Jump to content

User talk:Fenix down/Archive 11

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13→Archive 15

Administrators' newsletter – November 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2017).

Administrator changes

added Longhair • Megalibrarygirl • TonyBallioni • Vanamonde93
removed Allen3 • Eluchil404 • Arthur Rubin • Bencherlite

Technical news

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • The Wikipedia community has recently learned that Allen3 (William Allen Peckham) passed away on December 30, 2016, the same day as JohnCD. Allen began editing in 2005 and became an administrator that same year.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:50, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Report Teambk edits

Today, the user change flag TPE to TWN again, such as [1], [2], [3] (just some of his edits) and he added some non-english texts such as [4], [5], thanks! Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 08:52, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Blocked again, I don't know why he won't edit in line with consensus. Feel free to revert any instances of non-English text and TWN / TPE flag issues where you see them. Fenix down (talk) 09:52, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
I filed on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Teambk, please see it, thanks! Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 11:07, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, that's not something I can intervene on but another admin will look at it. The annoying thing is that TeamBK does make a lot of good edits, it's just this continuing flag changing is getting really disruptive now. His talk page indicates he is beginning to understand, and I would be willing to unblock if he stated clearly the reason for his block, an understanding of why it was made and a promise not to do it again, but I have told him that I want to wait until the SPI is complete, as that is another issue. Fenix down (talk) 12:07, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Now the SPI case was closed by an SPI clerk. But, unluckily, you look...... Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 14:21, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Quick question in regards to 2017 VCU Rams men's soccer team

Greetings. I am not the creator of the article/redirect, but my understanding of the notability guidelines and every AfD discussion I've seen on the topic of college soccer is that teams can have season articles if they qualify for the NCAA tournament. Since VCU has done so this year that should mean that it is eligible, yes? Unlike in the previous discussion where WP:CRYSTALBALL was invoked, this is no longer the case. Jay eyem (talk) 00:02, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi Jay, in principle, I agree, if the team has qualified for the NCAA national championships then they would be presumed notable per WP:NSEASONS. Looks like the current title is a redirect, but I'm happy for you to start building a proper article for the season. Would be good though if you could develop some sourced prose though so it isn't just stats. Fenix down (talk) 09:35, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Ok, just making sure I had that rationale correct. I'm not working on this particular article, but I am working on related articles, so I wanted to make sure I had that right. Cheers. Jay eyem (talk) 14:27, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
My question is, why would you remove a link to a non-existent redirect page without then linking to the good page (VCU Rams men's soccer)??? And do the same action more than once??? GWFrog (talk) 17:20, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
@Jay eyem: - I have an article in my sandbox we can use to make the article. Quidster4040 (talk) 20:34, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Iran-Iraq editor

Hi Fenix down. A user called WisperShadow is constantly removing the Iran vs Iraq match from the Iran national football team results and Iran national football team results (2010–19) pages and adding it to the Iran B national football team page. This is despite the fact that the sources on those pages (FIFA.com and TeamMelli.com both include the match as an Iran A team match. This is the same user who constantly removes the well-sourced section about the Iran-Iraq rivalry from the Iran national football team page. He also accused me of WP:vandalism in a WP:personal attack here. Is it possible for you to protect these pages to a level that stops him editing them, or block his account? His constant removal of sourced information to suit his own opinions despite multiple warnings has reached a stage where it is simply unacceptable and clearly disruptive. Thank you, Hashim-afc (talk) 16:26, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Club Universidad Nacional Reserves and Academy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Club Universidad Nacional Reserves and Academy 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/Club Universidad Nacional Reserves and Academy (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Onel5969 TT me 03:16, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Club Tijuana Reserves and Academy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Club Tijuana Reserves and Academy 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/Club Tijuana Reserves and Academy (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Onel5969 TT me 03:17, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 November 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:40, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:FK Belita-Vitex Uzda Logo.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:FK Belita-Vitex Uzda 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) 18:38, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Chelsea McEachran

FYI someone contested this PROD and made a malformed AfD that I had to delete. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:05, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Tony, not sure what the editor was doing but I have denominated for AfD. Fenix down (talk) 08:17, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Fenix down. 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)

Requesting your opinion

I'd love to see your opinion at Talk:UAE Arabian Gulf League, thank you.--Bijanii (talk) 02:51, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2017).

