User talk:KyleRGiggs/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, KyleRGiggs, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!  Oldelpaso 21:17, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

4 & 5 star stadiums

The situation surrounding 4 and 5 star status is quite confusing - UEFA haven't published a list for a while, and the remaining sources aren't consistent. For example, St. Jakob Park isn't on the fussballtempel list, but it is four star according to FC Basel's website. Oldelpaso 21:17, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

ok, I've reverted it. You can revert things yourself if you wish, see Help:Reverting for details. Oldelpaso 10:02, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

UEFA Champions League 2006-07 52nd and 15th editions

The 2006-07 competition is the 52nd overall and 15th named Champions League, to confirm this:

1955-56 | 1956-57 | 1957-58 | 1958-59 | 1959-60 | 1960-61 | 1961-62 | 1962-63 | 1963-64 | 1964-65
1965-66 | 1966-67 | 1967-68 | 1968-69 | 1969-70 | 1970-71 | 1971-72 | 1972-73 | 1973-74 | 1974-75
1975-76 | 1976-77 | 1977-78 | 1978-79 | 1979-80 | 1980-81 | 1981-82 | 1982-83 | 1983-84 | 1984-85
1985-86 | 1986-87 | 1987-88 | 1988-89 | 1989-90 | 1990-91 | 1991-92 | 1992-93 | 1993-94 | 1994-95
1995-96 | 1996-97 | 1997-98 | 1998-99 | 1999-00 | 2000-01 | 2001-02 | 2002-03 | 2003-04 | 2004-05
2005-06 | 2006-07

That's 5 lines of 10 and 2 extra, 52 overall.

For Champions League:

1992-93 | 1993-94 | 1994-95 | 1995-96 | 1996-97 | 1997-98 | 1998-99 | 1999-00 | 2000-01 | 2001-02
2002-03 | 2003-04 | 2004-05 | 2005-06 | 2006-07

10 + 5 = 15 Champions Leagues

Where did you get 51 and 14 from? - MTC 21:24, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh I got messed up! Thank you.--KyleRGiggs 10:51, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Copa Libertadores 2007

I reverted all your changes. All the groups standings in one article will be too long. I used the model of FIFA World Cup 2006.--Dpapic 01:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

NBA Season

Yes, you should never add it again since it is unnecessary. Good day. Chris 18:52, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

2007 NBA Playoffs

The {{footballbox}} isn't just for football/soccer, I've applied it nicely to a basketball-related page (see 2006-07 PBA Philippine Cup). --Howard the Duck 13:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

You can use the recap link with the report parameter there. It just doesn't show when it's not needed. --Howard the Duck 01:59, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Template:football box on UEFA Champions League 2006-07 pages

I don't understand your comment about the box being long. Why do you keep reverting the edits? PeeJay 18:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, but wouldn't it be better to have the Italian and English flags next to "Milan" and "Man Utd" respectively? PeeJay 17:21, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Football club logos in season pages

The fair use policy does not permit use of non-free images such as football club logos in a purely decorative manner. Hence I have reverted your changes to FA Premier League season articles. Oldelpaso 19:46, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Copa Libertadores 2007 - Group Stage standings & results

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Copa Libertadores 2007 - Group Stage standings & results, by EPWA airport (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Copa Libertadores 2007 - Group Stage standings & results fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason:

it's not even a stub, it has no category (current sport event is not relevant), nothing links here and there are other articles about each group


To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Copa Libertadores 2007 - Group Stage standings & results, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 09:59, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

UCL 07-08

You need to request it at This page for semi-protection]]  CHAZA93  Talk  Contribs 
14:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletions?

The requests for deletion should've been retracted. --Deryck C. 14:37, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Name Deletion in Brian Ching

Please stop. If you continue to blank out (or delete portions of) page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. Yo seem to be bretty good at editing, come up with a better reason to take stuff out, perhaps this guy has a Chinese name. Tennekis 21:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Venue suggestion needed for a meet-up in Yuen Long

Dear: KyleRGiggs/Archive 1 ：

In the past meet-ups, we always had our meeting in the centre of Kowloon, either Kowloon Tong or Mong Kok. However, apart from these places, I am sure that alternative venues in other region would be suitable.


