User talk:Michaeldble/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Michaeldble. 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. |
| Archive 1 |
Welcome!
|
June 2020
Hello, I'm GiantSnowman. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Ben Killip have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. GiantSnowman 15:15, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
- Hi there - Wikipedia relies on reliable sources to verify information, especially about living people. You didn't provide a source for your changes to the Tom Brewitt article, but I have found one and added it for you. Please try and remember to include sources yourself with future edits. Please let me know if you have any questions. GiantSnowman 14:11, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Barry Roche, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Mattythewhite (talk) 16:32, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
- Please note that players who have been released will not actually leave their clubs until their contracts expire on 30 June. GiantSnowman 19:59, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: 2018–19 Hartlepool United F.C. season has been accepted
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 Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class 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.
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 .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
Eternal Shadow Talk 20:16, 13 July 2020 (UTC)Disambiguation link notification for August 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cheltenham Town F.C., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page EFL. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:24, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Transfermarkt is not a reliable source
Please do not use it to verify information, especially about BLPs. GiantSnowman 15:20, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
August 2020
Hi there - Wikipedia relies on reliable sources to verify information, especially about living people. You didn't provide a source for your changes to the Ovie Ejaria article, but I have found one and added it for you. Please try and remember to include sources yourself with future edits. Please let me know if you have any questions. GiantSnowman 21:27, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 |
Disambiguation link notification for January 3
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cheltenham Town F.C., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page EFL.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:20, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
March 2021
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Dave Challinor, you may be blocked from editing. Mattythewhite (talk) 18:44, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: 2003-04 Hartlepool United F.C. season has been accepted
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 Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class 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.
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 .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
Noah 💬 17:27, 9 April 2021 (UTC)Players will not actually be released until their contracts end on 30 June 2021
Please do not remove them from squad listings/change their articles until that date. GiantSnowman 16:22, 26 June 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 |
Your GA nomination of Hartlepool United F.C.
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hartlepool United F.C. you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MrLinkinPark333 -- MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:00, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Hartlepool United F.C.
The article Hartlepool United F.C. you nominated as a good article has failed 
; see Talk:Hartlepool United F.C. for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MrLinkinPark333 -- MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:41, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from AUKUS into Premiership of Boris Johnson. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 23:29, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
- @DanCherek Noted, thank you Michaeldble (talk) 13:25, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
September 2022
Your edit to Premiership of Liz Truss has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 13:22, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:47, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of 2021 National League play-off Final
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2021 National League play-off Final you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kosack -- Kosack (talk) 14:43, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
April 2023
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Sam Hughes (footballer), did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Telfordbuck (talk) 21:16, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of 2021 National League play-off Final
The article 2021 National League play-off Final you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold 
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:2021 National League play-off Final and Talk:2021 National League play-off Final/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kosack -- Kosack (talk) 18:03, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of 2021 National League play-off Final
The article 2021 National League play-off Final you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:2021 National League play-off Final for comments about the article, and Talk:2021 National League play-off Final/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kosack -- Kosack (talk) 19:21, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: History of Hartlepool United F.C. (May 18)
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:History of Hartlepool United F.C. and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
- If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
|
Hello, Michaeldble!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Dan arndt (talk) 04:59, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
|
Your submission at Articles for creation: History of Hartlepool United F.C. (May 20)
Disambiguation link notification for May 23
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2023 FA Trophy final, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jack Hunter.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
What do you prefer to state tiers for honours sections?
Would you prefer?
1)
National League (level 5)
2)
National League (level 5)
3)
Also, personally, when bigger clubs have won trophies such as the second, third division, fourth division e.g...