Administrator changes

added Joe Roe
readded JzG
removed Ericorbit • Perceval • Thingg • Tristanb • Violetriga

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, a new section has been added to the username policy which disallows usernames containing emoji, emoticons or otherwise "decorative" usernames, and usernames that use any non-language symbols. Administrators should discuss issues related to these types of usernames before blocking.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Over the last few months, several users have reported backlogs that require administrator attention at WP:ANI, with the most common backlogs showing up on WP:SPI, WP:AIV and WP:RFPP. It is requested that all administrators take some time during this month to help clear backlogs wherever possible. It should be noted that AIV reports are not always valid; however, they still need to be cleared, which may include needing to remind users on what qualifies as vandalism.
  • The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative is conducting a survey for English Wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works (i.e. which problems it deals with well and which problems it struggles with). If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be emailed to you via Special:EmailUser.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:57, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 December 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:27, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Sport Club do Recife

Hello, thanks for taking an interest in this article, which was being worked on in draftspace. It has now been moved by you to the mainspace, but it contains, as yet, no verified information. Please be aware of WP:BURDEN: All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and is satisfied by providing a citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 06:21, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I agree with you. However, in this instance the idea that an article of this size, about a club which is clearly notable and which has existed in the mainspace since 2004 now suddenly needs to be moved to draft is not a good idea. I agree with you that more sourcing is needed and there is also a definite need to trim the article for tone and structure, but I feel this is best done in the mainspace where as many editors as possible will have a chance to do this. I will have a look at this my self when I can. Regarding sourcing, whilst there is a lack of sourcing in the article, it is not fair to say that nothing is verifiable. For example this section is readily verifiable if you click on the hatnote at the top of the section. There are several other examples in the article too. I'll try to have a look today, but if there is no change in a couple of days, I think the best way forward would be to remove sections that lack sourcing that are potentially contentious. Fenix down (talk) 08:28, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Egy Maulana Vikri

Hi. You closed a deletion discussion on this a couple of months ago but it seems like it has been recreated at Egy Maulana. I know nothing about football so you might want to check it out. Deb (talk) 09:10, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Deb, thanks for the message. I had actually seen this recreation. The article confirms with sourcing that he has played for the senior Indonesian national team and so now passes WP:NFOOTY, so am happy that it stays now. During the AfD he hadn't. Thanks, Fenix down (talk) 10:48, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Arabian Gulf Cup

Hi Fenix down. An IP is constantly changing the name of the Arabian Gulf Cup to Persian Gulf Cup in the lead of the Arabian Gulf Cup page. It's called Arabian Gulf Cup as shown by countless sources including FIFA.com and has never been Persian Gulf Cup (Iran isn't even in the cup). He is also adding the offensive term "الملخ خور" into the lead of the article. Please can you protect the page so the IP cannot continue vandalising the page? Many thanks, Hashim-afc (talk) 22:32, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2017).

Administrator changes

added Muboshgu
readded Anetode • Laser brain • Worm That Turned
removed None

Bureaucrat changes

readded Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the administrator policy should be amended to require disclosure of paid editing activity at WP:RFA and to prohibit the use of administrative tools as part of paid editing activity, with certain exceptions.

