Jump to content

User talk:Bring back Daz Sampson/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Welcome!

Hi, Bring back Daz Simpson. Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your joining. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Charlie Jeff (talk) 17:07, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Bring back Daz Sampson, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Teahouse logo

Hi Bring back Daz Sampson! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cordless Larry (talk).

Visit the Teahouse
We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Marta Mateos, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Almenara. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited María Alharilla Casado, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jaén. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:32, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you + invitation

Thank you for your contributions to women's football/soccer articles. I thought I'd let you know about the Women's Football/Soccer Task Force (WP:WOSO), a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of women's football/soccer. If you would like to participate, join by visiting the Members page. Thanks!

October 2016

Information icon Hello, I'm CAPTAIN RAJU. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Brøndby IF (women)— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 16:24, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

Moves like Kim Little Barnstar
As a recipient of the Kim Little barnstar, we'd like to thank you for make amazing Kim Little-like contributions to articles related to women's football (soccer) and WP:WOSO. Thank you for your diligent work!

Hmlarson (talk) 00:24, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Bring back Daz Sampson (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #16757 was submitted on Oct 19, 2016 13:15:08. This review is now closed.


--UTRSBot (talk) 13:15, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

WP:DOPPELGANGER

It's not clear to me why this account was blocked. See WP:DOPPELGANGER > Clean start under a new name if you'd like to take steps to remove block on "master account" per this. Your contributions are appreciated. Hmlarson (talk) 00:07, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

WP:DOPPELGANGER does not apply here ("such accounts should not be used for editing") and WP:CLEANSTART is not available to users who have evaded a block or are making a new account to avoid scrutiny. If you would like to take steps to remove the block on your master account, or whichever account you would like to use as your only account, please read WP:STANDARDOFFER. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 01:07, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Actually, it may apply if the user has endured harassment. Sometimes people "act out" (in September 2015) when they've been poorly treated. If you'd like a few samples, let me know - but you can probably start with the top of this talk page. Hmlarson (talk) 01:41, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Am I really blocked for another six months, then? By my reckoning I got bombed out early Feb, came back early August, so I've already repaid my debt to wiki-society. If I was a bit keen and jumped the gun with my comeback I can sit out the 'residue' of a few days or whatever it was (although even that seems petty). Yet another six months is strikingly punitive, since the usual tariff for my (ahem) crimes is measured in days or weeks. Since doubts were expressed as to the suitability of my previous noms de guerre I ditched those and intend staying as Bring back Daz Sampson. I worry that sometimes editors caught up in the cut and thrust of policing wikipedia around the clock forget what it's like for those of us with one foot still in the real world. When you're back after a six-month sabbatical you naturally want to edit some articles, not spend ages wading through dry rules and regulations checking if it's okay. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 18:17, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

I believe you that your desire to overcome your block and return to legitimate constructive editing is genuine, and I think that that's wonderful, but I have to correct you on a couple points:

  1. You're not blocked for six months. Your block is indefinite, as most blocks for repeated sockpuppetry are, which means only that your block has no set length. It never expires, there's no set date where your actions are automatically forgiven and forgotten and you can just return to editing like nothing ever happened. Your block can be lifted, if you can convincingly demonstrate that you understand the behaviour that led to your being blocked and that you won't repeat that behaviour. If you can't do that, then you will remain blocked to prevent further disruption. You don't necessarily have to wait six months for that, although that's the usual standard for sockpuppetry.
  2. By your reckoning, you've forgotten that you edited in April as Bring back Regi Blinker, and it's very likely you edited as an IP in July, so in fact you've persistently evaded your block. It will work in your favour to be honest about it.
  3. It's the Wikipedia community that will ultimately approve or oppose your unblock request, so it is strongly to your advantage to stop making disrespectful statements that your block was "grossly disproportionate", griping that you "had to bow and scrape before the blocking admin", and referring to users not having "one foot still in the real world". This is especially true considering your block originated in part from personal attacks.
  4. This last point I think you need to really understand. The Wikipedia community has an especially strong desire to deter sockpuppetry, because of the extensive severe problems we have had from users abusing multiple accounts. The fact that you made constructive contributions while blocked, no matter how well-intentioned, is a point which works strongly against you.

