Hello, Andygray110. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hi Akani Songsersawad has changed his name to Sunny for the simplify things for him in the uk this has been confirmed by Neal Foulds on Eurosport. Can we change his name in the draws please ? 178.167.166.152 (talk) 14:20, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Kirk Stevens Canadian Professional Championship wins
Hi did you check Stevens players profile page on Chris Turners'site ?. When you go to that page check out the "career highlights" section at the bottom 3 wins are listed there ok ? 92.251.145.64 (talk) 06:24, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't need to go and check it, I've provided a source for it which backs up what's on the encyclopedia. Send me the link to the page you're talking about it and I'll have a look at it. Andygray110 (talk) 06:26, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia editor Abishe just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Hello Andygray110: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Abishe (talk) 10:06, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
In Snooker cuetracker.net has some events that Chris Turner does not have. Why is this site blacklisted and what other sources are blacklisted please ?. 31.200.137.180 (talk) 15:46, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi great idea. how long do you think it will take for that list to be completed please ?. Also what would happen if you can't find info on some of the events ?. If it's not possible for some of the older events and you can't create a page, would they just stay as they are in the finals section of the players involved ?. Regards 178.167.142.215 (talk) 14:27, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think the list will take quite a while! I'm realistic and realise that in some cases there may not be enough info to create a page, so yes as you say in some cases it will probably be left as a finals section. Although I'm hopeful that someday the information will appear :) Andygray110 (talk) 05:59, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi can you create a homepage for the above event please ?. It really should not be part of the Grand Prix era of tournaments. This is a seperate chinese event and should be seperate in my opinion. If you create it i can edit the page. 31.200.191.76 (talk) 21:26, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately I cannot, consensus among other editors for that decision was reached here: [1]. That would be the place to open up a discussion about moving any pages. Andygray110 (talk) 22:13, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please dont remove players wins from their pages because there is little info about them
Hi i have painstakingly added victories to players profiles for years ie Eddie Charlton is referenced by the BBC and other sources as having won 20 Australian Professional Championship losing only once in 20 years. There are other references to support this. Just because Chrus Turner had 14 does not make him correct he is missing info like everyone else.You removed 6 titles that he had won. When Charlton passed away Australian Snooker referenced 20 wins also. I noticed you have removed wins from other players where i had a suitable references to acredit the win. Please do not remove these wins as these events took place we just have limited info on them. We are working together to get results here 31.200.166.234 (talk) 18:52, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If there are "other references" to support it, then feel free to add them to the page yourself. I have not removed 6 titles, I have aligned it with the sources available. Just because you have painstakingly added victories for years does not mean you own the pages. As you say, it is a collaborative effort here, but it is built on sources. Again I say if you have sources, add them yourself, but drop the hostile tone and be civil. Also, just because you're making an accusation, please provide me with info as to which other players I have removed wins from and links to my edits so that it doesn't look like you're making unfounded accusations. I've added this message to your talk page also. Andygray110 (talk) 22:23, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Andy some events there are little or no info on especially old events like for example Cliff Thorburn's page you have removed wins because only his website lists these wins. Just because it is only his website listing them does that mean they did not take place ?. I think they did take place does that mean you will be removing all events with maybe one source or no source on other players pages?. You said to me a couple of weeks ago if no info could be found on old events they would just be left in players finals sections so what has changed please ?. If you read Chris Turner's bio on Eddie Charlton it quite clearly states he won the Australian Professional Championship in 20 out of 21 years from 1964–1984 (21 events) losing once in 1968. Regards 92.251.170.139 (talk) 23:36, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. I had a VERY similar conversation with another user a few weeks ago about this. If you have a source, then add it. It's not that I disagree with you. Wikipedia has very clear rules on using sources, and adding info without sources is original research. You removed sourced material earlier from Canadian Professional Championship, and re-added unsourced material. That's against the rules of the encyclopedia. I don't make the rules, I just follow them. I suggest you do the same. If you don't know how to add a source then I suggest you read this: Wikipedia:Tutorial/Citing sources. For example, you and I may agree that (for example) Mark Selby won 20 Australian titles. Even if we agreed, we couldn't add this on