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Liga MX Femenil query

Hi Fenix down - I'm concerned with the way you handled the mass deletion nominations (60+) for the Liga MX Femenil players between January 5-6, 2018 and left this message on the editors' page after nominating. A significant number (going on 20+ so far) of these articles have secondary refs to support inclusion on Wikipedia based on a simple Google News search. I'm curious if you took the time to do any research for this large amount of articles nominated in such a short period of time? In hindsight, would you have approached this the same way you did? Thanks. Hmlarson (talk) 02:49, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I looked at a sample of the articles created before nominating and did not find anything to support GNG, the timestamps for nomination are not reflective of the overall process I went through. None of those I looked at were players with senior international experience and with hindsight I would not have nominated those as they met NFOOTY. I appreciate you have gone through a number of the articles and added secondary references and I have been watching these. I have not taken any of these go AfD as I appreciate you are going through and adding additional sources. However, I am not satisfied in many instances that you are showing GNG and in time, if further sources are not forthcoming then I will be taking them to AfD. In many instances I feel the source's you are presenting are routine transfer / call up talk, primary sources or simply don't provide a level of coverage beyond the trivial. However, acknowledging there was perhaps a little too much haste on my part earlier I don't think there is a need to rush to the next stage where relevant. Fenix down (talk) 07:58, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
To add some colour to my comments above, let's look at the sources in Diana Evangelista for example:
  1. ligafemenil.mx - this is a primary source and not suitable to support GNG
  2. diariodecolima.com - this is a very brief article that does nothing other than confirm she plays for Monterrey
  3. elcomentario.ucol.mx - this is a primary source and not suitable to support GNG as it is the newspaper of the university she attends, Universidad de Colima
  4. afmedios.com - this is a very brief routine match report about a game she played at the World Student Games. She's mentioned very briefly and there is essentially nothing of significance that could be used to build an encyclopedic article.
  5. primeraplanamx.com this does contain some content that could be used to support GNG, but a quarter of the article is concerned with the WSG team selection.
  6. afmedios.com another very brief article that notes only a few games she plays in and confirms participation in the WSG. There is nothing of significance here that has not been dealt with in sources above (I'm not sure why we have four sources confirming WSG participation anyway).
  7. excelsior.com.mx - this is a routine match report. The player is mentioned by name only. This is the definition of trivial coverage
  8. fmfstateofmind.com - This is a routine match summary. The player is mentioned by name only. This is the definition of trivial coverage again.
I understand you are still adding sources to a number of articles, but the article I discuss above is pretty representative of the qualitry of sourcing being provided. I am happy to provide comments on sourcing of any of the other articles if you want to link to them. This article is one I would be looking to take to AfD in its current state, though I would not look to bundle any articles together as I feel this is not always a productive way of looking at things, plus I would look to bring a detailed rationale as above so my thinking was clear. Fenix down (talk) 09:02, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your thorough response. Are you still of the opinion that this editor was disruptively editing? Would a civil discussion addressing the need for more references be more appropriate before the mass deletion nomination + disruptive editing accusation? Hmlarson (talk) 18:34, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
No problem, I really don't like some of the blanket "fails NFOOTY and GNG" comments we see in a lot of AfDs, not just those about female footballers, so try to provide analysis like that where possible, even if it can be a bit lengthy. I agree with you the wording of the templates can be a bit blunt, but in this instance, this user has a history of creating very basic articles, often not clearly indicating which guideline they might pass and has very little desire to engage with other users and has actually been blocked for this in the past, so I felt in this instance, the sledgehammer approach might be better in terms of getting a response. Fenix down (talk) 18:05, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
My question was: "Would a civil discussion addressing the need for more references be more appropriate before the mass deletion nomination + disruptive editing accusation?" Hmlarson (talk) 00:55, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Not when I believe articles to be non notable, when they have been mass created as stubs with very little content by an editor who has history of this behaviour and has been blocked previously for refusing to engage, something which he has done again this time. I felt I made this quite clear above. Like I said above for those where the player has not played senior international football I don't think you or any other editor has got close to satisfying GNG for any of the articles deprodded, so they were justifiable prods and unless there is a very significant increase in the quality and significance of sourcing I will be looking to take the vast majority of them to AfD shortly. Fenix down (talk) 07:25, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
So you don't believe civility is necessary here? That is remarkable, particularly for an editor with admin privileges, and that is why I communicated my concerns. Thank you. Hmlarson (talk) 18:32, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
I don't believe there has been an issue with civility. I've been very clear with you explaining my actions at length. I have no interest in continuing this discussion. Fenix down (talk) 23:25, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Noted, thanks for your time. Hmlarson (talk) 01:03, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:26, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Unreferenced article

