User talk:Wiggy!

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

User Talk:Wiggy!/Archive
User Talk:Wiggy!/Cited by the Image Copz

[edit] Thanks for visiting!

Thanks for stopping by. I enjoy hearing from other Wikipedians (most of the time!) and appreciate the company. Remember, new stuff to the bottom of the page and sign your edits with four tildes (~~~~) and check back for a reply. Keep well. Wiggy! 18:31, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Contents


[edit] Berliner FC Dynamo

It's all right with the section literature.--Fox53 21:37, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

 :) ! Wiggy! 00:20, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dynamo Dresden Logo 1950'ers until 1970's

There is a former DD-Logo: http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270107266318#ebayphotohosting Please edit it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fox53 (talk • contribs) 16:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

Point of clarifiication. I generally treat stuff off of eBay as a secondary source that requires other supporting references unless its an exceptional case. The wimpel for sale on eBay isn't significantly different from what's already posted on the page, and quality-wise isn't near as good as other available reference materials. There are many other well-cited logo examples already available as DD isn't some obscure club or one lost in the mists of history. On top of that, wimpel designs tend to be all over the place, as they are often just quickly produced, cheap souvenir items that don't necessarily follow any sort of graphic standard established by the club. Sorry, but I don't think this particular example from eBay needs posting. Its only a minor variation of the existing images and its from a second-level source. But don't be discouraged! Every once in a while a diamond appears at eBay! I fish there regularly. Keep your eyes open.
So, you're Fox53 now? Looks like some decent work on ice hockey clubs so far. Have fun, be cool. Wiggy! 17:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BFC

The logo of the BFC is false, then they haven't the licence. Therefore the logo is violet and the Dynamo-D is broken instead of swung. Otherwise they must pay for it to "Pepe". --141.76.177.36 13:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, N~, but it isn't clear what you are trying to say. Pepe doesn't own exclusive rights. The logo that is currently displayed is the one in use on the club website with the addition of a championship star. My own feeling is that a simple Dynamo logo should be displayed without the star, and the championship version with a star displayed elsewhere with a proper explanation of what it is. But, of course, you have a different view.
Now I have reverted your addition of the logo because the caption or explanation you have attached to it is written in poor English, it is unclear, and doesn't significantly add to the article. There is no direct connection between this logo and BFC's European Cup appearance - its just coincidental.
Wrestling over this stuff with you is getting tiresome and I really do not want to be fighting over this all the time. I'm simply interested in seeing a well-written, factual article in place. Maybe we make some peace. How about we display a basic logo (with no star) in the info box and display a championship logo (with a star and an explanation) further below? That represents an accurate up-to-date position.
And do me a favor by not adding unnecessary tags to articles I have edited. While the articles may need sourcing tagging something just because I edited it is counter-productive and is a waste of everyone's time. Go out there and be a good, productive editor. Wiggy! 14:06, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
P.S. if you have a link to current information about Pepe and the legal status of the logo (I see you've marked the item as 2007) please post it so eveyone can have a look. Wiggy! 14:16, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Green quarters

Many thanks!!!!!!!!! ChrisTheDude 07:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Hiya Wiggy! On a similar note to my query with the green quarters, would you be able to take a look at the _redquarters14 pattern? The non-red quarters are showing up as solid white rather than transparent. Many thanks for your assistance! ChrisTheDude 08:57, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

The image file is part of Wikipedia Commons and can't be directly replaced. I've uploaded a new file to Commons which includes the proper transparent background in quadrants 2&3 and made a request to have the bad file replaced with that. Dunno how long it takes, up to the admins over there now, so stay tuned. Wiggy! 13:19, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Cheers!!!!! ChrisTheDude 14:46, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Feyenoord

Hey Wiggy!, Thanks for copy-editing some parts of the Feyenoord article already. That's exactly what I was looking for and I'm looking forward to see this happening to the rest of the article as well. I hope you can find the interest in doing this, but with fellow Canadians Jonathan de Guzman and Jacob Lensky playing at the club this hopefully won't be too much of a bother to you. Cheers, SportsAddicted | discuss 19:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm happy to make a contribution. Hope it suits. Thanks. Wiggy! 22:15, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
It definately suits. The thing is when I see what I actually should have written I always have the feeling that I could have came up with that as well, but for some reason I don't, so it's always nice to have someone nearby that speaks better English than I do :) SportsAddicted | discuss 23:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for another round of copy-editing. I did however see you changed 1-0 and 5-2 into 1:0 and 5:2, which is not a common way to print a result. I know this is done in Germany, but as far as I know nowhere else in the world. I also removed the "by fans" part as everybody nicknames the stadium like that... fans, team members, press, fans/players/members from other teams as well as whoever you can think of. SportsAddicted | discuss 23:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Okay. I see it's moving along and a number of folks are chipping in. This is good. Wiggy! 23:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
That's right, the more people are on it, the better the article eventually will be. SportsAddicted | discuss 06:58, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] How do you make kit images?

How do you make kit patterns that use Template:Football kit ? FootyStavros 01:19, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

If the image uses an existing pattern I use Adobe Photoshop to change colours, do horizontal flips, move patterns from one image to another, etc. If I am making an image from scratch I use something like CorelDraw to create a new pattern and export it as a .png when its ready to go (just because I'm a regular CorelDraw user and can easily make it do what I want) and tune it up in Photoshop if I have to. There are other .png editors out there (including some freebies) that'll do the job as well. MS Paint will let you edit .pngs as well, real simple to use, but doesn't handle the transparent backgrounds that some kit images use. Hope that gives you a few clues. I imagine other folks have their own favorite apps for the job. You're trying to put together your own kit I assume? What club? (Good luck with it) Wiggy! 02:21, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

How do I make this image into a .png? I can't send any images to Adobe photoshop either. FootyStavros 22:33, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I use CorelDraw v7 (sometimes v12) and Adobe Photoshop CS to modify kits. CorelDraw allows you to export a file as a .png. Photoshop will handle .png files natively - you can open a file as a .png and save it as a .png. It also offers a Save for Web option that will save the file as a .png. You can open a .jpg (or other file format) under Photoshop, edit it, and save or export the result as a .png.
What software are you using for your work? It may just come down to developing some familiarity with the file functions of Photoshop (or whatever else it may be that you are using). Wiggy! 23:11, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, I figured out how to do it. THANKS ALOT WIGGY. FootyStavros 23:24, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Woohoo! Congratulations. Wiggy! 23:31, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Wait a minute. Ihe problem is that all my kits have to be on certain colour. I don't know how to make it with a colour you choose. Like for example:

Team colours Team colours Team colours
Team colours
Team colours
FootyStavros's failed patterns

The arms and the body have my patterns on them. They're all supposed to be blue. But when I save them they change colours! FootyStavros 21:46, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

The problem is with the files you are uploading. Part of the image has to be transparent so that the background colour you select shows through the kit image that is laying on top of it. You can think of it as a cutout, I suppose. Mastering the use of graphic files with transparent backgrounds is one of the tricks that makes the football kit images work. Note that not all graphics software support transparent backgrounds. Improperly prepared transparencies will place the colour white in the area that is supposed to be transparent.
I've fixed your arms and will do the body as well. Wiggy! 21:59, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Can you fix this then? It's the real one. FootyStavros 01:21, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Done. Saved as _thingoldsides rather than thingoldsidess to match standard naming convention. Wiggy! 01:36, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SC Verl

Thanks for your rewrite of the article. Please tell me if my English was actually bad, as I'm always working toward improving it. I will accept "rivalry", although it is an animosity. ;) DevSolar 14:03, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Your English looks to be quite good. "Animosity" is fine by me, I had toned it down some without really knowing how much of a hate on there was between the two groups of fans. I'd also be more inclined to include the highlights as part of the general history section just as a matter of narrative flow, but that's just my approach. I take it that you are a Verl fan? How is your side doing this year? Wiggy! 14:34, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
You wouldn't happen to have a club logo image handy, would you? Wiggy! 14:35, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
As for the animosity, well... any more of it, and visiting the derbys would become really uncomfortable. ;-) This season is looking good so far. Our team is virtually unchanged, with only a few reinforcements, as opposed to our strongest competitor SC Preußen Münster who assembled a whole new team after coming down from Regionalliga (for 1.5 times the funds we have available for the whole club, just for their first team.) But we're ranked 2nd, one point behind and one game less played, so it's looking good.
Club logo is tricky. There are lots and lots around on the 'net (like, at the top of http://www.scverl.de), but I couldn't solve the copyright issue sufficiently for any of them to dare a Wikipedia upload. :-( DevSolar 08:27, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
It's okay, I found one. The use of a sports logo is okay as far as it goes as long it is properly tagged {{logo}} or {{sports-logo}} when uploaded/posted. Maybe the goings-ons on in Sachsen will help cool off the fans. Only a point out with a game in hand is looking good. Still a dozen games or so to go? If your guys can keep that up you have a good chance at moving up. Good luck. Go Verl! Wiggy! 12:00, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Nah, so far things stopped short of "real" violence. That's what I meant with "any more of it...". ;-) Twenty games to go. If you're really interested, check the German wikipedia entry, or the statistics thread in the fan forum. The moving up this year would be rather crucial... next year the 3rd Bundesliga will be formed, meaning that clubs still in the Oberliga (IV) by then only have a chance for qualifying for the new Regionalliga (then-IV) or staying in the Oberliga (then-V), while teams already in Regionalliga (III) have a (really good) chance for qualifying for 3rd Bundesliga (then-III), and cannot be relegated from Regionalliga (then-IV)... DevSolar 12:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
WE DID IT! :-D 217.95.134.211 14:56, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Well done and congratulations! Time now for the bigger fish. Go get 'em! Here's to another successful season in 2007-08. Wiggy! 17:14, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

Football (soccer) barnstar
For bucketloads of great contributions, particularly in the area of German football, I award you this barnstar. Oldelpaso 21:59, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Wow. How cool is that? <blush> Thanks for the notice. Wiggy! 23:45, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] answer to your questione

I lived in Nicaragua for about 5 years then i left the country when Ortega was first elected because he had some very weird rules you buy a certain kind of meat your not allowed to buy any other kind of meat you were told were you could spend your money, Im originally from Amsterdam i moved to the U.S to work as Chef and i'm an Associate at a private catering company I'm in my late 40's my wife is from Mexico. I last visited Nicaragua in Dec. 2005 i went to san juan del sur, laguna de apoyo, lago colcibolca etc. I mean no trouble but i think the Tourism section should be backed up with proper information and not from a personal point of view or a government site that has absolutely nothing to do with it, i first got interested when i was searching for information on central america i wanted read about other countries that i plan to visit next and i can honestly say wikipedia is no help i wouldnt recommend it to anyone until these articles are fixed. It doesnt seem to me that your contributors are helpful i know they are volunteers but they are rather discouraging this is not a friendly welcoming site and Nicaragua being the only country in central america that i have lived in i'd like to see some sources. I will contribute but lately work's been busy but when i get a chance i will gather up some sources for things i would like to write. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Holand (talk • contribs) 05:42, 27 February 2007 (UTC).

