User talk:BeL1EveR
Hi there. As you may have noticed, I have been working extensively on this article, so if you need a hand with helping to get it to FA status, feel free to ask me anything. PeeJay 18:21, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks.
- I've done what I felt was obvious that needed doing. I can see you've done some quite extensive copy-editing of the article. On my to-do list is to slash the stadium section, but this will take time as mentioning the old stadium is important and then deciding what makes the cut will take a bit of time. Also some extra sourcing is needed for some of the old sections, although obviously this will be quite difficult in places as I don't think Ernest Magnall was too familiar with the internet.
- With reference to FA status, once those two issues have been addressed we should make a few comparisons with clubs that DO have featured status (chelsea, arsenal, everton, gillingham, sheffield wednesday should be enough), and if sourcing and formatting is at least as good as some of these then there is basis for asking for another consideration. In terms of comments on history ours seems VERY similarly structured to Gillingham, and let's face it, we have slightly more history to cram into that space ;)
- Any other thoughts? BeL1EveR 18:48, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- That's pretty much what was on my list too. I had expanded the stadium section, but I do agree that it could use a bit of a pruning. Other than that, I was going to just carry on plodding through the tips Oldelpaso left on the Peer Review page.
- A lot of the stuff I used to pad out the history section was from The Official Illustrated History of Manchester United. I guess I should have sourced everything as I went along, huh? :D PeeJay 19:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
The sources will exist so it's just a matter of finding them. But if anything the history section is too long. Admittedly our history has been more incidental than most, so you can justify it being a bit longer than most but if you look at Arsenal's page in particular you'll see what I mean. We have more on the pre-war section than they do on their history section... and pre-war they were more successful than us! I don't want to make sweeping changes because I've been here five minutes and haven't got the foggiest what the consensus is, but if you want to get featured status I think it needs addressing.
That doesn't mean to say "I don't want to change because of consensus, I'll leave it to you and let you take the wrap", but how would a massive change like condensing the history into five or six paragraphs be taken? I mean, there would still be the main history article (which in my opinion could possibly then be remerged into one article, but again my opinion isn't a consensus). BeL1EveR 21:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for attempting to reference the citation tag which was added by me to the above article. Unfortunately, your source does not answer the citation, due to Answers.com being a "Wikipedia mirror" parsing project i.e. some of the information contained on its servers is obtained verbatim from Wikipedia (and the Collina info certainly is - compare it). Therefore the referencing value 'implodes', I'm afraid. For this reason, I have reverted your recent edit. Thanks, and I hope the reliable source can eventually be found. Ref (chew)(do) 21:26, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
- The new reference is spot-on - well done. Keep up the good work - I wish I could find time to source some of the citations in the referee articles, but I always seem to be doing other things in Wikipedia. Best wishes. Ref (chew)(do) 14:29, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Cheers for the support on the FAC! ChrisTheDude 13:15, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Isle of Portland FAC[edit]
As per your useful comments, I have added notes and changed the text for the 2005 estimate, updated house prices for 2006, and changed the Climate table on its Template page. Sorry about the slight delay - work! I've looked at the other figures too, and they also needed updated, so I did. Thanks for noticing that, I wouldn't have otherwise! Rossenglish 12:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you, I certainly will ask you if I need a Peer Review! Rossenglish 10:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
The Apprentice (UK) FAC[edit]
Thank you for your comments. We have made changes based upon them. Please can you visit the page to confirm if you support or oppose? Thanks, Dalejenkins | The Apprentice (UK)'s FA plea-please have your say! 14:41, 2 August 2007 (UTC).
