User talk:Daemonic Kangaroo/Archive5

DYK

On 1 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bert Freeman, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 14:53, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Super-collapse

Following the discussion here it is clear there appears to be a call for these to be put in place, however after reviewing the results and the conclusion it does appear that the implementation does require some tweaking.Londo 06 07:24, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yesterday's disruptive IP

Hi. I reported IP 79.77.22.109 to WP:AIV last night. However, presumably because what they were doing wasn't obvious vandalism, the report was moved to Wikipedia:Administrators noticeboard/Incidents#From AIV: 79.77.22.109 for discussion. I've explained my view of the problem, just bringing it your attention in case you want to join in. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:39, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Retired" is not necessary - it's self-evident as he's dead

LMAO. You've got a good point there! :-) Dan1980 (talk ♦ stalk) 19:27, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

English cricketers + footballers

Football isn't my specialty so I was just wondering whether of not the Corinthian F.C. were classified as playing 'professional football'. When I was submitting players to the article I noticed a large number of early players represented the club but didn't put it beside their names as I was unsure where the club stood. The impression I got from reading the Corinthian article was that they were an amateur club. Many of the cricketers on the list played for other cricket clubs but as those games were not first-class cricket I didn't include them, so if Corinthians were only amateur then I'd lean towards omitting them as well. Of course, I am only speculating and am probably completely wrong so your input would be appreciated. Cheers. Crickettragic (talk) 00:08, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's fair enough, it did look pretty silly having England as the only team they played for. Including Corinthian F.C. and having amateur in brackets is a good solution. Basically, as you've clarified in the intro, we should include amateurs only if they represented England so those four players that you mentioned would be perfect for the list. Thanks for your input and keep up the good work. Crickettragic (talk) 08:10, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Billy "Spud" Murphy

I recently created an article on Billy Murphy (footballer), who played for Southampton for a couple of seasons in the 1920s. Do you have anything on his time at Southampton? Oldelpaso (talk) 08:50, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cricket/football list

Hi. Just to let you know what I'm doing. I've added a column for football references and added refs to englandstats.com for the England players. Having had a proper look at what information is contained in various England footballer sources, I'm going to change them to englandfc.com instead, although I don't like the format, it gives more information. Specifically, it lists all their clubs, where englandstats only mentions the club(s) played for at the time they won England caps, so it can be used as a club reference as well, which is needed for the pre-League players. E.g compare Charles Chenery's pages. Englandstats only mentions Palace, while Englandfc highlights Palace as the club played for when capped by England, but also lists Barnes and Wanderers as other clubs played for. Need another cup of tea first, though :-) Which would then only leave the post-war non-England players to do.

PS. I edited William Bates, cricketer and footballer, to play for Leeds City not United, and noticed at the end of the article his son "Eddie Bates" going on to manage Southampton. Presumably Ted Bates, but there's no mention of the father in Ted Bates' article. Thought you might be interested. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:22, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Saints badge 2.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Saints badge 2.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 07:19, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Teddy Davison

On 9 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Teddy Davison, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 05:19, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya, thanks for the nomination of Teddy Davison for DYK, it means a lot. I notice your good work on English international footballers, hopefully Wikiproject Sheffield Wednesday will create a substantial article for every Wednesday player who ever played for England in the not too distant future. Regards Mick Knapton (talk) 15:33, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Shearer

Hi, I notice you made a few changes to the above article, including changing two of the season formats to XXXX-XX instead of XXXX/XX. While I don't really have a preference either way, I changed them in order to make the whole article consistent. If you think it would be better the way you changed it, then could you possibly fix the entire article as such, rather than having two inconsistent styles, as I was hoping to improve the article to GA status. Thanks! Also, you don't happen to have access to some licensed Shearer pics we could use to illustrate the article do you? I've had a good search on appropriate sites, but there don't seem to be any. Cheers. - Toon⁰⁵ 17:22, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cris Freddi

Hi, Daemonic K. I'm new to this, so I don't know the protocol. But I do have good sources. Email me and I'll send them. crisfreddi@hotmail.com. All the best. User:82.45.192.148 00:33, 25 July 2008

Apologies again, DK - I really am new to this wikipedia game. Email me when you can and I'll provide all the sources I've got for JRB Owen, Norman Bailey, etc. Yes, I'm THAT Cris Freddi - but my dear old Fact Book is way out of date. I wouldn't bother with it, because there are HUNDREDS of errors by now (my research has moved on considerably in the last 17 years).

As I say, email me and I'll help where I can. And again, apologies for not knowing my way round wikipedia.

All the best,

Cris —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bikeroo (talk • contribs) 05:08, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Shilton

Saw the edits to the Peter Shilton article and just wanted to ask where the 'Normal style format' can be found ?

I don't see specifics on WP:FOOTY that could apply and was curious.

Aaron carass (talk) 23:25, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't necessarily want to revert the edits. I was just hoping that there was a style page, I had missed, that supported this format.

Many player profile articles use the term 'Runner-up' exclusively, in fact I don't think I have seen any other articles that have 'Finalist'.

I would have a preference for 'Runner-up' simply because, both teams are/were 'Finalists'.

Aaron carass (talk) 13:17, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 19:25, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done.