Thanks for the reply. Sounds like you've skipped around some, from place to place. Living in Nicaragua at a time of such big changes must have been a little scary. I'm from Canada which, except for some occasional excitement over Quebec, is a boringly - but wonderfully - stable place to live.
As to fixing the article on Nicaragua, I'd maybe go about it a bit more gently. I know it can be a frustrating chore sometimes, but I'm sure that if you work at a bit at a time it without beating up on your fellow contributors that it could be put into decent condition - especially as it sounds like you have something useful to add. Don't get too wound up over it and spend some time building some credibility with the other contributors by making useful incremental edits and - most importantly - by showing them some respect. Calling everyone a dope and bad-mouthing Wikipedia won't get you anywhere and the site can only be as friendly as you help make it. Patience, persistance and politeness. Wiggy! 17:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] African Cup of Nations

Thank you for copyediting of the article. Keep up the good work. --ChaChaFut 01:19, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to WikiProject Germany

Welcome, Wiggy!, to the WikiProject Germany! Please direct any questions about the project to its talk page. If you create new articles on Germany-related topics, please list them at our announcement page and tag their talk page with our project template {{WikiProject Germany}}. A few features that you might find helpful:

  • The project's Navigation box points to most of the pages in the project that might be of use to you.
  • Most of the important discussions related to the project take place on the project's main talk page; you may find it useful to watchlist it.
  • We've developed a number of guidelines for names, titles, and other things to standardize our articles and make interlinking easier that you may find useful.

Here are some tasks you can do:

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me or any of the more experienced members of the project, and we'll be very happy to help you. Again, welcome, and thank you for joining this project! -- Kusma (talk) 07:03, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg<

[[Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg<|thumb|right]] Nice find, that image!

Cheers, —Ian Spackman 14:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, isn't that a beauty? I felt a delicious wikithrill when I came across it. A tad lurid maybe, but classic 40s-style stuff from an era before the arrival of the ubiquitous videocam. Wiggy! 16:06, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes: back in the days when people who made images had to work at it! —Ian Spackman 16:14, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Abseits Guide to German Soccer

I just noticed that the Abseits Guide, used liberally as external weblink for German soccer clubs, is a bit fuzzy when it comes to the lower German leagues, especially when it gets to which tier that league was at the time (quoting only the tier of that league as it is today. It's somewhat excusable, as even the German Wikipedia doesn't give much info on this, and there were (and still are) some regional differences. I just want to mention that the website isn't exactly "encyclopedic" in its info. (Just one example: The SC Verl page misses the fact that Landesliga was (IV), not (V), in the 70ies (there was no Oberliga before 1978...) DevSolar 11:45, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

It may not be "encyclopedic", but having made regular use of the site it is clear that overall the info there is of generally high quality. I find it a great place to get started in developing a club profile because it provides a quick, easy to digest overview. In reading the author's profiles it is often obvious that he's visited the club site and used other sources. I also appreciate the tongue-in-cheek character of some of his remarks related to things that are often spot on that can be tough to find elsewhere, especially if the club itself won't talk about a given aspect of their history. Details like league standings can generally be confirmed at other sites, but again, I think the summary material available at Abseit's is valuble for its conciseness and ready availability. As a fan you know as well as I do that the historical structure of German football leagues is more than a bit convoluted, but to me that's part of the fascination of the game in the country. As a web asset Abseits is tough to beat and I appreciate the effort that's gone into the site, but wouldn't consider it a sole source.
I've settled into something of a routine when working on a club page that starts with a visit to Abseits. Then I'll hit up a bunch of other sites which generally include the German Wikipedia entry, the club site and some of its fans pages, the historical league results archive at www.f-archiv.de, the club summary page at eufo.de (for teams from tier IV and higher), and various wappen (logo) sites. I also used to make use of Hirschi's Fussballzahlensalat for details on very early German football, but that's disappeared. www.fussballdaten.de is often useful for confirming results (standings, match scores, cup competition), as is rsssf. And whatever else I may come across - throw into a pot and stir. I've got into the habit of appending external links to Abseits, f-archiv, and eufo (after the club page) as being the most useful to readers who want to do some follow-up or start their own explorations.
I'll typically gnaw at an article for a bit and then walk off and see what comes up in the next fews weeks or months and re-visit if I find new stuff or simply do a review and see if the item stands up. Its great to see folks adding stuff (corrections, new facts, perspective) and watch an article grow. Wiggy! 15:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Founding members of DFB

Great Job you did here so far with all the Club infos. If you need help i'll try to find things. I guess some of the founding clubs are not existing any more especially the ones from Berlin. I will check out what I can find tomorrow. Greetings --Panth 02:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. It has made for an interesting little side project within the context of German football, but I think I'm down to the real tough ones now. I found that a number of the clubs are long gone and so in some cases the available info in the articles is rather thin. In other cases I was surprised to find clubs still among the living. I might have material for one or two others salted away, but that's it for now. Thanks for your interest and I'm looking forward to see what you might come up with. If you can find additional material I'd be quite impressed. Good luck! Wiggy! 02:33, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Ok as i realize this is hard work to find information about the missing Clubs ;) I found a homepage of a Soccer History Museum in Dresden which might help us out with the Dresdner FC 1893. Unfortunately the page seems new and they dont have an email contact yet. Ill keep an eye on that. For Frankfurter FC Germania 1894 i found hints that it might still exist as VfL Germania 1894 but im not sure if it is the same Club and found no Club homepage. The same it is with FC Association 1893 Hamburg which might be the VfL 93 Hamburg e.V. which has a hompage [1]. I might check that as well. --Panth 13:17, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
As I said, its down to the tough stuff now, the cherry picking is over. I'll follow up on the leads you've provided. Thank you and good hunting! Wiggy! 14:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Well you did it! After your nudge I found a page for VfL Germania 1894 here. It's got a clear reference to being the same side that joined the DFB in 1900. Wiggy! 14:19, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Thats good to hear ;) Maybe you could do me a favor now. I found a mistake on Bundesliga. Theres this this template on the Bundesliga champions on the right side where they are all listed. Instead of 1998/1999 Bayern München it states 1988/1989. Just a minor edit but i couldnt find out where the source code of the box is located.--Panth 11:35, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that club page had a pretty detailed history section that also included a number of tidbits that I'll be able to use in the articles for other clubs. I've made the fix of the error you pointed out on the Bundesliga page. Thanks again. Wiggy! 12:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP Munich Sports Task Force

I've just created a sports task force for WP Munich. I've noticed that you have been editing 1860 Munich. The project is broken down where you can specifically help out 1860 Munich related article. Kingjeff 01:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

If you are interested, you can sign up here and here. Kingjeff 01:34, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] older logos FC Carl Zeiss Jena

Hi! The older logos at FC Carl Zeiss Jena are also not correct all. Please have a look at [2]. It's in German, but should be self-explanatory ;-) Otherwise please contact me.

--J2w 15:09, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Nice find! Where did you come across those old logos? I'll put together an updated historical logo image in the next day or two. Wiggy! 00:26, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
I have created this logos for the internet from paper versions from the club archive. The "green" logo on your pic is an older logo from another club in Jena (SV Jenapharm Jena, former: BSG Jenapharm Jena (1982-1989), BSG Chemie Jena (1951-1982)). --J2w 20:01, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#Regarding notability of Football (soccer) players

Hi, seeing you are interested in football this is an invitation to contribute to this discussion to clarify certain issues about football player notability. I think clearer guidelines are needed to avoid repeated inappropriate nominations for deletion and time consuming discussions. Cheers! StephP 20:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Türkiyemspor

I have fotos from Türkiyemspor Fans in the 90s and of Ümit Karan in Türkiyemsporjersey, also the original logo of the club ( a little bit of the logo wich was posted here, the blue is more open and about the number is written the club name once more. But I dont know how to post them, and the explaining here is to long. Is there a possibility to send as to you ? have a nice day--Batiberlin 02:11, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if you have seen it or not, but I left an email address you can use at your talk page. I'll repost it here - wikiwiggy@gmail.com Wiggy! 23:38, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Eintracht Frankfurt logos

Hi,Wiggy! I noticed your great work on German football and especially the logo section. I wondered if you could upload the old logos for Eintracht Frankfurt for they are missing and I'm not in the picture right stuff. That would be very appreciated by me as I'm keeping the Eintracht page up to date. I'm not sure if you are familiar with German but anyway: Schönen Gruß nach Kanada! ;-) -Lemmy- 10:45, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Sure, I will look around and see what I can find. My German is not very good, but I am getting by with the Google-machine. Für deine guten Wünsche danke. Good work on the Eintracht page. Wiggy! 11:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Oi,Wiggy. I created a new section in my favourite article. May I "misuse" you to have a swift cross-read? All the best -Lemmy- (talk) 17:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I've copy edited your material if you want to have a look. Nice addition to the page, Lemmy! Wiggy! (talk) 18:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Fantastic as always!:-) Thanks! -Lemmy- (talk) 19:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] re: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football

No worries - you fixed it before I saw your edit. But thanks for letting me know. Cheers. Ytny (talk) 20:05, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Toronto FC

Thanks for your note about fair use rationales. I noticed your interest in soccer, and wanted to suggest that you take a look at Toronto FC and make any improvements that seem appropriate. --Eastmain 00:24, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationales

You might want to add the fair use rationale that I added at Image:SpVggUnterhaching.png to *all* the football (soccer) logos which you have uploaded. I realize that doing so will be a lot of work, but it might be good insurance against having the logos tagged for deletion by another editor or a bot. --Eastmain 00:34, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I was figuring on something like that. There's close to 300 images, though, so it's not going to happen within three days or one week or whatever asinine target the BCbot has in mind. I don't have a bot and I do have a life. While I can appreciate the need for images being properly tagged, the approach is heavy handed. Assembling a group of editors to facilitate a transition alongside the bot's work would have been a friendlier way of meeting the objective. The arguments over what constitutes a proper fair use rationale that then follow the bot around are just adding insult to injury. It has me hoping that BC loses his wallet and gets caught in the bureaucratic circles of hell. He should be able to appreciate the irony of it all on some level given that there will be lots of mindless nobs around who will insist only on doing things right and filling out the necessary forms just so - even if they're out of date, or change every other day. Wiggy! 01:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merging the West German soccer team

I see you were involved in the discussion for merging the West German soccer team. I have put a voting section here. Kingjeff 14:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Concerning User:Kay Körner

Sorry to bother you; I've been following your exchanges with the user above, and I cannot fail to notice his, let's say obvious bias, concerning GDR football and the GDR herself. I've left him messages in German, as his English is probably not good enough to understand what we want of him. If you encounter real problems, just let me know. Lectonar 20:19, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