here as there is no evidence (i.e. sources) to prove it. I'm making it very clear on the record here, I am not in conflict with you, but we have to use sources, otherwise it would be one user's word against anothers. That serves no purpose. I'm happy if you want to raise it on the Cliff Thorburn talk page if we can use this source and put it to a vote with fellow editors or I'll do it if you would rather I do it. I'll be happy whatever the outcome is. Otherwise we'll get drawn into a long-term edit war, which will serve no purpose. Andygray110 (talk) 23:53, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Can i ask why we can use Chris Turner site as a source but not Cliff Thorburn's sure that is absolute nonsense am i right ?. His site seems to be the only source for these events so why not use it ?. Thay are hardly making the wins up right ?. Its not like im not using a source at all.the problem is some clown on here is making judgements that some sites carry credence over others like cuetracker.net being blacklisted sur that is absolute nonsense just because betty logan didnt like it why should she decide ?. I cant see the problem as long as we have some source do you agree ?. 92.251.170.139 (talk) 00:10, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
With these pages you are trying to create at the moment, Will you still be leaving events that you cannot gather any info on in the players finals sections after you finish ? Regards 92.251.170.139 (talk) 00:14, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I do share some of your frustrations, as I liked using CueTracker for certain things (but not others). The reason Chris Turner is considered reliable by the community is he used to be an official Eurosport statistician (I seem to recall another editor mentioning that). The reason Cliff Thorburn's website might not be considered reliable is it may not be objective or may be too close to the subject matter, I honestly don't know. I originally used the source myself but then over time became concerned it may not be reliable, the talk page discussion should help to clear that up. Consensus for a lot of what is considered reliable is decided at WikiProject Snooker, you can also ask there. As for the players' finals sections, they are mostly covered in the links embedded into the page (snooker.org, snookerdatabase.co.uk) and many of them can be pieced together from the various sources used on the page. Andygray110 (talk) 00:30, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Andy lots of old events do not have sources from the above mentioned some have none at all. Will you just be leaving them as they are in players finals sections?, otherwise lots of titles will be removed for no reason i reckon ?. Are you happy to leave them ?. 92.251.170.139 (talk) 00:34, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't get involved in talkpages because i get really pissed off reading some of the crap put up there. Why did you have concerns over Thorburn's site especially his career wins just curious ?. 92.251.170.139 (talk) 00:36, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If I get round to them I'll certainly source them. Which ones in particular did you notice? I'm sure I can find sources for them. The reason why I was wondering about Thorburn's site was I couldn't find a record of the trophy wins elsewhere and even though that can sometimes happen with other sources, usually it's a reliable source that carries details of them. Also after reading WP:NOTRELIABLE it may be too close to the subject matter. In all honesty I would rather include them than not as I don't see why it wouldn't be reliable, that's why I'm not removing them from his page again. But, I'm not sure as I can't corroborate them, so in that case I think it's best to check with others. Andygray110 (talk) 00:41, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should have just left them on because now others maybe removed from other pages.i dont think people had a problem with them really. Just old titles from the 70,80, and 90s ive noticed here and there some have no references it would be impossible to find some of them pre computer era you know that yourself i suppose. You would be happy to leave them in if you cant find old sources though right ? 92.251.170.139 (talk) 00:47, 15 January 2018 (UTC) regards[reply]
I honestly don't know, depends on whether I come across them or not. I don't think there will be a mass purge as no-one will be too interested in taking the time to do that. There's lot of books out there that contain trophy wins, one of which is: The CueSport Book of Professional Snooker: The Complete Record & History First Edition by Eric N Hayton, John Dee (ISBN: 9780954854904). It's a great source which carries lots of complete tournament records. So I wouldn't worry, most of what I've come across is included in that book. Andygray110 (talk) 00:54, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You must think im a novice here ive been editing snooker for years i know all the books and all the sources. I just know lots of non unsanctioned old events would not be in books or sourced you know yourself from looking at old pages. As you said i dont think people are too bothered whats included in career wins anyway. I just think you should have left Thorburn's wins in as i hope it doesn't open a can of worms. Will you state on the talkpage you want them included i'll do the same ?. 92.251.170.139 (talk) 01:03, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well I couldn't possibly know that as you're not a registered user and your IP address edit history only shows a handful of edits. But that's fine, a lot of people's IP addresses change, so possibly I've spoken to you before. I've already said on the talk page I don't mind either way what everyone agrees on. There hasn't been anything mentioned on his talk page for years, so who knows, perhaps nobody will even reply. Andygray110 (talk) 01:10, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have to say you are doing some job creating all these pages for all these events lot of work involved. What is your next project after this when you clear all these pages ? 