This is the time for your suggestion! According to some discussion on Chinese Wikipedia, from August of 2007, the Hong Kong Wikimedians’ meet-up would be held in all districts of Hong Kong in a circulation basis.


Here is the tentative information of the first meet-up：

Date：11, August, 2007 (Saturday)
Time：After 5:00pm
Proposed region：Yuen Long


The community would request for ideas of where we should hold the meet-up , in order to have a better decision. If you have any good ideas, don’t hesitate to give your opinions, million thanks!


Please don't hesitate to give your good suggestion to us

Regards,

Hong Kong Wikimedian
16:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:David Taylor.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:David Taylor.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted after seven days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:David Taylor.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:David Taylor.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks lol... --Deryck C. 05:04, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Well here isn't a good place to talk about that. --Deryck C. 16:55, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Round of 16

A tag has been placed on Template:Round of 16, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

It is repeated with "Round 16 No Third"

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on [[Talk:Template:Round of 16|the article's talk page]] explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. KyleRGiggs 11:02, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tags

Hi, I've noticed that you've tagged several pages for speedy deletion because they were redirects from moves. To conform with GFDL guidelines, all pages that are redirects from moves must be preserved, so I will revert the tags that you placed. Singularity 21:18, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

User talk:PeeJay2K3\Archive 1

A tag has been placed on User talk:PeeJay2K3\Archive 1, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

I made a wrong command

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on [[Talk:User talk:PeeJay2K3\Archive 1|the article's talk page]] explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. KyleRGiggs 18:26, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Harry Potter roll-call

Hi there. Your username is listed on the WikiProject Harry Potter participants list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active on the project. Your name has therefore been moved to a "potentially inactive" list. If you still consider yourself an active WikiProject Harry Potter editor, please move your name from the Potentially inactive list to the Active Contributors list. You may also wish to add {{User WP Harry Potter}} to your userpage, if you haven't done so already. Conversely, if you do not wish to be considered a member of the WikiProject, leave your name where it is and it will be moved to the Inactive Contributors section. If you wish to make a clean break with the Project you may move your name to the Known to have left section. Many thanks.

Thanks! :)

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
You deserve to be recognized for the work you've done recently to improve the HP WikiProject participants section. It is appreciated. Thanks! Faithlessthewonderboy 05:08, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Dynamo Kyiv vs Dynamo Kiev

Hello. I've noticed that you've changed "Dynamo Kyiv" to "Dynamo Kiev" several times. If you think that's how it should be, the article, FC Dynamo Kyiv should be renamed in the first place. Be aware, however, that this issue is sensitive; Talk:Kiev/naming is 364K long. Conscious 05:33, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

How do you justify your latest changing to "Kiev" on the "FC Dynamo Kyiv" article - that (correctly in my opinion) uses Kyiv throughout. - fchd 17:23, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
So you're basing your argument on the English transliteration of the Russian name of the Ukrainian City. Why, when there's a perfectly reasonable transliteration of the native Ukrainian? Even the article is called "FC Dynamo Kyiv"... - fchd 17:31, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Would you cite your atlas as a Reliable Source? If so, it's 15 years out of date. It's like referring to Mumbai as Bombay - using the language and terms of the former colonial power. - fchd 18:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
I'd take that atlas back if I were you then! If you mean Spell-Checking system within my PC applications, both Kiev and Kyiv are OK, and quite right too, as for instance there would be no need to change the name of Chicken Kiev (Peking Duck would be a similar example). I see absolutely no justification for your continuing change of Kyiv to Kiev. I won't revert it any more, but I think you are getting very, very close to breaking the WP:3RR rule. - fchd 18:16, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Why did you just copy over a message from your talk page onto my talk page? As you can see, many people agree with me. The club is called FC Dynamo Kyiv, and so they should be referred to as Dynamo Kyiv in the Champions League articles. - PeeJay 17:43, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
The discussion at Talk:Kiev is unrelated to the football club's name. By the way, my home atlas says the city's name is "Kyiv". - PeeJay 17:48, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Why are you using trivial examples to support your tenuous claims? The club that you call "Dynamo Kiev" is registered with UEFA as "FC Dynamo Kyiv", and that is how they should be referred to. This is not a matter of translation, but a matter of official naming. - PeeJay 17:59, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for pointing that one out. I will change it now. - PeeJay 18:04, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Pairing?