It is no bother. Thanks for the notice and your consideration. I don't know how long you have been following, but it is a stupid, petty little drama that's been going on for months now and this is pretty much as quiet as it has been. Kay's English is clearly not that good, and he's got a clear POV. He has been approached in German before, but to no real effect. Nonetheless, no harm in trying. You may have the magic touch. Thank you for your offer and I'll give you a shout if it ever escalates again. Wiggy! 22:41, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FC Bayern Munich Taskforce

Would you like to join a FC Bayern Munich Taskforce at WikiProject Munich? Kingjeff 20:56, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Would you be interested? Kingjeff 22:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I'll drift over and have a look. I'm giving it some consideration. I didn't enjoy my last turn there because of an overly aggressive, narrow minded editor, but he looks to have pretty much gone away. It's the major German team and deserves a better article. Should be headed to a feature. Wiggy! 22:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

This would be a group thing and we're not just talking about the article FC Bayern Munich. Here is the main page for the task force. If you do decide to participate in anyway, the current roster would be a good place to start. A lot of these players are either Stub-Class or Start-Class. Kingjeff 03:21, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

here is the Task Force. I'm very keen to have you involved. Kingjeff 00:00, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Oberliga Hessen teams

Hi, Wiggy! I have just updated all Oberliga Hessen teams. The promoted sides are missing. Maybe we could add them together. One more note: The current Oberliga team FSV Steinbach will be renamed FSV 1926 Fernwald on July 1st. Could you change the logo? I will switch the whole article on July 1st. Thanks again for your efforts! -Lemmy- 21:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Great, sounds like a plan. I'll chip away as I have time and add logos where I'm able. Nice to see all the German league stuff coming together. Just about at the 300 team article count which compares favourably to what's available for many other countries. I see your name pop up all the time, so I'm equally appreciative of your work. Thanks and keep well. Wiggy! 22:06, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SpVgg Unterhaching Task Force

Would you like to join the SpVgg Unterhaching Task Force at WikiProject Munich? If you are interested you can sign up here. Kingjeff 01:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for the heads up. He doesn't know any english? Kingjeff 03:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Only of the most rudimentary sort. Check out some of the articles under his contribs link and you'll clue in in about two seconds. Its just not there. Wiggy! 03:43, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

He sounds like an Ossi. Kingjeff 03:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Yup. Nothing wrong with that, but no need to be obsessed with it to the point that you can't contribute. Wiggy! 04:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edit to MS 1860 Munich (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 02:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MS 1860 Munich

This is a redirect. I've never heard of this name for 1860 Munich. Kingjeff 16:42, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Somebody set up a spoof page (based on the original) which I blanked. A bot came along and reverted that thinking it was vandalism. I blanked it again but added a speedy delete tag, then someone else came along and attached a redirect which isn't quite right. It just plain needs to be nuked and I'm just not familiar enough with the process and haven't had time to better deal with it yet. Wiggy! 17:35, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Then maybe the speedy deletion tag should be added again. Kingjeff 18:15, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sportvereinigung Dynamo

None of the many reasons are actually cause for speedy. If you think the article is that bad, it looks like you'll have to use AfD, considering that there's opposition. I know it's a pain, but they're going to have their debate. Maybe it will settle things.  :) DGG 23:29, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Germany national under-21 football team

The Germany national football team and the U-21 team might be merged. I've already started a discussion and vote for this. You can join the discussion here. Kingjeff 16:50, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Viktoria Aschaffenburg

Why did you move this out of the article:

"* DFB-Pokal: 87/88 Quarterfinal (winfall viktory in the second round against former leader of the Fußball-Bundesliga 1.FC Köln)"? Is there a misetake? Berlinschneid 22:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, no mistake. "Honours" generally refer to divisional championships, cup wins, or finals appearances (i.e. vice-champions, cup finalists). The win to advance to the quarter final may have been exciting and significant in the club's history, but was not any form of recognized honour - it was simply an appearance in cup tournament play. The game you reference was actually a second round match. The team went on to defeat Hessen Kassel in the Achtelfinale before going out to Werder in the viertelfinale/quarterfinal. That's not clear from your entry and the team's cup performance is touched on in the main article. I'll work it into the main article if that will do. Wiggy! 00:51, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
O.K. That’s nice. And your are right, the win to advance the quarter final is nothing special. But as a long time supporter of the club, it was a great time. Particularly with regard to the depressing years which followed. I know, feelings should not find the way into a encyclopedia. But I think now it is a good compromise.  ;-) Berlinschneid 22:01, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for that. I'm from Canada where the football (soccer) is rather poor. Hockey is the game over here and my local team is the Toronto Maple Leafs. They have not won the big prize (the Stanley Cup) since 1967. But I was at the deciding match of their seven game semi-final series in 1992(?) which they lost to Los Angeles. No honours, but wow, what a thrill to see the team go that far - just one game away from the Cup final. So I understand your feelings. Why can't our teams win? Maybe one day. Aschaffenburg had a decent season last year - maybe this will be their year.
My dad is from Berlin and I grew up playing football, not hockey, so that is why I am writing Wikipedia articles about German football teams. I find the tradition of the game in Germany fascinating.
A small detail of English usage for your user page - you want to use 70s (to refer to the decade of the 70s), not 70th (which would be used to refer to a place/platz - which would be a very bad result). Good luck to your club! Wiggy! 00:20, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FSG Südkreis

Why did you remove the deletion template. The team plays only in the sixth devision. It would also be deleted in German wikipedia, because it isn't notable. --Yoda1893 18:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I tend to being an [[3]]. I am also not real big on short timelines for deleting stuff and note that other editors who may be interested have not yet responded. I've made a few edits to move the thing along and left a message for the fellow most likely to be able to help the article.
The club is undergoing some change and has made some recent progress. The article contains more than a lot of stubs for clubs from other countries. I don't see any harm in letting it be for a while and prefer that to seeing the thing disappear entirely. Wiggy! 19:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Hallo Wiggy! I wrote some information for you about the FSG Südkreis on my talk-page. StefanW-en 13:00, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] James Milner Career section

Not really asking for full feedback on this article (although I wouldn’t mind it). I’d just like to know what you feel the best way the divide up the Career section is, by Club, by season, not at all or some other way. Please leave your reply under the section in my talk page named “Milner Career section”. Buc 16:29, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dynamo

Hallo, ich habe erst mal erreicht, was ich erreichen wollte. Die Erinnerung an die tolle SV Dynamo, die selbst hier in Deutschland in Vergessenheit geriet. So wie du das gemacht hattest fand ich das gut. Ich habe festgestellt, dass ich ein "wikiholic" wurde und muss langsam mal loslassen und mich auf mein Abitur konzentrieren. Mein Übersetzungsprogramm tat mir mitteilen, dass Vereinigung Unification heißt und Association heißt auch Vereinigung mit Verband. Ich habe das deshalb genommen, da ich das so im Wörterbuch stehen hatte. Ich habe das nicht gewusst. Die Meisterschaften sind im Schwimmen so gut wie vollständig, aber auch bei dem Schießen gibt es noch militärgewehre, die ich nicht gemacht habe. Sonst müssten dann alle Meisterschaften vollstädnig sein. Am aufwendigsten ist dann auch die EM und WM, da dort nur Länder und keine Vereine stehen. Da muss Name und Verein bei google gesucht werden und dauert für eine person dann auch gleich ca. min. 10 min.. --Kay Körner 20.12.1983 13:41, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Ja, die Übersetzungen können schwierig sein. Dabei kann man üben. Es gibt keine Notwendigkeit den Namen der Mannschaft für den Gebrauch auf Wikipedia zu übersetzen. Andere Hinweise von der Mannschaft findest Du nicht in englischer Version des Namens; nirgends im Internet.

Viel Spaß und Erfolg mit (D/d)einem Studium!Wiggy! 14:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Danke! (Kay Körner)

Cool. Thank you. Wiggy! 21:49, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Kannst ja mal denie rassistischen und imperialistischen Äußerungen abschmacken. Das sind nur sinnlose Phrasen! Höre auf gefälligst auf Dynamo zu randalieren, wenn du wieder von nichts Ahnung hast; du billiger Agent! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.95.143.150 (talk) 12:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SC Dynamo Berlin Logo

Hi, I think the logo of my flag (I'm the owner of the only one flag of the SCDB) is the true logo. But yours is a former defective copy from the GDR-Time. --141.76.176.242 <<Image:SC Dynamo Berlin.png|right|180px>> 15:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Kay, SC Dynamo Berlin came out of SG Dynamo Berlin on 1 October 1954. Prior to that (1949-1954) the club played as a Volkspolizei side. SC became BFC Dynamo Berlin in 1966. After German unification BFC played briefly as FC Berlin from 1990 to 1999 when they resumed the name BFC Dynamo. That's straight out of Grünes's Vereinslexikon.

There is nothing "defective" or incorrect about any of the logos on the BFC page that cover the history as I have outlined it above. The logo you have is correct for the period from 1954-66 and a much cleaner, better quality version of that logo is displayed on the page alongside the BFC and FC logos. The Volkspolizei logo is missing and should perhaps be added. East German clubs used generic logos depending on what sector of the economy/government they were associated with. What you have posted on the SC page is a poor quality image variant of the Dynamo (security forces) logo. There are cleaner versions of that available on the web, too. And while you may own the actual logo-bearing flag, that has nothing to do with the separate copyright issues.

I don't understand your point of your comment. We have been through this and other business before and I'm not interested in re-opening an old debate over a POV approach to article/image editing. Wiggy! 17:53, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

That's not true, like every time!!--141.76.176.148 16:43, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Kay, don't start up. I gave you the facts and identified the source. It is not clear to me if your previous ban has been lifted and now you look like you are ready to begin again with the approach that got you banned in the first place. Be civil, get your facts correct, and don't spam the rest of us here. Wiggy! 18:55, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SV 1919 Bernbach

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article SV 1919 Bernbach, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Cruftbane 19:23, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User_talk:Kay_Körner_20.12.1983#Category

I responded to your comments to Kay here. - Che Nuevara 17:45, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

To which I further responded. Thanks and all, but be wary of this fellow and his conduct. You might want to look at User:Fox53 and follow the concentric circles from there. Wiggy! 18:02, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
I added yet another comment to this discussion, because a) his edits do not make sense to me, and b) I wished to point out the pointlessness of using German on the English-language wikipedia. Have my doubts as to the helpfulness of the efforts, but someone's gotta try, no? Madcynic 03:08, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Actually, thanks for bringing it back to my notice. I had let it slip from my attention because Kay's new category was at least in English, wasn't overtly POV, and wasn't being inappropriately spammed all over creation. Thanks also for taking the time to comment. Wiggy! 12:24, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

While it's a little awkward to have to sort out the German language discussion, I have to give you some credit, Che, for at least being able to draw Kay out into some sort of discussion. Just be mindful of feeding the troll.

