User talk:The Replicator

2015–16 S.L. Benfica season

Just to let you know about 2015–16 S.L. Benfica season. SLBedit (talk) 15:41, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

@SLBedit: Thank you very much. I will expand it as soon as I can. The Replicator (talk) 19:07, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Should we start adding first-team players from the previous season to "Squad information" or should we wait until 2 July? SLBedit (talk) 18:14, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

@SLBedit: Hi, I think it's better to wait until July 2. Thanks for calling me. The Replicator (talk) 21:24, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Should we move the transfers of Jhon Murillo (20 May) and João Cancelo (25 May) to 2015–16 season? (there is also Romário Baldé) SLBedit (talk) 07:44, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

@SLBedit: Sorry, I haven't been around here these days. Yes, I think so. Their contracts will surely begin at the new season, I guess. The Replicator (talk) 14:04, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

If you have time, please check player positions in Squad information. SLBedit (talk) 20:22, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

@SLBedit: I think everything's correct. Thanks for calling me. The Replicator (talk) 20:47, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't think it matters what the media says. The league says (that's the source used) it was a goal from Mitroglou. SLBedit (talk) 01:14, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

The (record) attendance of yesterdays match was 22,834 according to Boavista (Maisfutebol). SLBedit (talk) 20:33, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

@SLBedit: Yes, I saw that 22k figure at Record's printed version, LPFP has 17,193 but the 22,834 figure is more believable by just watching the TV images and LPFP's website has many blatant mistakes and omissions, namely completely off goal/card times (not just a difference of 1 or 2 mins.), lengthy omissions of certain attendances, particularly Vitória de Guimarães and Belenenses' home matches, all the mess with Santa Clara's home matches kick-off times... I would say LPFP's website isn't very good at statistics. The Replicator (talk) 20:44, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Should we ignore Liga Portugal website when it's an obvious mistake/error and add sources from other websites? SLBedit (talk) 21:16, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

@SLBedit: Absolutely. The Replicator (talk) 21:24, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Liga Portugal website failed again at match report. Cassio didn't get a yellow card.

According to Benfica, the match at home against Bayern Munich had the second highest attendance of all time (64,358 - source). SLBedit (talk) 22:33, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

@SLBedit: About Cássio's "ghost" yellow card, I really think that between zerozero, Record, A Bola, club sources and LPFP, the LPFP website is the one which accumulates the most mistakes, by far. And most of the time, they are not small mistakes. As for the Benfica vs Bayern Munich attendance, I don't know. UEFA tend to be very careful with their online reports the minutes of goals and yellow cards are presented with precision, no gross blunders, but it is worth noting that they release the reports with the attendance figure a few minutes after the end of the matches. It might have been an update after the report's release. Maybe it won't hurt to substitute the attendance at Benfica's season article. Not at Champions League article, there the UEFA reports are followed strictly. The Replicator (talk) 23:39, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

They have corrected the yellow card. SLBedit (talk) 14:36, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Is the Fooballer of the Year award by CNID the same as the LPFP Primeira Liga Player of the Year? SLBedit (talk) 21:59, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

@SLBedit: Honestly I don't know, I've never been really into those awards... Right now I'm doing the usual updates and then I may check it out. The Replicator (talk) 22:04, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

@SLBedit: I made a research on Wikipedia and I came to the conclusion that the CNID is handed by a press club (Record, A Bola, O Jogo...) while the LPFP award is awarded by the League. Hope I have helped. The Replicator (talk) 22:29, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Seeding Champions League and Europa League

Hi, I write to you as one of the main contributors to 2014–15 UEFA Champions League and 2014–15 UEFA Europa League.

Seeding of Champions League has been discussed at Talk:2014–15 UEFA Champions League#Seeding and there we determined to not add seeding until all teams decided. That is why seedings added by several users has been reverted. But on Saturday, after 2015 UEFA Champions League Final we know all coefficients, and on Sunday the last teams will be decided. For that reason I have started to prepare the seeding, which can be seen at User:Qed237/sandbox#Seeding Champions League and User:Qed237/sandbox#Seeding Europa League. I have checked and double-checked the numbers and will triple-check on Sunday so it can be added correctly before all IP's and other editors start editing.

I thought I should inform you so that several editors dont to the work that has already been done. If you see any errors feel free to correct my sandbox or ask let me know something might be wrong so we can look at it together. Qed237 (talk) 16:48, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Thank you for letting me know about it. Before Sunday I will check it myself, just in case. If there's any typo there I'll ping you. The Replicator (talk) 18:31, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: I've checked it and didn't find any error. Tomorrow, with the end of the Greek and Polish leagues and the Swiss cup final, it will be finished and you can check it yet again and add it all. Thank you once again. The Replicator (talk) 15:42, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes I will take a final check tomorrow when all teams are decided and then add it. Sounds good. Qed237 (talk) 20:28, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Also I would like to add that on my laptop (slightly smaller screen) I get some linebreaks becase txt get to long with "Coeff." so I am considering changing back to "CC" like last season. We can always have a note if editors dont understand what CC means. What do you think? Qed237 (talk) 13:53, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Sure, go ahead, to me it's completely indifferent if it's Coeff. or CC. I don't use laptops regularly. The Replicator (talk) 13:56, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Just letting you know that after CL and a lunch I will now work on EL. Qed237 (talk) 13:02, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Okay, thanks. Meanwhile, I'll see what I can do. The Replicator (talk) 13:17, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, again. It seems like we do the same work, updating CL at the same time which is really not necessary. How about you make the remaining CL match and I take EL today and on thursday? I have prepared excel-sheets and documents so I can update seedings at EL third round and everything smoothly on thursday. However I will not have the time to add the goalscorers then (if you want something to do on thursday). You are of course free to do what you want, I just thought we could make an agreement so we dont do the same edits and avoid edit conflicts. Qed237 (talk) 19:57, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Yes, it makes sense. I'll take care of the remaining CL match and today's EL match also being played now and will be there on Thursday, although more on the background without making those huge edits at the same time as you. Thanks. The Replicator (talk) 20:03, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Okay, sounds great. Pershaps, I will miss some matches early because my family usually eats dinner (17:30 match at risk) but otherwise I should be able to update scores and teams. Qed237 (talk) 20:08, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

If you want, we can make more plans for the future rounds later. Qed237 (talk) 20:09, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Okay, I'll be around here on Thursday and you can always contact me for planning. The Replicator (talk) 20:20, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I just wanted to inform you that family dinner is early today so I can not update any matches the upcoming hour, I can possibly update matches starting 1700, but 1730 at the latest. Qed237 (talk) 15:43, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Hi, I will be here at 17:00, maybe a few minutes later, and I will update everything I can until you arrive. Thanks. The Replicator (talk) 15:50, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

I am here now, and should be able to do my part for the rest of the evening. Qed237 (talk) 16:55, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Okay, I arrived now. I'll be here the rest of the day from now. If you need anything, just ping. The Replicator (talk) 17:13, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

If you could keep an eye on stadiums and goalscorers (and obvious mistakes) that would be great (and should not cause edit conflicts). But of course only if you want to. Qed237 (talk) 17:14, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Absolutely. I'll do it. The Replicator (talk) 17:16, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi. When adding information about changed stadium, would you mind adding source? Perhaps it is not necessary, but a source as to why it was moved could be nice (when we have the info). For example I have a Swedish source for change of stadium for AIK so I will add that (does not have to be english source). Anyway thanks for a great job yesterday (and all other days). Qed237 (talk) 10:59, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, you're welcome, you did a great job too. Yesterday was really exhausting, but if I had started earlier doing those 17:00 matches it wouldn't have piled up that way. It will be better next week. As for the source, sure, I'll find it again, it's in Croatian. The Replicator (talk) 11:07, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes it was really exhausting, and I had worked all day with world cup qualifiers because FIFA released draw procedures and country rankings the same day. Anyway it was the biggest draw and round ever (according to UEFA) and in the coming rounds it will be less matches. Qed237 (talk) 11:14, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi again, tomorrow it is time for more interesting matches. I just wanted to look to see if you want a plan tomorrow also. It should be a lot easier as it is first leg and only result and goalscorers will be edited (no seeding) and it is fewer matches. I feel like I have been making a lot of decisions so I thought I would ask you how you want to do tomorrow and if you have any wishes? We can do it like last time, with one editor for goalscorers and one take the results. Or we can take a few matches each and divide them. Or one editor can do the updating, and the other can monitor and correct errors. If you are planning to update tomorrow of course, you are free to do whatever you want (I can do everything as well as nothing). Qed237 (talk) 18:43, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: I think that for tomorrow we can use the same system as on Thursday (you update the results and I update the goalscorers), but for Wednesday, I will be away from home most of the day and I don't know exactly at what time I will be at home, so you may do both until I am back home and help for the rest of the day. For Thursday I still have to think about it. I will say something tomorrow after I've checked it closely. Thanks again. The Replicator (talk) 19:02, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