...I don't see the need to place the tier afterwards, the "Third Division" is pretty self explanatory, think stating tiers is more important for leagues that do not clearly state what level on the pyramid they are/lesser known leagues. Joseph1891 (talk) 11:53, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
- Probably say may fav is the third option, as it seems the least cluttered, but be good to know your thoughts! Joseph1891 (talk) 12:02, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
- I think most pages tend to use: (level 5), so option 1. Most football fans would probably understand L5 but I think we should be as clear as possible personally. As for the final point, I think the Third Division was the fourth tier from 1992 to 2004 so I would still always include them where possible. Michaeldble (talk) 12:40, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks Mich, so do you think option 1 or 2? Joseph1891 (talk) 12:50, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
- Option 1 personally Michaeldble (talk) 12:57, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks Mich, so do you think option 1 or 2? Joseph1891 (talk) 12:50, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
- I think most pages tend to use: (level 5), so option 1. Most football fans would probably understand L5 but I think we should be as clear as possible personally. As for the final point, I think the Third Division was the fourth tier from 1992 to 2004 so I would still always include them where possible. Michaeldble (talk) 12:40, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: History of Hartlepool United F.C. has been accepted
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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
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 .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
Robert McClenon (talk) 04:17, 28 May 2023 (UTC)- @Robert McClenon Thank you for all your help! Michaeldble (talk) 10:54, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: History of Hartlepool United F.C. (May 20)
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:History of Hartlepool United F.C. and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
- If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
- @Robert McClenon Thanks for your feedback on the draft!
- Regarding the previous deletion of the History of Hartlepool United F.C. article in 2020, the reasoning was that it was: poorly written, poorly sourced and that it was shorter than the history section (at only 28,000 bytes) on the main article. However, I think the circumstances since this deletion have changed enough to justify the new article.
- The reason that I wanted to re-create the article was that I thought Hartlepool United F.C. (especially the history section) had become too detailed and long - potentially causing reader issues. I thought the history section was better to be: WP:SPLITTING because it was over 5,500 words long which seemed excessive for a club article. Most of the info was notable and verifiable so I thought it would be wrong to remove it from Wikipedia entirely. Instead, I wrote a more condensed 1,500 word section intended for the main page as a replacement if this draft passed submission which I think would be preferable.
- I did attempt to gain consensus on Talk:Hartlepool United F.C. twice to do this but I received no replies so I wasn't sure on next steps.
- Regarding the issue with sources, which ones were not reliable please?
- Thanks again Michaeldble (talk) 07:36, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Robert McClenon Michaeldble (talk) 13:45, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
- User:Michaeldble - I did not have an issue with any particular sources. The mention of sources is canned language, not my words. I want to see rough consensus. I will post an inquiry about what is the proper process for finding rough consensus when a subtopic has been split and merged. Please seek additional discussion on the talk page in the meantime, and I will ask about what process can be used. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:30, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Robert McClenon I see! Thank you, I wasn't too sure if there was anything I could do for now - I've posted on the talk page but haven't heard anything back yet. I think the WP:SIZESPLIT is around 100kB, so I think this would apply at 130kB. Michaeldble (talk) 16:20, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
- User:Michaeldble - I did not have an issue with any particular sources. The mention of sources is canned language, not my words. I want to see rough consensus. I will post an inquiry about what is the proper process for finding rough consensus when a subtopic has been split and merged. Please seek additional discussion on the talk page in the meantime, and I will ask about what process can be used. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:30, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Robert McClenon Michaeldble (talk) 13:45, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive
| Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive |  |
August 2023 Backlog Drive:
| |
| Other ways to participate: | |
| You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. | |
History of the England national football team
|
The Football Barnstar | |
| Thank you for your recent work improving the page History of the England national football team. Tffff (talk) 10:05, 17 August 2023 (UTC) |
CS1 error on History of Derby County F.C. (1967–present)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page History of Derby County F.C. (1967–present), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 18:22, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi, Michaeldble. Thanks for placing the Recentism template on the Southend article. I was very conscious of the detail that was being added to the article (mainly be me!) but I wanted to wait for the club's sale before consolidating the more salient details. Now that the sale is approaching conclusion, I have started to remove some of the less relevant content from the recent history.
