User talk:Govvy/Archive11

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Govvy. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archives

Archive1 (Feb 2006 - May 2007)

Archive2 (May - June 2007)

Archive3 (June - February 2009)

Archive4 (March 2009 - Jan 2013)

Archive5 (Jan 2013 - November 2015)

Archive6 (2016)

Archive7 (2017)

Archive8 (2018)

Archive9 (2019)

Archive10 (2020)

Archive11 (2021)

Archive12 (2022)

Archive13 (2023)

Archive14 (2024)

Happy New Year, Govvy!

Happy New Year!

Govvy,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 09:34, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

@Iggy the Swan: Thank you, Happy New year to you. I really don't have time to do stuff on wikipedia. Hope all is good with you. Cheers. Govvy (talk) 17:25, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Harry Wilson

Thank you, much appreciated. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 14:15, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Rob Chandra

Can Rob Chandra be moved to Draft until i find valid references, he is(was) top Venture Capitalist in Silicon Valley — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raovikramnet (talk • contribs) 11:35, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Unwind Yourself

Hello Govvy. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Unwind Yourself, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, or is not a musical recording. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 12:15, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

@Shirt58: ?? But as stated Unwind Yourself is a song recorded which makes it a musical recording! Also, there are no citations on the page for notability, so I am pretty sure I tagged that page correctly! :/ Govvy (talk) 12:18, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Govvy! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Lupin plugin?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.

The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:05, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

If you want to improve something...

If you want to improve something, but don't have the time, just leave a request in a section here using ==text==, then wait. I will inform you on your talk page with "Re: Article". Thanks! AnotherEditor144^{talk contribs} 17:04, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Norwegian football articles

Govvy most of the articles I put forward are now toast because they're simply not notable. If you don't agree you can either keep making tenuous keep !votes based on WP:MUSTBESOURCES, as you have been, or I suppose you could avail of deletion review. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 15:40, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@Bring back Daz Sampson: It's all about what you have access too, if you have access to the right archives, that helps. It's always how one uses and interprets information. I certainly do not see your point of view on most nominations, and from some of my searches, I can't find anything, so I haven't even bothered to argue a case for a lot of articles you've sent to AfD. But for the few, I've used google, found some sources and looked at the citations in the article. I feel it's fair that I express my view and I also feel you haven't done all the research towards these nominations of yours. Govvy (talk) 17:18, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Here's my research. Perhaps you could point me in the direction of yours? Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 18:33, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Zlatko Kranjčar

On 4 March 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Zlatko Kranjčar, which you nominated and updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. TJMSmith (talk) 02:42, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 1985–86 South Midlands League

Hello Govvy,

I am, Denebleo, the South Midlands league is the forerunner of the Spartan South Midlands league. And was a feeder to Isthmian League. the teams later promoted to this league can be found here. Why would you delete this page? When you delete my page then should you also delete 1985–86 Eastern Counties Football League or 1985–86 Kent Football League. Why are these pages importanter that the 1985–86 South Midlands League?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Denebleo (talk • contribs) 15:07, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

@Denebleo: All those season pages, they are so down the ladder, they are not notable. I've sent three to AfD. They all should be deleted. Govvy (talk) 16:50, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

@Govvy: You will delete also 1985–86 Eastern Counties Football League and 1985–86 Kent Football League? Or 1985–86 Essex Senior Football League, 1985–86 Combined Counties Football League etc? They were at same level as South Midlands League!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Denebleo (talk • contribs) 17:06, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

International European Heritage Month

WP:DENY. Govvy (talk) 12:55, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi. Can you move my article back from draft space? Because, this is a valid article because I am the person who has invented a month honoring European people and people of European descent. It doesn't exist anywhere else yet, but I made it exist and I'm hoping for more support. Other races have months honoring them, so I started an International European Heritage Month to be fair. ____

International European Heritage Month is intended to raise awareness of, celebrate, appreciate, and prevent prejudice against, these people and their history.

International European Heritage Month was founded by Richard Kutney, a citizen of the USA, on March 3, 2021.