P.S. Friday morning there's the third qualifying round draws. I can do everything for the Champions League, but for Europa League, it would be interesting that one of us do the table and one of the legs and the other do the other leg. If you agree, of course. The Replicator (talk) 19:08, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Okay sounds great, you have very good control over player names so I am happy with that tomorrow and I have no problem doing everything on Wednesday. And about thursday, no rush, we dont have to decide anything now, things can happen in real life until then. About the draw on friday, I will "prepare" on Thursday night (adding the matches and result table) and after that who does what is not really that important. What I think is most important is that the list of matches (the table) is updated first so readers can see what teams meet directly and dont start updating the table themselves. After that we can add the matches/legs or perhaps if one of us do the results table and one of us does the matches is perhaps the best. But we can think about that for a while, what is best. Qed237 (talk) 19:24, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Just informing you that doing all matches today is not a problem, they are only five matches and it will be fairly easy. Also I want to inform you that I am going through all league tables for top divisions in Europe so I may change some team piping per WP:COMMONNAME and so that they are same on League tables and on CL and EL pages. I look through history how they are piped before, how other sources name them, and their own articles for commonname. Qed237 (talk) 12:53, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Okay, so I will be on the background today. That thing you will do about the common names is very cool, thank you for that hard work. And for tomorrow, if you agree, I'm thinking on doing goalscorers and you the results, except for the very first match (Kairat vs Alashkert at 16:45) as I will be ready for it a little bit after the end of that match. Then I catch up and do goalscorers for all the other matches. The Replicator (talk) 17:23, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

My way of piping has met opponents (see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football‎#Tautologous Nordic club names) so I will go through it later to remove those that were not correct (why have article at HJK Helsinki if that is not correct?). About yesterday it sounds like a good plan. I may miss one or two matches as well early in the evening (dinner time), but we update when we can. Qed237 (talk) 19:02, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

No problem, if you do the first match between Kairat and Alashkert, then I can do everything that you may not be able to do. I'll arrive a bit after the end of that match and I'll be here the entire evening tomorrow. The Replicator (talk) 19:26, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

I have had some more thinking on the draws tomorrow and thought maybe it is time for a decision. You said earlier you can do everything for Champions League, and that sounds like a really good idea. I am a "slow starter" in the mornings and I have more personal interest in the Europa League draw, so my sugggestion is that you take Champions League and I take Europa League. It is a simple split, we wont get edit conflicts with eachother, and it might be easier focusing on one competition instead of both. Also CL is 15 matches and EL is 19 matchs so they are practically equal size and same amount of work. Then there is no need for you to stress from CL to EL as it can be tight on time. Just make sure to update the matches table first and after that the legs. What do you think? Qed237 (talk) 11:57, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: To me it sounds perfect. Thank you. The Replicator (talk) 12:17, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

I have been a bit busy and have guests coming in an hour. Could you do the stadiums if you have the time? A think that is the only thing left to do. Qed237 (talk) 13:41, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Of course, I'll do it. And I'll put those UEFA.com references at the UCL article like at the UEL, as PeeJay dubbed it "clean up". The Replicator (talk) 13:47, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much, and once again you have done a very good job the entire week. I think our cooperation really has been working and today when I had to go, you could continue. Also I think we do complement eachother, with me being a bit more mathematically following all results and matches, while you have very good control over player names and stadium, but we can both still do all parts. Have a nice weekend and reload for next weeks matches. Qed237 (talk) 21:38, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Thank you for your kind words and I can say exactly the same about you. I'll be here whenever I can to help. See you next week. The Replicator (talk) 21:48, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Hi, Champions League tomorrow and Wednesday. How about you taking care of tomorrow and me on Wednesday? The Replicator (talk) 20:24, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I was just about to write to you =). That sounds great, I am actually totally free all day and night tomorrow (a house by myself), while wednesday some family is coming over, so thats perfect. There is also one Europa League match tomorrow (one of my favourite teams) so if you dont mind I take that to, and you can relax (and watch for errors if you want). I have already looked at seedings for future rounds and nothing will change tomorrow or on wednesday, so we dont have to worry about that. About thursday, we can discuss that later but there are more matches then, so perhaps split the work somehow then. Qed237 (talk) 20:30, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Hi, for Europa League tomorrow, would you mind to do everything on the three matches that start at 17:00 (I won't be at home between 18:00 and 19:00)? And do you think it will be easier if we split that 12-match cluster at 19:00, 6 matches each? The rest we can follow the normal system. Agree? The Replicator (talk) 22:03, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

I have caught some form of illness (probably strong cold), so honestly I dont know how my day will look tomorrow and how much I will be able to update. I can probably update the 17:00 matches, but I am not sure I have the strenght for the whole day. That 19:00 cluster is massive so the main thing is to update score and future round and dont bother about the scorers right away. Qed237 (talk) 22:19, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Oh, okay, so I hope you get well soon and I'll do my very best tomorrow. If you think you can do those three 17:00 matches, I don't ask you anything more tomorrow ;). Again, get well soon. The Replicator (talk) 22:25, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I am feeling a bit better at the moment so if you need help let me know. I may work at a slower pace but if you need help I am here. Qed237 (talk) 19:08, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Great, I'm glad you're doing better. So, I guess we should do the same system, I'm really late too, I had problems with edit conflicts and lost a lot of data and, well, it has been difficult. But don't feel bad about it, we can fix this ;). The Replicator (talk) 19:16, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

I do score and you scorers? Qed237 (talk) 19:22, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Yes, please. The Replicator (talk) 19:24, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Hi, Champions League QR3 tomorrow, I am thinking to do everything tomorrow, plus the EL match on Wednesday (Jablonec vs Copenhagen) and you on Wednesday (CL). Share your thoughts :). The Replicator (talk) 21:38, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Sounds good. Qed237 (talk) 21:43, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Hi, two things: first off, there are now 16 players with two goals at the Champions League, maybe it's too much, do you agree on removing them at all, doing the same thing as in the Europa League article? Secondly, regarding tomorrow, the schedule seems more nice than in the previous EL matchdays, so I'm interested in keeping the system (you at the results and me at goalscorers), except for the first game (Kairat vs Aberdeen), as I will not be at home in time for that match. Deal? The Replicator (talk) 21:34, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, yes I agree, we should keep it around 10 players so 16 players with two goals (19 in total) is to many, so I agree with removing them. About tomorrow the matches are more spread out so, as you say, it should go more smoothly. Continuing with our system sounds great and I should be able to do the first match, it depends on what time it is dinner tomorrow (could collide with first or second match but probably I eat in the gap between them). We have a deal. Qed237 (talk) 23:02, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

If you dont mind I can do the whole 1800 match as I am watching it and it is no extra work when it is only one match. Then we can start our system at 1900 matches? Qed237 (talk) 16:50, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Sure, I arrived now. The Replicator (talk) 17:00, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Hi, Champions League again, how about you tomorrow and me on Wednesday? The Replicator (talk) 21:46, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Sounds very good. Do you need help with seedings for future rounds? The CL matches this week will change seedings in CL-playoff round, CL-group stage, EL-playoff round and EL-group stage. For that reason I have prepared sheets for the seeding to get it correct on all four places and tomorrow it will be smooth but with more matches on wednesday perhaps you can do all matches (result and goalscorers) on wednesday and I do seeding for future rounds? (unless you want to do everything yourself?). Qed237 (talk) 22:30, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Ah, yes, the seedings. Well, I think it's better you doing that, if you have the sheets prepared, I trust you :). If you don't mind of course. The Replicator (talk) 22:36, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Of course not, I dont have any problems with that. So then I do everything tomorrow (only four matches) and on wednesday you do all remaining eleven matches (results and goalscorers) while I add the teams in correct seedings? Qed237 (talk) 22:39, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, that's it. Thanks. The Replicator (talk) 22:42, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: I can do the coloring, together with the scores and goalscorers. The Replicator (talk) 17:03, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: For Europa League tomorrow, I am interested in doing scores, goalscorers and colours, just like today; and you at the seedings. Are you okay with that or do you have anything different in mind? The Replicator (talk) 22:14, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

That works fine for me. I might be a bit late with updating the seeding after the 1800 matches, depending on when it is dinner time, but the plan sounds good. Qed237 (talk) 23:11, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

While we still have some time before the matches tonight, I thought I should ask if you have thought about the draw tomorrow? It is a risk (but not likely) that I wont have any computer tomorrow but I will know that later tonight. Anyway I am a slow starter in the morning and you did a great job with Champions league last time so I propose that you take Champions League and I can do Europa League. Perhaps you can add the stadiums for the Europa League after I added the matches if you want more work, since EL is more matches. What do you think? That way it should not be any conflicts, just make sure to update the results-table first so readers can se what teams will meet. As last time I will prepare tonight (better this time). Qed237 (talk) 15:04, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: No problem, I can do it. The Replicator (talk) 15:06, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Time for the very interesting play-off round. I am planing on watching one of the matches on Wednesday so maybe I can not follow all matches then. What do you say if I take Tuesday and you take Wednesday (5 matches each) and then we can help eachother on Thursday? Qed237 (talk) 19:44, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Perfect. I'm also interested at a Tuesday match, so that works perfect. The Replicator (talk) 19:54, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Europa League tomorrow, you at scores and me at goalscorers, like usual? The Replicator (talk) 21:22, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Should work, as usual I might miss a bit in the start due to dinner and some other things, but lets go for it. Qed237 (talk) 21:46, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Hi, as last week you did Tuesday and I did Wednesday, do you want to do it the other way round this one? The Replicator (talk) 22:10, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Honestly, I am not sure. It would work since I want to watch one of the matches tuesday, but we also have to keep in mind that it will affect the seedings both for Champions League and Europa League. Qed237 (talk) 22:15, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: So do you prefer I do the goalscorers instead? The Replicator (talk) 22:22, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Not sure what is best, does not matter much to me. But I have worked on and prepared the seedings. You can decide. Qed237 (talk) 22:25, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Okay, so I'll be there tomorrow and Wednesday and I'll see what I can do about the CL matches. Thanks. The Replicator (talk) 22:30, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi, sorry if I appeared a bit late tonight with the updates. I got stuck screaming at the TV, very happy. Tomorrow I will be able to update seedings much faster, and hopefully I can create group stage article tomorrow. Anyway, the main reason I write now is that I am very interested in the CL draw and I saw now that the draw is at thursday evening. This is a problem because it is at the same time as Europa League (start 1800 CET). So how do we do? Can I take the CL draw and EL group stage seedings, while you take both scorers and result for EL? Or what do you think? Qed237 (talk) 22:23, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Yes, I was really thinking about doing both scores, goalscorers and the colours at the top of the page at Europa League, while leaving the draws and seedings to you. Speaking about that, unfortunately I can't follow the EL draw live on Friday morning, so I'll arrive home later, eat something and then do what isn't yet done, like stadiums and such. Deal?

