User talk:Fma12/Archive 10

9 ≤ - Go to archive: - ≥ 11

Copyright problem on 1883 FA Cup Final

Content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from https://spartacus-educational.com/FblackburnO.htm, which is marked as being a copyright web page. Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Content you add to Wikipedia should be written in your own words. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. — Diannaa (talk) 14:14, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Colors

Hi, please don’t manually add the colors in the infobox for NCAA Division I schools – they are automatically displayed in the box. All Division I schools are imputed this way and some Division II schools are... the goal is to make all this way if we have a source. If you need them updated, please request at Module talk:College color or you’re more than welcome to ask on my talk page. Thanks, Corky 21:55, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Same goes for the official website at the bottom of the page. It is automatic when we use {{Official website}}. All Division I schools Andy their individual teams are in the Wikidata which makes the template open the url when used on the page. Corky 03:21, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, @Corkythehornetfan:, ok, copied that. I'll take into account from now on. Thank you - Fma12 (talk) 18:30, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Auburn

Hi, I reverted this edit which removed the "FieldName" parameter from the infobox (Template:Infobox college football team). The parameter and link appear to be correctly used in the Auburn article. UW Dawgs (talk) 18:01, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

NFL team uniforms

Hello, Fma12 (talk), I was wondering if there would be any way you could please update File:Tampabay buccaneers unif20.png & File:Cowboys uniforms12.png? The main thing that needs to be updated for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers' uniform is simply the logo on the helmet. The team uses this logo found on NFL.com. As for the Dallas Cowboys, the main fixes needed are the color of the pants for the "Cowboys Star" uniform (white jersey with royal blue numerals & lettering), silver-green pant color (the correct color code for silver-green pants is  #ADD9CE ), and royal blue socks ( #00338D ). Also, the Cowboys only wear a Color Rush uniform, and not the throwback uniform any more. Here & here are images of what the Cowboys' Color Rush uniforms look like. I hope you would please consider my requests. If you have any questions, please leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 00:57, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi, @Charlesaaronthompson: I will gladly make the corrections on those uniforms. The Buccanneers kits will come first so the changes are simplier, but I'll continue with the Cowboys color rush as soon as the Buccs are finished. Regarding to the Cowboys throwback uniform, do you know when they stopped wearing it? Another user told me that it only remained for the 2012 season, but I need to confirm that in order to update other sections. I have been using this source as reference, but obviously, its information is wrong. I'd really appreciate your assistance on this topic. Thank you. - Fma12 (talk) 11:52, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

@Fma12: I want to say that the Dallas Cowboys stopped wearing their throwback uniforms with the white helmet as of the end of the 2012 NFL season. My source for that information is from the Gridiron Uniform Database. Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 18:50, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

@Charlesaaronthompson: Thanks for the useful information. I'm on my way to update the uniforms. And I'll also keep in mind that Gridiron uniform database for future references. - Fma12 (talk) 18:54, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

@Fma12: You're welcome. Anytime. You definitely should keep the Gridiron Uniform Database in mind. As far as NFL team logo and uniform changes are concerned, they're pretty accurate and up-to-date, even if they are not a part of the official NFL.com Internet network of sites. Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 22:50, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Uniforms

Hello, Fma12. I hope you are doing well and staying safe in the midst of this pandemic. If you have not heard already, you have done an outstanding job updating uniforms for the NFL and I want to let you know that your work is much appreciated. Thank you very much for the effort you have put in, you certainly have a gift. I do have one request for an update. For the Carolina Panthers' set, would you mind swapping out just one of the silver pants pairs for a black pair? It really isn't that important, I just wanted all of the pant sets to be represented. Once again, thank you very much for your contributions. Jimania16 (talk) 15:00, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi, @Jimania1: I appreciate a lot your kind words and recognition to my work. I really enjoy making the NFL and NCAA uniforms and the feedback other users leave me and I usually do my best to make all of you feel satisfied with the results. Thanks again - Fma12 (talk) 20:41, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Vandalizing Page

Hello the user user:Slipknot000 stay make false edits, and is vandalizing the page NiziU by posting false information, if you can protect the page only for administrators, because it always puts kpop and it appears on itunes and official website jpop and always putting the origin and incorrect formation always insisting, Thanks.--Majoriesend (talk) 23:42, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi, @Majoriesend:, unfortunately I don't have administration privileges in order to protect the page or block vandals, but you can report that kind of incidents here: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Good luck with that. Fma12 (talk) 00:20, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Washington Football Team