Hello, the article you moved from draft does appear to be unsourced, I asked the creator if by external link they actually meant source. I'm moving this back to draft, of course when it has clear sources it can be moved back. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 08:14, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@Boleyn: it's clearly not unsourced. The external link plainly supported statements in the article both in terms of notability (WP:NFOOTY) and BLP requirements. This isn't a player with borderline notability claims, this is a player who has played at the highest international level on multiple occasions. To be completely honest with you would it really have been that difficult for you to do this? Although I added a couple of extra references, they are all from the same source, which was present in the external links section. It would have been a far more productive edit than simply dumping something in draft in such a bureaucratic manner. If you're not sure on whether an article is clearly sourced, it would be better to go to WT:FOOTY and check there when attempting to communicate with an individual editor has proced fruitless. In future, please follow these steps:
  1. When you are not sure if an article is clearly referenced check the external links
  2. Confirm to yourself whether the external link supports statements in the article that would resolve potential notability / BLP issues
  3. Convert the external link to a reference by your preferred method, or ask another editor to do so
  4. If unsure contact editor or WT:FOOTY pinging the article creator
  5. Only if sourcing genuinely unclear and confirmed or no response received through these channels should you move articles on obviously notable people to draft.

Thanks. Fenix down (talk) 09:51, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Request protection for 2018 Indonesia President's Cup

Hi there. Can you help me to increase page protection for 2018 Indonesia President's Cup? Because several IP's tend to edit it not properly. If the edit was properly then I don't mind it, but they not read my information for editing the page. Like if the group stage was done, then no need to put status A (Advance) or E (Eliminated) in that group like I saw in all UEFA Champions League season pages. Can you help me please? Regards Wira rhea (talk) 02:13, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@Wira rhea: Since not all group stage is end, it is unnecessary to remove status. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 02:36, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
@Hhhhhkohhhhh: Oh, in that case, I apologize and thank you for the information. Wira rhea (talk) 04:01, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
Don't think any action is needed here, is there? Fenix down (talk) 09:55, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

TWN again?

Please see 2018 Taiwan Football Premier League, thanks! Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 07:01, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Definitely, though I don't think maliciously. My interpretation of the way we show things in football articles is flags are meant to represent the FIFA nationality. Feel free to change these yourself if you see them, but only in football articles. Fenix down (talk) 09:59, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Arabian Gulf Cup disambiguation page

Hi Fenix down. There is currently a page that is protected so only administrators can edit it, which is the Arabian Gulf Cup page. This page is supposed to be a redirect to the Gulf Cup of Nations. However a user called Bijanii (who has since been blocked) constantly changed the redirect to being a disambiguation page. On this disambiguation page, he says "Arabian Gulf Cup could refer to" and lists 4 tournaments. The latter two are not and have never been called Arabian Gulf Cup, so they should not even be on the page. The first two on the list are Gulf Cup of Nations and UAE League Cup. Arabian Gulf Cup is the official name for Gulf Cup of Nations, has been ever since the tournament founded 48 years ago, and is an international tournament that has received plenty of notable coverage from reliable sources. UAE League Cup is a cup that for the past 4 years has been occassionally called Arabian Gulf Cup due to a temporary sponsorship with the Arabian Gulf Development. The competition itself is UAE's secondary domestic cup that has existed for 9 years only and searches online show it receives far, far less coverage than Gulf Cup of Nations as well as only being a temporary name. Thus, per WP:DISAMBIGUATION#Is there a primary topic?, Gulf Cup of Nations is the primary topic and UAE League Cup less notable topic. Per WP:DISAMBIGUATION#Deciding to disambiguate (third bullet point), this means that a disambiguation page is not needed, all that is needed is a hatnote on the primary topic's page. The Gulf Cup of Nations already has this hatnote: This article is about the international competition. For the Emirati cup competition that is known as the Arabian Gulf Cup for sponsorship reasons, see UAE League Cup. Thus, to me it is quite clear that Arabian Gulf Cup being a disambiguation page is going directly against Wikipedia guidelines, and it should simply be a redirect to Gulf Cup of Nations. This is why I kept reverting Bijanii's edits, but the page is now protected due to the 'edit war' between me and Bijanii (who has since been blocked for edit warring). I asked the admin who protected it and he said he "knew nothing about and didn't care about" the issue of it being a disambiguation page, he just wanted to stop the edit war. Unless I am mistaken in any way, it certainly should not be a disambiguation page per WP:DISAMBIGUATION and I ask you as an admin who I respect especially when it comes to football-related articles to please to change it back to a redirect page. Thank you, Hashim-afc (talk) 19:50, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