Oh, and congrats for your team (Malmö?)! The Replicator (talk) 22:53, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Sounds great. we have a deal. And yes, I was supporting Malmö. It is not really "my team" and the team I support is currently not in the top tier, but I have never had any "issues" with Malmö as opponents and it is always fun when your nation does good. Sweden did not have any team in CL for 14 years before Malmö made it last year and they sshow it is possible for Swedish teams. Success for Malmö also mean more ranking points for Sweden so we climb on ranking and could soon get a second spot in the qualifications. Too bad none of the Swedish teams could also qualify for Europa League. Qed237 (talk) 23:08, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi, just a quick info. Everything is done on 2015–16 UEFA Champions League group stage, except stadiums and reports. UEFA keeps updating with more and more reports so I thought I can add them, but if you want more work before the last, very late, EL match ends you can add stadiums (of course only if you want). I was also planning on updating the matchdates in the standings-template soon so I have some work to do. Qed237 (talk) 21:10, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Okay. I just finished updating the penalty shootout at Red Bull Salzburg vs Dinamo Minsk and since there's only Belenenses vs Rheindorf Altach left, I can do that and maybe help with the dots at the Europa League map. The Replicator (talk) 21:15, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi again. I just wanted to thank you for your great work during the Champions League and Europa League qualification stages. Now that the group stage has started there will be many editors involved and a lot of conflicts, so I will probably look at the matches and not edit the matches that much. I will edit the group standings so that they are properly updated, but not the matches (unless I see it is needed afterwards). Once again, thank you for your great work. Qed237 (talk) 11:04, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237: Thank you for your very kind words. I'll be there on matchdays, watching the scores and doing corrections and such, so you may ping me if needed. The Replicator (talk) 17:27, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2015–16 S.L. Benfica season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Emmanuel Boateng. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:07, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Table positions

Hi, there is currently a discussion that might be of interest to you at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Team positions in team tables, since you have been updating such articles.

Basically it is if we should display teams on same position if they have the same points and tiebreakers, during the tournament and before. For example

Alternative 1: 1) CHI 2) COL; 3) ECU, 4) URU, 5) PAR; 6) VEN; 7) ARG, 8) BOL; 9) BRA; 10) PER. Alternative 2: 1) CHI 1) COL; 1) ECU, 1) URU, 5) PAR; 6) VEN; 7) ARG, 7) BOL; 7) BRA; 7) PER.

The exampel is for Template:2018 FIFA World Cup qualification – CONMEBOL table where 4 of the teams won 2-0 and they have exact same tiebreaker.

So should they all be listed at same position and should we list all teams at same position before any match is played? Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Team positions in team tables. Qed237 (talk) 13:07, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

UEFA Euro 2016 qualifying

Please refer to WP:INFOBOXFLAG before reverting. Mattythewhite (talk) 21:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

@Mattythewhite: Okay, I got it. Thanks. The Replicator (talk) 21:40, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

2015–16 UEFA Europa League group stage

Why?

2015–16 UEFA Europa League group stage: Therefore, Ukrainian club Dnipro Dnipropetrovsk (Pot 1) and Russian clubs Rubin Kazan (Pot 1), Lokomotiv Moscow and Krasnodar (both Pot 3) could not be drawn into the same group. — but FC Dnipro Dnipropetrovsk and FC Rubin Kazan could not be drawn into the same group just because these teams are both from Pot 1. :)

If you mean that Russian and Ukrainian clubs couldn't be drawn into the same group and also couln't play against each other until further decisions — it's a good idea, but it's not mentioned in the article. --Brateevsky ^{(talk to me)} 16:27, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

@User:Qed237.

--Brateevsky ^{(talk to me)} 16:27, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Re: Campeonato de Portugal vs Taça de Portugal finals

I always had this doubt and am still not sure how to look at this issue. On one hand, Campeonato is the predecessor of the Taça, which kept essentially the same knockout format (and trophy!), and this is shown by having the former included in the latter's article. On the other hand, they were different competitions not only in their title but also in their purpose: the first determined the national champion until the Primeira Liga was created and it became the national cup. Very much alike the Copa del Rey, with the only difference that the name did not change drastically (if one ignores the temporary republican and Franquist-associated titles). In contrast, regarding the example you gave on the European Cup/Champions League and UEFA Cup/Europa League, I think their original purpose was preserved despite all their rebranding and format reformulations.

Having said this, I'm not sure if it would be wise to create a separate article for the Campeonato de Portugal. Thanks for reading my 'two cents' on this. Parutakupiu (talk) 01:24, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

@Parutakupiu: Yes, this is still kind of a "touchy" matter, especially when counting how many championship titles has Benfica or Porto or you name it. My view on this is that FPF created the Campeonato de Portugal in 1922 and defined it as the competition that defined the champion of Portugal, but it wasn't a proper championship, it functioned like a cup, like, let's say, the FA Cup. In fact, some journalists and other specialists at the time had a theory that FPF called this competition "Campeonato" to hide their incapability to organize a proper championship (round-robin), for financial reasons or simply because football in Portugal wasn't very developed at the time.

Anyway, in 1934, someone had the idea to create that proper league and it started in January 1935, on a experimental character, and the Campeonato de Portugal was still in place. Then in 1938, as the "Primeira Liga Experimental" revealed a success, FPF decided to restructure the competitions, officializing the league and creating the modern Taça de Portugal, in the place of the old Campeonato de Portugal. However, people started counting the titles in different ways, either out of lack of knowledge about these changes many years ago, or because the criteria used suited their own club. For example, when Benfica were crowned champions in 1994, newspapers counted is as Benfica's 27th championship title (since 1938), then 11 years later, they counted 2005's title as Benfica's 31st (since 1934). I think the problem here is that FPF were never interested in clarifying this kind of issues, leaving it to the newspapers, clubs and anonymous fans' opinion, leading often to heated discussions between fanatical and often misinformed fans. Now the newspapers' criteria is counting championships since 1934–35 but counting cups since 1938–39, practically ignoring the old Campeonato de Portugal. And I think it's just wrong to use different criteria for league and cup.

A little trivia here, if you look closely at the bottom of the Taça de Portugal trophy, you will see all the winning teams' names since... 1922. Not since 1939. Portugal's first cup winner was indeed Porto in 1922, not Académica in 1939. In my opinion, the Campeonato de Portugal editions do belong to the Taça de Portugal article. Especially now that FPF renamed CNS to Campeonato de Portugal... which is quite amusing to me.

That's my view on this topic. If you have any doubt, you're welcome. The Replicator (talk) 02:11, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

I agree with your view completely, FPF has much to blame for not clearing this mess up and leaving it to clubs/media to ramble about it as they please. Still, when we look at the honours section of, say, FC Porto, one sees that they won four Campeonato de Portugal titles, but then in the matches navbox there is no entry regarding appearances in finals of this competition – only Taça de Portugal finals. It's this inconsistency, you see? According to your view, one would simply just add the Campeonato titles to the Taça tally and FC Porto, for instance, would have 20 Taça titles instead of the current 16. But again, it's something that FPF should've clarified a long time ago. Parutakupiu (talk) 11:25, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

@Parutakupiu: Anyway, the articles at the navbox have the correct name (Campeonato de Portugal or Taça de Portugal) and I think that's enough to recognize its continuity, just as the continuity of the UEFA competitions is recognized after all rebrandings and changes of model, etc. The big problem here is lack of information from the official entity, leaving it to the opinion of others. Finally, I would like to thank you for your interest in this question. The Replicator (talk) 19:27, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Reports

Hey, you know that the link is enough in the footballbox? It was changed a few days back to remove the ([ Report]) and make life easier and quicker. Kante4 (talk) 10:29, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

@Kante4: I see, I guess that's a good thing. Thank you for informing me. The Replicator (talk) 14:25, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Greek cup

Hi. Are you sure there is an agreement to resume greek cup. From what I can read in [1], the source you added, it says (with google translate) "the Executive Commission EPO invites the Minister, accepting the requirements of FIFA and UEFA as is contained in the letter two international football organizations have sent, to proceed...". As I read it (and how it is translated to my own language) is that the Greek Football Association are "begging" the minister to resume the competition and that they want it resumed, but no decision has been made by the parliament that suspended the competition. Qed237 (talk) 10:41, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: Hi. My interpretation from the rough translation to English is that the FA is willing to cooperate with FIFA in order to make changes to the regulations related to the relations between FIFA and national governments, maybe in reaction to FIFA's "ultimatum" sent to the Greek government. This may also be the Greek FA scared of the clock ticking, as FIFA's deadline is Friday 15. Now, if you are not certain about the interpretations made by this rough translation, we can wait until further information. Thanks for calling me ;) The Replicator (talk) 17:37, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: P.S.: The Greek FA may be just buying some more time, if they are indeed, then you totally have a point. The Replicator (talk) 17:40, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