International European Heritage Month is in September. International European Heritage Month happens during the same month that European Heritage Days occurs. Rich Kutney (talk) 01:24, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

International Men's History Month

WP:DENY. Govvy (talk) 12:55, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi. Can you move my article back from draft space? Because, this is a valid article because I am the person who has invented a month honoring all men. It doesn't exist anywhere else yet, but I made it exist and I'm hoping for more support because women have Women's History Month and men do not have a history month yet. So I started a Men's History Month to be fair.

____

International Men's History Month is intended to raise awareness of, celebrate, appreciate, and prevent prejudice against, men and their history.

International Men's History Month was founded by Richard Kutney, a citizen of the USA, on March 3, 2021.

International Men's History Month is in November. International Men's History Month happens during the same month that International Men's Day occurs. Rich Kutney (talk) 01:33, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Speedy deletion of International Data Spaces

Hi Govvy. I saw yor message regarding speedy deletion of the article on International Data Spaces. I must admit that I am a bit puzzled, especially on your characterisation of it being promotional. IDS is a new data sharing standard, supported also by governmental bodies. I assume that articles on 5G or on Open Data Protocol are not seen as promotional since they are there. The reason I created the IDS article was because I was turning to Wikipedia for info on this topic, but I only found a quite extensive German article on Interrnational Data Spaces, but NOT an English one. Sadly my German is not good enough to translate the German article entirely, but I learned that it’s possible to write a stub article on English Wikipedia and add the suggestion that someone translates it from German Wikipedia (this is described in the translation instructions on English Wikipedia which I assume that you know). And as you can see that is exactly what I have done. Is the German article promotional? Please have a look again and then I look forward to your advice. Bjorn.Hakansson (talk) 18:41, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

@Bjorn.Hakansson: The way I saw it, it looked like an advert with the url on the end, and it got deleted last year for the same reason. Govvy (talk) 11:06, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

So it has been deleted now? Even though I started a talk on tha article talk page that the deletion was contested? Do you still think that there should be a German Wikipedia article on this topic but not an English one? Is it possible to have the deletion undone? Bjorn.Hakansson (talk) 18:07, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Religious objectivity

That article is important and true. It isn't "promotional"; it's honestly descriptive. My own viewpoint is opposite. Even if I agreed with it 100% it still wouldn't be promotional. If you think some parts are untrue you can fix it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KyZan (talk • contribs) 18:46, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

This page should not be speedily deleted

This page should not be speedily deleted because...

Hi Govvy, I just notified that my article is nominated for speedy deletion, may I know why, because it's an actual and real article for my college. Please help me in understanding the subject. Need help regarding the mentioned subject, hope for your best suggestions and advices, Please have a look again and then I look forward to your advice. thanks--Sultan Abdul sultan (talk) 16:15, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Double World

Hello, Govvy. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Double World, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:02, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of deletion for Pdogg production discography

The person I created the page for is a music producer who has their own Wikipedia page but I was creating it for the albums, songs, etc. he's produced. That aside I was confused as to why it was already in the mainspace when I intended to make a draft for it. I even went to the live desk to ask about it but no one responded. Instead of deleting it, could you have it moved to the Draft space? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 52-whalien (talk • contribs) 23:46, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

@52-whalien: There is plenty of room in the main article you created of Pdogg for the discog, no need to do a separate article. Govvy (talk) 23:50, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

@Govvy: He has 200+ songs. Do you really still recommend that I add them to his page? 52-whalien (talk)

Thanks

Dear Govvy,

I see your support for these articles and I thank you very much. I wish to in the future make them all uniform and neat so that they are not removed again in this way in the future. I honestly do not understand why Onel5969 is so insisting on deleting and blanking these pages!

Once again, I thank you.

And also sorry about Newcastle, (my brother's a Spurs fan too) :(

Sincerely, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apple20674 (talk • contribs) 14:36, 6 April 2021 (UTC)‎

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FC Dinamo Sukhum

NB you cannot withdraw an AFD while there are active 'delete' !votes. At the very least you should have pinged me to reconsider. Giant Snowman 09:32, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: When I read the documentation, I don't remember it say anything like that, and that's the first ever close I done. Govvy (talk) 09:38, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: Also I closed it, because if you have a look there was already a much older article FC Dinamo Sukhumi, and you would need a whole new AfD for that, you can't transfer an AfD from one article to another like that. It had to be withdrawn. Govvy (talk) 09:44, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

This is covered by WP:WITHDRAWN. "While the nominator may withdraw their nomination at any time, if subsequent editors have suggested an outcome besides keep [i.e. delete] or added substantive comments unrelated to deletion, the discussion should not be closed simply because the nominator wishes to withdraw it|. Giant Snowman 10:07, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Portsmouth F.C.