I think you can get some sense from Kay's remarks that he is, at best, disdainful of accepted editing practise on Wikipedia. He's got a long history of POV editing here that includes building long lists of spam links, assembling large collections of poor quality, unlicensed images, and poorly translated POV edits regularly placed out of context which he goes to great lengths to defend against all reason. It would be one thing if this was limited to just a couple of articles, but he'll spam dozens of articles based on his POV. He didn't get blocked here and at de:Wikipedia because he's nice guy - it was because of the persistently disruptive and often offensive nature of his edits, his disregard for established Wikipedia policy, and attacks on other editors (no, not just me). Continue to tread carefully in dealing with this fellow. Wiggy! 12:46, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I apologize if you found it off-putting that I was conversing with Kay in German. I actually initially posted to him in English, but he responded in his native German. As a native English speaker who has lived abroad, I know how frustrating it can be to have to conduct even the simplest tasks in a language not your own, no matter how high a level of proficiency you have. I would like to assure you that I did this for no reason other than to make him feel comfortable in an attempt to draw him into reasonable discussion. I would have gladly translated the conversation into English for you if you had asked -- I have nothing to hide.
In that sense, I disagree with Madcynic that speaking German on English WP is pointless -- I was hoping that, by making this user more comfortable, I would be able to open his mind up a little bit to the realities of Wikipedia.
I'm not sure I would call him disdainful. He may in fact be aware of the full reality of WP policy and practice and simply ignoring them, but I think it's also possible that he doesn't (yet) fully grasp what he's been doing wrong. And I don't mean the language issue, obviously, since he's been active on de.wiki. There are plenty of native English speakers on en.wiki who are honestly confused or misled, unfortunately. In any case, I was hoping that I could lead him by the hand to get him to be a better Wikipedian. Perhaps I've gotten through to him; perhaps not. But at the least I can say that I tried.
Like I said, I apologize if you found my approach off-putting, as I meant absolutely no disrespect to you. I understand your frustration with Kay and do not begrudge it you.
Thanks again for your concern. - Che Nuevara 16:34, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
No, I'm not particularly fussed over the language thing - I've been trying to learn some German and there's nothing like real life to help things along. And I don't ascribe any bad intent to the whole thing on your part at all, and I don't think you have to consider yourself as having to apologize in any way. Thanks, in fact, for your effort.
It's simply that, in various forms, Kay has been conducting himself in a disruptive manner for months. You're new to this guy, so you're legitimately assuming good faith on his part. It just isn't there and he's demonstrated that repeatedly. In this case, when the sport unification (=sportvereinigung) thing initially came up, I provided him with an explanation and offered some alternatives. He ignored that and went ahead and did his own thing - which was wrong simply as a translation before anything else - and started tagging all kinds of stuff with an ill-conceived, incorrectly translated category and other spam. From where I sit it was just the start of another round of the behaviour that got him blocked previously. The short bit he fed you is just a mild dose of his view of things. He's tiresome and frustrating, and isn't showing any real interest in learning otherwise. I think he's full aware of the unacceptable character of his conduct as he's heard about repeatedly both here and at de:Wikipedia in both English and German. He just doesn't care. He'll just carry on until he has to slip on a new identity or edit out of some Dresden-based IP.
I suspect Madcynic is aware of Kay's conduct over time, as we frequent some of the same areas of interest, and he's likely seen Kay and I going back and forth at it. As I imagine have a number of other editors (a little to my embarassment). I appreciate his notice in this instance and if there's anyone who thinks he can straighten Kay away some, that would be a good thing. In the meantime I'm not inclined to just watch him do his POV thing and inflict poor English on articles as he sees fit. Wiggy! 17:21, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


Che, given your fluency in German you might want to look at these two links by way of example:
http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Benutzer_Diskussion:Kay_K%C3%B6rner_20.12.1983&action=history
http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sportvereinigung_Dynamo&action=history
Yes, I indeed am aware of the edits - and I think I should clarify my statement insofar, as I do not object to using a foreign (i.e. other than English) language on the EL-wikipedia per se. I just believe that especially in cases such as this, where there is a lot of potential for conflict, sticking to English is more helpful in terms of allowing third persons to understand what is going on. I do realize what you were trying to do, Che, but as Wiggy! has pointed out before, I doubt it will have any success. Nevertheless, you go ahead and try. Madcynic 21:10, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Here's my two cents on Kay ... and maybe I'm wrong, I don't know. I think he's actually very confused. It's possible that he's fully aware that what he's doing is problematic, but if he is, he's putting in an awful lot of effort to keep up an act. I think that de.wiki demonstrates this. Kay_Körner_20.12.1983 wasn't actually his original username. He was originally registered as Kay_Körner_(Dresden). Now, they're a little less forgiving over at de.wiki than were are here in en, and Kay was indefblocked about three hours after his first edit [4] [5], not for blatant vandalism, but because "no will for encyclopedic cooperation [was] evident". Granted, he was being contentious and perhaps even trollish, but I've never seen someone here be indefblocked on their first day for anything but threats of violence and vandalism (and even then usually they're a recreation of a past vandal).

I'm pretty sure Kay is Jewish. [6] He is also from the former East Germany. [7] He apparently believes he is being discriminated against for one or both of these reasons.

[8] A list of actions taken by other editors he finds unfair, followed by "right, Christians!"
[9] "TheK and Polaris constantly erase my work. They don't read what I do here, because they don't like seeing the success of Germans."
[10] (After Polaris defends his deletions and says that he too is German) "You have to read what I write! And besides you haven't added anything, you federal citizen!" (This refers exclusively to West or reunited Germany -- an East German would not have been a "Bundesbürger".)
[11] "At the federal Wikipedia" (again the East-West thing) "I am immediately locked out without warning" (that's actually true -- he didn't receive a single talk warning before being indefblocked) " [...] People muck around here and delete things immediately, but they get upset about the Stasi. I feel I am being handled in a racist manner."

Now, I'm not defending him -- he's contentious and acting very problematically, and something needs to be done. But I honestly think he is immensely confused. Which is unfortunate, because he's going to wind up getting himself indefblocked here too. I'm not sure I know what to do about him, though. - Che Nuevara 18:44, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

So that he can't say he didn't get fair warning, here is the translation of what I posted to him:
Kay: You need to stop. I know you feel hurt. But if you continue to act as you have acted until now, you will surely be blocked. No one is allowed to insult another person here on Wikipedia -- not you, not me, not anyone else.
I can guarantee to you: if you fight, attack, and disparage further, you will be blocked. That is not a threat -- that is simply how it is here on Wikipedia.
If you wish to work more at Wikipedia, you have to speak with others civilly, socially,`and reasonably. You must also hold yourself to the rules. I would recommend that you read them. If you don't understand a rule, I will gladly clarify it for you. And when you don't agree with something, you are allowed to explain your opinion calmly and without attack.
I hope you take this warning seriously. It would serve your best interests to do so.
I think that's about as clear as it gets. And he already apparently finds me sympathetic, so maybe there's a chance he'll take me seriously. If not, I wouldn't expect to see him around for too much longer -- he's bound to get himself in trouble more this way. - Che Nuevara 19:16, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

Please don't remove {{sources}} or related tags without adding sources. Thanks, Cruftbane 21:21, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Club song

Hello again! I need your help on my club's song Im Herzen von Europa. I translated the lyrics from German to English but I guess there are some little mistakes or not plain translations in it.Feel free to change it.Thanks in advance! -Lemmy- 20:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll have a run at it (even though I'm not any kind of poet). Sounds like fun. :) Wiggy! 20:15, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
More poet than I am ;-) Thanks for your work! -Lemmy- 10:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bad simple:Wikipedia user

Thank you for letting me know about simple:User:Kay Körner. Regards, huji—TALK 18:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Captain Future

[12]

I was afraid of that.

Do we know this for a fact? Should we request a CheckUser? If it is the same person, then he's evading a block (which he may not actually know he's not supposed to do -- I'm still struggling to figure out just how much this guy understands -- although that is, of course, not an excuse), but I would hate to report this guy only to have it be a misunderstanding. - Revolving Bugbear (formerly Che Nuevara) 13:07, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, its him. Exactly the same edit pattern and style, posting the same pics &etc. that go back months and months. If he follows pattern he'll start out all apologetic, beg for some help, go easy for a bit, but then be back to his old aggressive editing practises within a couple of weeks. He understands fully what he's doing. Wiggy! 13:33, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

[13]

I thought you might be interested in seeing that. In the spirit of WP:BEANS, I'm wrestling with what to say to him about it. - Revolving Bugbear (formerly Che Nuevara) 20:55, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Thx. More of the same. He's persistent if nothing else. It wouldn't bother me to see him do his thing at SV but he always goes off from there to slip POV crap or nonsensical cruft into articles he thinks are even remotely related to his pet club. Unfortunately, some of our interests overlap. So I'm an edit monster. And I eat kittens. Whatever.
Dunno what you might say that could help as Kay has made it clear as a bell that he's happy to ignore everyone here, unless he's doing the {{helpme}} thing, which always manages to draw in a couple of innocent folks, but good luck in any case. Thx again for the heads up. Keep well. Wiggy! 23:14, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Grande Torino commemorative stamps.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Grande Torino commemorative stamps.png. 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 within a couple of 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 10:01, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Oberligen u.s.w.

Thanks for the praise! Unfortunately most of my books on football are still in Germany, I wish I had them here, it would make writing about Oberligas and Verbandsligas a lot easier! Also, having just started, getting to know wiki's style means lot's of studying of other pages. Anyway, I'm getting there with the southern German leagues, just questioning who cares about the Bezirksoberliga Schwaben anyway? But I do hope the Leafs win a Stanley Cup in your life time again, can anybody remember 1967? I wasn't born then!

Well you deserve some sort of pat on the back. You've added significant amounts of German football material. Great to see somebody get into it (and with a decent writing style, too). Bezirksoberliga Schwaben? It'll be somebody's pet league. There is still quite a ways to go before before getting down to the level of league info available in the English nad Italian sections. As for the Leafs and the Stanely Cup, I'm afraid it'll be some time yet by the look of things. If suffering builds character then Leaf fans will be among the most upright, noble people you can find. The teams last good run was in '93 when they got to the semi-finals. That was fun and I was really looking forward to a monster sized party. However ...
And yes, it is no fun to be separated from one's books, but good work nonetheless. Keep well. Wiggy! (talk) 15:26, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Creating new Dynamo article...

Yeah I suppose a disambiguation page isn't the best place for that complex history of the electric dynamo. The whole dynamo issue is annoying because people do not realize it was originally much more than an electrical generator, and really it was the source of many different rotating electrical devices. I've decided to take over the old Dynamo redirect and see about fleshing it out into a full article to discuss these ambiguities.. DMahalko (talk) 07:23, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Probably best. You added some interesting stuff that'll stand well on its own. Wiggy! (talk) 18:20, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] This is probably the last thing you want to hear ....