I dont speek the language and have to trust google translate (bad idea, but only option), but to me it sounds like the Greek FA says "we will do everything FIFA tells us to do" and hopes that the greek goverment will resume the competition. Perhaps we can find a greek speaking editor that may help with the translation and meaning of the text. Qed237 (talk) 17:44, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: Good idea. If we don't have a Greek interpreter, we'll have to wait for FIFA or some media source. The Replicator (talk) 17:48, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I had some well deserved time of the computer today and I have been late with updating CL and EL qualifications (and have not calculated all scenarios for all nations yet). So thanks for your great working checking evrything is okay and remove the incorrect additions. I will probably be available for updating tomorrow. Qed237 (talk) 23:34, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: You're welcome :). The Replicator (talk) 23:37, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Template:2015–16 Ukrainian Premier League table

The Replicator, please, do not revert just because you do not know. I suggest you discuss it first. FC Volyn Lutsk did not apply for professional license and therefore will be withdrawn from the professional competition, not relegated which means to be demoted to lower leagues. Metalist and Hoverla apparently also under a threat to loose the license as well, but they have 10 days since 26 April to appeal it. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 23:01, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

@Aleksandr Grigoryev: If Volyn Lutsk did not even apply for the professional license, they are relegated, I guess. I don't understand what is the difference, in practice, between being withdrawn from professional competition and being relegated, as if Volyn cannot stay in the Premier League, they will be moved to a lower league. If Metalist and Hoverla are "under a threat to loose their license" and still can appeal, then that situation is not at all clarified at the template, which stated only that Metalurh Zaporizhya did not receive a license and will be relegated. Nothing about Metalist, Volyn or Hoverla's lack of license. The only reason I reverted your edit was because you denied that Metalurh are relegated, which for me didn't make any sense, given the information below the template. The Replicator (talk) 23:57, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

The Replicator, according to the Wikipedia explanation: "In sports leagues, promotion and relegation is a process where teams are transferred between two divisions based on their performance for the completed season." However Volyn Lutsk is not getting demoted to compete in lower leagues, while Metalurh Zaporizhia was dissolved. Currently there is another team competes in amateur competitions Rosso Nero that recently was approved to change its name to Metalurh Zaporizhia. However the original Metalurh Zaporizhia was dissolved, not demoted as it is implied by a concept of relegation. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 02:37, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

The Replicator, I have been editing the Ukrainian football competitions on Wikipedia (particularly articles on Ukrainian Premier League and other professional competitions) for over 8 years and I am surprised at your persistence. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 02:40, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

@Aleksandr Grigoryev: First of all, you didn't address the inconsistency between what you say and what is written below the table at the template. Secondly, it's a weird thing saying you are "surprised at [my] persistence" as anyone at Wikipedia, being an user or an IP has the right to edit articles, discuss matters and question other people's edits. By the way, I guess Qed237 agrees with me, so my opinion isn't that unvaluable here. The Replicator (talk) 11:34, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

As you may know, I have been editing for consistency across all leagues in Europe. "Withdrawn" are used when a team withdraws from the competition, this season and by putting "withdrawn" we say that they have withdrawn from 2015–16 Ukrainian Premier League and that they will not play more this season, which is wrong for Volyn. However, after this season they will not play in top tier and are "relegated" after the season. Qed237 (talk) 11:41, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

The Replicator, for the record, I am not trying to devaluate your edits and I apologize if it came out so. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 22:47, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

@Aleksandr Grigoryev: Apologies accepted. :) The Replicator (talk) 23:12, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Wording

Hi,

I think "but will be reduced to under 80,000"(A) is a better wording than "but is reduced to just under 80,000"(B). I wonder what is the justification of prefering B over A. (I use American English conventions, and that might be different from Br Eng conventions)

Thanks.

Ueutyi (talk) 01:36, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

@Ueutyi: Hi. It has nothing to do with British or American English. The point is that San Siro's capacity is just under 80,000 for all UEFA matches, not only this final. So, we use present tense here instead of future, it it were only the final (despite Internazionale and Milan both failed to qualify to this season's UEFA competitions). You're welcome. The Replicator (talk) 01:42, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Ok I get it now. I still find B a bit awkward though. Ueutyi (talk) 02:13, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

2016–17 UEFA Europa League

Hi, thanks for updating 2016–17 UEFA Europa League tonight. You made it very clear and explained everything in edit summary. The reason I give you this message is that I wont be available on the computer tomorrow night (from about 17:00 UTC+1 and forward), due to a family event (at least not until late at night). But I have been keeping a close eye on all leagues (with a big excel sheet) of what nations play at what time and I have scenarios for the upcoming matches at User:Qed237/sandbox. If you think it is useful and plan on updating tomorrow, feel free to use it (and update if you see something wrong). The matchtimes listed are start times in my timezone (UTC +1) so there might be an hour difference or so to you. As I said feel free, but only if you want. Have a nice weekend. Qed237 (talk) 22:17, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: Hi. I will be watching on TV the Portuguese cup final at 18:15 (UTC+1) so I will be a little busy too updating that article, but I will still keep an eye on what happens at the other leagues and cup finals, mostly at evening when I get the POR cup final done. I will have to check tomorrow's schedule and then see what I can do. The Replicator (talk) 22:32, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

No worries, only if you feel like it, I can still do first matches and there is no rush. You just enjoy the game, I have a feeling it will be a good one. Qed237 (talk) 23:30, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2016 Supertaça Cândido de Oliveira, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aveiro. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:44, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 3 June

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the 2016–17 LigaPro page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (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, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:30, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Sent off

What's the rationale for not updating sendings off? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:36, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

@Martinevans123: There is a practice here in Wikipedia to not update match details during the match. Only at the end. The reason for that is to avoid edit conflict and duplicating information. Thanks for the understanding. The Replicator (talk) 14:39, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

I can understand that policy for goals. I'm rather unconvinced about yellow cards and sendings off. Edit conflicts and duplication of information happen occasionally, that's just the way things work - these can be very easily corrected. How can a sending off be duplicated exactly? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:43, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

@Martinevans123: Sorry, but the policy applies to goals, cards, substitutions, everything. The Replicator (talk) 14:46, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Is that written down somewhere? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:47, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

@Martinevans123: This The Replicator (talk) 14:56, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. That very brief single thread, with a one line statement by PeeJay about "stats", dated 9 November 2013, isn't the most convincing exposition of policy I've ever seen. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:02, 11 June 2016 (UTC) p.s. people aren't even allowed to update at half-time? If someone scores (or gets sent off) in the first minute, that means a mandatory period of a least an hour and a quarter while the article has to remain incorrect. That seems a bit odd.

@Martinevans123: The policy is very clear about the updates. Only at the end. Think about Wikipedia being an encyclopedia, not a live scores website. The Replicator (talk) 18:10, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I'll try. But I think maybe it should be clearer in some way for readers that the article is not being updated, and for editors that updates are in fact not allowed i.e. a clearer indication thanthe notice hidden away here, etc? An alternative might be to impose some kind of protection for the time that the match is being played. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:18, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

That notice appears when you open the edit page on football-related articles, at least most of the times. I think the reason why we can't just protect the pages is that we would be discriminating IP users without previous live edits or bad edits, being them in good faith or vandalism. So we can't just protect the pages for no valid reason. The solution is that notice, and hope users and IP's read it. The Replicator (talk) 18:24, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Hmm, well it's a hope I guess. If avoidance of "duplicate information and errors" really is so important, then protection seems perfectly justified. You seemed to be quite busy reverting additions from both registered editors and IPs alike. Maybe it's just that "statistics or scores" doesn't make it clear what's prohibited. I guess players names may be corrected if they are wrongly spelled. But what if a named player fails to start? Is that correction justified after the game has begun? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:40, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

@Martinevans123: Of course names spelled wrongly or a player who quits the starting XI at the last minute are justified reasons to edit it, no matter that policy. To me, that would be just common sense. The Replicator (talk) 18:46, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes, that seems sensible to me too. Maybe I just don't see red cards as "statistics". Ideally, I guess, the article would allow specific parts to be protected. But that seems beyond technical possibilities at present. It's just that the current system doesn't seem to be wholly clear or efficient, to me at least. Thanks for the discussion, anyway. Hope you enjoy the tournament. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:50, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Northern Ireland Squad - re: Chris Baird

Thanks for asking - I can indeed read! However, the logic of the criteria being used is ridiculous! Perhaps the sentence relating to "last team played for" should be removed from the article? A player plays for/is registered to a team. If he is loaned to another club, that doesn't mean he is then permanently registered to that club! His parent club still holds his registration?! In the case of Chris Baird, he is a DERBY COUNTY player. The fact his last game was ON LOAN at Fulham, is utterly irrelevant! Perhaps you ought to check the OFFICIAL websites of Derby County FC and Fulham FC!! Links as follows: Derby County - http://www.dcfc.co.uk/team/player-profile/ Fulham - http://www.fulhamfc.com/first-team/player-profiles

Also, if it helps, here is a link to a report today on Northern Ireland's game versus Poland - http://www.dcfc.co.uk/news/article/2016-17/international-review-baird-northern-ireland-fall-to-narrow-defeat-3141063.aspx. It is from the Derby website, presumably as Chris Baird is a Derby County, not a Fulham player!!

The fact of the matter is, the information on this page is INACCURATE, and the fact that it is, doesn't do much for the perception that Wikipedia is not an accurate source of information.

DazAtt (talk) 18:46, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

@DazAtt: Sorry, but that's how it works. When referencing the clubs of the players on national squads, it will be the club that player last played, not future, nor even if he was loaned to X and will return to Y. The text at the top of the article is just reinforcing that criteria. The Replicator (talk) 19:16, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Ah well. Better to have incorrect information (Baird has been a Derby player since 19 June 2015) and keep to "the way it works", than have accurate club information for players? I guess "the way it works" needs revisiting?! Look forward to seeing the information updated during the next season, if/when Baird plays for Derby?