Good day, Fma12! I hope you are doing well. I don't know if you heard, but the Washington Redskins are temporarily going as the Washington Football Team until a new name is determined. If you have the time, would you mind updating the uniforms for the team, please? I have a few pictures from Twitter of the new uniform right here. The new uniform is pretty similar to the old ones with a few tweaks: the helmets ditch the old logo and striping and have the player number on the sides instead, similar to how the University of Alabama does it; The chest, instead of "Redskins", now reads "Washington"; and the striping on the pants is now the standard prototype of a classic NFL uniform. Also, the Nike swoosh will still be on the sleeves, not on the chest.

Please take this into consideration if you see this. Thank you in advance! Jimania16 (talk) 19:07, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi, @Jimania16:, I had heard some news about the change of name of the (ex) Redskins, a case similar to the MLB team Cleveland Indians. Of course, I'll be working on the new uniforms and image to upload them this weekend. Thanks you for the information and best regards! Fma12 (talk) 21:25, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Template:Dunlop

Hi. I noted that you made this template into a redirect to Template:Dunlop Holdings. When that was done, you unintentionally made the error of putting in the navbox in place the golden "G" in a square, which is used to identify which tyre manufacturer the team/driver used during an event. Hence. I have reverted the template back to its original purpose. MWright96 (talk) 13:51, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi, @MWright96:, I didn't realise of that mistake, thanks for clarifying me about this. Fma12 (talk) 13:52, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Template Boca

Buenas, como estás? Disculpa entonces! Excelente, no sabía que se seguía un hilo, perdón. Yo simplemente quería dejarlo similar al de grandes clubes europeos que después del nombre citan jugadores, técnicos, presidentes, historia, temporadas, como les fue en competiciones internacionales, temporada actual, ejemplo Barcelona o Madrid. ¿Que opinas? Sino lo dejo como está. Hace poco armé una pagina de todas las temporadas de Boca en la histori y también tengo un proyecto de crear una pagina que liste todas las competiciones internacionales disputadas por Boca, tomando como ejemplo también clubes europeos, creo que Boca lo merece y está a la altura de tener esos artículos. Quedo abierto al dialogo. Cabj94 (talk) 14:20, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Hola @Cabj94:, qué tal? todo bien, aclarado entonces el tema, en realidad si te fijás los templates de Bayern M, Juventus, Man.Utd y otros clubes, son bastante sintéticos y siguen el estilo. Yo lo dejaría como está. Vi tu página con las temporadas de Boca, me pareció una gran idea, sin duda alguna, y por supuesto que el club merece ese reconocimiento y más. Yo había creado tiempo atrás History of Boca Juniors y la página de las temporadas sirve como excelente complemento. Ojalá más adelante haya tiempo y ganas como para ir completando cada temporada en este template: template:Boca Juniors seasons

Si necesitás asistencia en cualquier artículo que armes sobre Boca, avisame sin dramas. Fma12 (talk) 15:44, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Washington Football Team uniforms

I noticed that you updated the uniforms but wanted to alert you that the team's early photoshops were misleading and that the white strip on the arm cuffs weren't removed after all (see here). ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 00:51, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Washington Football Team uniforms

I noticed that you updated the uniforms but wanted to alert you that the team's early photoshops were misleading and that the white strip on the arm cuffs weren't removed after all (see here). ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:48, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi, @Dissident93:, I'll upload the uniforms a.s.a.p. Thanks for letting me known. Fma12 (talk) 22:22, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

New Orleans Saints uniforms

Hello again, Fma12 (talk), I just wanted to ask you if would please update File:NO_saints_uniforms19.png? As far as I know, the New Orleans Saints actually wear their old gold colored pants with a thick solid black stripe & Fleur-de-lis logo on the side panel more often than their white pants, when paired with their white away jersey. Is there any way you would please update the uniform file? My source is per NewOrleansSaints.com. Thanks in advance. Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 04:46, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hyphens

Please be aware of Wikipedia's Manual of Style for hyphens, which says "Avoid using a hyphen after a standard -ly adverb (a newly available home, a wholly owned subsidiary) ...". In particular, in the article R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company. Chris the speller ^yack 16:52, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

@Chris the speller: Thanks for the advice, I'll keep it in mind for future edits. - Fma12 (talk) 19:08, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Fair use image usage removal