... but [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:March_27#Vandalism_and_racist_discriminating_by_User:_Wiggy.21.

I will try to keep an eye on this situation. Please let me know if you decide to do anything in particular about this, as I will be happy to comment. - Revolving Bugbear 19:36, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Kay floats a helpme about once every two months or so. He's blocked under several identities and is only occasionally re-appearing to do a little sock IP editing. Thank you for the notice and your offer of assistance. My guess/hope is that this will fade away without too much fuss. Keep well. Wiggy! (talk) 21:23, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I've had the SVD page on watch since our last meeting, so I've noticed his antics. He does seem to be calming down, but hasn't quite given it up yet. Cheers, and happy wiki'ing. - Revolving Bugbear 21:49, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

As a heads-up, I've 3RR warned Kay, but both of you have 3 reverts on the page. As much as I agree you're in the right here, be careful regarding 3RR -- I'd hate to see you get blocked, even for a short time, over this silliness. - Revolving Bugbear 23:26, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks and thanks. I've been to the same edge with this fellow once before, but you're right, time to head off and do something productive. Be good. Wiggy! (talk) 23:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A Question

Hey Wiggy,

just a quick question: I modified an image (Image:Deutschland_Lage_von_Nordrhein-Westfalen.svg, creating Image:Deutschland_Lage_von_Westdeutschland.png) to highlight the area of the Regionalliga West but i'm not sure about the whole copyright thing. Will it be deleted, is it ok? It would be good if you could give me your opinion on it, Wiggy! Thanks,EA210269 (talk) 15:27, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

The original file is from Commons, which makes it a license free image (as long as the license info attached there is valid). That should allow you to take the image, modify it, and then make use of it under the same type of free license. I would simply create a license tag for the new image by identifying yourself as the creator, crediting the fellow who created the original image, identifying Commons as the source that the new image is based on, and tagging it as GDFL. You could probably post it to Commons for everyone to use and reference in the article it from there. That would allow you to copy and paste most of the existing license info from the original Commons file. I hope that helps. If you'd like me to add the necessary tag, I can do that and you can treat it as a model for future images.
By the way, I keep seeing you all over German football here at en:Wikipedia, and I have to say (once again) very nice work. You're making substantial contributions. Well done. Wiggy! (talk) 16:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
If you could create a sample for me by tagging this one, that would be great, Wiggy. Frankly, I find this copyright thing a little confusing at times. If I had a sample I could do simular images for the other Oberligas and Regionalligas, where needed. Thanks again for the praise, Wiggy, but I'm greatly enjoying writing about German football, especially about the leagues below the two Bundesligas, where information in English is hard to come by. I'm hoping to finish the Oberligas soon. Thanks also for tidying some of my club articles, especially the images, I couldn't get the SpVgg Lindau one sorted out, looks much better now!EA210269 (talk) 02:09, 22 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Regarding user Betacommand

Hey Wiggy, sorry to bother you with another question but you are a bit of an authority so maybe you now the answer. On quite a few occasitions, user betacommand added reflist to articles, thinking it will improve them, however, it messes them up as it does not remove ols references and they therefore appear twice. I made him aware of this but redeived no reply. I noted now that he continous to do so, still causing the same problem. Is there anything that can be done to stop him? He propably means well but doesn't seem to know what he is doing. Regards, EA210269 (talk) 00:38, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Can you point me to an example or two?
Stop him? Probably not. BC is convinced of the Righteousness of his Cause which makes him tough to deal with. My guess is that'll take some persistence in bringing the issue to his attention. Mind you it looks like there's finally a group of folks backing the bot up by looking at complaints/concerns as they are put forward and trying to make some sort of reply (which is where things should have started from). Once I look at some examples I'll be happy to express myself and we'll see if anybody else is having similar issues.
Catch you later. Wiggy! (talk) 02:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
I've got two current examples which I havn't bothered fixing up, they are Bezirksoberliga Schwaben and Bezirksliga Schwaben-Nord, have a look when you got time. I repaired the other ones a couple of days ago. I had a look at his contributions and he seems to do this "fix" on a large scale. I also left him another message. To be fair, the way I originally did those reference lists on those articles is propably not of the highest quality but to my escuse I say didn't know any better. Anyway, have a look, let me know and I fix up the two articles after that again. Talk to you soon, EA210269 (talk) 03:48, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. On our previous discussion, I'm working up what I hope will be a suitable fair use rationale/license for your league maps and have attached the first version to the image in the Regionalliga West article. I'll tweak it a bit over the next little while and we'll see what reaction it draws. Its based on the criteria set out at Commons. Up to you to write the description that you think works best. Wiggy! (talk) 03:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, Wiggy!, looks just fine, this will help me a lot in making simular maps for other German leagues. Danke Schön!, EA210269 (talk) 04:18, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Maps of Germany

I have finally managed to create the maps you've made me a sample for. Have a look and many thanks for your help,EA210269 (talk) 02:10, 7 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Know this website?

Hey wiggy!,

writing the Landesliga Thüringen article, I stumbled over this website, seems to be quite usefull, especially to somebody that likes writing German football club articles, have you used it before? Nordostfussball. I only had a brief look but seems ok.EA210269 (talk) 01:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

New to me. I'll go root around there some. Thanks for the tip! Wiggy! (talk) 18:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion about the Regionalliga

Hi, perhaps you know something that should be mentioned in the discussionWikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Regionalliga? Thanks, Punkmorten (talk) 16:31, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dynamo article

Hey wiggy!,

just happened to read the Dynamo article (or tried to), somebody really doesn't like you there! The english of the article is a shocker in places, and that sure must mean something, coming from me, a German! Anyway, what I really wanted to ask, do you know User: 194.95.142.179? He has made a heap of edits there and just resently edited the Regionalliga Nord article with some nonsens, have to clean it up now. Take care, all the best,EA210269 (talk) 00:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't like me?! <laugh out loud> I'm afraid that particular editor and I have a long and unfriendly history. What you see on that particular page is pretty much the standard of work he applies to just about anything he puts his hand to. Our emnity goes back to his attempts to turn the Dynamo Berlin article into a team tribute page that was rather heavy on hooligan/communist/Stasi oriented spam. The glories of East Germany and all that. Go back a have a look at the history of the thing if you want to get a feel for this guys approach. The edits to the Regionalliga Nord article are just a small sample - you are now on his turf (anything to do with the old DDR) with that article.
So, that said I'd be careful about wading in on SV Dynamo, as that's his pet. I mostly ignore him these days unless he starts to wander around and do dumb things. Like linking Dynamo to the article on oak trees because there's an oak laurel in the team crest or otherwise spamming/hacking at similarly remotely related articles. So heads up. He's at User:Fox53, blocked here and at de:Wiki under a pile of different names, and is limiting himself to using IP's out of Dresden these days. He goes to school there.
I'd be happier and it would be better for us all if he could do the kind of work you do - good solid contribs and you're easy to work with. All the best to you, too, and keep up the good work. I'm always delighted to see what you have to add. Thanks for the note. Wiggy! (talk) 01:15, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the warning, Wiggy!, I can see, he could be a difficult "customer". I guess it is very hard to bar somebody when they constantly change their IP address, he is obviously very determined. I just wrote an article on the DDR-Liga yesterday and edited the DDR-Oberliga one a little bit so I guess I can expect a visit soon! Thanks for the praise, Wiggy!, I will try to keep the standard up! Always a pleasure, EA210269 (talk) 01:40, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

That looks like evidence to me that CF is creating articles for the anonymous IPs to be able to edit. Unfortunately he has no talk space edits and as good as no edit summaries, but those plus the grammar specifics should be enough to pin him to these troublesome IPs, and from there it's only a baby step to Kay.

Three new articles this week. I think it may be time to move to WP:SSP, and I'll be happy to be slammed as a "Bundesbürger" in my Wessi haven of Frankfurt. What do you think? - Revolving Bugbear 18:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, probably a good suggestion. It's quite clearly Kay/CF given the style and focus. Note that User:Fhsssssss is probably also Kay.
Mostly nuisance edits, but tagging stuff as "featured" (or "good" as Kay has done in the past) is just not right for stuff that is so poorly written and POV. Stepping into the main stream with those kinds of edits is just asking for the wrong kind of attention. The article on Lyric poetry of the Sports Club Dynamo is just plain bizarre. I note that it appears Kay/CF may have got some help with his last edit on the Dynamo talk page. The English is far better than he generally is able to deliver, but it all still boils down to a pointless rant that clearly demonstrates a failed understanding of the nature of the Wikipedia community.
Thanks for your help. Greetings from Peterborough, Ontario Canada. Wiggy! (talk) 18:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I have created a section in the article titled "Controversies surrounding the Sport Club Dynamo", lets see wether he will let it stand! I wonder if he is tolerant enough to accept a well referenced section contrary to his world believe. I've researched a lot of sources, the amount of information regarding DDR-doping is overwhelming! Only used the most reliable sources, like BBC, The Guardian, etc. I also added a Dynamo section to the Doping (Sport).EA210269 (talk) 03:42, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Nope. Wiped out in short order. Not a surprise. Going to be a lot of work ... Wiggy! (talk) 12:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] SpVgg Au/Iller

Thanks for the article, Wiggy, it was on my to-do-list, for quite a while! Unfortunatly I didn't find the clubs website to informativ. I find club articles a lot harder to write then leagues!EA210269 (talk) 05:20, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure. You're right about the club's website, but I'm working from a copy of Vereinslexikon, - which helps hugely - and the German language Wikipedia articles. I wandered around through the league articles last night and updated a few of the templates to link to existing club articles. I'm blown away by how much league stuff you've assembled - you've clearly got some good source material there at least! Wiggy! (talk) 12:25, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kay / AN

WP:AN#SV Dynamo and multi-indef-blocked User:Kay Körner. - Revolving Bugbear 20:28, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Wiggy! (talk) 20:39, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

Football (soccer) barnstar
For the fact that new articles about German football clubs are poping up from Babelsberg to Kaufbeuren, I award you this Barnstar. Keep them coming, Wiggy!EA210269 (talk) 23:12, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I will wear it with pride

Thanks Wiggy, looks really nice on my talk page, this barnstar! And many thanks for your last couple of articles. I do like seeing new articles about football clubs in Schwaben! Well, and happy birthday to you! On the (wikipedia-)work front I'm going through old articles of mine, cleaning them up a bit, the older ones I did can use a bit of polish. In the East German football league system article, I have tried to give a bit of background on the club names and affiliations in the old DDR, a thing we spoke about a while ago, I think. The other thing, I've added a little poem I found to the BFC Dynamo article. Translation is difficult when it comes to poems and I'm not sure it even really should be in the article but after Lyric poetry of the Sports Club Dynamo I figured some counter balance (and sanity?) was needed. Have fun, great having you around on wikipedia,EA210269 (talk) 23:45, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] March 2008 edition of the WikiProject Germany newsletter

The Germany WikiProject Newsletter
Issue II - March 2008
From the editor

This is the second issue of WikiProject Germany's newsletter. The newsletter is intended to help all members of the project to keep up with new developments and coordinate new collaborative efforts. If you think anything should be featured in the next issue, please leave a note at the Newsdesk
Other areas where you can help
  • Assessment requests: Some open Requests for assessment need to be answered. To see new assessment requests as they come in, you can watchlist the assessment page.
  • More task forces and subprojects: As this WikiProject covers a very large topic area, it is helpful to add more task forces that focus on specific aspects of Germany. Currently, we have a Mainz task force, a Munich subproject and some joint task forces with other WikiProjects. Any project member is invited to start a new task force. Suggestions for possible topics:
    • Transportation in Germany
    • German politics (the political system of Germany and the biographies of its politicians)
    • German Democratic Republic

Be creative! If you have an idea, just suggest it on the project talk page (don't forget to watchlist it).