@Hashim-afc: I do not think your idea is good because I think your idea will confuse readers, I hope you can reconsider after RM or start a discussion on WT:FOOTY. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 14:20, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
@Hhhhhkohhhhh: If we follow the guidelines at WP:DISAMBIGUATION, I'm certain my idea is the correct course of action. Why do you think it would confuse readers? Arabian Gulf Cup is only a temporary sponsored name of the UAE League Cup which in itself is much less notable than the cup for national teams. Disambiguation pages aren't supposed to be made when there are only two pages and one of them is the primary topic over the other. Hashim-afc (talk) 17:04, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
@Hashim-afc: I think you had better go to WT:FOOTY to open a new discussion. Although Fenix down is an admin, but an admin can not abuse admin tool and this page has an edit war. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 01:53, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
@Hhhhhkohhhhh: That's fair enough and I understand what you're saying (see below my explanation for why I wanted an admin to make the change now rather than later). However I would like to know why you think a redirect would be confusing to readers though. Are you saying the guidelines at WP:DISAMBIGUATION are wrong or am I interpreting them wrongly? Hashim-afc (talk) 12:37, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay in responding. Looks like this is being taken care of through RM if I read correctly? Fenix down (talk) 09:56, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Well currently there is an RM for Gulf Cup of Nations to be moved to Arabian Gulf Cup. The reason I wanted Arabian Gulf Cup to be redirected to Gulf Cup of Nations in the meantime, is that I don't want the closing admin of that RM discussion to decide against the page move due to Arabian Gulf Cup being a disambiguation page, when in reality it should not be and there was never consensus for it to be one, a user called Bijanii forced it through edit wars and he's been blocked since, so that's why I was hoping an admin could redirect it before the RM discussion finished, unless my interpretation of WP:DISAMBIGUATION is wrong which I don't think it is. Hashim-afc (talk) 12:37, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Cup qualification

With regards to your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Essendon Royals SC, what separate cup competition are you referring to? The qualification rounds are not a separate competition (unlike the old Scottish Qualifying cup in Scotland). See 2015 FFA Cup preliminary rounds as an example. Not sure how this is any different to qualifying rounds in England which are regionalised until the last one. Number 57 15:22, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

That would be the Dockerty Cup. If you're competing for a separate trophy, it's a separate competition in my mind, particularly when it has been going for over 100 years. All of the states have separate cup competitions from which the last few qualify. I think this is completely different to FA Cup qualifiers because:
  1. The cups all have different names
  2. There is a specific trophy for each competition
  3. They are competitions organized by State Associations to my knowledge
  4. The state competitions have been running much longer than the FFA Cup
To be honest, I don't agree with qualifying round appearances, when not truly national, counting as appearing in a "national cup" for notability purposes for any competition but accept I am in the minority, but for Australia it is a completely different setup. No one would claim that because they have taken part in the Intertoto Cup that they have played in the Uefa Cup, and I see clear similarities here in Australia. Fenix down (talk) 15:38, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
OK, thanks for the explanation. It would be useful if that info were in the FFA qualification round articles. Cheers, Number 57 15:57, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
No problem, it is a bit of a weird setup and those qualification articles really confuse me, it only became clear when I clicked on one of the links in the 2015 qualifying article. For the FA Cup, I can see why people would argue that the qualifying stage is still a national competition because, to my understanding, the qualifying rounds are regional to keep costs to a minimum for very small clubs, so I wouldn't want to push against consensus here, but as far as the FFA cup goes, I think you are only notable if you have played in the competition proper. Fenix down (talk) 16:10, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2018).

Administrator changes

added None
removed Blurpeace • Dana boomer • Deltabeignet • Denelson83 • Grandiose • Salvidrim! • Ymblanter

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC has closed with a consensus that candidates at WP:RFA must disclose whether they have ever edited for pay and that administrators may never use administrative tools as part of any paid editing activity, except when they are acting as a Wikipedian-in-Residence or when the payment is made by the Wikimedia Foundation or an affiliate of the WMF.
  • Editors responding to threats of harm can now contact the Wikimedia Foundation's emergency address by using Special:EmailUser/Emergency. If you don't have email enabled on Wikipedia, directly contacting the emergency address using your own email client remains an option.