Protected for two weeks. · AndonicO ^Engage. 09:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Crouch

Peter Crouch has 0 Portsmouth goals, stop changing it. You may think it is 'cool' and 'hip' but it's just stupid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.87.218 (talk) 00:09, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't insult other users on Wikipedia. I originally agreed with you, that Crouch hasn't scored for Portsmouth, but he has been credited with a goal against Everton - see the article at Pompey's website. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 05:12, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Soccerbase and BBC Sport both credit the goal as being Defoe's. Mattythewhite (talk) 12:51, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, now I see this. Mattythewhite (talk) 12:55, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmy Warner

Cheers for helping with Jimmy Warner's article. I think your reasoning regarding his date of death is perfectly just. As for the DYK thing, I guess I just mis-read the entry criteria. It's too late for me to nominate it for the main page now, isn't it? – Pee Jay 08:32, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Keegan

Yes I am aware of that. But as I noted in my edit summary, I'm also aware that there is no consensus to delink dates that are currently linked. See this diff and the discussions on the talk page, including this proposal. Changing articles from the status quo is unwise until a consensus has been reached. DrFrench (talk) 20:23, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're trying to split hairs a bit. I directed your attention to one proposed MoS wording which says, "To avoid disruption, however, this deprecation should not be taken as license for wholesale removal of existing links from articles currently employing them extensively". That seems fairly clear and a sensible proposal, given the lack of consensus.

It seems to me that you had two choices; a) correct the date formatting so that it's consistent throughout the article, or b) correct the date format and remove the wikilinks from the dates.

Option a) is non-contentious and to be encouraged (it's something I do on a regular basis whilst making other edits). Option b) is clearly contentious as evidenced by the discussion indicated above. If a consensus emerges to delink all existing wikilinked dates, then a bot can set off to do that task. If some other solution emerges (e.g. using a date format template to allow users to choose their own preferred format, without needing to wikilink dates) then a bot can be set off to convert wikilinked dates into whatever the solution ends up being. But if you start delinking dates now, then it won't be possible for a bot to convert them later - and someone else will have to edit them by hand. Which do you think will cause less overall disruption to Wikipedia? So (contrary to your accusation) it's not some airy-fairy point of principle - just a point of simple practicality. DrFrench (talk) 22:23, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Charlie Handley

Hi, I'm a relative of Charlie Handley's, former Winger for Tottenham Hotspur during the 1920's

I was just curious how you knew so much about him?

or where you got your information from?

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.205.23.50 (talk) 15:14, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Mills (footballer)

Restored. Oldelpaso (talk) 14:30, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

stats amended

Where I've noticed them I've put the zeroes back in, I didn't really notice what they were doing. I'll put them back in the Morton ones after the next game on Saturday.

Salty1984 (talk) 18:45, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joe or Joseph Smith

Just created a stub/short article on Joe Smith (footballer born 1890), him being the last-but-one on my list of Blues players with >50 apps. I've added him to List of England international footballers (alphabetical), where he was listed as Joseph Smith; I wonder whether the England references call him Joseph to distinguish from the other Joe Smith who flourished at the same time. Should mention his birth date, which Matthews and Joyce both have as 17 April but the englandstats reference has as 10 April. Don't know whether the existing Joe Smith (footballer) should be changed to (footballer born 1889), or left where he is as possibly being the better known of the two. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 16:44, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Football players

Hi. I noticed that you managed to find a death date for Harold Miller (footballer). Does that site do international players, or just England? I'm trying to clean up Category:Possibly living people and I suspect that a subscription might be useful for finding death dates for the dozens of players that are scattered throughout that category. Cheers, CP 15:50, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Fred Geary

On 30 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fred Geary, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Daniel Case (talk) 02:11, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tour de France

{{helpme}} There seems to be a problem opening several of the Tour de France pages:

In each case, all I can see is a completely blank page, and this is the same from both my laptop and PC. Other years e.g. 2005 Tour de France seem fine. Can someone take a look to see if the problem can be fixed. Cheers. Bikeroo (talk) 09:41, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, they come up completely blank. It's not something I've seen before either. In order to get more people to look at this problem, you might want to post this at the village pump (technical) page. Sorry I can't be more helpful here. Gazimoff ^Write _Read 09:52, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They're all fine for me, but something really weird was up with 1993 Tour de France a few hours ago when I looked at it. There was background of a weird cross shape on a black background with some fairly disturbing text (something about "I'm upset at kids who have figured out my code"). There was nothing in the edit history for that article that suggested it, so I figured it might be someone messing with one of the templates, but all the flag templates are edit-protected and none of the other ones on the page had anything like that in the history. So I was pretty stumped. Nosleep (talk) 12:39, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Four for Cavendish in 2008

Your edit of the Petacchi claim looks solid (I must have missed stage 19 from 2004 when counting Armstrong's). All good there! Nosleep (talk) 12:36, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Souvenir Henri Desgrange

Hmm: I can see from the refs you have added to the Bonette article why you were wanting to persevere with attaching the SHD to that climb. However, the equivalent commentary and summary for yesterday, stage 17 ([1] and [2]), attribute exactly the same prize to Schumacher! It seems to me that we are left to conclude which might be more reliable: a summariser, albeit working for the official organisers, or the Tour's publisher rules and regs, and my preference would have to be that which was written slowly, especially if it constitutes the basis of the contract under which the teams entered. But I have also seen that it is always given to the highest point of the race, which would seem to indicate the Bonette. But who has an authoritative voice? I'm not too inclined to ask Mssrs Liggett and Sherwood, as they constantly refer to Augustyn as the youngest rider, thus ignoring Ciolek. I have found when putting together summaries that the TdF official site's commentary is not very reliable. Kevin McE (talk) 12:20, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Profiles

So this is a little convoluted :P I remembered you saying during the Tour that you had contacted someone who made profile images for each stage. Is it possible to track that person down to do one for the Olympic road race? I think the article would be benefitted by that. I don't know who the person to contact is, or I'd do so myself, but you apparently do, so....well, help me here, I'm trying :P Nosleep (talk) 15:31, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, no worries. The article passed GA with flying colors and it looks like it's even got a shot at FA, so it's all good :) Don't fall asleep ^zzzzzz 04:50, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]