User talk:KyleRGiggs/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Welcome!

Hello, KyleRGiggs, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!  Oldelpaso 21:17, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Contents

4 & 5 star stadiums

The situation surrounding 4 and 5 star status is quite confusing - UEFA haven't published a list for a while, and the remaining sources aren't consistent. For example, St. Jakob Park isn't on the fussballtempel list, but it is four star according to FC Basel's website. Oldelpaso 21:17, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

ok, I've reverted it. You can revert things yourself if you wish, see Help:Reverting for details. Oldelpaso 10:02, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

UEFA Champions League 2006-07 52nd and 15th editions

The 2006-07 competition is the 52nd overall and 15th named Champions League, to confirm this:

1955-56 | 1956-57 | 1957-58 | 1958-59 | 1959-60 | 1960-61 | 1961-62 | 1962-63 | 1963-64 | 1964-65
1965-66 | 1966-67 | 1967-68 | 1968-69 | 1969-70 | 1970-71 | 1971-72 | 1972-73 | 1973-74 | 1974-75
1975-76 | 1976-77 | 1977-78 | 1978-79 | 1979-80 | 1980-81 | 1981-82 | 1982-83 | 1983-84 | 1984-85
1985-86 | 1986-87 | 1987-88 | 1988-89 | 1989-90 | 1990-91 | 1991-92 | 1992-93 | 1993-94 | 1994-95
1995-96 | 1996-97 | 1997-98 | 1998-99 | 1999-00 | 2000-01 | 2001-02 | 2002-03 | 2003-04 | 2004-05
2005-06 | 2006-07

That's 5 lines of 10 and 2 extra, 52 overall.

For Champions League:

1992-93 | 1993-94 | 1994-95 | 1995-96 | 1996-97 | 1997-98 | 1998-99 | 1999-00 | 2000-01 | 2001-02
2002-03 | 2003-04 | 2004-05 | 2005-06 | 2006-07

10 + 5 = 15 Champions Leagues

Where did you get 51 and 14 from? - MTC 21:24, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh I got messed up! Thank you.--KyleRGiggs 10:51, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Copa Libertadores 2007

I reverted all your changes. All the groups standings in one article will be too long. I used the model of FIFA World Cup 2006.--Dpapic 01:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

NBA Season

Yes, you should never add it again since it is unnecessary. Good day. Chris 18:52, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

2007 NBA Playoffs

The {{footballbox}} isn't just for football/soccer, I've applied it nicely to a basketball-related page (see 2006-07 PBA Philippine Cup). --Howard the Duck 13:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

You can use the recap link with the report parameter there. It just doesn't show when it's not needed. --Howard the Duck 01:59, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Template:football box on UEFA Champions League 2006-07 pages

I don't understand your comment about the box being long. Why do you keep reverting the edits? PeeJay 18:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, but wouldn't it be better to have the Italian and English flags next to "Milan" and "Man Utd" respectively? PeeJay 17:21, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Football club logos in season pages

The fair use policy does not permit use of non-free images such as football club logos in a purely decorative manner. Hence I have reverted your changes to FA Premier League season articles. Oldelpaso 19:46, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


Copa Libertadores 2007 - Group Stage standings & results

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Copa Libertadores 2007 - Group Stage standings & results, by EPWA airport (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Copa Libertadores 2007 - Group Stage standings & results fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason:

it's not even a stub, it has no category (current sport event is not relevant), nothing links here and there are other articles about each group


To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Copa Libertadores 2007 - Group Stage standings & results, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 09:59, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

UCL 07-08

You need to request it at This page for semi-protection]]  CHAZA93  Talk  Contribs 
14:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletions?