Technical news

  • A tag will now be automatically applied to edits that blank a page, turn a page into a redirect, remove/replace almost all content in a page, undo an edit, or rollback an edit. These edits were previously denoted solely by automatic edit summaries.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 5 February 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:12, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Phuentsholing City FC Logo.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Phuentsholing City 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) 18:38, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

List of nationality transfers in association football

Unsure why you are challenging the PROD given long-standing consensus that these lists are non-notable (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of association football players with dual nationality). GiantSnowman 14:12, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

WP:LISTN is quite clear: One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list. A google search quite clearly shows a wider range of articles covering a significant time period which deal with this very subject in a substantial manner. Beyond this, I would say elements of the list, such as those who changed their nationality to Equatorial Guinea are probably worthy of a list on their own, or at least as part of a dedicated article given the coverage that got on its own. Fenix down (talk) 15:28, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Agustin Gómez

Hi, Fenix down!

It looks like I've misinterpreted the cup notability rules. I now see what it says on the notability page, I've always known/thought it was enough to play in a cup match for a professional team (like AIK). E.g. if a player played an FA Cup match for Manchester United or Tottenham Hotspur against non-league opposition, they'd be suitable for an article even without passing GNG. Is that not the case? I had a little look around the AfD archives and saw similar articles marked as keep based on cup appearances for a pro team. Ex: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Curtis Osano. Admittedly, it seems to vary depending on what day of the week it is. Ha. Ex: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bilal Sayoud.

Cheers. R96Skinner (talk) 23:58, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi R96Skinner, I'll admit it's not clear from NFOOTY what to do in cup competitions. THings have definitely moved on since the first AfD you cite in 2007 and the general consensus is that any appearance in a competition proper (i.e. not qualifying rounds) in a match between 2 teams from FPLs is sufficient for NFOOTY. Normally, one appearance when a player's career is ongoing is enough under the assumption there will be more, but in the instance of the second AfD, there was greater consensus that in that instance it was insufficient. A bit of a grey area! Fenix down (talk) 12:13, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Indeed. All good! R96Skinner (talk) 12:23, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
I saw it had been moved to your draft space. Makes sense to me, he's back at his parent club in an FPL, so may very well meet NFOOTY soon. Fenix down (talk) 13:19, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 February 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Phuentsholing City FC Logo.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Phuentsholing City 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) 18:56, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2018).

Administrator changes

added Lourdes†
removed AngelOfSadness • Bhadani • Chris 73 • Coren • Friday • Midom • Mike V
† Lourdes has requested that her admin rights be temporarily removed, pending her return from travel.

Guideline and policy news

  • The autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) is scheduled to end on 14 March 2018. The results of the research collected can be read on Meta Wiki.
  • Community ban discussions must now stay open for at least 24 hours prior to being closed.
  • A change to the administrator inactivity policy has been proposed. Under the proposal, if an administrator has not used their admin tools for a period of five years and is subsequently desysopped for inactivity, the administrator would have to file a new RfA in order to regain the tools.
  • A change to the banning policy has been proposed which would specify conditions under which a repeat sockmaster may be considered de facto banned, reducing the need to start a community ban discussion for these users.

Technical news

  • CheckUsers are now able to view private data such as IP addresses from the edit filter log, e.g. when the filter prevents a user from creating an account. Previously, this information was unavailable to CheckUsers because access to it could not be logged.
  • The edit filter has a new feature contains_all that edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.

Miscellaneous

Obituaries

  • Bhadani (Gangadhar Bhadani) passed away on 8 February 2018. Bhadani joined Wikipedia in March 2005 and became an administrator in September 2005. While he was active, Bhadani was regarded as one of the most prolific Wikipedians from India.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

I’m happy that the logo is removed from the ‘commons’ area for the reasons you suggest. Are you able to do this or should I go back to GlasgowBraveheart who kindly managed to do this for me... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Central Dibs (talk • contribs) 09:26, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments Fenix down, I wasn't aware of the implications of uploading the image. Although I was acting in best interests I have requested the file to be deleted from wikimedia commons. Hope everything gets sorted with the badge, it will be a good addition to the encyclopedia. Thanks GlasgowBraveheart (talk) 22:45, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Al-Mosul FC