DazAtt (talk) 19:26, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

New european season

Hi again. A new interesting season in european football "starts" tomorrow with the draw for the first two rounds of UEFA Champions League and UEFA Europa League. I thought I should check with you if you will have any focus on that or if the focus is on UEFA Euro 2016? If you plan on updating the articles after the draw, should we find a way to avoid edit conflicts like previous season? Qed237 (talk) 12:37, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: Yes, I'm interested on the Champions and Europa Leagues, despite the Euro 2016. You may update the tables with the matches and I may help with the match boxes after that. Good thing tomorrow Euro matches are both at 21:00 local time, it leaves time for that. The Replicator (talk) 15:17, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that. UEFA has probably made a plan so it does not collide. I think that there is a two day pause in Euro 2016 when first round matches are played as well. Your plan sounds good. I have a good way to prepare and make it easy to update wikilinks to the teams and flags, using "find and replace". This take no extra time for matchboxes so I fill both matchtables and matchboxes quickly. After that, the "div id" and stadiums needs to be filled in the matchboxes, and also the team linking in the "summary" section (match table) which is same as the div id. Do you want to separate matchtable and matchboxes or can I add team on both (which goes fast)? And to you want to do the rest or should I complete the matchtable links? Qed237 (talk) 16:33, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: Uh, if you can do that (find and replace), that's even better. I still do the stadiums/cities and may double-check for minor mistakes, as four eyes are better than two, right? Thanks. The Replicator (talk) 17:18, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

That sounds like a plan. Qed237 (talk) 18:48, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Just to be clear, I will do all team wikilinks, all flags and the div id links with "find and replace" which should be the fastest way. I will update the teams and flags first as that is the visual part seen by readers. And yopu update the stadiums and locations, as well as check for errors (which may very well happen as it is a lot of teams). Qed237 (talk) 19:04, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: Deal! The Replicator (talk) 19:07, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Awesome. By the way I can say that the "find and replace" is shown in the top right corner of my edit window when you press on "advanced". I just prepare with "N01", "N02" and so on were nations/flags should be and "W01", "W02" an so on for the wikilinks and then use the find and replace during the draw. Qed237 (talk) 19:57, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

I had some technical issues so it to some extra time, and I skipped the div id. But now I have caught up (except div id), so what do you want me to do? Qed237 (talk) 15:08, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: Well, I've just made almost half of the stadiums, and when I reach it, I will save and I will not be at home for a while. Then, it will come the Group B matches of Euro 2016. Later at night, I would continue to do what is needed here. The Replicator (talk) 15:14, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Okay so I can add numbers and fix the order of seeding in EL second qualifying round? Qed237 (talk) 15:17, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: Yes, please. Thank you very much. I'll do the rest of the stadiums at late night. The Replicator (talk) 15:21, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Just wanted to say that you did a great work, and it went very well (usually a chaos before we found our colaboration). Now I wait for UEFA to add matchreports and update schedule, but they seem very slow so I have been looking around at the homepages of the teams instead. Qed237 (talk) 19:57, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: Thank you very much. I think yesterday it went very smooth, also because all attentions are turned on the Euro. I think UEFA have their hands full too, so they are being slow on the QR's :). When they get the reports, I'll check it too. The Replicator (talk) 20:01, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Sounds great, and yes I guess everyone works with the euros. But it should not be to hard for them to add some simple reports and just upload the matches :). Qed237 (talk) 20:05, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for updating all the dates and times in 2016–17 UEFA Champions League qualifying phase and play-off round. I just wonder what order we should list the matches in? Apperently we ordered based on first leg kickoff time last year (or the editor that changed format did), while in other articles like 2014 FIFA World Cup qualification – UEFA Second Round they are ordered in the same order as the matchtable (draw order) so they are easy to find with many matches. What do you think is best? Should we ask for comments from other editors for consistency? Qed237 (talk) 09:59, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: I was thinking about ordering by first leg kickoff but I am totally open for discussing it for the sake of consistency. The Replicator (talk) 13:10, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Today it starts! Do you plan on following the matches today? If so, how should we divide the work? One tournament each? Qed237 (talk) 11:20, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: I do the Europa League matches. You can do the Champions League. 4 matches each. The Replicator (talk) 11:25, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Sounds great. Qed237 (talk) 11:45, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi again. Time for a new week of matches. I dont know if you have noticed but my edit count has dropped significantly the last few days. This has several reasons, including watching the Euros (on TV), but also because I spend less time at computer when it is summer and warm outside. However, the main reason is that I took the time and create a C++ programme for calculating seedings for all Champions League and Europa League round (qualification rounds, play off and group stage). It took longer than expected as there is much to take in consideration with draws before previous round being completed for the first qualification rounds, and also the different possibilities for teams transferring from CL to EL (what gives highest seed in ELPO, does not give the highest in ELGS). Anyway that is all completed and all teams is added to the programme (with the amount of teams in EL that also took a long time), so now the seedings should be updated quickly when matches are completed as I only have to write who progressed from matchups and the programme calculates new seeds in a second.

With that being said, I want to hear if you have any thoughts about the upcoming matches. I will of course check the seedings (which wont be affected until thursday I think), but is there something more you want me to do? Qed237 (talk) 15:17, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: Hi, would you mind updating this first Champions League match (Alashkert vs FC Santa Coloma) and then I can update all other CL and EL matches today and tomorrow? Then Thursday we'll see? Skyblueshaun also gave a great help last Thursday too. The Replicator (talk) 15:24, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

It might collide with dinner, but sounds good. And as you say there is always someone helping if we cant. It sounds good. Qed237 (talk) 15:26, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know that I prepared tomorrows Champions League and Europa League draws in two of my sandboxes for smooth updating. Qed237 (talk) 15:25, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

EUFA Euro 2016

Please be more careful with the revert button. --John (talk) 21:14, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

@John: Good evening, I was reverting edits that were breaking the infobox/not updating all information and timestamp. Unfortunately I didn't notice your good edit and it was reverted too. For that, I apologize. The Replicator (talk) 21:19, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Could the replicator edit the euro 2016 page which says that Italy are group winners? This is not yet definite! Yes very likely but still wiki shouldn't be biased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.205.194.226 (talk) 21:30, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

@213.205.194.226: Perhaps you should give the tiebreaking criteria a read before suggesting wrongly that Italy haven't won the group already. Or watch/read the news. The Replicator (talk) 21:39, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

June 2016

Your recent editing history at UEFA Euro 2016 knockout phase shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Sorry, but I have to. Both of you are way over what is acceptable. Qed237 (talk) 22:57, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Just to be clear, I totally understand you and I have been there myself (which I learnt the hard way with an immediate block instead of warning as "I should have known better"). I agree with the fact that we should not list this or, but it is a content dispute which is not an exception to WP:3RR as it is not pure vandalism. Just take a few steps back, relax and then look forward to the UEFA Euro 2016 knockout stage. Qed237 (talk) 23:06, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: Yes, I know I shouldn't get too involved on that and focus on what I was doing (I was checking the events at Group E and the teams were doing substitutions very quickly at the end, so I was already stressed). I am fully aware that I shouldn't have continued the edit war. Thank you for your warning and for your words of comprehension. The Replicator (talk) 23:25, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Penalties and statistics (Euro 2016)

There is a consensus about waiting until the match has finished, but I think it is also good to update after extra time, since the statistics will not change anymore. :) Centaur271188 (talk) 16:12, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

@Centaur271188: No, it was my mistake :). I went too fast and didn't think about removing bold from the eliminated team's goalscorers. That's why I undid my edit immediately. Thanks anyway. The Replicator (talk) 18:18, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

AN/I

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Mr rnddude (talk) 08:16, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Penalties

Then why |penalties2= appears after |penaltyscore= in {{football box collapsible}}? I'm following the template. Change the template and then make the "necessary" changes to articles. SLBedit (talk) 17:52, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Sorry

Hey! Just want to say sorry for being rude and calling you dim. I was being stupid, and thanks for all your contributions to football/soccer on Wikipedia! You're awesome :) Here's a sloth:

File:Cute Sloth.jpg

— ThiefOfBagdad (talk) 21:11, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

@ThiefOfBagdad: Apologies accepted and I retribute with my apologies for having been harsh on you. Thanks :) The Replicator (talk) 21:13, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Kit Portugal on semi-finals

Socks are the same colour of shorts and body. Now socks show as a dark green. Fix it.--82.53.34.49 (talk) 19:59, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

ces't la vie

you want me to point you to a gajillion articles on this website that aren't accurate/are completely outdated? --SuperJew (talk) 21:21, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Champions League 2015/16, quarter-finals edit

Thanks for all the football contributions you make to Wikipedia- they are very much appreciated.

I have just noticed that you removed an edit of mine on 18 March 2016,

 Manchester City and Wolfsburg were both appearing in the quarter-finals for the first time.

I have checked this carefully, and I am sure that I was correct: was there anything offensive or otherwise inappropriate about it?

I don't want to just revert to my version, because you are obviously more experienced than I am, and I may be missing something. Thanks again!

