User talk:Bestbaggiesfan

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, then place {{Talkback|Bestbaggiesfan}} on your talk.
Please click here to leave me a new message.

fc template[edit]

Hi there and thanks for your contributions. Just regarding your use of the fc template in this edit, you might not know that this particular template (Template:fc) is designed to be substituted, not transcluded. If we transclude it, we unnecessarily obscure the link targets. Basically, you need to type {{subst:fc|Portsmouth}}, not {{fc|Portsmouth}}. I've fixed that page now, but just a heads up for future edits. Hope this makes sense. Thanks. --Jameboy (talk) 21:54, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for letting me know this but I have two questions regarding what you've said:

As the link still worked and there was no visible change, why change it?
Also, it takes much longer to type what you've said, so when is the 'fc|team' template actually used?

From what I've read, transclusion is better than substitution. Apologies if you explained it in the original post but I'm finding it hard to understand why a change is needed. Bestbaggiesfan (talk) 11:30, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tennis[edit]

Hey, are you being serious? How about you check every other tennis aricle and see how it is done there? Or bring it up at WP Tennis to discuss that. Why do you think there is a tennis3 template? Kante4 (talk) 16:02, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm being perfectly serious, you can't think that 'compact' looks better than the more spread out one? Bestbaggiesfan (talk) 16:05, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Why do you want to change it? It has been done like this for years now and you want to change it, bring up some arguments why. Maybe not only here but at the project site where i may take this. Kante4 (talk) 16:08, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your point but this is the English version of Wikipedia so surely the templates used should be the ones that are used in all English media? Tennis3 template Bestbaggiesfan (talk) 16:11, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Has nothing to do with english wikipedia. check the other article from the previous years or even this. Makes no sense that you change it without even discussing it at the project site. Kante4 (talk) 16:14, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was the one who created the article and that's the template I set it to, that's all I'm saying. If you feel that strongly about it then change it back. t least I know now for future reference but I still believe my template is better but if Tennis 3 has always been used then so be it.Bestbaggiesfan (talk) 16:49, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No one owns an article. I change it back because the other one is used since a few years. Kante4 (talk) 16:55, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say I owned it! I just said that's how I created it.Bestbaggiesfan (talk) 17:05, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Does not change the fact that you used a completely different template than every other creator used so far. Kante4 (talk) 17:06, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, why do you keep deleting 'reflist' on the page aand deleting external links too? Bestbaggiesfan (talk) 20:49, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw that, because the draw is the reference and as long as there are no other refs given (who won etc...) there is no need for the reflist. External links are given in the main article. Kante4 (talk) 20:39, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Clara[edit]

Please see WP:COMMONNAME. Until the 50th episode broadcasts, she has appeared as Jenna-Louise in all of her Doctor Who episodes (and all of her other screen appearances, for that matter), and is still better known as such. The name change is mentioned and sourced at Jenna-Louise Coleman, and the new form of her name is used at 50th anniversary special (Doctor Who) and 2013 Christmas special (Doctor Who) as she will be credited as such per sources. The time for changing the other uses, such as at Clara Oswald, will be after the 50th special airs. U-Mos (talk) 17:03, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor Who references[edit]

Hi, I noticed that you reverted my edit, could you please explain why? I don't believe there is anything wrong with the edit I made. Melonkelon (talk) 21:14, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've just gone and rechecked and realised I read the edits back to front. I though you'd changed <refname="HurtDoctor"/> to <refname="HurtDoctor"></ref>. That'll teach me to double check reversions in future. Sorry about that. Thanks for bringing it up. Bestbaggiesfan (talk) 21:45, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fires of Pompeii[edit]

Basically, you're completely wrong about this. They're historical figures, they share the same traits as the historical figures they're meant to represent, there is precedent in every other Doctor Who episode page on linking to historical figures, the pages for the figures themselves mention the episode, and Capaldi's page and the Twelfth Doctor page both link to the Caecilius page. Unless you intend on removing the links for every other historical figure from every other Doctor Who episode, you have no justification or precedent for doing so on that page, so I'm going to continue to revert if you try to change. Kuralyov (talk) 00:24, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the use of the Caecilii wasn't suggested or written by Davies, so I don't know why you would claim that as part of your justification. Kuralyov (talk) 00:28, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know you must be looking at it from a different point of view to me but they simply aren't historical figures! Certainly not famous enough to think that Russell T Davies deliberately meant for them to be equivalent to Charles Dickens when he wrote him into the show. There is room for disambiguation when you are talking about Caecilius whereas with other historical figures, like Charles Dickens, there wasn't. This is why I think it is wrong to link to that page.Bestbaggiesfan ✉ 09:08, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

More importantly, how on earth can you know he's playing the real person when they are only credited as Caecilius and Quintus during the episode? In fact, during filming in the video of Peter Capaldi and Tracey Childs on the right hand side here, he is credited as Lobus Caecili which shows that he was never intended to be a historical figure, just a made up name. Bestbaggiesfan ✉ 09:19, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Look, not to be rude, but have you even read the article in question, let alone, are you familiar with the actual history at all? If not, then you should probably try and educate yourself a bit so you don't come across as being so uninformed. The Caecilii were chosen for this episode because they are a famous Roman family that lived in Pompeii at the time of the eruption and their house was uncovered in near-pristine order, so much is known of their lives and profession. Most grammar-school Latin students in the UK and US learn about them as part of their introduction to Latin. The widely-used textbook that features them was what inspired James Moran (and NOT Davies so I don't know why you keep bringing him up) to use them in the episode. This is all covered in the article. Again, I don't want to come off as rude, but did you even read the article you're trying to come across so authoritatively on? Kuralyov (talk) 13:52, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Writer's Barnstar

Thanks for all the work you have done on the Wiki entries for "EastbourneTennis".

At eastbournetennis.com, we have this year embedded your content into our site and you have saved us hours and hours of duplicating work.

Thanks again Tenniseastbourne (talk) 17:07, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 16:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Bestbaggiesfan/2013 Aegon International – Men's Doubles[edit]

User:Bestbaggiesfan/2013 Aegon International – Men's Doubles, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Bestbaggiesfan/2013 Aegon International – Men's Doubles and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Bestbaggiesfan/2013 Aegon International – Men's Doubles during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:54, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]