I am not a Southend fan, but I have extensively edited various articles about financially troubled clubs (eg: Bolton, Bury, Macclesfield, Scunthorpe). I think crisis periods should be sufficiently explained so that readers can understand the causes, events and outcomes. Southend's problems are unprecedented in the club's history so the 2020-2023 narrative will naturally be longer and more detailed than other periods. However, I would welcome you running your eye over the (now shorter) article.
(I am conscious that Recentism isn't just about too much recent coverage; it is also about insufficient detail regarding past periods. Unfortunately, I don't have access to extensive reliable sources about the club's earlier history, though I was able to expand the section about the club's foundation and formative years.) Best wishes. Paul W (talk) 09:18, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Paul W Hi, hope you're well. Yes, my main concern with the article was that the first 80 years of the club's history had less information than a six year period (2004–2010), the early years definitely need to be extended further. I will have a look for some sources for this period. As you said, the financial issues are a very important part of a club's history so will naturally be more detailed, plus it is still an ongoing issue in this case which makes it difficult to summarise right now. I think the best approach personally for these types of articles is to move all of the financial issues detail onto the relevant 'History of ...' page and provide a more brief summary on the main page. I still think the recent history could maybe do with more of a trim personally, as over half of the 117-year history is covering the last three years. All the best, Michaeldble (talk) 11:07, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, Michaeldble. This morning I have been doing some modest expansion of the earlier years, drawing on material/sources from other Wikipedia articles and also the recently published Shrimpers Trust document about the Ron Martin era. Will now wait for you (and any other editors) to help address the issue. Cheers for now... Paul W (talk) 11:46, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Paul W Thank you for your help! Michaeldble (talk) 12:05, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, Michaeldble. This morning I have been doing some modest expansion of the earlier years, drawing on material/sources from other Wikipedia articles and also the recently published Shrimpers Trust document about the Ron Martin era. Will now wait for you (and any other editors) to help address the issue. Cheers for now... Paul W (talk) 11:46, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:59, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: 2023–24 FA Trophy has been accepted
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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
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 .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
Oltrepier (talk) 10:02, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Your GA nomination of Hartlepool United F.C.
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hartlepool United F.C. you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Casliber -- Casliber (talk) 03:00, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
March 2024 GAN backlog drive
| Good article nominations | March 2024 Backlog Drive | |
March 2024 Backlog Drive:
| |
| You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. | |
(t · c) buidhe 02:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Darwin Nunez
I believe that he still won the EFL Cup, even though he did not play in the final. HIs involvement is very obvious and can be looked up, I believe. Please correct me if I am wrong but I believe his honours need to be re-updated. Scientelensia (talk) 18:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Scientelensia Hello, hope you're well. Do you have a source that explicitly states that he received a medal?
- It's a bit of a grey area but I think we usually only include honours for the players that were included in the matchday squad for the final, unless there's a source that states they have definitely received a medal. The honours have also been removed for players in a similar boat to Núñez (involved in the earlier rounds but not the final) i.e. Salah, Szoboszlai and Jota for example. It might be worth a wider discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football or Talk:Darwin Núñez but I don't think it should be included unless a reliable source says otherwise. Michaeldble (talk) 19:19, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, thanks for your reply.
- I have searched extensively but unfortunately have not found one. Still, I think that it is strange that he is not given the honour on the page even though his team won and he was clearly involved in previous rounds. I agree, a discussion at the WikiProject would be very useful.