Greetings FMA12! Thanks for your work on Wikipedia. I noticed you removed the image File:Union Pacific poster.jpg in the Charles H. Sharman and List of Union Pacific Railroad civil engineers (1863–1869) articles. Sharman's journal was the basis for Haycox's movie script and therefore relevant and appropriate. I thought these instances and my documentation on the image file met the WP:NFCCP policies and requirements. You thought otherwise. Can you share with me your thinking? Thanks. Risk Engineer (talk) 16:43, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, @Risk Engineer:, thanks for your feedback. As you said, I removed the poster based on Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. The poster was included in four articles so I considered there was an excesive use of the "fair use" principle. As a theatrical poster, it is the main image "for identification purposes only" for the movie article, but according to WP:NFCC_policy#1, there are enough free images related to Charles H. Sharman that can be included in that article, therefore a (non-free) movie poster is not strictly necessary. In fact, Commons:Category:Golden Spike Ceremony has a lot of images (related to the topic) that can be used there.

Regarding List of Union Pacific Railroad civil engineers (1863–1869), there is no need of a non-free image there so the main topic is not the movie. I guess you agree with me on that point. - Fma12 (talk) 16:59, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

No I didn't but I figured whatever your rationale was for Sharman, it would roll over into the List article. IMHO, none of the commons materials are of the same quality as the movie poster. As to WP:NFCC_policy, there is a minimum requirement but no maximum in the policy, so the four articles seems to be your policy interpretation. (The artwork is only used in one place per article.) I started doing a survey of other movie posters to see examples and the number of times there were used to develop a counter argument, but I don't think the energy is worth it. Going forward before you delete more material, I would ask you to develop a basis for your criteria of four being excessive. Sadly, I think in this case, the removal of the image takes away from the article. Risk Engineer (talk) 19:13, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

@Risk Engineer: I guessed that you would disagree with me at that point, from the moment you started this conversation. My criteria of "being excessive" is based on my long-time experience as editor in the project, and some removal of images that didn't meet the NFCC due to the reasons I explained you above. On NFCC:enforcement it is clearly explained: "A file with a valid non-free-use rationale for some (but not all) articles... (...) Instead, the file should be removed from the articles for which it lacks a non-free-use rationale, or a suitable rationale added."

Based on that statement, I removed the poster from articles where it was not strictly necessary or free images could be used instead (with List of Union Pacific Railroad civil engineers (1863–1869) as the most notable example). As I told you before, the use of non-free images is not unlimited. Nevertheless, and in search of consenssus, I'll open a case in the administrators' noticeboard to discuss the issue. – Fma12 (talk) 19:29, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

That's all I can ask for. Risk Engineer (talk) 19:36, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

October 2020

When adding links to material on external sites, as you did to 1994 FIFA World Cup, please ensure that the external site is not violating the creator's copyright. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website's operator has created or licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as YouTube or Sci-Hub, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates its creator's copyright. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you believe the linked site is not violating copyright with respect to the material, then you should do one of the following:

• If the linked site is the copyright holder, leave a message explaining the details on the article Talk page;
• If a note on the linked site credibly claims permission to host the material, or a note on the copyright holder's site grants such permission, leave a note on the article Talk page with a link to where we can find that note;
• If you are the copyright holder or the external site administrator, adjust the linked site to indicate permission as above and leave a note on the article Talk page;If the material is available on a different site that satisfies one of the above conditions, link to that site instead. Removing images that are still under copyright is not vandalism. Stating that it is vandalism is not in any way constructive. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:17, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: You're a persistent "reverting user", but speaking about the topic, the photographs are PD in Argentina (according to Law 11,723), so there is no permission needed from the copyright holder (El Gráfico in this case), as you stated above so all the photographs published in Argentina enter to the PD automatically after 25 years. Nothing to do with Youtube or Google copyright violations. Therefore I may consider "vandalism" when someone removes images that are not copyrighted in their country of origin, considering that there are a lot of articles in the en.wiki with URAA images on them. The question is "what criteria is used"?)