The requests for deletion should've been retracted. --Deryck C. 14:37, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Name Deletion in Brian Ching

Please stop. If you continue to blank out (or delete portions of) page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. Yo seem to be bretty good at editing, come up with a better reason to take stuff out, perhaps this guy has a Chinese name. Tennekis 21:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Venue suggestion needed for a meet-up in Yuen Long

Dear: KyleRGiggs/Archive 1 ：

In the past meet-ups, we always had our meeting in the centre of Kowloon, either Kowloon Tong or Mong Kok. However, apart from these places, I am sure that alternative venues in other region would be suitable.


This is the time for your suggestion! According to some discussion on Chinese Wikipedia, from August of 2007, the Hong Kong Wikimedians’ meet-up would be held in all districts of Hong Kong in a circulation basis.


Here is the tentative information of the first meet-up：

Date：11, August, 2007 (Saturday)
Time：After 5:00pm
Proposed region：Yuen Long


The community would request for ideas of where we should hold the meet-up , in order to have a better decision. If you have any good ideas, don’t hesitate to give your opinions, million thanks!


Regards,

Hong Kong Wikimedian
16:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:David Taylor.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:David Taylor.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted after seven days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:David Taylor.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:David Taylor.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks lol... --Deryck C. 05:04, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Well here isn't a good place to talk about that. --Deryck C. 16:55, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Round of 16

A tag has been placed on Template:Round of 16, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

It is repeated with "Round 16 No Third"

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. KyleRGiggs 11:02, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tags

Hi, I've noticed that you've tagged several pages for speedy deletion because they were redirects from moves. To conform with GFDL guidelines, all pages that are redirects from moves must be preserved, so I will revert the tags that you placed. Singularity 21:18, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

User talk:PeeJay2K3\Archive 1

A tag has been placed on User talk:PeeJay2K3\Archive 1, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

I made a wrong command

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. KyleRGiggs 18:26, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Harry Potter roll-call

Hi there. Your username is listed on the WikiProject Harry Potter participants list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active on the project. Your name has therefore been moved to a "potentially inactive" list. If you still consider yourself an active WikiProject Harry Potter editor, please move your name from the Potentially inactive list to the Active Contributors list. You may also wish to add {{User WP Harry Potter}} to your userpage, if you haven't done so already. Conversely, if you do not wish to be considered a member of the WikiProject, leave your name where it is and it will be moved to the Inactive Contributors section. If you wish to make a clean break with the Project you may move your name to the Known to have left section. Many thanks.

Thanks! :)

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
You deserve to be recognized for the work you've done recently to improve the HP WikiProject participants section. It is appreciated. Thanks! Faithlessthewonderboy 05:08, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Dynamo Kyiv vs Dynamo Kiev

Hello. I've noticed that you've changed "Dynamo Kyiv" to "Dynamo Kiev" several times. If you think that's how it should be, the article, FC Dynamo Kyiv should be renamed in the first place. Be aware, however, that this issue is sensitive; Talk:Kiev/naming is 364K long. Conscious 05:33, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

How do you justify your latest changing to "Kiev" on the "FC Dynamo Kyiv" article - that (correctly in my opinion) uses Kyiv throughout. - fchd 17:23, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
So you're basing your argument on the English transliteration of the Russian name of the Ukrainian City. Why, when there's a perfectly reasonable transliteration of the native Ukrainian? Even the article is called "FC Dynamo Kyiv"... - fchd 17:31, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Would you cite your atlas as a Reliable Source? If so, it's 15 years out of date. It's like referring to Mumbai as Bombay - using the language and terms of the former colonial power. - fchd 18:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
I'd take that atlas back if I were you then! If you mean Spell-Checking system within my PC applications, both Kiev and Kyiv are OK, and quite right too, as for instance there would be no need to change the name of Chicken Kiev (Peking Duck would be a similar example). I see absolutely no justification for your continuing change of Kyiv to Kiev. I won't revert it any more, but I think you are getting very, very close to breaking the WP:3RR rule. - fchd 18:16, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Why did you just copy over a message from your talk page onto my talk page? As you can see, many people agree with me. The club is called FC Dynamo Kyiv, and so they should be referred to as Dynamo Kyiv in the Champions League articles. - PeeJay 17:43, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
The discussion at Talk:Kiev is unrelated to the football club's name. By the way, my home atlas says the city's name is "Kyiv". - PeeJay 17:48, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Why are you using trivial examples to support your tenuous claims? The club that you call "Dynamo Kiev" is registered with UEFA as "FC Dynamo Kyiv", and that is how they should be referred to. This is not a matter of translation, but a matter of official naming. - PeeJay 17:59, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for pointing that one out. I will change it now. - PeeJay 18:04, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Pairing?