Best wishes

Pete Ridges

Pete Ridges (talk) 19:22, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

@Pete Ridges: Hi. I reverted your edit for two reasons; that kind of information is more appropriate for the involved clubs' articles, it is not notable enough to be at the 2015–16 Champions League article; and using a Wikipedia article is not approved because Wikipedia can be edited by virtually anyone, who can insert wrong, incomplete or misleading information, be it in good faith or not. You're welcome to ask more questions if you want and to contribute to Wikipedia. All the best. The Replicator (talk) 21:06, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply. I take your point about notability. Personally, I would only remove dubious information if there is a chance that it might be wrong or misleading- this one seems absolutely clearly correct. But not everything that is correct is notable. Pete Ridges (talk) 12:23, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

@Pete Ridges: Note that I didn't say that info about Manchester City and Wolfsburg was wrong. Of course it's correct. But even then, using Wikipedia article as a source is not approved. The Replicator (talk) 13:03, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

References

Derley

Can you confirm that Derley is out on loan to Chiapas F.C.? The best source I could find was this one. SLBedit (talk) 01:45, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

@SLBedit: There is this Brazilian source and this Mexican source. Also A Bola. The Replicator (talk) 13:39, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Premier league

Hi, since you also edit tables, could you take a look at Template:2015–16 Premier League table and see if I am right or wrong? Qed237 (talk) 16:57, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: I've checked and you're totally right. That is the usual wording we use on the tables and the anon user resorted to that "notebook" comment. The Replicator (talk) 17:05, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: He has to be reported. He's already forcing the three-reverting rule. The Replicator (talk) 17:16, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Exactly, we show the same in all other leagues. For example if runners-up and third-placed team qualify, then third wins cup, we only say third qualify as cup winners. And the editor will be blocked, just be patient. Qed237 (talk) 17:39, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

@Qed237: Yes, I still remember what happened a few weeks ago... so I stopped reverting. The Replicator (talk) 17:41, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:2015–16 Premier League table

There's no need to discuss. If you update a page with content, I remove it once. You do it again, I remove it. You update it for the 3rd time and you are the one warring?

You might have a read on this one: Wikipedia:Revert only when necessary 2001:12F0:614:300:3555:617D:C422:775B (talk) 17:36, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

@2001:12F0:614:300:3555:617D:C422:775B: I count already nine reverts that you have made. Three users already reverted you. The Replicator (talk) 17:39, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

2016–17 S.L. Benfica season

Do you have information about the attendance of friendly matches against Vitória de Setúbal and Derby County? SLBedit (talk) 14:51, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

@SLBedit: I'm afraid not. Maybe tomorrow or at the weekend I'll try to find them too, as today I'm more busy with Europa League. The Replicator (talk) 15:08, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I have added information about the referee of yesterdays match, with source from A Bola's website, but the referee doesn't look alike Anders Frisk. SLBedit (talk) 15:17, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

@SLBedit: Ah, abola.pt is dead wrong on that. Anders Frisk is a Swedish former referee who retired in 2005 and he is 53 years old now. Furthermore, the usual thing in friendly matches is to nominate local referees. The Replicator (talk) 15:54, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Exactly. I have corrected the information with the printed edition of A Bola as source. Another thing, Record newspaper shows an attendance of 15,000 but most online sources show a different number. SLBedit (talk) 16:30, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

@SLBedit: The attendance is at Sheffield Wednesday's official website and is 12,207 (here). More official than this is impossible :). The Replicator (talk) 16:33, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

It is written "Andy Madley" in the newspapers (100% positive about A Bola). SLBedit (talk) 16:43, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

@SLBedit: Okay, but if we google Andy Madley referee, we get to Andrew Madley which is a referee from Huddersfield, not far from Sheffield. The Replicator (talk) 16:59, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Okay, then it's WP:OR. SLBedit (talk) 17:00, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Got nothing about the attendances in Algarve Football Cup? SLBedit (talk) 12:49, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

@SLBedit: Only rough figures and not from the usual sources. 8,000 against Vitória de Setubal and 10,000 against Derby County. The Replicator (talk) 13:16, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Is the {{clear}} necessary? In my browser the article looks just fine without it. SLBedit (talk) 23:18, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

@SLBedit: For me it is, at least for now. Without the {{clear}} the squad table top coincides with the bottom of the infobox and it gets squeezed. With {{clear}}, it gets normal, only with a small space between the title ==Squad information== and the table. The Replicator (talk) 23:23, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

@SLBedit: Eventually if the infobox gets shorter later in the season, I may remove the {{clear}} if I don't need it anymore. The Replicator (talk) 23:26, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

According to Liga Portugal website, Baiano and Hassan got yellow cards at 45+2 and 75 minutes, respectively. Another mistake by the website? SLBedit (talk) 22:33, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

@SLBedit: Honestly, I don't know this time, because I didn't watch the game at home and I was far from the TV, so I can't be sure about the minutes. Therefore, I'll trust them (LPFP) this time. The Replicator (talk) 22:37, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Why don't we link to thefinalball.com (in English) instead of zerozero.pt? It's the same website. SLBedit (talk) 22:50, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

@SLBedit: If you wish, I have no real problem with that. The Replicator (talk) 22:56, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

"Last editor" refers to P3DRO, who came up with that bullshit. SLBedit (talk) 20:15, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

2016/2017 UEFA Champions League Playoff Round

Hi! I see that the stadia have been added to the Playoff Round games. Dundalk will play Legia Warsaw at the Aviva Stadium and not Tallaght Stadium. The Football Association of Ireland reached an agreement on 4th August 2016. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SportsAficionado (talk • contribs) 11:56, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

@SportsAficionado: Hi, I just noticed it. Thank you for being quick at correcting it. The Replicator (talk) 11:58, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

UEL

UEFA misled me! You can see the Group C with Qarabağ and the Group J with Qäbälä (in the text, not in the photo). --IM-yb (talk) 13:07, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

@IM-yb: I just saw the incoherence. The photo shows Gabala on Group C and Qarabağ on Group J, just as it was updated here in Wikipedia. But the text below says Qarabağ on C and Gabala on J. I think the photo is the correct version. Thanks for the link. The Replicator (talk) 13:12, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 26 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the S.C. Braga in European football page, your edit caused a missing references list (help | help with group references). (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, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Fun with Ibra and Pogba

I see there is a value addition in English Premier League and it is a big impact specially Manchester United who had terrible season last year and now its total revamp of team and coach

Let's see how its going to create an impact overall — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.71.63.132 (talk) 14:06, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Sacgossamer&action=edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sacgossamer (talk • contribs) 14:19, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

2018 FIFA World Cup qualification – UEFA Group I

Just in case you do not understand my recent notice :) Thanks for N. Kalinic (I overlooked Lovre Kalinic and thought Kalinic was clear enough) :) Centaur271188 (talk) 21:10, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

@Centaur271188: You're welcome. By the way, sorry for the little mess I made with Group I goalscorers, I corrected immediately. The Replicator (talk) 21:12, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

No problem, mistakes are normal in these busy matchdays. I knew you would soon realize and correct them :) Centaur271188 (talk) 21:21, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, The Replicator. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

2016 FIFA Club World Cup Final

If I obeyed, because in that edition deleted some line spaces. So the other user stopped of reverted.

Now if you say it is a useless change then I do not understand for what purpose there is such template ({{URL}}). --186.145.98.162 (talk) 01:02, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

@186.145.98.162: If you look at the documentation on {{URL}}, it clearly says

• Note - this template is for formatting the appearance of displayed URLs, while making them machine-readable as part of emitted microformat meta-data.
• If you wish to display text instead of the URL (e.g. "BBC website" instead of bbc.co.uk), please do not use this template.
• Parameter 2 is deprecated and should not be used.

So maybe check the intended usage first? Secret Agent Julio (talk) 10:34, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Taça da Liga Final

Sorry about your work, I rearrange the display of the "route to the final" section that I had created for the final. Hope you don't mind. I was creating a more appealing table while you edited the page. Cheers mate. P3DRO (talk) 23:08, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

@P3DRO: Thank you, I'm satisfied with your changes, it is now more similar to the table used at UCL and UEL finals. I have just made some minor changes. Keep up the good work! The Replicator (talk) 23:23, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, I'm glad you liked it. And thank you for your minor changes. Hope we can add Benfica to that final tomorrow. You too, keep up the good work! P3DRO (talk) 23:35, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

2016-17 Uefa europa league

I've seen you reverted my edit on the aforementioned page. Please can you explain why as the version you've reverted it to doesn't make grammatical sense.

KP-TheSpectre (talk) 00:02, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

@KP-TheSpectre: This expression exists in English language, it is used in media and has been used in similar articles here in Wikipedia. The Replicator (talk) 00:16, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Maybe as a form as slang but it doesnt really make sense, like the phrase 'could care less' (I'm unaware if that is also used on the site). It doesnt really explain why you reverted my edits on 2 pages now given mine version is clearer in why it refers to. KP-TheSpectre (talk) 01:19, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Check the archives at Inter Milan

Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:48, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Attendance UCL

Full time report LEI-ATL is 2nd leg. Fix it.--79.13.53.211 (talk) 20:59, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

2016-17 UEFA Europa League knockout phase

Thanks for editing my updates :) I overlooked the current format (actually I did not know we can use * until now) and used <br /> instead. This way is better. Centaur271188 (talk) 04:23, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Monaco goal scorers in 2016-17 champions league.

Why do these still need to be in bold? As you have not left an edit summary I do not know. Red Jay (talk) 21:46, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

@Red Jay: We must wait until the source (uefa.com) updates, and then update all the table statistics, including timestamp, not just removing bolds. The Replicator (talk) 21:49, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

@Red Jay: And it updated right now when I was typing the answer above. Don't worry, I'll do it. The Replicator (talk) 21:51, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining. I didn't realise that updates only relied on uefa.com. Red Jay (talk) 05:37, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

2018 FIFA World Cup qualification – UEFA Group A

Zirath's note (Luxembourg eliminated) is correct :) Just in case you still do not understand, Luxembourg have to win all remaining matches to get 13 points, while France and Sweden have to lose them all. Both of them will meet Netherlands and Bulgaria, then if Sweden and France lose, Bulgaria and Netherlands will get 15 and 16 points respectively, still more than Luxembourg. Centaur271188 (talk) 22:07, 9 June 2017 (UTC).