  • Categorization: Uncategorized Germany stubs need to be categorized
Project news
  • Cities and municipalities task force

The task force dedicated to creating and improving articles on all German cities and municipalities is happy to announce that there are now (at least) stub articles for all municipalities of Germany. Now the task force is looking for help in fleshing these out a little bit. The current phase of activity for the task force is to copy in infoboxes from the articles in German Wikipedia. If you want to help, even just for a few articles, look at the instructions and links here

  • Article Assessment:

There are now way over 26.000 articles tagged as part of our Wikiproject and many still need either an importance or a quality assessment. Also there are many more out there that do need to be tagged like approx 8000 municipalities. If you would like to help take a browse through Articles needing Importance assessment or Articles needing a basic quality assessment.

- Newsletter Bot Talk 15:48, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

This newsletter is delivered by a bot to all members of WikiProject Germany. If you do not want to receive this newsletter in the future, please leave a note at the talk page of the Outreach department so we can come up with a better spamlist solution. Thank you, - Newsletter Bot Talk 15:48, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AFD

I think you might know something about this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SV Nord Lerchenau. Punkmorten (talk) 20:18, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate the heads up. I came across this earlier and was going to check into the club's history. At this point I'm working primarily at defending articles for those clubs who have played at fourth level and above if an issue arises. That causes some significant spill over down into the fifth division which makes it worth sticking up for that stuff, too, especially now that there are articles in place for all the teams currently playing at or above the Oberliga (IV) level. The introduction of the 3. Liga will probably stir things up some next season. I'll look into where Lerchenau is at (or was) and see if they are in any way significant or if there is a chance to expand the article. Thanks again. Wiggy! (talk) 20:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] BC Augsburg

Hey Wiggy, first of all, sorry to see the Leafs miss out on the play-offs, you might have to wait another year. I actually went to see some ice hockey (in Australia!), in Newcastle, Australia versus Spain, it was real good! I hadn't seen a game for years. Anyway, I saw your new BCA article and I'm not sure a separate article is needed. Most people in Augsburg actully feel that the FCA is a direct continuation of BCA, not a separate entity. The TSV Schwaben supporters never felt the FCA represented this club too. The main reason for this is that the traditional home of BCA in the north of Augsburg became the base for the new club and the Schwaben side of the club in the south of the city was ignored. There actually is a new BC Augsburg-Oberhausen which claims the name of the old BCA and seems to be doing alright in the Kreisliga Schwaben-Augsburg, leading the league and looking for promotion to the Bezirksliga. I can't find a logo so I don't know how close the conection is. But the suburb Oberhausen is were the old BCA once started. Anyway, two separate articles won't do any harm, I moved a few little things across to the new page which belong to the old club. Have fun,EA210269 (talk) 03:17, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, as the saying goes in this neck of the woods, "Winter must be over - the Leafs are out!". Not something I get too wound up over because they've been so bad for so long. Hockey in Australia ... hmm. A bit of an odd mental image for me alongside the notion of Spain and Australia having ice hockey teams. Especially as we are just emerging from such a snowy, icy winter this year. The snow is only melting away now and the ice is just coming off the lake where I am.
I wasn't too sure about how to approach BC Augsburg. There was clearly a lot of information that needed to go somewhere. Its something that's come up for other teams, too. I've used both approaches (new article vs. add to old). I think that ultimately I may lean to sticking with the approach used in the Vereinslexikon where there are articles for separate teams that are sufficiently notable. Got to chew on the idea. Interesting tidbit about the "new" BC. I'll have to look into that somehow.
Nice to hear from you, thanks for your comments. Keep well. Wiggy! (talk) 17:22, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
World championship, here we come! Australia just won promotion, for the first time, Wiggy! A bit of a miracle. To tell you the truth, I don't think many of the Australian players were born here, I think most of them hold the same passport as you! I actually work with a Canadian who plays hockey in Perth! Anyway, up we go, its going to be a tough challange next year.
BCA - FCA can be seen either way, two clubs or just one but I keep an eye on the "new" BCA-Oberhausen, its actually been around for many years. I'm quite curious wether it claims the old logo or not, that would be a deciding factor in my opinion. Enjoy spring and the melting snow, greetings,EA210269 (talk) 00:38, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New template

Hy, Wiggy! I've created a new template to make it easier to move between German Oberliga articles, Template:German Amateur Oberliga (football). I want to do the same for the Regionalligas and Verbandsligas but the later might be a bit large, have to see. Have a look, maybe you can see any necessary improvements. Anyway, FC Augsburg sacked their coach yesterday (again), a new one is supposed to be announced on the weekend. Who will it be and how long will he last?EA210269 (talk) 03:50, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, the following templates have been created and tied to the relevant articles. This should make navigation a bit easier:

Have fun, EA210269 (talk) 08:13, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Another fine bit of work. I love to see all these additions. Wiggy! (talk) 16:35, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] TSV 1860 Rosenheim

Hi Wiggy, its me again, asking a favor. When you get time, can you look at TSV 1860 Rosenheim and see if you can fix the logo? No rush, but I know you are much better then me at this. You fixed SpVgg Lindau and so on. Doesn't look all that great right now, I have to say. Thanks, EA210269 (talk) 14:54, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

No trouble. Will do. Wiggy! (talk) 16:32, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Finally! Wiggy! (talk) 12:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:SV Babelsberg 03.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:SV Babelsberg 03.png. 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) 12:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Keeping a low profile

It's been pretty quite lately from you, are you suffering from wikipedia-disilusion, Wiggy? It happens, I guess. Or are you just taking a breather before the end-of-the season rush comes on? In any case, hope you are all good, have fun, EA210269 (talk) 01:02, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

No, just kinda busy. Getting ready to re-open my park, taking some training courses, busy clearing trees from a hydro line - all kinds of stuff to do now that the weather is shaping up. Not in any way disillusioned with Wikipedia and still enjoying small amounts of Wiki time, keeping track of the odd bit here and there. Just too much to do right now. Haven't even had time to hang out with my Wappen buddies. Should drop them a line and let them know I'm still among the living. Thanks for asking. Wiggy! (talk) 01:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] SV Dynamo

Hi, I nominated Template:Kinds of sport and sport associations of the SV Dynamo for deletion. You can probably guess who created this template. Your input on the deletion discussion would be appreciated. Novidmarana (talk) 20:06, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Football icons

Please stop adding archaic football icons to wikipedia in violation of wp:nfc, if you continue to do so you will be blocked from editing Fasach Nua (talk)

No, I don't think so. You've taken a very pointy approach to dealing with other editors and in pushing your narrow view of the use of logos. You've defied established policy and guidelines with respect to logo use, as well as ignored the consensus of the community. To choose now to stalk me with pointy editing rather than properly defending your position on a talk page is a completely classless act. But then that is consistent with the approach the emerges in an examination of the history of your talk page.
So, to help you along, the use of non-free media on Wikipedia is permitted within certain bounds. That's policy. The use of logos is specifically mentioned there and there is a related guideline. In addition there is a community consensus that the use of logos is appropriate. That's all there in black and white for your examination if you bother to look. Your edits are inappropriate and being carried out in an unnecessarily pointy manner. It ironic that your chosen approach to improving Wikipedia involves beating on other editors in a manner that is outside the rules.
As I said before, if this is your burning mission, go get it properly sorted out in a broader sense instead of irritating other contributors with such an poinhty, aggressive editing style. You should be proud of what shows up on your talk page instead of having to bury it all the time. Wiggy! (talk) 16:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] your continued disruption

[edit] Edit warring

As much as I think the above bunch of warnings are pointy indeed (a content dispute is certainly not vandalism), please stop edit warring over these logos. You are coming close to 3RR in some cases, which is of course a limit, not an entitlement. Oldelpaso (talk) 09:04, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I hear your point and I'm sorry to see you dragged into this, but I'm not prepared to be bullied by this user. A review of his talk page history will show a similar pattern of disdain for other contributors. The only reason these particular logos have been tagged is because they have my user name attached to them. They meet policy and guideline and are supported by concensus in their application. Its not any differnt from the display of historical logos in the articles of many NBA, NFL, and MLB teams. My arguments are being ignored by a self proclaimed policy-warrior.
My difficulty is in how this is being approached. A number of football logos were put up for review by this user. That review wasn't going his way and so now he's decided to headhunt me - unless you can think of another reason for those particular logos to be targeted in the midst of this debate or you are a believer in fantastic conincidences. He's decided to flip off other editors by paying only lip service to the review process, choose what parts of policy and which guidelines suit him (non-free content is allowed and in the policy rationale is identified as being able to contribute to the building of a quality encyclopedia), and then ignore the established process for actually deleting images which requires notice and specifies timeframes. But then that would be playing by the rules ...
I'm not impressed with being wikilawyered by a narrow interpretation of policy. He's taken it on himself to define what is significant under nfc #8 despite the fact that that particular criteria is clearly marked as being under review and despite the fact that the use of logos is acceptable within defined guidelines. His repeatedly stated objective is to see an encyclopedia bereft of non-free content and he's refusing to listen to argument or even respect the existing rules and consensus. Wiggy! (talk) 22:27, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
An idea which would reinforce the fair use rationales: Generally, the football team articles which have become featured have a "Colours and crest" section, in which the evolution of a club's badge is discussed. Adding such a section to some of the relevant articles would provide the most rock-solid basis possible for including the logos. Oldelpaso (talk) 08:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I follow that and have given it some consideration. However, in many cases, especially for German clubs, there is necessarily evolution of the team crest per se. The most common practice in the country is for one club to simply absorb another. In some cases the logo is updated. In most cases the logo of the predcessor side, which is specifically named in the article and identified by its own logo, is abandoned. It becomes a historical artifact but is still part of the tradition of the club, which is a big deal in Germany, where being able to call yourself a traditional side comes with bragging rights of a sort - regardless of how good or bad a club you might be! :)
But even then, there's a problem with this editor. The article on Dynamo Berlin explicity discusses the logo in some detail, its variants, the ownership issues attached to it in Germany, etc. and shows the various logo forms involved in that dispute. All that ignored and nuked by an overzealous editor, completely ignoring the context of the article, simply for the sake of policy warfare. That's not responsible editing, that's just hacking at the other guy and clearly reflects the unreasoning approach of this editor who likes to spout policy but is bent on ignoring policy, guidelines and concensus to serve his narrowly defined mission. Wiggy! (talk) 12:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I believe you are acting in good faith, however your edit waring must stop, I have nominated these decorative images for deletion at Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion, please feel free to comment on them Fasach Nua (talk) 13:05, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I regret that I cannot say I hold the same belief about your edits and for me to say otherwise would be dishonest. Your editing style has been attacking and unnecessarily pointy. The use of logos is clearly acceptable under policy. There are guidelines in place for their use, and that use is broadly supported by concensus. You continue to ignore that and the clear weight of opinion opposing your position and approach that has emerged on the review page.
It is quite clear that you have targeted my work. Logos have been unilaterally deleted without providing edit comments and without following policy with respect to required notice and timelines. You only do so now after I have brought this to notice in other discussion.
A lack of good faith is clearly demonstrated not just by choosing to target my work in the middle of a review discussion, but the unthinking nature of some of the edits. The logos in the Dynamo Berlin article are the topic of specific discussion within the article and clearly relevant there, but they were blindly deleted despite that. Posting this series of logos for review is in this context just another aspect of assaultive editing - good to form finally - but still little more than an attack.
Characterizing the editing warring as "mine"? C'mon. I'm hard talking, but I didn't start this. Take some ownership. And stop being so condesending to me and others in your remarks. I am appalled at the bullying approach being used and the unwavering narrow mindedness displayed. I understand this is a harsh statement, but I feel you're way out of line on this, failing both in the approach employed and in the interpretation of policy and guideline. Wiggy! (talk) 13:29, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New season - new clubs