I noticed you added a pairing column to the UEFA Champions League 2007-08 seeding table. Firstly I am interested what is this? I first had assumed it refered to teams from the same country (as they can't draw each other), but this doesn't seem to be the case as Liverpool and Man U have different parings. Secondly if this isn't obvious to me as a football fan, it certainly can't be to someone who knows nothing about football; as we must always write articles on the assumption the the reader knows nothing about the subject, this paring should be explained in the article. John Hayestalk 06:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

No need Petsky explained it. John Hayestalk 10:12, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

RE: Complaint of 3RR

Jimbo Wales' talk page is usually used for matters that mostly concern Jimbo or require serious attention. Edit warring, three revert violations, and similar issues can be addressed at requests for page protection, the three revert noticeboard, and administrator noticeboard/incidents.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 20:11, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know, you are getting pretty close to 3RR yourself. As I said to PeeJay, regardless of whether you are right or wrong, it's more important to the encylopedia to keep valuable contributors such as yourself, than for everything to be correct, sometimes it's just best to take a step back from an edit war and come back later when things have calmed down. John Hayestalk 06:52, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Moskva etc.

Just to let you know I reverted your change to the other cities in that article for the following reasons. 1) None of those are in common usage, whereas you will often see the media use Kyiv 2) We shouldn't use the Champions League article as a place to decide these things. If you feel the city of Moscow should be called Moskva, then the article on Moscow is the place to change it, and only once it is there, then change it in the Champions League article. John Hayestalk 06:56, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand your reply. Generally UEFA would be irrelevant as it is Swiss, not English (or from any other english speaking country). The main factor on Kiev /Kyiv should be common usage. Kiev is clearly used much more than Kyiv, but that is not the case for Dynamo Kiev/Dynamo Kyiv. I have seen many in the media using Dynamo Kyiv, so then other factors such as UEFA, or the club itself should be considered. John Hayestalk 07:04, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I think your right, and Dynamo Kiev is used more than Dynamo Kyiv, but as both are used, I don't think it is a strong enough case to change it. In the end I really don't mind either way, just we should be consitent in our uses of a name across Wikipedia. John Hayestalk 07:29, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bayern_Munich_1_-_2_Norwich_City

Your comments imply that you think that no sporting event is worthy of a Wikipedia article. Staying with football alone, there is a well established consensus that some matches are notable (for example, all of the articles in this category are unarguably notable). The question to be addressed by the AfD is whether this particular article demonstrates notability using reliable sources, not whether the consensus that some matches are notable is incorrect. I'd be really grateful if you would reconsider your opinion, as I do genuinely believe this is a notable match. Many thanks, --Dweller 09:24, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:ClubWCRound7

Hi, I noticed that you changed the Club World Cup template, saying that there will be a 5th place match. I reverted it for now because it´s not displaying properly, but I'll be glad to help with fixing it if you can point to a good source about that. According to this, the fifth place match has been eliminated for the 2007 edition, but I might be missing some newer information, so please let me know if that's the case. Thanks, --Gabbec 04:32, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Recent edits re: Dynamo Kyiv

Please stop changing Dynamo Kyiv to Dynamo Kiev. There has already been a consensus established against your edits in two separate locations - Talk:Dynamo Kyiv and Talk:UEFA Champions League 2007-08. ugen64 05:13, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