Hi Govvy,

I'm not going to cite the bits that needs sourcing as that will take days; the users (mostly IP addresses) who add such large amounts of info need to do that. I also wouldn't call the templates "incorrectly used". The page is quite long and needs trimming. The pages of Manchester United F.C. and Liverpool F.C. (who are far more successful than Pompey) are far smaller and easier to navigate/read. It's also not normal for a history section to have every season described in detail, it really could use some summary. I'm not really bothered, however, so I won't engage in a revert war. Portsmouth's page has had such templates before so I won't be surprised if they were reinstated at some point in the future. Cheers, WA8MTWAYC (talk) 12:51, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello to you both, I noticed the edit war over tags on my talk page. The tags are not really needed. We use the sourcing tag for badly undersourced articles, not for articles which have heaps of sources but have some sections without citations (not sure if that's the case for Pompey, but I think that's the argument.) The article may be too long and definitely needs cleanup, especially through splitting out some sections - I think the crest might be able to have its own article, but there's certain parts of the page which violate WP:NOTGALLERY. So, yes, please work together to clean up the page, but tags aren't really needed here imo. SportingFlyer T·C 12:58, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@SportingFlyer:, @WA8MTWAYC: I actually had trimmed a load out a good while ago. Yes the page is long, and it needs trimming back, but an IP added a load back which I had trimmed even know it is also on the History of Portsmouth F.C. I've had problems in the past trying to trim it down for it all to come back, you're more than welcome to see if you can improve it! Govvy (talk) 13:38, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your replies. I think the lede (10 paras!) and the history section are the worst when it comes to the excessive detail. Ideal models would be Luton Town F.C. or York City F.C., which are very well written. I will try and find some time to trim back the Pompey article but can't promise anything. Cheers, WA8MTWAYC (talk) 13:57, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@WA8MTWAYC: More often or not each article has its own individuality, I don't think you can compare articles like that. Portsmouth page just needs work. Govvy (talk) 14:01, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Yeah of course, but I just wanted to indicate that you can write about a club's history in few sentences but still cover the most important aspects. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 14:12, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:24, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

ANI

The issue at hand is unique. I have apologized profusely. It is a different issue than has ever been brought up before. I am trying to do better and make Wikipedia a better place. I feel some people are trying to turn it into an opportunity to ban me from the thing I enjoy doing the most in my life. This is not fair.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:59, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Johnpacklambert: You don't need to apologise to me. Every so often I have noticed your name winding up at ANI level. I don't feel you need to be banned, it's just those AfDs, yesterday how many did you contribute too? Near 40 of them? Seems a lot. It does wind a lot of people up the wrong way. Maybe if you limit it down, it's less likely to bug people out. Govvy (talk) 18:19, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Well right now they are trying to ban me. It is unfair. There have been cases where over 5 articles I created were nominated for AfD in one day. The proposed limit of 10 is absurd when there are so many totally and without question articles being brought to AfD that are biographies of people who were involved in sports who were never even remotely close to being notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:26, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Henrique Campora has been accepted

Henrique Campora, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 01:23, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

AfD

Hi Govvy. Thanks for listing this AfD. For info, I've bundled together a batch of other pages created by the same editor, who are all U19 cricketers. That AfD is here. Thanks again. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:23, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Lugnuts: k, didn't know about the other articles, no probs, cheers. Govvy (talk) 08:42, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Nominations for deletion and page moves

Because there's a long entry, that's it. Giant Snowman 17:03, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Double World (film) has been accepted

Double World (film), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Mcguy15 (talk, contribs) 16:19, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Brandon Austin

Done Giant Snowman 16:45, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tagging

Don't tag articles with WP:A3 two minutes after creation. You must wait at least 10 minutes.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:30, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bbb23: I thought it said 20 minutes, anyway I had thought you had retired! Govvy (talk) 17:37, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

