User talk:Theanonymousentry/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, Theanonymousentry, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! NeemNarduni2 (talk) 13:44, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jon Magrin

The article Jon Magrin has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable rugby league player who fails WP:RLN.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. J Mo 101 (talk) 12:53, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore the above. Prod'ed by mistake. J Mo 101 (talk) 12:58, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Joseph Keyes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Enfield. 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) 10:28, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stub template positioning

Hi, I have reverted your change on Steve Snitch, as stub templates should be located after categories in articles, they should also be spaced by 2 blank lines from the categories. See MOS:ORDER for ordering of elements of an article. Keith D (talk) 10:51, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jamie Lyon

You are harassing me by threatening to ban me over an edit that you claim is unsourced. If you had been bothered to read the bottom of the article and checked the source links there is one from NRL.com that directly states Jamie Lyon announcing that 2016 is his final season in rugby league, a source which I added.

There is zero relevance over his impending retirement. He is still a Manly Sea Eagles player, in a current live season where Manly Sea Eagles remain alive. Once they can no longer win the NRL then and only then would it be appropriate to bring down the curtain on his career and close his Sea Eagles stint by placing the 16. Time is linear. I have not harassed you in any way and I am fully versed on Jamie Lyon's career and the fact that is winding down.Theanonymousentry (talk) 14:25, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd appreciate a bit of professionalism rather than being threatened with a petty ban. I've copped a gutful from administrators over rules that I've been alleged to have broken.

I can't claim to be a professional editor, but I can only point you in the direction of the MOS for the WPRL infobox, that's where I learnt the rules.Theanonymousentry (talk) 14:33, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jamie Lyon. 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:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
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. — MusikAnimal ^talk 14:55, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's cool, I have pulled back from edit-warring and raised the flag on the page in question.Theanonymousentry (talk) 14:56, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clubs' names

In infoboxes we refer to teams by their contemporaneous names. There has been a rough consensus for many years at Wikipedia:WikiProject Rugby league that mascots don't appear to have been adopted as part of clubs' official names until the 1970s. Not only that, but simply calling them "South Sydney" for pre-1970s players removes the whole infobox width problem. I'm not sure why you insist on making it an issue or what on earth History_of_the_South_Sydney_Rabbitohs#Early_years, which refers to them having been founded as "South Sydney District Rugby League Football Club" has to do with anything. You'll notice the same naming convention I refer to above is used for clubs' season articles. You can try gaining support for changing all of this at the Wikiproject if you like.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 00:44, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there Gibson Flying V. On Friday I pulled back from editing pre-70s South Sydney Rabbitohs players. I merely went with what the article link I posted. I will look into the pre 70s before editing these players.Theanonymousentry (talk) 09:23, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to still not understand that we can't make infoboxes as wide as we like. How can we get this message through?--Gibson Flying V (talk) 12:35, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure I've found the way. I'm not sure who the we that is putting that message through though.Theanonymousentry (talk) 14:40, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Craig Hall (rugby league, born 1977), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hornsby. 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) 10:17, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Date ranges

Hi there, as per MOS:DATERANGE, "Constructions such as 1982–present (with unspaced ndash), January 1, 2011 – present (spaced ndash), or January 2011 – present (spaced ndash) may be used where appropriate, but other constructions may be more appropriate in prose (see § Statements likely to become outdated). In tables, infoboxes, and so on, pres. may be used to conserve horizontal space (1982–pres.). Do not use incomplete-looking constructions such as 1982– and 1982–... ." Please stop reverting valid date ranges complying with Wikipedia guidelines to a non-compliant format. TheMightyPeanut (talk) 12:12, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The English version was not(ed) coded. He only played a few first grade games, I'm happy to hand him over to the other side and your templates for the infobox.Theanonymousentry (talk) 14:51, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't understand what you mean with "not(ed) coded". What on earth does "the other side" refer to? He played in excess of 150 first class matches, plus internationally. Also, what do you mean with "your templates"? I am referring to the date range format used. There are Wikipedia-wide standards for that, as per MOS:DATERANGE. TheMightyPeanut (talk) 14:59, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The to present feature isnot coded as into the rugby union infobox, whereas it is into the rugby league infobox. This produces - whereas on the union one it gives present as a word. The other side would be rugby union, and conversely the other side when viewed from a rugby union perspective would be league, in which he only played a few games for the Perth Western Reds and the South African rugby league team.Theanonymousentry (talk) 15:04, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, OK. I had no idea you were approaching things from a rugby league point of view. Clarifying that might have helped. TheMightyPeanut (talk) 15:14, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem and it very well might have done.Theanonymousentry (talk) 07:06, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox width