September 2007

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Dynamo Kyiv. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. There is nothing wrong with the link he made to your user page, yes ideally he would hide the "user:" but that is still no reason to edit his comment. Thanks John Hayestalk 08:57, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

And quite what does "Final warning" in the edit summary mean? Do you have the right to issue warnings? And if it is a "final" warning, what about a first or second warning? As far as I am concerned, I linked your user in the correct manner, and can't see what you found wrong. - fchd 10:30, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Please do not edit my talk comment again. - fchd 06:10, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Dynamo Kyiv, you will be blocked for vandalism. John Hayestalk 07:14, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

UEFA Champions League 2007-08

OK fine u reopened the vote. El-Nin09 17:05, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Well someone didnt listen El-Nin09 17:16, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Suit yourself, its your task now, not mine, I quit El-Nin09 17:32, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Doesn't matter this is a build up of everything that has happened to me recently, that is not the only thing i am quitting. El-Nin09 17:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
As i said its not just that its just i cant do anything right, people i know seem to be dissapearing. So... goodbye for a while El-Nin09 17:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Arsenal F.C. and Manchester United football rivalry

Arsenal F.C. and Manchester United football rivalry, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Arsenal F.C. and Manchester United football rivalry satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arsenal F.C. and Manchester United football rivalry and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Arsenal F.C. and Manchester United football rivalry during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Captain panda 01:32, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

UEFA Champions League 2007-08

What is this edit summary about "Do not change this order again - order released by UEFA - All revert of this order would be seen as vandalism" - how dare you accuse others who use different table orders of vandalism! For your information, the information off the UEFA website, Champions League standings page has no fewer than 6 of the 8 groups different to you. What is your official source that deviation away from would be considered vandalism? I'm not going to change it back as tables where all the teams have played zero games are completely meaningless anyway. You need to chill and appreciate that not everyone who has a different point of view is a "vandal". - fchd 18:33, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

C. W. Alcock

I hope you don't mind but I've reverted your edit, as I think that the eng-cricketbio template that you removed is appropriate. Though the article is quite substantial, the cricket side is pretty brief and could do with expansion, even though the soccer side of his career is well covered. JH (talk page) 12:59, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Archiving of WP:F1 talkpage

Hi Raymond. I'm a bit confused about what's happening with the archiving of the WP:F1 talk page. I gather you've added a bot to automatically archive the page(?) but it looks as though all the discussions which were previously in archive pages 10, 11 and 12 have been restored to the discussion page. Is that right? Thanks. DH85868993 02:16, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

WP F1 archive edits yesterday

Hi, I noticed that you rearchived http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Formula_One/Archive_10, as well as 11 and 12. The edit appears to have blanked the pages and destroyed things??

I am sure this was accidental, but could you provide technical support or info on how to get them back?

It would be appreciated if you could contribute some info on helping us get them back by posting at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Formula_One#Where.27s_wpf1_Archive_10_gone.3F

Thank you! Guroadrunner 02:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

The bot...

Yes thanks, I do. And I also know that many WP{:F1 discussions often start up again after many more than 21 days! It is arrogant in extremis for you to march in and slap an archiving bot on the page without first discussing it with the other members of the project. Think of that before you leave sarcastic comments on people's talk pages, and learn some manners. Pyrope 07:33, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Well the problem is that archiving neccessity isn't driven by age or size, but relevance. A quick conversation about a discrete issue - clarification of a driver's status or a car's build dates for example - which is resolved can probably be deleted after just one week, so long as the editor who raised the issue as seen all answers and people have had an opportunity to add any additional info. However, a discussion relating to major formatting, project protocols or a controversial factoid might need to be up as long as two months to ensure that some reliable, valuable editors, that may not get to be on the internet as often as they would like, have had the chance to contribute. Pyrope 12:07, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

2008 chassis

  • "Confirmed on Manipe" - By whom? Provide a source from a team that lists the chassis name. Manipe's assumptions do not count as fact. Wikipedia is not here to assume the chassis names for next year, even if they may appear as logical and simply increasing a number by one.
  • "I said that" - Saying they were confirmed on Manipe in your edit summary is not a source. You failed to add any references in the article to this apparent claim that Manipe has all of the chassis names.