- Thanks,
- – Scientelensia (talk) 09:15, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Electoral history of the Labour Party (UK)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Electoral history of the Labour Party (UK) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Llewee -- Llewee (talk) 18:27, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Chesterfield FC
Actually part of your change was good and I have changed it back. I hadn't noticed you also changed "an" to "a" at the beginning Spinney Hill (talk) 22:09, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you! Michaeldble (talk) 23:00, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
James Trafford
He should not be added to the 'England international' category until he actually plays. GiantSnowman 18:15, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads-up! Michaeldble (talk) 18:18, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Constructive Edits
I recently constructed an edit on chesterfield FC’s FA cup history and you took it down. I want to ask why? OAS 41 (talk) 18:01, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- I removed it because it was poorly written, poorly referenced and contained inaccurate information. That section also seemed a bit redundant to me as half of the information was covered in a previous section. Michaeldble (talk) 12:16, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- The information wasn’t inaccurate because I went to the games. And fair enough that it is in a previous section OAS 41 (talk) 20:02, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
England
Give over!! Neither is third place or runners-up in that case!! BRACK66 (talk) 22:07, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
- BRACK66 I don't really see how a fourth place finish at a World Cup can be considered an honour personally. At least with third place you receive a bronze medal. I see it has been reverted again by another editor anyway, might be worth a talk page discussion on the article? Michaeldble (talk) 22:37, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
Pedantic or vwhat.
BRACK66 (talk) 00:54, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
4th place is a semi final, as is 3rd place. Therefore, it should be included.
France and Germany include them, so what is good for them should be good enough for us. BRACK66 (talk) 00:56, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
- BRACK66 Regarding the initial comment you made before deleting: "Pedantic or what. Do one you cunt." Do you think it's maybe a bit odd for a grown adult to get annoyed over something so trivial?
Neither the French nor the German national team articles include fourth place finishes either, are you talking about something else maybe? Seen as it was reverted by someone else too, it might be a good idea to start a discussion on Talk:England national football team rather than here Michaeldble (talk) 10:21, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Electoral history of the Labour Party (UK)
Hello! Your submission of Electoral history of the Labour Party (UK) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Z1720 (talk) 19:30, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Notts county
Hi could you please update Aaron Nemane notts county stats
and Sam Austin stats and appearances too
thanks 86.6.177.2 (talk) 18:13, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
DYK for Electoral history of the Labour Party (UK)
On 30 April 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Electoral history of the Labour Party (UK), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Labour Party received their highest share of the vote to date in the 1951 UK general election but still lost to the Conservatives, who received fewer votes? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Electoral history of the Labour Party (UK). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Electoral history of the Labour Party (UK)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 6
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bromley F.C., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page London League.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Hartlepool United F.C.
The article Hartlepool United F.C. you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Hartlepool United F.C. for comments about the article, and Talk:Hartlepool United F.C./GA2 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Casliber -- Casliber (talk) 01:01, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of 2024 EFL Trophy final
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2024 EFL Trophy final you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of JC Kotisow -- JC Kotisow (talk) 22:43, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Electoral history of the Labour Party (UK)
The article Electoral history of the Labour Party (UK) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Electoral history of the Labour Party (UK) for comments about the article, and Talk:Electoral history of the Labour Party (UK)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Llewee -- Llewee (talk) 12:45, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Llewee Thank you very much for your help on this, I really appreciate it! Michaeldble (talk) 13:04, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you Michaeldble, Do you know how to nominate a fact to DYK?--Llewee (talk) 13:37, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Llewee I don't know much about it to be honest. Which fact would you suggest? Michaeldble (talk) 14:00, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Michaeldble, you can a nominate a fact using this form. Choose "Improved to GA" for the "status" section, copy and paste in the relevant references into the "source" section and the rest of the form should be fairly self explanatory. Don't worry about the "Reviewed" section for now as its only needed for editors who have made several nominations.
- @Llewee I don't know much about it to be honest. Which fact would you suggest? Michaeldble (talk) 14:00, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you Michaeldble, Do you know how to nominate a fact to DYK?--Llewee (talk) 13:37, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- In terms of interesting facts I think the simplest option would be something like "...that the UK Labour party more than doubled its share of the vote after the First World War?" Make sure you include a bolded link to the target article as shown. You could also add the image of the poster by ticking the "include image" box and putting "Will Dyson Vote Labour 1918.jpg" into the "Image name" section.
