User talk:DG Mester

September 2018

Hello, I'm Mattythewhite. I noticed that you made one or more changes to an article, Landon Donovan, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mattythewhite (talk) 16:41, 17 September 2018 (UTC

Hello, Landon Donovan is considered by many as the greatest U.S. soccer player of all time. Search it up, you will see.

October 2018

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Manhattan. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Shellwood (talk) 17:38, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I ddin't mean to vandalized. I was just trying to improved it.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at José Mourinho, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Mattythewhite (talk) 16:39, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Why are you removing the nationality of the club in the lead? If the player is not from the same country, it should be kept. Kante4 (talk) 16:48, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don't need to put that. Everyone knows on Google. DG Mester (talk) 16:50, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So, start a discussion as you have been reverted from more than one editor. Kante4 (talk) 16:51, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Again? It gets disruptive. Kante4 (talk) 21:28, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kante4: The unexplained removal of the location or league continued after your comments: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]. Would you say that this is or is not a problem? Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:04, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think the removal of league is not that bad, as i came across several articles where the league was mentioned but never updated after promotion/relegation. The nationality of the club should be given when it's a foreign club, not sure what you think @Walter Görlitz:. Kante4 (talk) 06:18, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kante4: I'm always happy to see league or nation updated. There's even a new suite of templates that addresses the promotion and relegation. I've seen it used on articles like Mesut Özil. Removing it is probably not ideal. My underlying concern is that it's all done without explanation. We may not have to worry based on this edit, but I did want you to know that it had continued after your last comment. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:32, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Walter Görlitz: Yeah, thanks. And i added those Premier League templates to those articles during the WC. Other than that, if no one bothers to update when e.g. Freiburg is relegated, then the player articles are out of date. That's why i think it should be removed. Kante4 (talk) 17:42, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Walter Görlitz:You are doing it again and after you were reverted on different articles by several editors... It gets disruptive. Kante4 (talk) 15:06, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Did you mean to ping as part of this? Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:44, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're doing it again. Please stop. As you have been advised above, there is no consensus for you to do this. Nzd (talk) 12:22, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Stop putting club on players name why don't do that for basletball or American football. Stoo being retarded. Thank you

You might also want to read WP:NPA. Cheers, Nzd (talk) 12:33, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Mesut Özil. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:17, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

National varieties of English

Hello. In a recent edit to the page Association football, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:55, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2018

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:00, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Zerozero.pt for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Zerozero.pt 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/Zerozero.pt 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. Azkord (talk) 16:29, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Soccer in the United States. BilCat (talk) 01:35, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Leaving edit summaries would help us to understand not only what you're doing, but also why you're doing it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:16, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Robinho, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Unsourced content. Mattythewhite (talk) 21:42, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Robinho is playing for different team in Turkey. The article is not updated. Thank you

Terminology in articles relating to Australia

Please note that, per WP:NCFIA, 'soccer' should be used rather than 'football' in articles about Australian subjects. Thanks, Nzd (talk) 22:21, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello: in Australia, football refers to Association football. Australian rules football is called either AFL or Aussie rules and Rugby league is commonly knowns as rugby or league, rugby union is called union or rugby. Australia change it's name in 2005 to Soccer Federation to Football Federation and I think here at wikipedia we should do the same. Thank you

A highly eloquent, but largely inaccurate thesis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.150.79.160 (talk) 04:25, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is the consensus. If you would like to try to change it, feel free to try. But please don't edit articles against the consensus because you don't agree with it. Thanks, Nzd (talk) 22:29, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to Wayne Rooney does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Your unexplained change had already been contested. You now need to take it to the article talk page, per WP:BRD. David Biddulph (talk) 00:49, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Wayne Rooney shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Nzd (talk) 02:39, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Stop your unexplained and simply incorrect edits. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:16, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Sport Club Corinthians Paulista. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. The changes you're making to numerous wiki articles are causing other editors more time to go back and fix. Please, there are more important things we could be working on instead of coming behind you and cleaning up. NsTaGaTr ^(Talk) 12:54, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Buffalo Bills, you may be blocked from editing. NsTaGaTr ^(Talk) 13:01, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at New York Giants shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. NsTaGaTr ^(Talk) 13:11, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's right information

New York Giants are based in East Rutherford. Stop being a pathetic. DG Mester (talk) 13:12, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you believe your edits are accurate, you should post them on the articles talk page to generate discussion on the point, rather than change an article outright without concensus. NsTaGaTr ^(Talk) 13:18, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do whatever you guys want so called experts, I will not change amymore.

Is there a reason you are logging out to make certain edits? (contributions). It's pretty obvious.. Nzd (talk) 13:55, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I dont have time for playboys like you.

March 2019

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. David Biddulph (talk) 14:44, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removal or changing if nationalities, and edit warring

Please cease making disruptive edits to player profiles. It is common to reference the nation or league of the club that a player currently plays in. This is applicable both if the player is from that country or not. You are now also edit warring on multiple articles, but in particular Diego Costa's page. The 3RR rule is there to tell you when to stop and use the talk page for consensus. However looking at your comments above and your edit summaries I am not sure if you will do that. Wikipedia is a collaborative effort. While the project supports bold edits and changes to be made, the changes made are subject to review and amendment by any other editor if multiple editors do not agree with you, then you must convince them of why your edits are better and under what criteria. Koncorde (talk) 12:07, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DG Mester, your recent edits have been disruptive and your conduct and attitude are concerning. Please slow down in your editing, listen to other users (such as @Koncorde:, and use the article talk page. If you continue as you are then you will likely be blocked sooner rather than later, and nobody wants that. Giant Snowman 12:32, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019 (continued)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Forbes' list of the most valuable sports teams. Yosemiter (talk) 15:14, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ad Orientem (talk) 16:17, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Likely block evasion via IP edits repeating same behaviour. Koncorde (talk) 14:50, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for block evasion. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ad Orientem (talk) 15:06, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are dangerously close to an indefinite block. Knock it off. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:07, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Now editing under 2601:192:8800:C0C0:5C81:7CE0:942:BAAE - surely this is in violation of a block, right? - NsTaGaTr ^(Talk) 12:57, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ad Orientem: - because I forgot the ping. - NsTaGaTr ^(Talk) 13:01, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent block evasion and disruptive editing.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ad Orientem (talk) 13:17, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a man to ask for forgiveness, but in this case I will ask. I apologize for the bad act on Wikipedia and promise that it will never be repeated again. I want a second chance and I will continue to help Wikipedia grow even more. Thank you DG Mester (talk) 16:56, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]