Those are two reasons why your edits were removed, and will continue to be removed. If you want to attempt to turn this into an accusation of vandalism, so be it. I'd like to see how far you'd get with it. The359 20:12, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Henrietta badge.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Henrietta badge.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --βandβ (talk•contribs) 09:56, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Missing article

Could you start an article on the Aussie driver Andrew Miedecke thanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 17:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

You annoy me

I understand you obviously feel quite passionately about the use of the English language in football articles, but please don't act like you've won some sort of contest when consensus goes in your favour. It's not very good manners to act so smugly. - PeeJay 17:41, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

No need to apologise. Just take my advice on board for next time. - PeeJay 17:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Moves of articles with football (soccer) in the title

I have reverted a couple of your recent moves, as the established convention is to use football (soccer) in such cases. See the archives of Talk:football (soccer) for more discussion on the subject than anyone could possibly wish for. Oldelpaso 11:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Preview option

Please try to use the preview option when adding templates. Think you'll find it helps!--Egghead06 (talk) 18:56, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Your message

Please do not make offensive comments like "use the sandbox". I understand very well how to use Wikipedia. And just what does "Do you know the rule of Wikipedia, you should not remove anything related" meam? I think you are just making rules to suit yourself. I will continue to make any edits that I feel are justified, thank you very much. WWGB (talk) 11:52, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of UEFA Cup 2007-08 first round

An editor has nominated UEFA Cup 2007-08 first round, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UEFA Cup 2007-08 first round and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 17:29, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

UEFA Cup first round

If the UEFA Cup first round is a "proper round", as defined by players' goals being counted towards the Top Scorer award, as you claim, why is Fernando Cavenaghi not listed amongst the players on five goals on uefa.com? – PeeJay 02:43, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


A tag has been placed on UEFA Cup 2007-08 first round, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as articles for deletion. If you can indicate how UEFA Cup 2007-08 first round is different from the previously posted material, or if you can indicate why this article should not be deleted, I advise you to place the template {{hangon}} underneath the other template on the article, and also put a note on Talk:UEFA Cup 2007-08 first round saying why this article should stay. An admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 4 under General criteria. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please feel free to use deletion review, but do not continue to repost the article if it is deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. We welcome your help in trying to improve Wikipedia, and we request you to follow these instructions. – PeeJay 02:46, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


Image copyright problem with Image:UEFA Cup Manchester 2008.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:UEFA Cup Manchester 2008.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 03:22, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

UEFA Cup 2007-08 first round

After seeing that the article you are trying to create, UEFA Cup 2007-08 first round, got deleted for the second time, I thought that if you decide to recreate it again, you should consider tagging it with the {{underconstruction}} template. Artyom (talk • contribs) 14:09, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Move of Steaua

Why have you unilaterally moved the Steaua Bucuresti page? There was a requested move on that document only a few months ago, which clearly reached "no concensus", which you have no doubt seen as you have just added a comment to the closed discussion. You refer to the new naming conventions, but I cannot see any new conventions between October and now that would support your actions. Please undo your move and if you feel it is necessary, bring it back to WP:RM. Controversial unilateral page moves are never a good thing. - fchd (talk) 07:38, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Move of Steaua

The official name of the club is FC Steaua Bucureşti. There are no new naming conventions as you claim and if there were they should be apllied to all football related articles with this discussion. To get this clear: Bucureşti is the name of Romania's capital city and it is engraved on the club's crest. There is no need to translate into English a word that is used in English speaking world and on all websites and televisions when regarding Steaua. Please do not move that page again until a consensus is reached and rules are clearly defined. Thank you. GabinhoPalavras 13:08, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of 2009 Australian Grand Prix