You can make an unblock request any time, but in my opinion it would be unlikely to succeed right now, and making unblock requests with little chance of success is considered disruptive and might lead to further sanctions. If you are serious about returning, address these points above before you make a request. If you have questions you can ask here. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 03:12, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

"It will work in your favour to be honest about it." - Isn't this what the editor said here and the request was immediately declined with no further explanation? For people who do not spend all their time in this realm of Wikipedia, there is a steep learning curve. From all of the disruptive editing and harassment I've seen, I agree that this perpetual block for an initial 2-week block for both editors is heavy-handed. I've seen lots of "sock puppets" over the years that do nothing but vandalize, troll, and disrupt. I don't think that's what's happened here and is clearly evidenced by the editing done by the accounts. You have stated a number of things that do not work in the editor's favour - what would? Or should the editor seeks some third opinions? Hmlarson (talk) 05:07, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Bring back Daz Sampson - if able, I might suggest adding the {{retired}} tag to other accounts besides your primary per this part of WP:DOPPELGANGER:

Clean start under a new name: A clean start is when a user stops using an old account in order to start afresh with a new account, usually due to past mistakes or to avoid harassment. A clean start is permitted only if there are no active bans, blocks, or sanctions in place against the old account. Do not use your new account to return to topic areas, disputes, editing patterns, or behaviors previously identified as problematic, and you should be careful not to do anything that looks like an attempt to evade scrutiny. A clean start requires that you no longer use your old account(s), which should note on their user pages that they are inactive—for example, with the {{retired}} tag—to prevent the switch being seen as an attempt to sock puppet.

Hmlarson (talk) 05:16, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Additional resources: WP:GAB, WP:NICETRY Hmlarson (talk) 05:43, 22 October 2016 (UTC) Hmlarson (talk) 05:56, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Hmlarson, I really appreciate your efforts on my behalf. I suspect if I did all this there would turn out to be some pettifogging rule against it or it would turn out to be deemed "egregious" in some way. Haha. Anyway, I've said all the right things already, but bottom line: they don't believe me. Or they don't want to call out User:Bbb23, one of the 'all-day, every-day' brigade, on his initial misjudgement. Hence the ludicrous, Kafkaesque block of unknown duration. Anyway, even if I did get back my little harem of co-morbid obsessives would soon be on my case, trying to get me jettisoned on some other pretext! Kinda flattering in a creepy way, but sad and pathetic for what I assume are grown men. I might have a crack at Simple English Wikipedia next, hopefully clean up my prose and provide some respite from the attentions of my fan club. Some of the stuff might be transferable to here I suppose (although I'm sure point 7, paragraph 4 of schedule 159b expressly forbids it!) Keep up the good work, how you don't go potty I will never know. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 10:23, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Bring back Daz Sampson - Wiki Loves Daz. That's for sure. His valued contributions - somehow overlooked here - will be missed. There's always the option of creating a WOSO-pedia starting with an import of existing articles as a solid start. I've considered this from time to time in lieu of going to the potty. There are also editors and admins in the community who can help provide some balance and a help shine a light on the path to re-instatement. Hmlarson (talk) 15:36, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Stories like this are also a huge motivator 1 - so I guess we'll be adding a few 100 more in Daz' honor until things can be rectified. Hmlarson (talk) 16:00, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
  • @Hmlarson: you've painted me as an enemy here but I'm honestly trying to help. If my interest was in keeping Daz blocked I just wouldn't weigh in here at all, the two of you are doing a good job of it on your own. I don't know what request you're trying to link to above, but my reply is on the assumption you are referring to this comment. What was denied was the request to run CheckUser, which I won't elaborate on here, but Daz's request is flatly untenable: they violated the multiple accounts policy multiple times and need to remain blocked to prevent and deter further disruption. If we let everyone who tried to make a new account to hide their past get away with it, the sockpuppetry policy would be meaningless. Daz's path to return to editing is to be unblocked through the proper process; I will explain why below, and that is my honest and true goal of editing this page at all. Mind you don't become a meatpuppet yourself: if you continue advising them to try to clean start and hide their abuse of the policy, I will ask at ANI to have you banned from this page. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:06, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
  • @Bring back Daz Sampson: see what I wrote to Hmlarson above; I am trying to help here. If you want to be unblocked, you need to own up to your past mistakes. I'm not entirely familiar with your history, I can only go by what I've seen, and what I can say about that is that if you were blocked for two weeks as a first block then whatever you did must have been reasonably severe in the eyes of the blocking administrator. Had you sat out the two weeks and then came back and did the same thing again, your next block probably would have been for a month or longer, but because you didn't sit out the two weeks but created sockpuppet accounts to continue the dispute while you were blocked, it was obvious you didn't get the point of the block and also escalated to abuse of multiple accounts, so you were blocked indefinitely. For an unblock request to be successful, you need to show that you understand why you were blocked in the first place, because if you don't genuinely understand why your disruptive behaviour was disruptive, you will not avoid that behaviour in the future.
I'm advising you to deal with your block through the proper channels, and not take Hmlarson's advice to clean start, because I am highly confident you will not be able to accomplish a clean start. Speaking as an SPI clerk, your edits are very easy to spot, editing as you do in a sorely "understaffed" subject area. If you try to create another new account to go back to editing here, your detractors (harassers, as you say) will identify you, and it will be very easy for them to build a case for blocking you again. Indeed, at this point, all they have to do is demonstrate that you are who you are. On the other hand if you have been properly unblocked and have not repeated the disruption, then when your detractors try to dig up your past it will be much easier to show they are not here to build an encyclopedia. You'll be far from the first productive editor to have an indefinite block in their past. So trust me that everything that I've written on this page is in the interest of getting you back to that point, but you have to do a lot of the work yourself.
First of all, your block is a CheckUser block (technical evidence proves you have abused multiple accounts) and policy says in that case the blocking CheckUser must consent to your being unblocked. That means you first have to convince Bbb23 that you have genuinely reformed. I've never known him to be unreasonable but I'm sure it will help immensely if you can stop insulting him in every comment you make. If you can convince him that your editing will not be disruptive, my guess is he will present your request to the administrators' noticeboard for community discussion, but he's not going to waste their time with a request that's obviously going to fail.
In the meantime, if you can productively edit other Wikimedia projects (like Simple English or Commons or other languages, assuming you're not also blocked on those wikis) then you can use that as evidence that your editing here will be productive. You can try to point to your edits here, I honestly don't know how that will go: some users will see a productive history while others will see you continuing to break the sockpuppetry policy with every edit.
Like I said, I am available to answer questions as best I can, but if you're obviously not going to take my advice then there's lots of other things I can better occupy myself with here. So it's up to you to decide how to proceed. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:06, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi again Ivanvector - It feels like you are trying to dominate and control this discussion. As you know, there are numerous editors in the community that can assist and contribute. Thanks for your efforts. You've made your point clearly and can step away at this point. Hmlarson (talk) 17:39, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Actually not. I've revoked Talk page access, and I will probably revert any additional comments you make, Hmlarson. Your comments are singularly unconstructive.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:42, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Bbb23 - Please explain how so. Thank you. Hmlarson (talk) 18:01, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Bring back Daz Sampson. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Appeal