@Centaur271188 and Zirath: Okay, I concede. I was wrong. Thank you. :) The Replicator (talk) 22:13, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:F.C. Barreirense matches

Template:F.C. Barreirense matches has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 19:05, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Attendance UEL København vs. Lokomotiv Moskva: 17,285 or 0 (no crowd match?)

This match soccerway source show this, but official website of København show this.--79.43.11.84 (talk) 21:45, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

@79.43.11.84: Judging from Copenhagen vs Lokomotiv Moscow's TV footage, it wasn't played behind closed doors. I don't know why Soccerway hasn't yet updated the attendance, but thank you for pointing this out. I'll keep an eye on it. The Replicator (talk) 21:57, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, ok. :)--79.43.11.84 (talk) 22:04, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Revert

Can you explain why you reverted my addition of "outside=1" to the location map at 2017–18 UEFA Europa League, and did so without an edit summary? MB 13:50, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

@MB: I don't see any difference between edits, result-wise, I wouldn't mind if you explain it to me; and yes, that point is a bit outside the map, but I guess users can get the idea that it is just outside the map, unlike Astana, which is located way off the map. The Replicator (talk) 11:30, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

If a point is off a map, the location map module puts the article in the maintenance category Category:Location maps with marks outside map and outside parameter not set. Usually, this is an error that needs to be fixed like a typo in the coordinate. In this case, the point is a bit outside the map so it is probably OK to leave it (ideally, there would be a sligthly larger map available). Setting outside=1 just removes the warning - in effect we are saying that this "error" is acceptable. There is no difference in the article. MB 15:06, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

@MB: Okay, thank you :). I will revert to your edit. The Replicator (talk) 15:10, 30 September 2017 (UTC) Edit: Already reverted. The Replicator (talk) 15:11, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, The Replicator. 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)

Reason for Revert

• I spent a not insignificant amount of time constructing a sourced wiki-table for 2017-18 UEFA Champions League only for you to revert it without any rationale given in this diff. As the edit was sourced, this deletion is not warranted in my view, so I have restored it to the article. If you wish to remove it again, please give a valid reason why. I am contacting you directly on this matter so as to avoid an edit war. Give a valid reason for removal, and I will remove the table myself. Thanks. Stormy clouds (talk) 23:37, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Let me preface this discussion by pointing out that I am a great admirer of your Herculean editing efforts on football pages. Like yourself, I only wish to improve them using data gathered from reliable sources in an appropriate manner - which I believe I have done. Stormy clouds (talk) 23:39, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

@Stormy clouds: Hi. I just noticed your contest to my revert and I commit myself to analyse the situation and give you an actual answer later today. For now, I am sorry for taking you as yet another clueless user/IP doing bad edits. The Replicator (talk) 11:29, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I would imagine that you have to put up with many malicious edits in your line of editing work, so I respect this fact. Stormy clouds (talk) 13:38, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

@Stormy clouds: Hi again. I considered it carefully and I will accept your contribution, by having a top assists table. On other seasons, other regular editors have been reluctant on including such tables, maybe because assists are not as much straightforward as goals, but as there is a UEFA.com source on the very same page as goals, I think we can change that. I will do some fixing work to make it totally similar to the goalscorers table and a table for Europa League. Once again, I apologise for not paying due attention to your good edit, I thank you for the polite insisting and kind words about my work here. Editors like you are certainly welcome, especially after some losses we had recently, like @Qed237: and @GAV80:. Cheers! The Replicator (talk) 19:13, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Glad to see that you are onboard, and kudos for the brilliant expansion which you made to the table. Great work! Stormy clouds (talk) 23:52, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

UEFA Europa League attendances

Hello. You putting every years attendances for UEFA Europa League with sources from Soccerway site. Now I make a question. Why Full Time reports of UEFA Europa League don't show attendances?

An example: this is Full Time Report of Porto vs. Liverpool and the pdf document show the number of attendance. This is Full Time Report of Dortmund vs. Atalanta and the pdf document don't show the number of attendance.

Why UEFA make this difference for the Europa League?--80.117.47.5 (talk) 14:49, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

@80.117.47.5: Hi. I don't know, I don't work with UEFA. I'm just a football buff who updates stats here at English Wikipedia. For Europa League, UEFA publishes a Champions-style report only for the final. Champions League is without question their major competition and stadiums are usually packed or almost, so that's my guess. Soccerway consistently publishes attendances from Europa League and international qualifying matches, consequentially that has been the practice over the seasons and I have just been following that. The Replicator (talk) 18:52, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Ok, thank You.--80.117.47.5 (talk) 22:31, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Attendance figures from Livescore

Hi, Replicator. In 2017–18 UEFA Europa League knockout phase, 80.117.47.5 recently added these numbers, citing Soccerway, but I read Soccerway reports and found none of them. In fact, he/she used Livescore's information. For example, this is Dortmund-Atalanta match report (spectators 62,500) [2]
Do you think we can consider Livescore a useful source and keep those numbers? If yes, then I will edit the references, otherwise we should remove the figures. Centaur271188 (talk) 21:04, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

@Centaur271188: Hi, that sounds good to me. Please, feel free to do that, as now I am focused on the Champions League matches :). The Replicator (talk) 21:23, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

The change has been made. By the way, when editing, I noticed some slight differences in numbers (specifically 3/16 matches, you can see page history to know more). Our guy/girl may have got those figures from Soccerway indeed :) However, Soccerway currently have no attendance information about these matches, therefore Livescore is the only source we have now. Anyway, I think Soccerway is more reliable, and we (more specifically, you) have been using it for a long time, so I will keep watching and switch to Soccerway if possible :) Centaur271188 (talk) 22:26, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

@Centaur271188: Yes, I noticed that too, and I agree with you, we better keep watching at Soccerway because those figures don't seem to be fake, at least most of them (for example, I even recognized the figures for Astana vs Sporting CP and Marseille vs Braga as they were also published at a Portuguese newspaper I read last Friday). The Replicator (talk) 22:33, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Update: Soccerway's versions in many other languages already have attendance information, but not 'International' yet. 80.117.47.5 would like to reinstate the int.soccerway.com references. It sounds like a WP:TOOSOON to me, but I think we can use the non-English Soccerway links. :) Centaur271188 (talk)

Hello. I before Read the number of attendance on other language on Soccerway and then I put the number of attendance with international English link as Done in others years. Admin of Soccerway will putting the number of attendance also for international link Very Soon in the following days. It is correct that international English link remain.--80.117.47.5 (talk) 02:19, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

@Centaur271188 and 80.117.47.5: Hi. It's not relevant anymore as the international version of Soccerway has updated now, but for the record, I would agree with Centaur on putting a language version provisionally. The Replicator (talk) 18:05, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

If attendances are show before for Deutch, Espanyol, Italian languages (for example), it is sure that the same number of attendances will be show also for International English link in the next times or next days. So, I prefer to putting directly the Internation English link. Yestarday I did this, today the all number of attendance (round of 32, 1st leg) are show now also for Internation English link.--80.117.47.5 (talk) 19:12, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

@80.117.47.5: Yes, I understand it, but I also understand Centaur's position. Let's see if this doesn't happen again... The Replicator (talk) 19:29, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

April 2018

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

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

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

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

Edit summary content is visible in:

• User contributions
• Recent changes
• Watchlists
• Revision differences
• IRC channels
• Related changes
• New pages list
• Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:13, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2017–18 UEFA Champions League. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:13, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

I was going to tag you with this but leave your contributions but I see you've been tagged and still have no clue how to edit in a community. Start explaining your changes. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:49, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:The_Replicator reported by User:Walter Görlitz (Result: ). Thank you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:17, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Atlético Clube de Portugal

Please start discussion before controversial move. Wikipedia:Other stuff exists, Sporting Clube de Portugal, sometimes know as Sporting Lisbon was moved to Sporting CP, does not mean Atlético Clube de Portugal need to move to Atlético CP. Matthew_hk tc 13:56, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

August 2018

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2018–19 UEFA Europa League. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:12, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: What edit war!? I reverted some live edits from anons putting Celtic there while they were playing. I am putting things in alphabetical order and according to practice. You just came here picking up with me and reverting me. If there is an edit war, you were the instigator. For what reason? Definitely you have a beef with me, given that this isn't the first time you pull this kind of crap up on me. Why? I don't know. Get out of my talkpage! The Replicator (talk) 21:16, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:The_Replicator reported by User:Walter Görlitz (Result: ). Thank you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:39, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, The Replicator. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

January 2019

Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow, or move it unilaterally against naming conventions or consensus, as you did to Lithuania National Stadium. This includes making page moves while a discussion remains underway. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Please gain a consensus for such naming. In addition, the "consistency" argument has been silly for ages and just because you made many page moves to your preferred version does not make it the "correct" version. – Sabbatino (talk) 15:49, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

2020-21 UEFA Europa League

Hi, The Replicator, Why did You revert my redaction about Tottenham Hotspur? It's truth. Tormon245t (talk) 10:01, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Tormon245t: Not true. At all. Tottenham Hotspur are qualified no matter what. Wolverhampton Wanderers and Arsenal are only if's for now. The Replicator (talk) 10:11, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