It's such rare that an user who has been recently blocked, come here and warn me about "being blocked", when I'm a long standing contributor, far away from infringing any form of copyright (if I did, it was by omission). - Fma12 (talk) 21:58, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

I have no clue what a persistent "reverting user" is, but you have now added copyrighted material twice. Don't do it again. Also, do not call it vandalism when the reason was provided. The way you were reverted would have caused an alert to the action. I can only assume that you elected either not to determine what was being told to you or what it meant. You now have a clear explanation. To be clear, those works are still under copyright in the United States (and definitely the United Kingdom) and so regardless of their copyright in Argentina, they cannot be added to the English project. Period. If you add the images to the article again, I will not only revert you, I will follow the guidance at WP:DCV and report the repeated behaviour to admins and let them deal with you. From what I am reading, it will not be a temporary block unless you can convince them that you read the English project's copyright policy, that you understood it, and as an expert in the field of copyright, you can explain why the notice on those images in commons does not apply to the you as an editor. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:06, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: Before threatening other user "to be blocked", take a look at your situation first. Are you some kind of clarvoyant to determine how long I would be blocked? Don't expect I give you the chance for that. As I said to you before, I added the images twice because there are a lot of PD-Argentina images on different articles of the English project, and the criteria used is certainly unclear. After seing some contradictions, you can't blame me for adding such images. Answer me that: why URAA images are allowed on certain articles (p.e. Argentina v England (1986 FIFA World Cup), with 7 photos) and why aren't they on another ones? Can you give me a good explanation for that? I'm willing to read you.

If you are such zealous for images still copyrighted in the US appearing on football articles, you should take a look at other World Cup articles that are plenty of this type of images and remove them all, as you persistently do specifically on 1994 WC. Which, in fact, is not the only article to be patrolled, have you realised that? Fma12 (talk) 00:18, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

I will take your advice and look at images on other world cup articles. As for my blocks, there's no need to mention them to deflect from your precarious position. I am not threatening you, I am explaining the situation you are in: you have repeatedly added images that are clearly marked as being under copyright in the US to the English project. You have not acknowledge that you erred in doing so, even doing so unwittingly. Recognize that now that you have been formally warned, your next infraction could result in a permanent block. That's not a threat in any way. It's a reality. Again, deal with your issues and I will deal with mine and there is no need to try to make it seem like I am in the wrong for trying to explain the precarious position in which you find yourself.

One thing further: do not reply unless you expect me to reply to you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:36, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: I don't need any answer from you now. Nor do I think that adding an (not allowed) image could result in a permanent block, but neither you nor me are admin to decide that, so there is no discussion opened on the administrators noticeboard about it, it is not a relevant point to discuss IMO.

To finish off: I don't need any reply from you, I only had to note you how many copyrighted images still remain on the English project. I hope you will be as strict as you are on the 1994 WC article, removing all of them. I could do it for myself, but those edits will be surely reverted by other users and I don't want to enter to edit warrings that draw my energy (and patience). – Fma12 (talk) 10:44, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Copyright rules are clear

You really do not seem to understand copyright rules. I do not nee to know that when it says that persistent violators will be blocked from editing. I did not write that template, it is used a the community level. And I did not write Wikipedia:Copyright violations nor the part that reads "Contributors who repeatedly post copyrighted material despite appropriate warning may be blocked from editing by any administrator to prevent further problems". You have been more than appropriately warned, and so you just need to recognize the problems you might create for yourself if you upload an image that is still under copyright in the United States to the English project. if you want the admins to decide, you should try to do so. And once again, do not reply unless you expect me to reply to you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:11, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: I thought you and me were finished in the last discussion. What do you want, an apology from me? I understand copyright rules perfectly, otherwise I would have added the images again or reverted your edit, and I didn't. Nevertheless, here you are, being so persistent saying the same thing again and again... (cite yourself): and once again, do not reply unless you expect me to reply to you... IT IS YOU who are filling my talk with your repetitive speach. I was clear to you, "patrol other World Cup articles to see how plenty of copyvio images they are". No more than that, so could you stop writing me? Or you'll reported, but for harassment. As you're not the nicest guy to deal with, my patience is not inexhaustible. Keep this in mind and DO NOT reply this message. – Fma12 (talk) 16:21, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Contribution on O'Neills

Thank you Fma12/Archive 10 for your edits on the page O'Neills. Your contribution no matter how small means a lot. Bekkadn (talk) 06:43, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, @Bekkadn:, I appreciate your comment a lot. Thank you for the recognition. Fma12 (talk) 22:01, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Diego Maradona image