- This might seem quite complicated but once you have had a go at doing it any mistakes should be fairly easy to deal with.--Llewee (talk) 14:50, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Llewee I've just nominated it now: Template:Did you know nominations/Electoral history of the Labour Party (UK) Thanks again Michaeldble (talk) 17:35, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Good, that is probably more interesting than my suggestion. Llewee (talk) 17:52, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Llewee I've just nominated it now: Template:Did you know nominations/Electoral history of the Labour Party (UK) Thanks again Michaeldble (talk) 17:35, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- This might seem quite complicated but once you have had a go at doing it any mistakes should be fairly easy to deal with.--Llewee (talk) 14:50, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 14
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Carl Magnay, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mike Williamson.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:30, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
Keir Starmer article edits
With all due respect, go to Jeremy Corbyn's article and you'll find chockablock information about his tenure as Labour leader. Why is the same not true of Keir Starmer's page? Corbyn also has a Labour leadership stub-article but that doesn't stop his main page having a lot of information about his leadership. This information is important to readers and there should be a consensus before removal, I've taken this to the talk page so we can finally get a consensus on this. ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 22:13, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
- I've replied on the talk page Michaeldble (talk) 22:32, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Greetings. The Manual of Style is very specific about the use of verb tenses in this section: present tense is the standard. If you believe that a better tense should be used, please post up a proposal at the MOS Talk Page. For what's it's worth, I'd support a change from plain old "present tense" to the "present perfect continuous tense", also known as the "present perfect progressive tense", making this "Rachel Reeves has been serving as ... since...". Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 09:43, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hello there @The Gnome, thank you for your message. I initially reverted it as it sounded unnatural to me, although I'd definitely not say this is my area of expertise. I also thought that wording was standard across most other British politicians although I see you've changed a few today. It seems the tense has been changed back again on the Rachel Reeves article again Michaeldble (talk) 22:17, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Ollie Watkins
Thanks for your constructive comments re. the 'Early life and education' section within this article. I have now added the requested sources to corroborate all statements contained therein. Best wishes, 82.38.214.91 (talk) 06:27, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Tom Heaton and England
Hi there. Just wanted to reach out and say it was not my intention to start an edit war over this issue. I previously opened a discussion on the talk page as I feel Heaton's call-up for the tournament without inclusion in the official squad is somewhat novel and doesn't have an established precedent as how it should be represented. AnimeBatman (talk) 15:29, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- @AnimeBatman Hello there! Yes, I'd just be a bit more careful going forward, I think you'd been reverted on five occasions by separate editors. After the second or so revert you probably should've started a talk page discussion then as per WP:BRD and WP:3RR. All the best :) Michaeldble (talk) 20:55, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- I've just replied on the talk page Michaeldble (talk) 21:02, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the reply, and you're absolutely right I should have sought a discussion to reach a consensus sooner rather than just changing things back. I'm a relatively casual editor and this is the first time I've hit a dispute like this, so I appreciate the advice. All the best back at you, and enjoy the final tomorrow! AnimeBatman (talk) 21:35, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- No worries, just so you know for next time. You too, should be a nervy one! Michaeldble (talk) Michaeldble (talk) 21:40, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
You reverted my true statement on Germany national football team
You reverted my true statement on the German national team and removed crediting Uruguay as also having 4 world titles like Germany and Italy. This is a true fact. World cups were not the only fifa world titles in history. The 2 Olympics proceeding World Cup were also senior world titles equivalent to world cups and Uruguay won those. Truefacts24 (talk) 13:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- I would suggest starting a talk page discussion at either Talk:Germany national football team or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football Michaeldble (talk) 13:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
CS1 error on Cody Gakpo
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Cody Gakpo, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 22:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)