TM (Motorcycle manufacturer)

Please review and return to live space. The article is now properly developed. It is linked multiple times throughout live space. As a contributing member of WikiProject Motorcycling I thank you. -- Cdw ♥'s ♪ ♫(talk) 13:24, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cdw1952: You haven't pointed to a sandbox of this. Govvy (talk) 19:01, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Sorry it's Draft:TM (motorcycle manufacturer) -- Cdw ♥'s ♪ ♫(talk) 04:27, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cdw1952: You will have to submit it for review and have some patients. I am not sure you need that whole section on engines, seems fluffy. Still seems weak towards GNG. Govvy (talk) 12:19, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

ANI mention

Hi Govvy - hope you are well. For info, and incase you didn't get the ping, I mentioned you in this thread with regards to the aricle patrolling you have done in relation to articles I've created. I'd be grateful for your input. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:13, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Major League Rugby Rivalry Cups

Hi I would like to contest your removal of the page. Major League Rugby annually contest some rivalry cups. This is an significant important bits of information. League like MLS has these kind of pages. StefanS33 (talk) 11:31, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

And yeah the page was not done only added one Cup still needed to add 6 more StefanS33 (talk) 11:45, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

@StefanS33: Pages need citations and need to pass basic WP:GNG. There is WP:DRAFT space to work in. Govvy (talk) 14:07, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Jamie Bowden

Grand - oh and thanks for your comments at ANI, very welcome. Giant Snowman 20:30, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: That whole ANI is just ridicules, everyone gets wound-up the wrong way round, and for what, it's like a drop in the ocean of bullcrap if you ask me! Govvy (talk) 20:40, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I've taken on board what some have said, and now moving on to (shock horror) edit articles and try and improve Wikipedia! Giant Snowman 20:41, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2008–09 Barnet F.C. season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lincoln.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Craig David

Bo selecta! Giant Snowman 20:14, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Documentation of Template:2021–22 UEFA Europa Conference League group matches

Hey, You've asked for a documentation of the template – and now you can find it in Template:2021–22 UEFA Europa Conference League group matches § Usage. Is there anything else that you'd want to be clarified? Deancarmeli (talk) 21:35, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

@Deancarmeli: I believe you miss understood my post on your page, some of the other templates you've done, lack documentation on how to use them correctly. That group matches one wasn't specified however I am sure it's helpful. Cheers. Govvy (talk) 16:23, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@Govvy: Than please specify which templates you are referring to. Deancarmeli (talk) 17:15, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@Deancarmeli: Na, I can't be bothered to say! Namaste

Govvy (talk) 17:22, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@Govvy: Productive chat. Cheers. Deancarmeli (talk) 17:28, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

GUERREIRO IS ALSO PORTUGUESE (DUAL NATIONALITY) !

En france on considère Guerreiro Portugais car il est né de parents Portugais et joue pour le Portugal, son pays d’origine. Vous êtes ridicule les anglais et américains. --81.64.12.21 (talk) 17:57, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@81.64.12.21: Pourquoi m'appelez-vous raciste? [1] Vous m'appelez ridicule pour éliminer la nationalité avant le footballeur. Besoin de souligner, c'est assez bien couvert dans l'article. Je pense que c'est vous qui est ridicule et franchement très impoli. Govvy (talk) 18:59, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Now your turn, Govvy... This guy also pulled that one on me (basically saying the same thing about American/English people - and I am Portuguese like themselves, epic LOL! - but with really really nasty vocabulary), i did not revert anything they added in the Guerreiro article and also write them a polite message in French (as you did just above these lines), they return to editing and refuse to issue any kind of apology, then "taking it up a notch" by being aggressive to another editor? What the fudge?!