Hi. I think the speedy deletion wasn't necessary, as the photo could be from Argentina, since it was already circulating on the internet before the French magazine published it. We could have waited a few days, and in the meantime we could have found more information about it. By the way I understand your position, and maybe it was the right decision to delete it right now. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 20:36, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Mazewaxie: sorry but the copyright violation was so evident that the image would have been deleted anyway... by any user, soon or later. I have uploaded lot of Diego images at Commons but I could not find a similar one in El Gráfico (which published most of DM images in Argentina). On the other hand, I have copy of Sólo Fútbol magazine (1985) with a very similar photo of Diego, I should scan this and then upload it to Commons. The image does not have the same quality than the one you uploaded, but is PD (Argentina) and won't be deleted. Thanks for understanding. Best wishes, Fma12 (talk) 20:47, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

@Fma12: It would so cool if you could scan and upload that one. The image that was deleted perfect for the infobox, it looked so good. By the way, I just found some information about it. Apparently it's copyrighted on Bildbyrån, a Scandinavian sports agency, so it was most likely photographed before the friendly game between Norway and Argentina of 30 April 1986 that was played in Oslo, Norway. However the website doesn't mention the author name, and it was published in 1992. You can find it here. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 21:01, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Mazewaxie: Yes, I will scan and upload the photo, be sure about that. About the photo you cited, unfortunately Norway has a long term of expiration for photographs (50 years after being created, see here for further details). Threfore that image is not suitable for Commons, either. By the way, I remember that Argentina friendly match in Norway, as preparation for the World Cup. The team made one of the worst performances I had seen, but then.... well, you know the story. Best, Fma12 (talk) 21:14, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Chicago Bears uniform

Hello Fma12 (talk), I was wondering if you would please update File:Ch_bears_uniforms.png? The Chicago Bears now have an alternate orange jersey once again, and no longer wear the alternate uniform that features a solid navy helmet with no logo and a solid navy jersey with solid block orange numerals. My source for the updated Bears uniforms is per ChicagoBears.com. Please update that uniform file? Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 01:44, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi, @Charlesaaronthompson:, I'll glady update the Bears uniform. Thanks for the information, I'm going to update it as a separate file, to avoid overwritting the original one. Fma12 (talk) 16:19, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Flags in MLS All-Star articles

Per discussions at WT:FOOTBALL, only a single flag should be used for each entry and it should represent the player's FIFA affiliation. SounderBruce 02:08, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Alignment

So you unilaterally decided to change the way the squad lists are displayed? Yeah, that's not gonna fly. Please stop doing it. – PeeJay 10:58, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Don't test your patience? What are you going to do? I'm well within my rights to question your changes, especially since it's a fairly dramatic change from the way the things have been done for about the last 10 years. The home team's line-up is supposed to be aligned to the left of the page, so why are you changing the code to move it closer to the middle? It doesn't look good. – PeeJay 11:16, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm not a newbie here either so I've been editing and making articles since 2006. Like I said before, I did not anything disruptive or questionable that deserves an automatic reversion as you did. You might have asked me before reverting the changes, and I would gladly answer you to clear your doubts. But you choose the other way, less polite. - Fma12 (talk) 11:21, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

You're edit is disruptive by its nature. As Peejay states, you're making changes to the way the line ups have been presented for nigh on 10 years with little material benefit. NapHit (talk) 16:06, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

@NapHit: As I stated before, I did not break any code or did something disruptive or vandalic. I simply introduced a change to improve the article. But some editors prefer to revert anything before taking a look at the changes first. I also think it should be discussed on the Wikiproject football page, which I will do when I have more time. – Fma12 (talk) 22:50, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

But it's just your opinion that it improves the article. Clearly it's not just me who doesn't agree with you. Thank you for posting on WT:FOOTY. – PeeJay 11:32, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

New uniform design for the Cincinnati Bengals

Hello again, Fma12 (talk). I was wondering if you would be so kind as to please create a new uniform file for the Cincinnati Bengals when you have time? My source for the Bengals' new uniforms is at Bengals.com. Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 03:35, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, @Charlesaaronthompson:, how you're doing? Yes, I'd like to update the uniform and I'll do it ASAP. Fma12 (talk) 18:31, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Hey Fma12, I'm doing fine. Is there any status update yet on the progress of creating a new uniform file based off the new uniform design for the Cincinnati Bengals? Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 03:55, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi, @Charlesaaronthompson: it's almost finished, I'll be uploading it at the end of the day. - Fma12 (talk) 23:06, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

@Fma12: I just saw the new uniform file. Thank you! Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 02:42, 13 May 2021 (UTC)