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Bring back Daz Sampson (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

-- Why do you believe you should be unblocked? I have waited six months without trying to evade my block for sock-puppetry and have used the time productively off-Wiki. I recognise my previous behaviour which led to the block was unacceptable and promise not to repeat it. During my block I have also made some positive contributions to simple English Wikipedia. I am hoping that a "standard offer" might now be considered appropriate as a way back for me. If you are unblocked, what articles do you intend to edit? Women's football (soccer) articles. It's a very undervalued and quiet corner of the encyclopedia, so if I was allowed back, I'd be confident of "keeping my nose clean". I would be very happy to get back and beaver away quietly without running into any potential issues with any other editors. Specifically, the European Championships for women's football (soccer) are happening soon and I would like to help expand, update and in some cases, create articles for the players taking part. Why do you think there is a block currently affecting you? If you believe it's in error, tell us how. I was originally blocked for 2 weeks for edit-warring, then, regrettably, used several different sock-puppet accounts to continue editing. I now see that an indefinite block was appropriate, so it certainly wasn't an error. At the time I was indignant and rather less than courteous to the administrators and would-be-administrators who applied the policies. Having read the stuff back it reflects badly on me and I apologise unreservedly. But I am asking for "mercy" and another chance as my actual edits were always good. Is there anything else you would like us to consider when reviewing your block? Just that I spent quite a long time blocked before my last block so in actual fact the total block period is now more like 12 months. Without seeking to trivialise my offences, I will suggest that the tariff is in danger of becoming disproportionate to the "crime". Obviously, I will only use one account and I am proposing to use "Bring back Daz Sampson". Doubts were expressed as to the suitability of some of the other usernames which made fun of a Scottish football team eg. "Sevcohaha". However, I am prepared to be guided on this. My oldest account is "Clavdia Chauchat" (AKA Vanished user llkdfkj4isw4) and "M?lfarlig!" was also me. So I can point to a record of many thousands of good edits over several years. Clearly if I was allowed back I would declare all my previous names on my userpage, to demonstrate that my old MO of getting back in the game with a new nom-de-guerre is wrong, and now completely behind me.