Hi Fenix down. An IP keeps removing Al-Mosul FC's logo from the infobox of their page. He says the Nuri Mosque (depicted in the logo) has been destroyed which is true but does not in any way mean the club has changed their logo. I asked him to provide a source that shows this is no longer the logo but he just keeps removing it without interacting with me. I would appreciate it if you could protect the page, thank you, Hashim-afc (talk) 15:29, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Done, but please in future raise with an admin before you break WP:3RR. Fenix down (talk) 16:27, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
As far as I'm aware I didn't break 3RR as my reverts were over a 2-week period not 24 hours. But in the future I will make sure to raise with admin earlier. Thank you, Hashim-afc (talk) 17:39, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Fenix down. The IP came back just hours after your page protection ended and removed the logo again. Requesting the page to be protected for longer, thank you, Hashim-afc (talk) 18:50, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
Protected now for 3 months. Fenix down (talk) 08:02, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

2018 Singapore Community Shield

Hello! Can you delete and salt this article, thanks! This article was repeatly recreated by Teambk (talk · contribs). I hope that he recreate this article via WP:AfC in the future. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 09:16, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Looks like another admin beat me to it, it's been salted too. Fenix down (talk) 12:10, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Re Manchester United's Digital Marketing Strategy deletion advice

Hello Fenix_down. Thank you for your feedback on my Manchester United's Digital Marketing Strategy article. Could you perhaps give me some more feedback on the article? I noticed you made a comment about the use of primary sources, I have since edited the sources and changed them (in an attempt to improve the validity/reliability)

Thanks

Benterry101 (talk) 16:30, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Ben, I think the more pertinent question is why is this a notable subject for a standalone article? Can you state in a couple of sentences why you think this is a notable subject?
To be honest, I don't see anything in the article that isn't simply generic comment which could be applied to any brand, most major organisations try to build relationships with customers / fans through social media, most major organisations try to sell through online platforms. Basically I could take the article as is, change Manchester United to Arsenal and bar the number of social media followers most of the content would still be pertinent.
Specifically on the sources, bar this, none of them show that this clubs specific strategy has gained significant coverage in independent sources. Sources 3,4 and 5 are primary sources, coming directly from the club. Source 1, being the Premier League is probably also close enough to the club to be primary, but this doesn't really matter as it isn't a source that discusses their digital marketing strategy in any way at all. Sources 2, 6 and 7 mention the club, but in a wider context and as such do not show that the club's digital strategy itself is notable.
If you look at an article like 2008 Summer Olympics marketing you will see multiple third party sources commenting on various elements of the organizing committees attempts to market the games through, which went far beyond basic social media, Apps and an online store. If you want to write an article on this subject then you need to satisfy WP:GNG, specifically demonstrate the topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Fenix down (talk) 16:53, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Deleted edit review

Could I get you to check the deleted version of Zhang Yu (footballer)? Is the current article about the same person as the one that was deleted five years ago? Thanks in advance. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:39, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Looks like it to me, same name, same club, same birth date. Fenix down (talk) 16:48, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Leeds Utd page

Are you able to edit the Leeds Utd page? There is some info on there about me that is incorrect. Ffmoore4141 (talk) 21:49, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Can you be more specific please? It's a long article! Fenix down (talk) 23:44, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Coaching Staff

Hi. I would say about the Leeds United Coaching staff, considering they have a large first team back room and also a large academy back room (Adam Underwood said 27 full time academy staff are employed alone), where the coaching staff and academy staff have been listed on the page Leeds for several years, to then have the entire first team and academy staff now are only listed as 3 members of staff, doesnt seem to fit right with the encyclopedia of Wikpedia. Seems far far too minimal? The majority if wanting further links, you could even go onto the Leeds United linked in page and see the employees listed on there too.

I think it is better to include to few people that include every single member of the coaching staff. The idea that we need to include the under 8s coach is frankly ridiculous. Have a look at other articles for a view on the normal staff listings. Fenix down (talk) 19:00, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Signpost issue 4 – 29 March 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:48, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fenix_down/Archive_11&oldid=834521342"