Hey Wiggy, sorry to hear you got some trouble with a "non-free-content-crusader". Just to let you know, I came up with an idea on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject German football and would like to know what you think. Take care, stay calm, EA210269 (talk) 23:21, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I just love zealots. But I hate bullies. Thanks for the advice. I'll wander over to the project and check out your notion. Looking forward to all the changes that'll be happening next season! Wiggy! (talk) 12:54, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Lot's of end-of-season work coming up. The new 3rd Liga will make it even more, with the shift in the tiers below it! Well, hopefully you will have a nice, long list of club articles for you to create! I think, you won't get bored in a rush! Regarding the whole image thing, I think it will make people, including myself, very reluctant to upload anything. Pictures and images add a lot to wikipedia, it will be a shame.EA210269 (talk) 01:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Definitely looking forward to the new stuff. With respect to the images, don't be giving up. There's nothing wrong with the use of logos and it would be a shame to be put off of contributing by one bad editor. I've had my rant over on the football project discussion page and we'll see what comes of it. I'm not impressed with the whole thing, but I'm not prepared to be bullied either. Wiggy! (talk) 03:29, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New club articles

I only just put VfB Königsberg on the list and you have already created it, pretty quick! Regarding clubs like the VfB and Vorwärts-Rasensport Gleiwitz, I think, there should be a sub-category for clubs from the former German terretories but I can't think of a title that's not to long, Catergory:Defunct football clubs from former German terretories seems a bit long. Any ideas? Secondly, when you create an article like VfB should we instantly remove it from the request page (I think not) or put the date of its creation and, maybe the creator (usually you) behind the name? I favor the later option. Anyway, the VfB Königsberg article was long overdue, in hindsight, great to have it now! EA210269 (talk) 00:26, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The list is handy to have. Like I said, it provides some focus. And I'm overdue to be writing some new stuff - too idle too long. Thanks for the spark. Interesting to learn about the old clubs. I've got the Kurmark Sportwappen cigarette card album full of club logos from the 1930s. Lots of old eastern and Baltic clubs there.
As to the category I can't see shortening it up any. Says what it needs to without being wordy.
I also think you're right on the process for removal. Gives folks a chance to see its been dealt with instead of just simply having disappeared. Keep well and see you around. Wiggy! (talk) 00:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Done, five articles in Category:Defunct football clubs from former German terretories so far. And the VfB article is dated.
Well, the 1930's logos should have one advantage, I don't think they are copyrighted anymore. I'm going back to Germany for a few weeks in August, I got a fair bit of stuff on football there still, I can't wait to get hold of it, heaps of information in it. There is also a DSFS Gauliga brochure, I'm hoping to be able then, to create artricles for them too. So far, 1945 has been the cut-off point for information on German leagues, hope to push that back to at least 1933. Anyway, take care, EA210269 (talk) 02:09, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Category fix

It didn't quite look right but I just couldn't see it. Thanks a lot!EA210269 (talk) 11:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Articles on historic football clubs

Good stuff, Wiggy, all this club articles. Reading them brings back a, saddly, almost forgotten part of Germany football history, even if not always a proud one. Anyway, keep them coming, I think they really add something to wikipedia, historically. Take care, EA210269 (talk) 05:43, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Thx. I find the whole thing quite interesting and there is always some poigniancy attached to writing about any kind of lost sports club. Yes, a rather sad bit of German and European history, but I agree - quite worth having as it does add some dimension. I see that User:Latouffedisco has also provided a list of lost or transformed clubs, in this case from France. And I found a record of a German club that actually survived the war's end to become a Polish or Russian side (can't remember which), so I'm looking forward to exploring that. Lots more fun stuff to puddle around in. Thanks again for the push. Wiggy! (talk) 21:24, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I have to say, this Vereinslexikon sounds like a good book, I might have to buy it. If you can add anything on the pre-war names of those French clubs, Wiggy, it would be real good. Most would propably have reverted to teir old names after the war and how they went from there is really beyond the scope of this article, I guess.
I think, the database we are creating right now for the pre-1945 clubs and leagues is quite good. Its a time I didn't know all that much about beforehand. Lot's of exciting facts to learn! I think, the DYK talk page is an excellent way to put up interessting facts about articles regarding German football and I've made three sugestions so far, one of them in connection to Yorck Boyen Insterburg (see here) . I think, if we could get a fact from the Wikipedia:WikiProject German football on the main page once in a while, it would lift the profile of this Project considerably. Well, have fun and keep those club articles coming, I enjoy reading them! EA210269 (talk) 03:12, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Not a good book, a great book. Well worth buying. I got mine off eBay and it cost me a fair bit to ship from Germany to Canada, but its been worth every pfennig. I'm sure you'd enjoy it. I have another of Hardy Gruene's books covering the period from the late 19th century to the end of WWII. Just as good. They're what I build my articles around before I go looking for other material. Quite handy.
I'll have to try my hand at the DYK stuff. Good idea for building profile as you suggested. Wiggy! (talk) 00:08, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:DGSE 01.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:DGSE 01.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --08:30, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] SV 06 Schlettstadt

Thanks! EA210269 (talk) 00:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the article you createt about the club now, it appears, the club is still active. It may have to be moved to its French name, if we are shure it is the same club, which seems likely. I added what I could find about it from a link User:Latouffedisco left me. I'm not quite certain what league level the club is on now, it appears, the Promotion A is the third level of the Ligue d' Alsace but I don't know where this league rates in the French league system. I don't speak French at all, that makes things a bit tricky. Anyway, I added what I could but that leaves us with the dilema of the club still being "alive". Greetings, EA210269 (talk) 04:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I ws wondering about that. I found a few hints but nothing specific, and what I have come across so far is more about handball than football. We'll see. Wiggy! (talk) 11:08, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi guys and sorry to interrupt you and thanks Wiggy for creating this article. As far as I know, SC Selestat is an omnisport club (the handball section plays in first division, which is good for a small town like Séléstat). The football section is still active. The link you put on the article suggests it [16] as FFF only lists active clubs. Moreover, this link [17] which is a very recent article about the team indicates that Séléstat is close to relegation. That's right they play in Promotion A, Group D, of the Ligue d' Alsace - Bas Rhin which is the ninth level of French football: Ligue 1, ligue 2, national, CFA, CFA2, DH, excellence A, promotion excellence A, promotion A. No, that is not complicated! And as the club is still active, maybe you should move the article to the club current name, no? Regards.--Latouffedisco (talk) 19:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I've not been able to find out much about the club post-war (except for its noteable role as a handball club) so there is a big gap ost 1945. I probably will move it over to SC Sélestat with a redirect from SV 06 Schlettstadt in a bit, along the lines of the Strassburg/Strasbourg clubs. Thanks for the note! Wiggy! (talk) 20:09, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome! It's true that informations for amateur clubs are very hard to find in France, we have to deal with that!--Latouffedisco (talk) 12:57, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, you guys did a good job rooting stuff out. I pretty much struck out. I've run into the same problem from time to time trying to pin down lower level German clubs, which can be kind of frustrating if they're traditional sides with some interesting history. Thx again. Keep well and happy editing. Wiggy! (talk) 16:24, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reverting German plural

Thanks for the revert in the Oberliga article. I just didn't have the nerve yesterday. Madcynic (talk) 12:18, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I wasn't entirely sure it was the right thing to do, but the German plurals wouldn't necessarily be clear to an English speaker with out somesort of explanation somewhere. That and the opening line about the DDR-Oberliga was already covered in the body of the text, so I just wikilinked it. I hope it all helps to keep the thing readable. Keep well. Be nervy! Wiggy! (talk) 14:43, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Being a native speaker of German, I can tell you it was exactly the right thing to do - for exactly the reason you mentioned. And I usually am nervy. But not at 11 pm. ;) Madcynic (talk) 01:16, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Hy Wiggy, I just had User:NiTeChiLLeR lecturing me on the fact that it is Ligen, not Ligas, propably a naitive German speaker, too. Is there any standard on what to use? I usually go with Ligas nowadays, for the reason mentioned by you above. EA210269 (talk) 22:28, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Whenever I see xyz-ligas I turn it into xyz-ligen as well. When we write in German we should stay be right or translate in English. But how? Oberliga = major league?, upper league? Oberligen and Regionalligen wouldn't do harm when we link Oberligen to Oberliga. -Lemmy- (talk) 10:56, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I suppose I should break down and do what I should have done from the word go - go look for some direction in the Manual of Style. I've always been a bit unsure at the approach to use, leaning towards Oberligas instead of Oberligen. I'm pretty sure in a couple of place I wrote something like Oberliga (plural: Oberligen) in a couple of articles so I was free to use the German plural without any confusion in the rest of the article. I'll go have a look at the MoS and maybe see what practise is used by some other leagues. Sorry if I've caused an unnecessary stir. Wiggy! (talk) 16:09, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Okay, here is the relevant reference as near as I can figure. Its at the bottom of the section, just below note 6. With apologies for looking like a rule banger ... it's just the way I'm familiar with writing this sort of thing. English_plurals#Irregular_plurals_from_other_languages Wiggy! (talk) 16:40, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