Accept reason:

My apologies for taking so long to review this. Per your unblock request and the recommendations below, I have unblocked you. Good luck. Bbb23 (talk) 21:46, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

  • Support - it seems apparent you know what went wrong that led to your block, and I don't really believe you ever really tried to hide the fact that you were using multiple accounts and you haven't continued since the last kerfuffle. Thus I don't see any preventive reason this block needs to remain in place. If in the future you feel you are being harassed, please see WP:DWH and/or contact an administrator for assistance. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:06, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
@Bbb23: I totally agree with your block, but in light of what the editor has said in the unblock request above, and the amount of time that has passed, do you think it would be reasonable to give him or her another chance now? The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:42, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi all, it has been a week now and I'm just checking that this request has not become 'stale'. At WP:UNBLOCK it says: "The process can take hours or a few days; for major discussions sometimes it can take a week or more." But there does not seems to be much discussion at all here? Therefore I hope it will not be regarded as an impertinence if I attempt a gentle nudge to proceedings at this juncture! The blocker has commented at their talk page, but has apparently not shown any appetite to respond here. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 11:40, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
Based on Bbb23's comment that "unblock requests from socks generally attract other CheckUsers", would other checkusers be willing to review? Pinging Materialscientist, MusikAnimal. Thank you. Hmlarson (talk) 17:33, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Okay, after my extended sabbatical I don't suppose another couple of weeks here on the naughty step has done me any harm! But I'm just presuming to "check in" again as, in soccer parlance, my appeal seems to have been booted into the long grass. I wonder if the support !votes here are "quorum" to give me another chance, please? Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 11:09, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks all, I will now be on my best behaviour! Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 07:01, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

An invitation for you

Please join us during the month of May 2017 for the...

Women's Sports worldwide online edit-a-thon

Contributions to new or existing articles on women athletes
(including WOSO players)
are encouraged and appreciated. For more information and resources, please see WP: Women in Red, the Women's football task force and WP:Women's Sport.

#wikiwomeninred

(To subscribe, Women's football task force/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women's football task force/Opt-out list)

Subject of mass mailing: Women's Football / Soccer Task Force News: August 2017

Women's Football / Soccer Task Force News: August 2017

Should the women's football task force become WikiProject: WOSO?

According to an op-ed in the recent Signpost, some editors think task forces and subgroups are dying in 2017.

What do you think about forming our own WikiProject separate from WP:FOOTY? There's an on-going discussion of the potential pros and cons on the task force talk page. Input is welcome.

Recent developments

New initiatives have been created for:

  • FA WSL (England's top-division league)
  • NCAA (American university teams, conferences, etc.)
  • W-League (Australia's top-division league)
Ongoing tournaments
Current and upcoming seasons for top-division leagues
Did you know?

While WP:FPL lists only two women's top-division leagues as notable due to its "fully professional" criteria, did you know you can create an article on any player in any league as long as the references meet WP:GNG guidelines? Make sure to tag the new article talk page with: {{WP Women's sport|footy=yes}}.

Have some new articles in mind or see some that need improvement? Add them to the Open Tasks page if you'd like and other editors may be able to help. Need tips, assistance, or resources from other WOSO editors? Leave a message on the task force talk page.

Thank you for your continued contributions to articles related to women's football / soccer (WOSO)!

Women's Football / Soccer Task Force
#wikiwomeninred

(To subscribe, Women's football task force/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women's football task force/Opt-out list) – Hmlarson (talk) 02:24, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Bring back Daz Sampson. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to join Women in Red

Thank you for creating several articles on women and their works over the past few weeks. We have become aware of your contributions thanks to research undertaken by Bobo.03 at the University of Minnesota.
You might be interested in becoming a member of our WikiProject Women in Red where we are actively trying to reduce Wikipedia's content gender gap.
If you would like to receive news of our activities without becoming a member, you can simply add your name to our mailing list. In any case, thank you for actively contributing to the coverage of women (currently, 17.25% of English Wikipedia's biographies).
  • Our priorities for December:

Seasonal celebrations First ladies Go local #1day1woman Global Initiative

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Ipigott (talk) 12:01, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Stefania Antonini, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anne O'Brien (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

WOSO Task Force News: April 2018

Women's Football / Soccer Task Force News: April 2018

Eniola Aluko of England (in white) and Jovana Mrkić (in red) of Montenegro, 2014
Eniola Aluko of England (in white) and Jovana Mrkić (in red) of Montenegro, 2014

Hello WOSO editors! A few initiatives have been started with an emphasis on making more WOSO links blue (similar to the work that WikiProject Women in Red does) and filling in the gaps within various league, team, and player, etc. articles.

If you're interested in collaborating with others to make more links blue, take a look at the initiatives listed in the box below. Sign up at the bottom of an initiative page and help grow the lists, add potential references, resources, and create the articles ... or create your own initiative.