31.200.150.233 (talk) 05:15, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure of their status. They're in a results book I have, if I can find other sources which corroborate them I may give them a go at creating. Andygray110 (talk) 00:41, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Im sure the ones i mentioned are pro-am i remember hearing or seeing them before. What will be your bext project when you clear all these pages you are trying to create ?. Its very time consuming id say 31.200.167.253 (talk) 00:45, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dave Hendon confirmed this when i tried to investigate this event previously. He told me according to Snooker Scene that only the event in 1994 took place and Chris Turner had added in error. How will you confirm this ? Regards 178.167.199.111 (talk) 18:22, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I only have details of the 1994 event in the Cuesport Book. There's no mention of the 1995 edition so I'm not sure of it's existence either, Chris Turner's site could well be mistaken. Andygray110 (talk) 18:25, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah as i said i contacted Dave Hendon and he said he only knew of the one edition in 94 and was adamant that it was only staged once. Was that cuesports book only published in 2004 ?. Regards 178.167.199.111 (talk) 18:39, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I cant get it to go in the right place it was stuck between the two links i was trying to move it. Dont be mad at me im trying to help. Can you just tell me on Hayton's book page listing the three legs did he just leave it that way and did you tot up the match result of 19-11 yourself ?. Is it possible they were 3 stand alone money events thats all i'd really love to know ok ?. Thanks 178.167.199.111 (talk) 15:20, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi are you sure the above is not an exhibition money event. It's on youtube money went up and down on pots and frames won its hardly a non ranking dvent with thst format ?. 178.167.199.111 (talk) 06:21, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You know these sources to this cuesports book why cant we view them like a link to chris turners site ?. All we can see is a page number is there any link to viewing it olease ?. Rdgards 178.167.199.111 (talk) 06:25, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes you can purchase the book and view it for yourself. Although you discussed with another user here [2] and asked them to read the introduction so I assumed you already had it. Plus what is the definition of a non-ranking event? Does the definition of a non-ranking event exclude extra money for every ball potted or frame won? The answer is no, it simply defines the tournament as non-ranking, which this one is. For example, the Championship League is by your definition also an exhibition money event as extra money is won per frame won. Andygray110 (talk) 06:35, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I read the introduction page on amazon. Can you tell me what the book says about this event please. Yes a non ranking event has a set of rules. It said Hendry won the first night 6–4, the second was a 5-5 but in that video the frames were not tallied together to make it 11–9 you to Hendry that was never mentioned. Can you tell me what that pages says please ? 178.167.199.111 (talk) 13:44, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's not up to me or other users to continuously provide you with scans or info about external sources. The ultimate fact is this is an encyclopedia with sources. I'm adding content using verified, accepted sources. All of your contributions are WP:OR, and you revert or correct my work based on your own opinion and refuse to provide any evidence. If you have a problem with my edits on snooker then firstly take it to the community here [3]. Andygray110 (talk) 13:55, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have watched the video and what?? That doesn't prove your point. Again, you just make a statement "the championship league is not the same" and tell me to watch videos and read sources. I don't need to follow your instructions. My talk page is completely filled with your objections to my edits. Any issues you have from now on, please raise it on the article talk pages as per WP:POINT. Andygray110 (talk) 13:55, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Im saying this is not a pro event and should not be added to the non ranking list. Ive watched the video jimmy white comes out handing out bags of money dressed as Santa Claus this was the third and final match surely not what you would do in a pro final right ?. . There was no adding up the frames to total 19-11 and no title to been handed out. Do you want a link ?. I think it was a novelty event for a bit of fun and see who had the most money. Im not objecting to your edits im trying to help you thats all. I want to add the right events ok ?. Im not against you. Regards 178.167.199.111 (talk) 14:19, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
To answer your question the Championship League is a best of 5 event all through with a final result and a trophy. I saw no trophy at the final of that event. I just asked a polite qustion what did it say in Hayton's book since i dont have it. Is it ok to ask that please ? 178.167.199.111 (talk) 14:21, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, firstly there is a trophy for the Championship League: [4].