You have a nice day, cheers from "America" --193.137.135.2 (talk) 09:43, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

@193.137.135.2: Don't know why you reverted, but I didn't see the need to reply. Nothing wrong with what you wrote, thought it was funny. Govvy (talk) 20:27, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

No worries, nothing personal. When i don't get a reply after writing a message i always think i'm imposing, and don't want to bother anyone. Continue the good work (me, 15 years and counting, but have resorted to IP editing due to merciless stalking of my work, for reasons that elude me), have a nice day :) --193.137.135.2 (talk) 12:17, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

@193.137.135.2: Imposing? That seems a rather defensive statement of ones self. Some people like anonymity, however IPs don't really get credit on wikipedia, most of the time editors frown on those that edit only from an IP. If not most of the time it's what people troll from, most vandalism is from. So the IP, the number is no more or less than a name. An IP editor can be seen as an editor without identity. Creating a username not only gives you an identity, but allows users to form respect and a bond to that username, which in turn does also allow that username to acquire the super-user rights of editing on wikipedia. There are far more advantages to editing from a username than the IP. If you edit in a neutral capacity and can avoid those ruthless that haunt places like WP:ANI you should be fine with a username. Govvy (talk) 12:37, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Could not agree more, thanks for input! --193.137.135.2 (talk) 12:49, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 15

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mark Walters, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Andrew Watson.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Fixed Govvy (talk) 10:19, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021

Hello Govvy,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.

Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:31, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

November 2021 backlog drive

New Page Patrol \| November 2021 Backlog Drive
On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. (t · c) buidhe 01:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

3rd kit

Hi! from what I know the third kit should be blue only they haven't presented it yet. The Halloween uniform is beautiful but it is a limited edition kit. DavidMilanista (talk) 18:22, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

cite web

A website doesn't have to be represented as a URL, it can be the name of the website. Your change was unnecessary. – Pee Jay 14:38, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

@PeeJay: Seriously, I am just following the documentation and what admins told me to do. Govvy (talk) 14:44, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

The documentaiton doesn't say to use the url, it says to use the 'Title (name) of the website' and gives several examples of doing that. Number 5 7 14:50, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

@Number 57: ugh, I swear it use to be other other way around... Really, there is no different between work and website anyway, I goto go out now and get my son from school, later. Govvy (talk) 14:55, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Manchester United F.C. in European football

Well, you qualify for the Club World Cup by playing in European football, right? Same applies to the Intercontinental Cup. If it bothers you that much, change the article title to Manchester United F.C. in international football, but I think it’s fine as it is. – Pee Jay 10:19, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

@PeeJay: Doesn't bother me that much, was just thinking it shouldn't be so mixed in with the other content on the page. I was also think that Man U article looked like a good article to get to GA, doesn't look like it needs too much more to do that. Govvy (talk) 10:24, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Chay Cooper

I have merged the two drafts and moved to Draft:Chay Cooper as I agree he is non-notable. @Jasonakagary88: he fails WP:NFOOTBALL as he has not played in a competitive match between two teams from FPLs. Giant Snowman 17:33, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: Thanks both. My mistake. Jumped the gun a little forgetting the FPL rule (still stuck in my old ways with the EFL Trophy!) Jasonakagary88 (talk) 17:57, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: Cheers for sorting that out. Govvy (talk) 08:05, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

2021–22 Maccabi Tel Aviv F.C. season (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Deancarmeli (talk) 13:12, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

This edit by you is marked by Mediawiki as a 'manual revert'. You may still have time to undo it, to avoid a block. EdJohnston (talk) 21:25, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: Why revert what was causing an issue with the mobile browser, in the state it was was violating WP:ACCESS. :/ The other edit I did was to take the data out of a template and put it back into the article per WP:SUBSTITUTE. I feel I haven't done anything wrong. As far as I am concerned it's Deancarmeli who isn't learning from his mistakes. Govvy (talk) 22:19, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

If that is your final answer I will proceed with the block. You started out on the better side of this one but are now digging a deep hole. EdJohnston (talk) 22:26, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I did nothing wrong, if you want to block me go ahead, not my fault if you feel that way. I am saddened that you want to revert back faults on the article. You are clearly only seeing one side of the coin I am only doing what is correct. If you fail to see that it's not my problem. You are creating your own problem. I must also point out this TfD, you should review all my edits today, and I mean all of them. You should never decide on one moment, that is rash and in poor taste. I said Deancarmeli can revert the edit to turn the template he created back. Which is this edit here, yet he didn't. He failed to do that twice. Not my fault, that's not my fault. Never the other side of the coin, I've seen this so many times at WP:ANI. So please, it is you who should reserve judgement for what ever action you want to do. You really need to be careful, choose the correct cup and not the wrong one. Govvy (talk) 22:39, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Edit warring at 2021–22 Maccabi Tel Aviv F.C. season

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

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}.