WOSO
Initiatives
Australia:W-League
England: WSL
France: Div 1
Germany: Bundesliga
Ireland: WNL
Italy: Serie A
Mexico: Liga MX Femenil
Nigeria
Spain: La Liga Femenina
Sweden: Damallsvenskan
United States: NCAA
Requested Articles
Did you know ...

WP:GNG takes precedence over WP:NFOOTY (which only includes the players in 1 active women's league)? Often times there is enough media coverage that meets WP:GNG or other notability guidelines. For more information, see WP:WOSO#Notability and be sure to tag the new article talk page with: {{WP Women's sport|footy=yes}}

Current and upcoming seasons for top-division leagues
Current season articles needing creation


Have some new articles in mind or see some that need improvement? Add them to the Open Tasks.

Has an article you worked on been nominated for deletion? See:

Want some tips, assistance, or resources from other WOSO editors?
Leave a message on the task force talk page.

Thank you for your continued contributions to articles related to women's football / soccer (WOSO)!

Women's Football / Soccer Task Force
#wikiwomeninred

Subscribe or Unsubscribe here. Sent by: Hmlarson (talk) 17:53, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Fai-conti-cup.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Fai-conti-cup.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:40, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Fiorentina Women's FC logo.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Fiorentina Women's FC logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:15, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Adina Giurgiu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arad (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

File:C.F. Florentia logo.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:12, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Bring back Daz Sampson. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Pink Sport Time Logo.png

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:05, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited KIF Örebro DFF, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frida Svensson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Växjö DFF logo.svg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:04, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Kungsbacka DFF.png

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:07, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

File:IFK Kalmar logo.png

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:10, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of S.L. Benfica (women's football) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article S.L. Benfica (women's football) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/S.L. Benfica (women's football) 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. SLBedit (talk) 15:15, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Logo-Campeonato Promoção Futebol Feminino.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:10, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello Bring back Daz Sampson, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019.
Happy editing,
Meatsgains(talk) 20:16, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Hello

Hi there, I noticed that you edit many articles related to Portuguese/Brazilian women's football. Just out of curiosity, are you brazilian or portuguese? Also, your edits are pretty good. Have you ever thought about joining the "the Women's football/soccer task force"? Your contributions could be very valuable to the project. Regards.--SirEdimon (talk) 19:10, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi P.H.TARU (talk) 20:18, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

File:1988 FIFA Tourny ISL.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 19:13, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Ada Hegerberg

Any idea why you have removed sourced content and re-added unsourced content? GiantSnowman 20:43, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Your incorrectly formatted source was already in the article - and the swathes of stuff you took out was covered by the Lyon profile and the Soccerway source I added! Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 21:30, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
Then remove the duplicate ref, and please directly cite in-line. GiantSnowman 09:11, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

File:Katharina Lindner.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:00, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Autopatrolled granted

Hi Bring back Daz Sampson, 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! Schwede66 18:47, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Balochistan United WFC logo.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Balochistan United WFC logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:27, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

File license clarification

Hi Bring back Daz Sampson. I'm wondering if you might be able to possibly clarify the licensing of WP:MCQ#File:Katharina Lindner.jpg and WP:MCQ#File:Anne O'Brien in 1980.jpeg. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:17, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

A page you started (Tampa Bay Extreme) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Tampa Bay Extreme.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Thank you for your new article on the Tampa Bay Extreme.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Doomsdayer520}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 20:30, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Lebanon women's national team GA review

Hi, I've read your post on the WikiProject talk page inviting us to join the women's task force. I have added a lot of information about the Italy women's national football team, especially about Italy at the FIFA Women's World Cup. However, my work here on Wikipedia mainly specializes in Lebanese football and, unfortunately, there isn't enough information online about player statistics to be able to create their own articles. I have, however, improved Lebanon women's national football team and have nominated it for GA. I was wondering if it were possible for you to start the review? Thanks, Nehme1499 (talk) 15:16, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Nehme1499, thanks for the message and your great work on these articles. I'll hopefully be able to take a proper look and see if I can review it in the next week or so? Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 19:45, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Don't worry, the review is already in process. If you would like to add some comments feel free to do so! Nehme1499 (talk) 19:47, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Johnson Hippolyte

Not sure what sources you have that meet GNG, but please can you add them? GiantSnowman 10:22, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

July 2019

Hi Bring back Daz Sampson. I know that you know that edits like this or this aren't appropriate. Please stop. Thank you, FASTILY 21:50, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Fastily - which part of the edits did you think was inappropriate? Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 07:07, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Archive 1
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bring_back_Daz_Sampson/Archive_1&oldid=1212125485"