Hi. Just wanted to give you some words of support for your nowrap work. It might take a little work to get consensus, but I believe you are mostly doing the right thing. Doctorhawkes (talk) 21:07, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, appreciate that.Theanonymousentry (talk) 07:27, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Overlink & Reflist

Hi, I just wanted to say that I appreciate another editor dedicating their time into rugby league on Wikipedia, however I have some suggestions.

Overlink is a thing we've been batting in rugby league articles for a few years now. It is where someone feels the need to link every mention of, for example 'South Sydney Rabbitohs' in an article. Once something has been linked, it doesn't really need to be linked again. Generally though, I feel it is acceptable to link a team's name in the lead at the top, in the infobox & once in the main article. Anything beyond that is going over the top. Same deal with linking words like NYC & team names in the little caption under the photos, they don't really need to be linked because they already have been linked in the article. Unless of course in the rare cases that the team name in the little caption, hasn't already been mentioned in the article.

With the reflist, it is helpful to split it into 2 columns in the case of articles that have massive amounts of references, to help keep the page tidy. However, in cases where there is only a few references, splitting it into 2 columns is not required. A good guide would be to use this tool: http://dispenser.homenet.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/webreflinks.py It is a reference bot that fills in the references of pages, it also automatically determines whether a page has enough references to be split into 2 columns. If you type a page's name into the site, it will do the job for you & make a change to the columns if it deems necessary. If it doesn't deem it necessary, you should trust it's judgement.

Don't take this as an attack, just some help before it becomes too big of a problem. I do think you can become a good contributor to rugby league on Wikipedia if you take these suggestions on board. Josh the newcastle fan (talk) 05:01, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Josh, I totally understand where you're coming from and I did consider overlink. My position is that I am linking the captions that show a team that is not in the infobox, and whilst it may well be linked in the article I thought it best to link the club in the photo to infobox, thus reducing the confusion in showing an individual playing for a team that is not listed, for instance as a first grade club, or junior representative rugby league. I have not linked players with captions that show a club or representative team listed in the infobox.Theanonymousentry (talk) 07:25, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Opened up the link on references, but a little unclear. Will look into it though.Theanonymousentry (talk) 07:27, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Have since worked it out.Theanonymousentry (talk) 08:06, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016

When an edit of yours is reverted, please do not simply revert without justification. Instead, discuss the edit per WP:BRD on the article's talk page and note while the discussion is underway, the status quo reigns. Edit-warring is never constructive. --AussieLegend (✉) 10:18, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. It was not a revertion as I only removed the caption that detailed the date of the logo, the second time around. I did not change the size of the caption for the stadium itself the second edit.Theanonymousentry (talk) 10:21, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Removing the caption after it had been restored still constitutes a reversion. Per WP:3RR, A "revert" means any edit (or administrative action) that reverses the actions of other editors, in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material. --AussieLegend (✉) 10:35, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Taken the partial element of that on board.Theanonymousentry (talk) 07:11, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

when changing 30 em

there does not appear to be a edit summary or reason for your change - please show why or how that is a necessary change - thanks JarrahTree 10:52, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. Many thanks.Theanonymousentry (talk) 11:44, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

well you could have also explained here as well in WP:AGF, perhaps I should have phrased it why or how you think the change is necessary as opposed to what you have found and changed. JarrahTree 15:13, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Small captions

Why on earth are you reverting me after my edit summary gives the reason? If you look at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility#Text you'll read "The use of reduced font sizes should be used sparingly. Avoid using smaller font sizes in elements that already use a smaller font size, such as infoboxes,...". It's nothing personal buddy, just the rules. I'll leave you to undo your reverts and stop doing it in the future. Bald Boris 14:58, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

From the articles that I've looked at there seems no justification for any of these small captions, which are being made small with mismatched tags. --AussieLegend (✉) 15:10, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]