No, no... If Arsenal win the FA Cup, they will be the second English participant in the tournament, after Leicester and BEFORE Tottenham. But, if Wolves win the Europa League, they will be the 5-th English participant in UCL 2020-21! In this case, English quotas in UEL 2020-21 will automaticly reduced from 3 to 2 ! According to the rule, that one federation may have no more 7 entrants in both tournamets.Tormon245t (talk) 10:35, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

So, The Replicator, isn't like that ?Tormon245t (talk) 13:09, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Tormon245t: Chanheigeorge explained it. Tottenham Hotspur are qualified no matter what. The Replicator (talk) 13:30, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Chanheigeorge: Hi, I don't know about a rule prohibiting 8 teams from the same association from qualifying to UEFA competitions. That will be the scenario if Arsenal win the FA Cup AND Wolverhampton Wanderers win the UEFA Europa League. Chelsea won't lose their place in the UEFA Champions League, what about Tottenham Hotspur? Thanks in advance. The Replicator (talk) 13:15, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

There is no such rule. Please read the regulations, Article 3.03 [3]: "The UEFA Champions League and UEFA Europa League titleholders are guaranteed a place in the group stage even if they do not qualify for the competition through their domestic championships. If the UEFA Champions League or UEFA Europa League titleholder qualifies for the UEFA Europa League through one of its domestic competitions, the number of places to which its association is entitled in the UEFA Europa League is decreased by one." If Arsenal win the FA Cup, then Wolves do not qualify for the Europa League through its domestic competitions, and even if Wolves later win the Europa League, the three teams Leicester, Spurs and Arsenal continue to play in the Europa League. Chanheigeorge (talk) 13:23, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Chanheigeorge: That's what I thought, but wasn't 100% sure. Thank you :)! The Replicator (talk) 13:30, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

There IS A RULE ! Manchester United qualified for the 2017–18 UEFA Champions League as the title holders of Europa League. They were unable to defend their title as they qualified for the Champions League knockout phase. As a result, England was represented only with two teams in UEL - Arsenal and Everton ! Check this !!Tormon245t (talk) 13:40, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Tormon245t: Where's that rule? Manchester United's situation in 2017 wasn't the same, they were qualified for UEFA Europa League by domestic competitions, unlike Wolverhampton Wanderers if Arsenal win the FA Cup this year. There can be 8 teams from the same association on UEFA competitions (5+3) and there could even be 9 (5+4), if the UEFA Champions League winners were English too and they were out of UEFA competitions by domestic performance just like Wolves (for now). The Replicator (talk) 14:11, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

The quotas may be 4+3, ore 3+4, ore 5+2. NOT possible 5+3...Tormon245t (talk) 13:44, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

So,Chanheigeorge, what You think about ?Tormon245t (talk) 14:00, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Mathematician probability this to happends is 3.125%, but there is option like this !Tormon245t (talk) 14:20, 28 July 2020 (UTC):

Oh...The Replicator, please, explaine , how it is possible, 5+4 ?!? Please !Tormon245t (talk) 14:47, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Tormon245t: 5+4 would be possible with UCL and UEL titleholders from same top-3 association, both failing to qualify to UEFA competitions domestically. The 5 UCL teams would be both UEFA titleholders plus the top-3 teams of the domestic league, and the 3 UEL teams would be the usual (FA Cup winner, 4th and EFL Cup winner OR FA Cup winner, 4th and 5th OR 4th, 5th and EFL Cup winner OR 4th, 5th and 6th). The Replicator (talk) 15:21, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

LOL... :)) The Replicator, You, even don't know, that if the UCL winner is not in top 4 in domestic competition, then the UEL winner HAS NOT WRIGHT to be participant in UCL ! 5+4 NEVER would be possible! You have to read MORE ! LOL...Tormon245t (talk) 16:29, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Tormon245t: Damn, you are stupid! You say I should read more, I say you should learn to read, period. The Replicator (talk) 16:45, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Yep, The Replicator, maybe I'm stupid, but I still can read... Read THIS, smart friend: 3.07

"If the UEFA Champions League titleholder and the UEFA Europa League titleholder come from the same association and do not qualify for the competition through their domestic championship, one of the following scenarios applies:

a.If the association is entitled to four places in the competition and both titleholders qualify for the UEFA Europa League through their domestic championship, the lowest-placedof the association’s UEFA Champions League representatives is automatically transferred to the UEFA Europa League (into the UEFA Europa League group stage where a vacancyis created). In this case, the association of the titleholders is entitled to one additional place (total of five) in the UEFA Champions League, 'but the combined number of places to which it is entitled in the two competitions DOES NOT change." So, anyway, according to You, how 5+4 would be possible ?? LOL... Tormon245t (talk) 18:52, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Tormon245t: I'm talking about both UEFA competitions' titleholders being from the same top-3 association and both failing to qualify to UEFA competitions domestically, not just UEFA Champions League! Both would qualify to CL, the 4th in the domestic league is "relegated" to EL, and where the hell is the vacancy you're talking about, if they were not qualified to EL in the first place? Not maybe, you are definitely stupid! You can't read and you can't write properly. And now get off my talk page, I'm tired of wasting my time with such a moron! The Replicator (talk) 19:19, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Tormon245t: 3.07 c) "If the association is entitled to four places in the UEFA Champions League and neither titleholder qualifies for the UEFA Europa League through its domestic championship, the lowest-placed of the association’s UEFA Champions League representatives is automatically transferred to the UEFA Europa League (into the UEFA Europa League group stage and the access list will be rebalanced accordingly). In this case, the association of the titleholders is entitled to one additional place (total of five) in the UEFA Champions League and one additional place (total of four) in the UEFA Europa League." 5+4=9! Moron! The Replicator (talk) 19:39, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Ok, The Replicator ,I agree, at last. And, sorry, but "get off", especialy "moron" are not very refined expressions... Not even for editor...I think so, with my stupid brain...Tormon245t (talk) 20:03, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Pni-freguesia Peniche Serra d'El-Rei brasão.png

Thanks for uploading File:Pni-freguesia Peniche Serra d'El-Rei brasão.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:File copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 01:46, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Unspecified source/license for File:Serra d'El-Rei.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Serra d'El-Rei.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:File copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 01:47, 17 November 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:45, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

UEFA European Cups knockout phase

I recommend having a look at this talk. Could you give an opinion about it?--Island92 (talk) 20:44, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Rafael Toloi

Because most sources spell his name without the diacritic, including his club and national team websites. Where are we getting actually getting the spelling with the diacritic from? Mattythewhite (talk) 15:00, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

@Mattythewhite: Basically all sources in Portuguese language, which is his native language. If there wasn't such a consistency in Portuguese sources, you could have a point. Why should we (Wikipedia) be lazy if Italian sources are lazy with diacritics (and when I say Italian, I could say other languages). Plus, you just moved without justification or discussion. The Replicator (talk) 15:06, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

@Mattythewhite: Plus, Portuguese grammar. The stress is in the last syllable, so the diacritic is mandatory. The Replicator (talk) 15:10, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

I agree that we shouldn't be lazy, but we ought to be guided by the name that is mostly commonly used, per WP:UCRN. I would note that Mr Toloi himself spells his name without the diacritic. Mattythewhite (talk) 15:38, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

@Mattythewhite: Social media doesn't really cut it. The Replicator (talk) 17:05, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

@Mattythewhite: And this. The Replicator (talk) 17:08, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Belgium

Belgium has already advanced to the knockout stage. Even if they finish 3rd, they will definitely finish above from the third-placed teams from Groups A and E (max points: 4). So, worst case scenario: they finish third and qualify as one of the best third-placed teams. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Costasgeorg (talk • contribs) 18:09, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

@Costasgeorg: Right. Thank you. The Replicator (talk) 18:12, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

3RR

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

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Seasider53 (talk) 14:07, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

@Seasider53: I already made an incident report on Snowflake91. Here. Thank you. The Replicator (talk) 14:12, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Voting

There is a voting on the UEFA European Championship talk page in a discussion you have been part of, could you please cast a vote? Thank you. Piotr Bart (talk) 20:22, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

WP:3RR — 2021–22 UEFA Europa Conference League group stage

Your recent editing history at 2021–22 UEFA Europa Conference League group stage shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
I have restored the page to it's original state, before the war began. The talk page discussion was opened before the relevant page sections were created, with no significant objections and with explanations. You are more than welcome to state your case there. Deancarmeli (talk) 09:35, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@Deancarmeli: That's rich! You go discuss your frivolous idea at your open discussion, instead of messing with others' work without discussion and approval. The Replicator (talk) 09:40, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

1. The discussion was opened before the games were scheduled.
2. After the games were scheduled, I have transcluded some of the groups to 2021–22 UEFA Europa Conference League group stage — and was reverted after a few hours.

You are more than welcome to join the discussion, or better yet – Add information to Template:2021–22 UEFA Europa Conference League group matches to help every one, having your edits appear in more than one place. Deancarmeli (talk) 09:49, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:The Replicator reported by User:Deancarmeli (Result: ). Thank you. —Deancarmeli (talk) 09:59, 29 August 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) 00:38, 23 November 2021 (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) 01:28, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

"final"

All articles with "Final" at the end of their title have been renamed to use "final" (lowercase). New articles will also use "final". SLBedit (talk) 15:43, 5 June 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) 00:44, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:30, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of List of heirs to the throne of Liechtenstein for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of heirs to the throne of Liechtenstein 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/List of heirs to the throne of Liechtenstein until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Celia Homeford (talk) 14:34, 21 November 2024 (UTC)