An editor has nominated 2009 Australian Grand Prix, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2009 Australian Grand Prix and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 16:59, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Dates

Your edits make the dates appear as "19/February 20" and "4/March 5" for those using the American date style, which makes no sense when read. Obviously that wasn't your intention, but writing the dates as "19 February/20 February" and "4 March/5 March" is the only way to get around this little problem. – PeeJay 18:46, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

That could be one way of writing it. See how it goes. – PeeJay 19:00, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

UEFA Cup

To avoid any confusion, no team should be entered until they actually win. The way it's done, you can put Bayern Munich in the articles for next season's Champions League, UEFA Cup and Intertoto Cup. Kingjeff (talk) 03:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Another problem is that we're all puting Cup winners in the article. Shouldn't it be Cup winners or losers with an explanation on why this is the case? Kingjeff (talk) 03:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Then have do we explain how Borussia Dortmund gets in even if they lose the cup final? Kingjeff (talk) 04:32, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Eredivisie 2007-08

You recently made some edits to the article Eredivisie 2007-08 regarding the position of Roda JC in the final league table. For instance [1] and [2]. If I understand it correctly, you have stated that Roda JC automatically qualify for the UEFA Cup if they finish outside the top seven. As far as I know there's no such rule in Dutch football. Roda JC still have two roads to UEFA Cup: the playoffs for P5 to P9 and the cup final. On what information were your edits based? AecisBrievenbus 23:59, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that Roda JC will face Feyenoord, not Ajax. See KNVB Cup 2007-08. Ajax were eliminated in the Round of 16. AecisBrievenbus 11:02, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
I've just come across this explanation by the KNVB, and it's wonderfully complicated. If Feyenoord wins the cup and finishes in the top 5, they enter the playoffs for 1 Champions League ticket and three UEFA Cup tickets. If they then qualify for Champions League Q3, the UEFA Cup ticket will go to Roda JC as the losing finalist. If they don't, they qualify for the UEFA Cup as the Cup winner, P5 to P9 will play for a remaining UEFA Cup ticket and P10 to P13 play for a Intertoto Cup ticket. If the cup winners finishes between P5 and P9, the best they can do is qualify for the UEFA Cup, which they will already have achieved as Cup winner. There is nothing to gain for them in that case, so P10 will be the fourth team in the playoffs for the fourth UEFA Cup ticket. This would mean that P11, P12 and P13 will not compete in the playoffs. P14 and P15 will not be in the playoffs anyway, and P16 and P17 will play relegation playoffs. It's very complicated, but there's no special clause wrt P7. AecisBrievenbus 11:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I've looked at your new edits to the article, and I think it's a bit premature to remove the UEFA Cup playoffs and add the Cup finalists, because Feyenoord can still finish in the top 5. I'm not sure how we could process the details properly though. AecisBrievenbus 21:45, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

There's a bit more confusion surrounding the Eredivisie 2007-08 playoffs. We mention in the color keys and in the hidden comments that FC Groningen, NEC, FC Utrecht and the team losing the KNVB Cup final will qualify for the playoffs for an Intertoto Cup ticket. But just about all Dutch media report that the four teams will play for a UEFA Cup ticket. The largest football magazine, Voetbal International, has the full schedule. A quick summary: Heerenveen will face Ajax and FC Twente will face NAC Breda in the CL playoffs. The winners of both matches will then face each other, with the winner going to the Champions League and the loser going to the UEFA Cup. The two first round losers will face each other as well. The winner will go to the UEFA Cup, while the loser will face the winner of the playoffs down to P10 for the final UEFA Cup ticket. I don't wanna know what the inventor of this system smoked, but as a Dutchman I think I've got an idea... AecisBrievenbus 20:36, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
I think it would be best to use a table similar to the one used in e.g. 2008 Davis Cup Europe/Africa Zone. We would have Ajax, NAC, Heerenveen and FC Twente in round 1 of the first table. The two winners would move to the right, where they would face each other. The two losers would move to the left, where they would face each other. The winner of that match qualifies for the UEFA Cup, the loser of the match goes on the play the winner of the playoffs featuring FC Groningen, FC Utrecht, NEC and the Cup runner-up for the final ticket. I think we need to make a separate template just for these playoffs... I think I'll go and start drafting one in my userspace. AecisBrievenbus 15:47, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Image tagging