Per a complaint at the edit warring noticeboard. Continued reverting after the report was initially closed. EdJohnston (talk) 00:43, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: Okay, on the reverse of the coin now, can you please revert the edit done at 2021–22 Maccabi Tel Aviv F.C. season by Deancarmeli who not only just now broke and violated WP:3RR, but is also reinstating an edit which violates WP:ACCESS. I was never the enemy here, nobody wins here, everyone looses, and I am tired of these silly wiki-political games. This will only end up at ANI tomorrow if it's not done. Thank you. Govvy (talk) 09:42, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Govvy:. You do great work here. I think it's important to understand that if the edit war is over a content dispute and you are not reverting clear and obvious vandalism, it's immaterial whose changes are "correct" – admins will usually block for edit-warring and not get involved with the content dispute. I haven't looked at the changes between you and the other editor but if their changes only violate WP:ACCESS they wouldn't qualify as "edits that any well-intentioned user would agree constitute vandalism, such as page blanking and adding offensive language" (WP:3RRNO).

In my experience, starting a discussion and telling the other editor calmly why your changes are more in line with Wikipedia policies and guidelines usually avoids an edit war. Just my tuppence worth… Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 10:16, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

@Robby.is.on: hence, the edit summary, I don't think that was read. :/ Besides, look at what he re-instated, at the article in question. A big ass long key for a table which only requires wins/losses and draws. There are five additional fields on that key, none of which is needed. To me that's pretty dam obvious the fields are not needed for that table. That key I change over to be correct to the table is now incorrect again. I really can't see why the obvious is completely missed!! :/ Govvy (talk) 10:30, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

In my experience, explanations in edit summaries can sometimes avoid an edit war but a proper discussion is better.

Again, admins usually don't get involved with content disputes. We are expected to solve content disputes without their help. You already mentioned AN/I. AN/I states:

Before posting a grievance about a user on this page:
Take a look at these tips for dealing with incivility

Consider first discussing the issue on the user's talk page

Or try dispute resolution.

I would suggest discussing the issue with the other editor and see if the two of you can agree on something. If that doesn't work, you can ask other football editors at WP:FOOTY for their opinion and gain consensus for your change. Robby.is.on (talk) 10:46, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

umm, I don't mean to be rude, but I've been editing this project for over 15 years, I know and have read all that shit, please don't go into this wiki-verse crap here with me. I not only find this offensive from you. But that post above has all the hallmarks of I am better than you. Nope, no one is better than anyone. Everyone is equal to everyone else. Every editor like every person in life has an internal scales, you either move to the dark side, to the light side or neutral aligned. You too need to balance your scales now. Govvy (talk) 10:51, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

I know and have read all that shit Well, you obviously didn't follow it and that got you into trouble.

But that post above has all the hallmarks of I am better than you. I tried to help. Maybe you will see that when you're less agitated (the cussing would suggest agitation at least). Robby.is.on (talk) 11:02, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Probably too late to say this, but I think this block should have only been applied to the individual article itself instead of the entire English Wikipedia. The rest of their contributions to other articles aren't edit warring recently. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 20:44, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020–21 Tunisian Super Cup, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hussein Ali.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Fixed Govvy (talk) 08:54, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Close

I do not appreciate your reversion at the AFD. See Wikipedia:Snowball clause. I think you could have brought it up with me first? You could also have reached out to the nominator about what constitutes a reason to start an AFD. Geschichte (talk) 14:12, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

@Geschichte: From what I saw, I just saw someone close an AfD way too early, it hadn't even been 24 hours yet, let alone the standard week. I thought you were a general user, I would have thought an admin would of known not to close an AfD so dam early. That was not enough time to allow the nominator a rebuke. Whats the point in having rules if you don't want to follow them. Govvy (talk) 14:39, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

3–0 v Rennes in the infobox

Hey Govvy! I believe we should include this technical result in the infobox, regardless of whether it was awarded. It was still recorded as a 3–0 loss and that would make it their biggest loss. Thanks, --Mwiqdoh (talk) 13:31, 23 December 2021 (UTC)