It seems, for once, there isn't a rule on wikipedia for something! From a German point of view, Ligas sounds a bit wrong, but as we are on the English wikipedia, I guess we should stick with what it recommends rather then our personal feelings. Regarding what Lemmy says, I think, names of leagues should not be translated, Oberliga is fine to use in my opinion. You certainly get no useful hits when googling Upper League Bavaria! EA210269 (talk) 23:27, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, even if you are a native speaker of German - this is not a German-language project. Hence I would use plural markers that are used by the English language, in this case, adding the suffix -s to the original noun. Anything else only leads to confusion, IMHO. Madcynic (talk) 09:04, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
in my opinion it doesn't matter if en.wikipedia is an english project or not - the problem is that there is no standard for plural-forms in english. an example is the german Fachhochschule: as you can see the plural-form is Fachhochschulen (with an 'n') ALSO on en.wikipedia! NOBODY will use the word Fachhochschules - not in germany and not at any partner-universities in kanada, usa, france, vietnam or china! the reason is the international spelling of some german, french, spanish.. words, which cannot be transfered to english-grammar - but there is the same problem with english words in the german language (called anglicism ;-), where is no general standard. so, in my opinion also the english project of wikipedia should keep in mind that on the one hand there is the english-grammar-problem, on the other hand we should keep many international forms of other languages.. (would be very embarrassing speaking german words with english grammar to german people :-)) in fact: use ligen and not ligas. --NiTeChiLLeR (talk) 13:58, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
There actually is a rule as I pointed out in the link above which is "Nouns from languages other than the above generally form plurals as if they were native English words". That said, rather than have a -s camp and an -en camp and an unnecessary dispute of the trivial sort, maybe we could adopt the Oberliga (plural: Oberligen), Regionalliga (plural: Regionalligen), Verbandsliga (plural: Verbandsligen) approach? The problem seems to only really crop up in the articles written about the ligas/ligen themselves and if its explained away early in the context of the article that should let us teach English speakers a thing or two, while keeping good form in German. It should be possible to write around the problem in nay other article that it might raise its <ugly> head just by re-working a sentence or two. Does that sound like a fair approach to keep both the -s and the -en advocates happy? Peace and serenity in the pursuit of knowledge and all that. :) Wiggy! (talk) 22:22, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Keep in mind, that the word Liga is not exclusevly owned by the German language but in fact used in many, mostly Eastern European countrys (see Liga). I think, Wiggys idea of an early explanation in the article seems fine. Where this is missing however, we should stick with Ligas. EA210269 (talk) 00:13, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] HSV Barmbeck-Uhlenhorst

Hi there, do you think you got the name right ? Today Barmbek is written without the ck and your external link, the Official team site states by HSV Barmbek-Uhlenhorst e.V..

Greetings Sebastian scha. (talk) 01:33, 26 May 2008 (UTC) (plz answer here i'll watch this page a week or two) (nice article by the way :-)

You're right! Thanks. I'll fix it right away. Good eye. Wiggy! (talk) 01:36, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
No problem, I'd like to help. More important: now I have a sports link, when/if I start the quarter pages. ;-) Sebastian scha. (talk) 01:44, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Halle, Jena, Erfurt

Hy Wiggy, I just added three more clubs to the Articles on historic football clubs list. Currently, all three pages are redirects only, created by me today because the clubs they redirect to have some historical information on the original, pre-1945, versions. I'm just wondering what you think. Should these three clubs have their own article or do you consider the current arangement sufficient? Have fun, EA210269 (talk) 02:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't have my Vereinslexikon handy, so I can't say how much info there is available on the club. I'll have to check in a day or so. I ran into a similar thing at HSV Barmbek-Uhlenhorst just the other day. Both that club and KSG Alsterdorf have their own Vereinslexikon entries as first division sides historically. Alsterdorf was a wartime side made up of several other clubs (including BU) and really hadn't done enough to merit its own article, so I set it up as a redirect like you have done with these other sides. The only real difference is I have bolded the name of the KSG side in the style used for the main topic of the article. I've seen that approach used here on the English wiki and over on de:. That may be the way to go if there is not sufficient material? It can always be updated if we come across fresh info. Wiggy! (talk) 10:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
True, an article can always be written once more is known about a club. Regarding those East German clubs, I feel, the association between the pre-1945 and past-1945 clubs seems sometimes sketchy. The communists tried hard to wipe out any connections after all. I don't think, for example, the current DSC has any real connection to the old Dresdner SC, and so on. To much time had passed! Anyway, I guess I "pile enough work" on you, "demanding" all this club articles. Problem is, I write one Gauliga article and come past three or four teams that were quite prominent in this league, a ratio that disfavors you, Wiggy! Much easier for me there! I've decided I will only list Gauliga champions to keep the number resonable. Anyway, its fun, bringing those leagues and clubs "back to live". All the best from rainy Perth, EA210269 (talk) 10:51, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
You're right on the East German stuff and the communist attempts to re-make the game in the country. I've noticed that some clubs make the effort on their home pages to reclaim or hang on to the historical link, while others clearly just walk away from it. I generally use Vereinslexikon (again!) to identify where there are valid historical links.
Demanding club articles?! No, I don't think so. I'm quite enjoying myself and as I've said, it's useful to have the focus. The articles are pretty straight forward to put together from the club template and sources I'm using. I just have to get caught up on fleshing out the bare bones with checks of the de:wiki articles, the team sites, adding logos, etc. And here I was thinking it was easier for me when I look at all the league and Gauliga articles you have assembled. Overall, I'm really delighted with how the German football section is growing. I still have in the back of my head emulating the de:wiki and their goal of having articles for each of the clubs listed in the Vereinslexikon. Also have to set sights one day on working up a featured club article. And yes it is fun to bring these clubs "back to life".
Rainy Perth, eh? Here in my corner of Canada (Toronto-Brampton-Peterborough is where I'm circulating) it has been unseasonably cold. We had a long snowy winter (second greatest amount of snow ever recorded, about a dozen cm shy of that record) and I'm not entirely convinced summer is on its way. But that's okay, the weather is the weather, and we'll get through it all.
An interesting turn here with our football club Toronto FC. They were a completely sad sack expansion team last season. So far this year they are competitive and nine games in have a winning record. That could turn, of course, but in the meantime its fun to watch. But what I'm really looking foward to Euro 2008 this summer! Wiggy! (talk) 11:15, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, a featured article would be nice, but also hard to archive. I think, a target would have to be carefully choosen for such a project. Well, I hope Toronto FC does what no Canadian ice hockey, baseball or basketball team seems to be able to do right now, win a major title. I've got a good feeling about Germany this year, I think they will go all the way at the European championships. Snow? Whats that? Havn't seen any for longer then I can remember! Take care, its not raining today and I've got to walk my dog! EA210269 (talk) 00:29, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:wikistalking

I am very flattered that you have choosen wikistalk me, however it may not be the most productive use of your time, and your outbursts do not reflect well on you as an editor Fasach Nua (talk) 16:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't be flattered. I am opposed in principle to your drive-by image deletes that are in too many cases on shaky grounds and your utter disregard for the contributions and sensibilities of other editors. There are mechanisms and processes in place to do that sort of thing and you are ignoring them. You are not the sole arbiter of what serves others here under nfc #8 (which is curently under review, by the way). You ignore repeated invitations to discuss what you're doing from affected editors (in multiple contexts) and simply parrot back your narrow view of policy and mission. Other editors opinions also count for something and you should heed legitimate protests being voiced.
You might try applying some of the mission to your own work and see what taste that leaves you with. Take Ireland national football team (1882–1950) for example. The infobox is intended to display a logo, not some indescript map that doesn't really provide the user with any useful information, which is a violation of nfc #8. The image of Billy Gillespie needs to go because its redundant - he already appears in the team shot, so that's a violation of nfc #3. The very nice photo of the blue plaque honouring Joe Bambrick should only really appear on his page (nfc #3 again!) and it could really be replaced with something like "Bambricks former home is marked by a blue plaque historical marker honouring his six-goal performance aginst Wales in 1930". That would be nfc #8 again, or maybe nfc #1 where text adequately conveys the information, so that no image is required at all (mission). The Ireland-Linfield Mural is also used excessively and appears in more articles than it needs to be (nfc #3). The Linfield connection is touched on but not explained in the article so its out of context in that sense (#8, not significant). And while the images of the three footballers and two logos is nice, it doesn't really belong in a notable players section (which is inherently POV and original research, but that's another story) because its only function is decorative, which I'm sure you're aware is yet another violation of what, #1 or #8? Or should we just stay with the shotgun approach and nail it with everything without explanation? So are you prepared to live by your own standards or just inflict them on everybody else wherever you go?
As to wikistalking, I remain unimpressed by your targeted attack on my image work in the midst of an on-going discussion about football club logos. You are not in any position deliver me that lecture. And despite everything we went through in that business, you choose to attempt to delete another logo image without real cause and without the courtesy of a meaningful explanation. Am I not supposed to notice that type of behaviour? I'm aware that this does reflect well on me as an editor. I'd rather be off puttering about at my own thing. But the principle is worth sticking up for and it doesn't burn me to on occasion give a leg up to other editors who are being blindsided or bullied by a persistently POV editor who can't see clear to abide by his own standards. Wiggy! (talk) 17:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


It is good for you to actually address the issue, your analysis of the Ireland article is quite good,and I would encourage you to use the same analysis with other articles, the minimal usages issue with Gillespie is a particularly astute observence, and the sort of thing that is not applied enough. The one issue you missed was that all the images used in this article are free, and therefore they can be used in any way we choose. I actually think the Ireland article is a good example of how an article can be written entirely without non-free content, which is very much part of the WP goal of this project. I share your concerns about the logo, Ireland is fortunate to have a recognisable shape, that can be used in lieu of a logo, which is why I raised the issuse at the WP:FUR, it was unfortunate that you view discussion of issues as "way off base", I think there is a lot to be said for discussion and the sharing of ideas, rather than your bulldozing approach, I have been having reasonably sensible discussion with peejay and others befor you barged in ranting, and perhaps, you may consider engaging in the process, and you might get somewhere. Fasach Nua (talk) 17:39, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
On an aside you may want to look at this peer review, can you spot the big issue needed to get this up to GA class? Fasach Nua (talk) 17:42, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Eimsbütteler TV

After writting the Gauliga Nordmark article, I came across this: Eimsbütteler TV. I will try to find out some more about the club but we may need your "magic book"! EA210269 (talk) 03:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I managed to expand the article from one sentence, its a bit better now. EA210269 (talk) 06:27, 31 May 2008 (UTC)