You're not reading what I've said. This is all your opinion (original research) and I told you I've already watched the video. I don't understand how Jimmy White being dressed as Santa Claus has anything to do with this. It does add up to 19-11 as per the source. Here is the how the Cuesport book has each leg laid out:
I saw that at the start but on the video the never kept a running total of frames and saying Hendry is leading by 14–8. Do you get my point i think they were 3 stand alone nights played for money and they frame scores were irrelevant and they djd not add them up because it was money won on the night ?. Do you see what im saying. There was also no trophy presented to Hendry as he won. Im just trying to help. Like this morning with the British Caledonian. Im trying to help like you do with me ok ?. Im a genuine guy on here. 178.167.199.111 (talk) 14:41, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Does Hayton give a 19–11 result or did you add the 3 legs together. Is it possible there were 3 stand alone events with nothing but a money result thats what im kinda worried about ? Regards 178.167.199.111 (talk) 14:50, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi you never got back to me about the above question please ?. Does Hayton list a final result of 19–11 in his book or have you added up the scores from the 3 events yourself to get this final total please ?. Regards 92.251.135.193 (talk) 17:46, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly. You can purchase it here - [5]. In addition, here is a link to discussion I had with another IP address of yours earlier - [6], and here are also links which I'm making a note of on this page where you asked another user the same question about the competition and followed me onto their talk page - [7] & [8] I'm getting very irritated and running out of patience constantly discussing this; I am here to build an encyclopedia, not endlessly discuss inclusion of edits you don't agree with. I would appreciate it if we could now limit discussion to the WikiProject Snooker talk page. I'm not prepared to discuss this topic any further on this page. Andygray110 (talk) 01:42, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to just see a source which lists a final score of 19–11 please ?. The only source listed is a page number i cannot see. Did you add the 3 legs together to get the result yourself ?. I respect the work you are doing here, a great job but i do not think this can be added as a non ranking event as it was 3 stand alone legs. Do you get my point ?. Regards 92.251.152.23 (talk) 02:00, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't mind if you didn't keep asking me the same question over and over. It's been almost a month now, and when there's no sign of consensus between two editors such as ourselves on this topic, it's time to drop the stick, which is what I'm trying to do. If we can't agree or if you don't like my answers or vice-versa, then time to take the question to the WikiProject. Andygray110 (talk) 02:36, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Andy can you take a look at this in the "cuesports book" please ?. It is sourced here as a pro-am but i have emailed Clive Everton and he has responded saying they were non ranking events in that season like in previous seasons. Can you check this out please ?. Thank you 178.167.203.144 (talk) 18:57, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Andygray110, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! —Tom Morris (talk) 19:15, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
Hi Andy how are you are ?. Will you remove the middle name Rhys out of his wikipedia page please as he is known on World Snooker and other Snooker sources as Jamie Clarke. This is out of date can you look please ? 31.200.140.191 (talk) 19:39, 18 April 2018 (UTC) Regards[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryan McCann (footballer, born 1982) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Jellyman (talk) 21:24, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Andygray110. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello, Andygray110. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Andy I know of lots of tournaments referenced on cuetracker that are not sourced on any other site and they are listed on Wikipedia. Why is it ok to use it for some tournaments and not others then please ?. makes no sense can you explain that to me please ?> DooksFoley147 (talk) 03:38, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
can i ask you to remove that complaint that you lodged against me ?.