Hi, I was wondering why you tagged Image:Play off system eredivisie.png for speedy deletion. I declined the speedy because it is tagged as being Public Domain. Is there some reason I don't know of that you nominated for deletion (like was it copied from a website or something)? Thanks for your time, James086Talk | Email 10:16, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

If the image is not factually accurate that should have been raised on the image talk page or perhaps in an Images for Deletion discussion. The speedy deletion tag you added does not apply to that image. I will leave it up to you to decide what to do next with the image (perhaps contact the uploader about the error if you haven't already). Thanks, James086Talk | Email 16:18, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry

I'm sorry for reverting your changes. I thought it was an IP vandal vandalizing that page. Hope you can forgive me. Cheers, Razorflame 13:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Why "Internazionale"?

I see that you have just changed the instances of "Inter" to "Internazionale" on Coppa Italia 2007-08. Wherever Inter appears on Italian football pages, it always gets changed, and I have never seen a consensus discussion or a good rationale for it. I've never met anybody, English- or Italian-speaking, who regularly calls the club "Internazionale." On the F.C. Internazionale Milano article itself, there are 92 uses of "Inter" and 20 uses of "Internazionale", all but two of which are in the context of the full club name "F.C. Internazionale Milano." This seems to be good precedent for "Inter." And please, don't take this as a notice to do a find and replace on the club's article; it will seriously impact it's readability. —Ed Cormany (talk) 14:18, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

UEFA Cup 2008-09

Hi Kyle, I was editing Partizan's case for Uefa Cup 2008/09, but not logged on, so you could see my IP address instead of username. You are right, allocation list is taken out from Bert Kassies's pages about European football. The main idea is to simplify list as better as possible. That means if some topic or item must be discussed, then we should put reference. Otherwise it's not necessary. also, I have one remark. Most of editing are related to some correction of spelling i.e. Inter or Internazionale, writing Besiktas with correct Turkish letters etc. But I think team name or city name must be always written in original form. So don't write Red Star if team's name is Crvena Zvezda. Such names cannot be translated.

Best regards Mijo34 (talk • contribs) 14:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Invitation to Wikipedia research by CityU HK

Dear KyleRGiggs,

I would like to congratulate you to the fantastic work you’re doing for Wikipedia! Because you’re an expert in your field and a well integrated member in the Wikipedia community, we would like to invite you to participate in our research project on collaboration activities and mechanisms in Wikipedia.

At the Center for Applied Knowledge and Innovation Management at City University we’re currently doing a research project on Wikipedia, and we are inviting experienced Wikipedians in Hong Kong to share their success stories and views on different aspect of the community processes with us. We would thus like to invite you to an interview at your convenience, preferably within the next two weeks if possible. The interview should not take longer than 30-45 minutes and will be conducted at a place and time of your convenience.

We would very much appreciate the opportunity of talking to you and learning about your experiences with Wikipedia, and we hope that you are willing to participate in our research project. Any information about participants will, of course, be kept strictly confidential.

For further questions about the project and to arrange a date for an interview, please contact Dr Andreas Schroeder at aschroe@cityu.edu.hk.

We’re looking forward to talking to you in the near future.

Kind regards, Dr Andreas Schroeder Center for Applied Knowledge and Innovation Management Information Systems Department City University of Hong Kong —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiResearcherHK (talk • contribs) 09:28, 16 May 2008 (UTC)