User talk:Londo06/Archive 32
St. George Illawarra Dragons
[edit]The NRL Finals Series is practically over, however the Grand Final is this Sunday and once it is over, the template will be changed back. Thank you. Mas0playa (talk) 07:02, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Blog links
[edit]I don't understand why you persist in adding a blog link to Graham Murray to reference his departure from the Cowboys. The fact is already covered in the article and there are reliable third party sources referenced in support. Surely you have been editing around Wikipedia long enough to know the policy on reliable sources and the use of blogs? Only the other day at WP:RLT you were lamenting the number of well sourced articles in rugby league yet here you are diluting attempts to improve the reliability of articles by adding SPS! •Florrie•leave a note• 04:38, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
- Seriously, do you make this stuff up? What standard? Whose standard? And again with the blog refs when there are perfectly good reliable sources already quoted? •Florrie•leave a note• 13:56, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
:-)
[edit]good to see you so active tonight :-) hope you enjoyed the game - pretty unexpected but most welcome! :-) Privatemusings (talk) 10:11, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for re-adding {{navboxes}} I'd forgotten you'd removed it before and I now semi-automatically add it when I see a page with several navigation boxes Gnevin (talk) 23:47, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
overlink
[edit]Your message: "I don't know if it is yourself our your bot, but it appears details are being de-linked on rugby league infoboxes. Per our MOS they should be linked. Many thanks."Londo06 08:54, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
- By "details", I presume you mean dates and date fragments. This is occurring throughout WP not only in infoboxes, but in all parts of articles. Please see MOSNUM for the new practice. I have been wanting to make contact for a while with editors who manage sports articles, since they are among the most needful of date auditing on the project. Can you direct me to other individuals or Wprojects that are relevant? Tony (talk) 10:19, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
- But is your point that the infobox is different from the main text in this respect, or that such items should always be linked? Please see Wikipedia:Only_make_links_that_are_relevant_to_the_context#What_generally_should_be_linked. Tony (talk) 12:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
- Do you mean Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(infoboxes)? I can find no example or advice that suggests such items should be linked in infoboxes. Have we spread into the issue of infobox templates? If so, you may have noticed that since the start of this month, quite a few of the date-producing templates in infoboxes do not now link. This may be occurring for place names produced by templates too (are there any?) In any case, the time when we linked everything in sight has passed, and people have realised that text in infoboxes, especially those with coloured background, is easier to read when plain black. Can you link me to an example that is concerning you? Tony (talk) 12:37, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
- PS an alarming proportion of Australian sports-related articles use US date formatting. It would be much appreciated if you could resist this trend whenever you see a chance. Tony (talk) 12:53, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
- Do you mean Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(infoboxes)? I can find no example or advice that suggests such items should be linked in infoboxes. Have we spread into the issue of infobox templates? If so, you may have noticed that since the start of this month, quite a few of the date-producing templates in infoboxes do not now link. This may be occurring for place names produced by templates too (are there any?) In any case, the time when we linked everything in sight has passed, and people have realised that text in infoboxes, especially those with coloured background, is easier to read when plain black. Can you link me to an example that is concerning you? Tony (talk) 12:37, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Fair dinkum, mate, what are you hoping to achieve? Push me into 3RR? Why don't you try constructive editing? You might actually like it. •Florrie•leave a note• 13:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)