports table. This would actually take a bit more time than the quick fixes above, but as the fb template system is to be phased out (i.e. it will eventually be deleted from Wikipedia), using the module would be future-proof. If you have any more questions regarding the fb templates and/or the sports table module, feel free to ask. Oh, and please don't forget to sign your comment by adding ~~~~ at the end of it. – Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 12:01, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply] Hello, Can you revert this page : 2013–14 Luxembourg National Division - I do not know why it does not appear anything.Thanks--Alexiulian25 (talk) 00:14, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply] I am improving now Liga II, can you please split the league table (when you have time) in 2 here: 2006–07 Liga II, 2007–08 Liga II and 2008–09 Liga II because all the seasons are with 2 separate tables for the 2 series. I also have to delete the limitless goalscorer list and keep just the Top 10. Some people when edit add to much useless information. Why would you add players with no goals in the top scorers list ? :))--Alexiulian25 (talk) 21:26, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply] Hi again [edit] I am editing now Balkans Cup, and I do not know to create a template yet, with all the editions of Balkans Cup. Can you create it please and add the editions there, and in time me and a friend will create the seasons. Thank you. And also there is an error, down, in References.--Alexiulian25 (talk) 20:01, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply] ArbCom elections are now open! [edit] 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 Wikipedia 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) 13:49, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply] Intercontinental Cup (football) [edit] Intercontinental Cup (football) - Can you help me please with something, with the refs, how to add in the last column the refs for each edition from RSSSF.com ? If you scroll down in "references" there are many errors. Thank you.--Alexiulian25 (talk) 09:23, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply] Matthias Sammer and RB Leipzig [edit] Hello I see that you are a native speaker of German. I am not, so I find it very hard to translate sentences that include metafors and similar. Could you please help me translate what Matthias Sammer is saying about RB Leipzig in the following sentence? (It has been widely quoted by German newspapers.) "Ein paar Traditionalisten werden wieder rumschreien und weinen, aber das ist nicht in Ordnung. Wenn es Lok und Chemie Leipzig nach der Wende nicht geschafft haben, ihre Kraft im Interesse des Fußballs vor Ort zu bündeln - dann gibt es immer einen lachenden Dritten." I am currently rewriting the section about criticism in the article on RB Leipzig. I will add criticism from Tobias Kollman, Hans Joachim Watzke and Peter Neururer. But I will also add comments from Heiko Rosenthal, Uli Hoeness and Matthias Sammer. I think the section has to be balanced. Kindest regards /EriFr (talk) 09:03, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply] Disambiguation link notification for August 23 [edit] Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2016 Emperor's Cup, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Kashima, Tosu and Matsumoto. 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) 09:53, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply] ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open! [edit] Hello, Soccer-holic. 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 Wikipedia 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)[reply] ArbCom 2017 election voter message [edit] Hello, Soccer-holic. 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 Wikipedia 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)[reply] Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Fb team templates National teams [edit] A tag has been placed on Category:Fb team templates National teams requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 10:36, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply] ArbCom 2018 election voter message [edit] Hello, Soccer-holic. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 Wikipedia 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply] ArbCom 2019 election voter message [edit] Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply] ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message [edit] Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:41, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply] Regarding Article verification [edit] Can you help me in getting this Article Published. The subject is a professional Indian football coach https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Darzubair/Muzamil_Mahmood Dar zubair 19:36, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply] ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message [edit] Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:19, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]