- Hello, just wondering why you added your support to the article and then removed it. Is there something you think still needs improving? Dalejenkins | The Apprentice (UK)'s FA plea-please have your say! 15:56, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- OK. I've extended those short sections. Does this change your view? Dalejenkins | The Apprentice (UK)'s FA plea-please have your say! 15:14, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Manchester United F.C. seasons[edit]
Hey man, thanks for commenting on the Peer Review for this article. I really appreciated it. I have since added a couple of replies to your comment, and I now feel that the Peer Review has run its course. I will close it in a day or two, but if you wish to add another reply to it before then, please do so. - PeeJay 23:58, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- This article is now a Featured List candidate. Please feel free to leave your comments at the candidacy page. - PeeJay 01:28, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- Cheers for supporting my attempt to get Manchester United F.C. seasons to FL status. I hope more people will view the candidacy the way you have. I might just have a chance then :-D - PeeJay 19:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Gabriel Heinze[edit]
Re: The section on the transfer saga took up more space than his actual playing history! Condensed to one paragraph and added a fact template. Well done! -- Alexf(t/c) 15:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey, if an article appears to be an obvious redirect, go ahead and do it! You don't need to suggest a deletion for it. Don't worry, if you muck things up or someone gets angry, things can always be undone. I've redirected it, in this case. --UsaSatsui 03:36, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
A month or so back, you made a comment when the Malaysia article was up for FA status, stating that it needed a copy-edit. I was wondering if you could give the article a copy-edit, as it is currently up for PR, and am preparing it for another stab at FA. Many thanks in advance, Davnel03 17:49, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! I'll leave you to get on with it for a bit! Any problems, just leave a message. Davnel03 20:51, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- The copy-edit looks great so far! Just one thing that I dislike. I dislike the qualifying section. I feel the sub-like heading (Q1, Q2, Q3 and penalties) splits the text up too much and makes it harder to read in terms of flow. I've also left 2 internal comments in the background part. Davnel03 09:30, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. That looks OK for the Barrichello note down by the classification, I can't see anything wrong in doing that. The thing about Button being overtaken, yes that is correct, the reason you stated. Anyway, as a result of a superb copy-edit (even if it's not finished yet!), I present you with:
|
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | |
| For a truly superb copy-edit. Hopefully we can work and get this article to FA. Thank you! Davnel03 19:54, 6 October 2007 (UTC) |
- The comment you made about post-race section. Hell yeah, if you can find more details to make a new section, please do!! It would definately help the article. Davnel03 18:56, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Please register your support (or oppose!). Davnel03 08:37, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
List of nationality transfers in football (soccer)[edit]
I have requested that the List of nationality transfers in football (soccer), an article you proposed for deletion some time ago, be undeleted and sent to AFD. See Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 November 13#List of nationality transfers in football (soccer). AecisBrievenbus 01:13, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Userbox Change[edit]
Hi there!
The userbox, User:Tyty1234/thug/highscore has changed. There are some variables that needed to put in instead of just a simple " | " after the userbox link. Anyway, if you want to change it and make it look better, view the documentation to follow how to fix the userbox.
Thank you.
Tyty1234 (talk) 01:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey, this is the first edition of the WP F1 newsletter. If you want to keep getting it, please talk back on my talk page.
Enjoy!LB22 (talk) 11:14, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 Year I - Issue 1 - February 2008 | |
|---|---|
|
"So to avoid any confusion, here is the order: Hakkinen leads and is yet to stop. Coulthard leads and is yet to stop..." - Murray Walker | |
Hello, Reader! Welcome to our first monthly Formula 1 WP Newsletter. This is to give you the best source of information, right in your user talk page. We hope that you find this newsletter useful, and please leave me a message on this newsletter in my talk page. All that is left to say is, I hope that you enjoy the read! Enjoy! --LB22 (talk) 21:13, 16 February 2008 (UTC) | |
|
 |
| |
Hi there. I noticed from the list of participants at WP:FOOTY that you are a Manchester United fan. A task force has been set up to help improve articles related to Manchester United, and we are looking for participants to help with the effort. If you would be interested, please add your name to the list at the task force's page. Thanks. – PeeJay 10:26, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
- That's excellent, mate. We can always use people covering any aspect of the topic, whether it be the high-profile players or the lesser-known ones. Good luck. – PeeJay 22:24, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I'm not actually on the PR volunteers list, but I'll point out a few things anyway!
- First of all, the lead section should be an overview of the article - you should add some stuff about his "return to Sweden", and try to summarise the whole article; it doesn't need to go in-depth, just guide the reader through his life.
- Secondly, there seems to be a whole chunk of information missing from the article: What happened when he was at Parma? There is literally nothing mentioned-he is at Milan, transfers to Parma for 4m, then bam, he's moving to Man Utd.. I think this is a major problem, and definitely holds the article at C-class.
- I think that the division of the article is a bit higgledy-piggledy - the sub-headed sections are quite short, given the fact that he spent a lot of time at different clubs, I'm not sure that "Manchester United" needs to be a different section to Everton and Charlton. You might want to take a look at the Stig Inge Bjørnebye article - it's GA-class, and has taken a different approach to many other Footballer GAs and FAs, in that the "Club Career" is in one, longer sections. I think this would be a better layout, or at the very least to have the Premier League career bit together and the Serie A bit together, with no need for sub-sub-headers.