Can I ask if you will remove that complaint you made against me ?. I am trying to help out on here not look for hassle ok ?. I really don't appreciate the way you criticised me to be honest I am only helping out. DooksFoley147 (talk) 04:05, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glenn Dunlop until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. SportingFlyerT·C02:01, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
Source for the inaugural tournament is Belfast Telegraph, p11, Tuesday 5th April, 1927. Thanks for bringing to my attention I've omitted the sources, I'm in the process of adding them. Good job on finding the 1985 result. Andygray110 (talk) 11:51, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Andy, as a member of the snooker project, I wonder if you would like to contribute to the FA review that we're working on at the moment for the 2019 World Snooker Championship article? I'm co-nominator for the review (with Lee Vilenski). We're looking for constructive comments and support to move things forward. Please can you assist? Best wishes, Rodney Baggins (talk) 11:02, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hi Andy you are putting this in the non ranking results timeline when you clearly call it a variant event yourself. it cannot be a non ranking event and a variant it is one or the other. This event is not counted in a Snooker players career wins as a non ranking win or as any win as it is not snooker. power plays, power zones, double points and 50 bonus points if you made a century. the six red events are placed under the banner "variant format tournaments" in the player's performance timelines so why are power snooker and tenball not added in that section with the six reds world championship as that is also a variant ?. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.204.180.89 (talk) 00:07, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have no problem with any of that, my issue is with you deleting the work, which you have done again on Mark Selby. Reverting edits is the incorrect way to go about this. Move it to a different section labelled "former variant tournaments" if you want, but please stop reverting my edits which are made to help improve Wikipedia - instead of deleting other people's work and denigrating the encyclopedia try to improve it. Andygray110 (talk) 08:47, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I do work here too i apologise for deleting your edits i did not mean to insult you. Do you accept my apology ?. I will move them to the variant format tournament section so. I apologise again for what happened ok ?. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.251.193.116 (talk) 17:23, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. JMHamo (talk) 22:57, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have granted your account an exemption from IP blocking for a period of three months. This will allow you to edit the English Wikipedia through full blocks affecting your IP address when you are logged in.
Thank you, can you please clarify why this is for a period of three months only, or why it is time limited at all? I've been editing through this account for 14 years without incident. Andygray110 (talk) 23:25, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is because the block that affects you is set to expire in three months so this is what you needed to edit unimpeded. IPBE is issued on an as-needed basis and I only issue time-limited exemptions. That is current best practice based on discussions with other checkusers. If you happen to find yourself caught behind another range block in the future, you may follow the instructions and request another IPBE. — Berean Hunter(talk)13:02, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sucks a bit that legitimate users like myself have to go through that every 3 months - could lead to delays in editing unimpeded while waiting to be unblocked. Understood though and thanks for explaining. Andygray110 (talk) 21:36, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Lee, all good hope you're well also. Sadly not, I have a copy of the Cuesport Book of Professional Snooker but not the Crucible Almanac. Wish I did! Would be very nice to have :) Andygray110 (talk) 19:50, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Stephen Hendry, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Champion of Champions.
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bill Irwin (footballer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Irish League.
Hi Andy how are you ?. I noticed on the homepage for the above event, it says on the source you added for Gary Owen's win in 1970 "Owen beats title holder". This suggest Reardon was the defending champion and must have won an earlier edition to be the title holder ?. Regards 92.251.163.215 (talk) 19:24, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, correct on the second comment. Sometimes the title of a referenced article doesn't lend itself to clarity; in this case it's in reference to the opening sentence of the article. In full:
Gary Owen, of Birmingham, was given a morale booster for his world professional snooker championship attempt in Australia when he beat title holder Ray Reardon at Stratford. Owen, former world amateur champion, beat Reardon by six frames to four to become the first holder of the Stratford League's professional challenge trophy. Reardon made the best break of the night, a 66. Owen had a 54. Owen flies to Australia tomorrow for the three-week championship series. Reardon, John Spencer and John Pulman are the other Britons who will compete, and Eddie Charlton leads the Australian challenge. Last night's match, staged at the Wilmcote W.M.C., is likely to become an annual affair. Organiser Bill Shotton said today: "There was not an empty seat in the hall. It shows that there is the demand for this type of match and the sponsors were delighted."