- You will need to find a source for the following assertions:
- All statistics need sourcing at the very least - "he scored 8 goals in 24 league appearances en route to the league title." is completely unsourced, and I'd like to see match reports for the goals mentioned.
- "Although considered a fringe player..." - or rephrase it as something along the lines of: "while he wasn't a regular in the first team, making just XX starts..." (sourcing the stats of course)
- "Ferguson still believed he had ability, and persuaded Everton manager Walter Smith to offer..." - how do we know this? I'd like a source to point out the link between Ferguson and Smith; and also that he "still believed he had ability", it seems a bit of a superfluous bit to be honest.
- I'd like to see the goals he scored cited please - try searching for the game via google, match reports schould be available somewhere.
- this is a better source for ref #2, as you can see the whole article, and you don't need to register.
- What makes red11.org and level-k.com reliable sources? Try to find news articles etc. if at all possible.
- Try to switch all of your citations to the {{cite web}}, {{cite book}} etc. style - they include much more info, in a more structured way than just ref tags.
I hope that this helps, if you need any more feedback or want to discuss anything just let me know. I think it is definitely possible to take this article to GA status, but it needs more work yet. :) - Toon05 20:27, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- It was probably through The Rambling Man's talk page. I can see you've expanded the sections, so they are less stubby - they look better now. You might want to get a proper Peer Review as well, or comments from more experienced editors, as I'm not as well versed in the MOS as others. ThinkBlue is a GA reviewer who likes to look at footballer articles, and was really helpful in his comments for Alan Shearer; when you get to GA-nomination stage, you might want to drop him a line. On a side note, is there any more information about Blomqvist's international career? 30 caps isn't insignificant - there's no mention of his debut, or if he played in World Cup or Euro qualifiers etc. - Toon05 18:32, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Long time no see![edit]
Long time since I spoke to you after our brief interactions on 2007 Malaysian Grand Prix nearly a year ago. Not a lot has actually happened regarding that article since then, still a fledgling GA-status article! However, I have been working on other Formula One race report articles, and recently the 1995 Japanese Grand Prix was promoted to FA-status! Anyway, good to see you back here on Wikipedia! =D D.M.N. (aka Davnel03) (talk) 15:07, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Re:Jesper Blomqvist[edit]
Sure, are there any specific links you want me to have a look at? I'll do a search for articles on those subjects, but it'll have to wait until tomorrow. Regards, Tooga - BØRK! 20:45, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Hello again. I think you made an accurate interpretation about the fotbollskanalen reference, and I have found the same information on other websites too, so it should be reliable.
- Personally, I never use Expressen as a reference due to the poor content, and at least some of the Swedish wikipedia community agree with me. There has even been a proposal to ban Expressen and Aftonbladet to be used as references on the Swedish wikipedia at sv:Wikipedia:Bybrunnen, our Village pump. But at the same time, I don't doubt the contents of this specific article as he made quite a controversial move. Many of IFK Göteborg's supporters signed a petition to bring him back to the club and was disappointed when he chose Djurgården and is now considered a "Judas". [1] Therefore, I don't think such threats are unlikely. But don't take my word for it as that would be original research.
- I haven't found any non-football info about him yet, but I will continue my search. Regards, Tooga - BØRK! 16:43, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, but it seems that there isn't that much non-football info about him on the internet. Although I did find this: [2] An article about Tina Nordlund. Apparently, she and Blomqvist were a couple during a short time in 2000. Regards, Tooga - BØRK! 17:15, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Re:WP:MUFC and Bobby Charlton[edit]
Yes, the idea of adding the showcase was one I'd been thinking of for a while, but I didn't want to get ahead of myself. I would suggest it at WT:MUFC, but the amount of participative interest in the project seems to have waned slightly. I'll just add it and see how we go. As for Bobby Charlton, I have his autobiography about the Manchester United years, so at least I have a bit of a base to work from. Just got to read it now :D – PeeJay 21:41, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
- Probably the right attitude, that. Well, as long as you and I give it a good go to begin with, I'm sure we'll do fine. Unfortunately, I'm in the process of getting everything ready for moving back down to Cardiff for uni, but after the weekend I'll be good to go again. – PeeJay 22:18, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
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) 13:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)