British Newspaper Archive is how I came across it (for which you need a paid subscription). Although you can search by player name or tournament name etc., it sometimes doesn't pick up your search terms and a lot of wading through history can be required! Great resource though. Andygray110 (talk) 23:19, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hi Andy this was a tournament in 1974 sometimes you see pictures of the players involved but I know Thorburn is listed as the winner on his website. Can you find this event please ?. Thorburn also won the Lada Snooker Tournament in 1980, I am sure this was a four man tournament and he beat Alex Higgins in the final. Can you help me out with these two events please ?. 31.200.164.235 (talk) 01:50, 25 November 2020 (UTC) Regards[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello Andy
How are you ?.
I noticed you removed the above from the Higgins/O'sullivan non-ranking pages.
That Daily mirror article is false there was no best of three match v hendry.
where is there proof that there was a best of three wit Hendry ?.
This was not reported by any other source regarding the result. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.251.249.87 (talk) 18:24, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
The tournament was covered by Snooker Scene in November 1993 on page 8.
it said it was a sanctioned by the WPBSA and shown live on sky sports.
I have pictures from the edition of snooker scene in question.
if i send it to you to read will you add this event back to the non ranking section.
Snooker scene is a reliable source of course.
Is that ok ?. 92.251.249.87 (talk) 18:12, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, you are a banned user for precisely the type of revert that you have just done - unhelpful removal of content without discussing or even attempting to build a consensus first.
Secondly, the Daily Mirror source (which I have added as a reference - noting you have NOT added Snooker Scene as a reference) states verbatim: "Young cue-masters Ronnie O'Sullivan and John Higgins clash in a one-off game at the Motherwell Civic Centre, Scotland. The winner plays world number one Stephen Hendry in a best-of-three match." I think that makes it clear this was not a tournament in its own right.
Thirdly, yes you are partially correct, the Regal Scottish Masters was shown on Sky Sports and was sanctioned by the WPBSA, but this particular "Regal Scottish Masters Challenge" match is clearly a glorified exhibition and not a tournament. Andygray110 (talk) 18:57, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There are other articles citing this result also like the one on the John Higgins page prior to you removing it. It was in the sporting results section. I do not think they would have included an exhibition result in newspapers or snooker scene do you ? 92.251.249.87 (talk) 18:15, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nigej how can a "one-off game" be a tournament with a final. may I remind you the 1990 Centenary Challenge between Davis and Hendry was played between two players and you count that on wikipedia. The Irish Masters was one off challenges in the early days as was the world finals.
I have evidence via pictures from the snooker scene source from the November 1993 edition page 8 it states that Ian Doyle wanted to stage the regal challenge he had to go to court to stage the event. The WPBSA sanctioned the event at the 11th hour so it could go ahead and be shown on Sky Sports it is all in the article. If it was an exhibition he would not have to go to court. It is all on the snooker scene article and I can provide evidence of this article for all to see. If I am allowed to please.
This result was also published in many newspapers as was referenced on the John Higgins page. Surely papers would not include the result of an exhibition in their results sections 92.251.165.206 (talk) 19:30, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Andy how are you doing today ?. Can you add an event to this season's calendar that has been missed up to now please ?. It is an event on the "World Seniors Tour". It is the "Seniors 900". It will be played on one day 29 December. It will be staged at the Epsom Downs Racecourse, in Epsom. You can check the Seniorssnooker website to verify the event if you want. Can you add this to the above season calendar please ?. Thank you 31.200.188.62 (talk) 11:59, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Mid-Ulster Cup, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Hi. Did you write the information that Steve Davis would have been the first victim of "three misse and out" rule? If so, could you reveal your source for this? Problem is that this rule wasn't in the rule book before September 1995. 2001:2003:F82A:6A00:E557:3EC:62AC:B25F (talk) 07:48, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi - not me. Per page history it was added here by an anonymous user. I've added a tag that a citation is required and if none is provided the wording is open to removal. Andygray110 (talk) 18:53, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello there, I noticed a person made an erroneous edit on his page and no has corrected it. Can you correct this error please as the page is auto-protected ?. Thank you 178.167.172.35 (talk) 13:36, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_cropped.jpg)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Mid-Ulster Cup, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