I noticed you added a pairing column to the UEFA Champions League 2007-08 seeding table. Firstly I am interested what is this? I first had assumed it refered to teams from the same country (as they can't draw each other), but this doesn't seem to be the case as Liverpool and Man U have different parings. Secondly if this isn't obvious to me as a football fan, it certainly can't be to someone who knows nothing about football; as we must always write articles on the assumption the the reader knows nothing about the subject, this paring should be explained in the article. John Hayestalk 06:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

No need Petsky explained it. John Hayestalk 10:12, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

RE: Complaint of 3RR

Jimbo Wales' talk page is usually used for matters that mostly concern Jimbo or require serious attention. Edit warring, three revert violations, and similar issues can be addressed at requests for page protection, the three revert noticeboard, and administrator noticeboard/incidents.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 20:11, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know, you are getting pretty close to 3RR yourself. As I said to PeeJay, regardless of whether you are right or wrong, it's more important to the encylopedia to keep valuable contributors such as yourself, than for everything to be correct, sometimes it's just best to take a step back from an edit war and come back later when things have calmed down. John Hayestalk 06:52, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Moskva etc.

Just to let you know I reverted your change to the other cities in that article for the following reasons. 1) None of those are in common usage, whereas you will often see the media use Kyiv 2) We shouldn't use the Champions League article as a place to decide these things. If you feel the city of Moscow should be called Moskva, then the article on Moscow is the place to change it, and only once it is there, then change it in the Champions League article. John Hayestalk 06:56, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand your reply. Generally UEFA would be irrelevant as it is Swiss, not English (or from any other english speaking country). The main factor on Kiev /Kyiv should be common usage. Kiev is clearly used much more than Kyiv, but that is not the case for Dynamo Kiev/Dynamo Kyiv. I have seen many in the media using Dynamo Kyiv, so then other factors such as UEFA, or the club itself should be considered. John Hayestalk 07:04, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I think your right, and Dynamo Kiev is used more than Dynamo Kyiv, but as both are used, I don't think it is a strong enough case to change it. In the end I really don't mind either way, just we should be consitent in our uses of a name across Wikipedia. John Hayestalk 07:29, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bayern_Munich_1_-_2_Norwich_City

Your comments imply that you think that no sporting event is worthy of a Wikipedia article. Staying with football alone, there is a well established consensus that some matches are notable (for example, all of the articles in this category are unarguably notable). The question to be addressed by the AfD is whether this particular article demonstrates notability using reliable sources, not whether the consensus that some matches are notable is incorrect. I'd be really grateful if you would reconsider your opinion, as I do genuinely believe this is a notable match. Many thanks, --Dweller 09:24, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:ClubWCRound7

Hi, I noticed that you changed the Club World Cup template, saying that there will be a 5th place match. I reverted it for now because it´s not displaying properly, but I'll be glad to help with fixing it if you can point to a good source about that. According to this, the fifth place match has been eliminated for the 2007 edition, but I might be missing some newer information, so please let me know if that's the case. Thanks, --Gabbec 04:32, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Recent edits re: Dynamo Kyiv

Please stop changing Dynamo Kyiv to Dynamo Kiev. There has already been a consensus established against your edits in two separate locations - Talk:Dynamo Kyiv and Talk:UEFA Champions League 2007-08. ugen64 05:13, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

September 2007

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Dynamo Kyiv. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. There is nothing wrong with the link he made to your user page, yes ideally he would hide the "user:" but that is still no reason to edit his comment. Thanks John Hayestalk 08:57, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

And quite what does "Final warning" in the edit summary mean? Do you have the right to issue warnings? And if it is a "final" warning, what about a first or second warning? As far as I am concerned, I linked your user in the correct manner, and can't see what you found wrong. - fchd 10:30, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Please do not edit my talk comment again. - fchd 06:10, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Dynamo Kyiv, you will be blocked for vandalism. John Hayestalk 07:14, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

UEFA Champions League 2007-08

OK fine u reopened the vote. El-Nin09 17:05, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Well someone didnt listen El-Nin09 17:16, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Suit yourself, its your task now, not mine, I quit El-Nin09 17:32, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Doesn't matter this is a build up of everything that has happened to me recently, that is not the only thing i am quitting. El-Nin09 17:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
As i said its not just that its just i cant do anything right, people i know seem to be dissapearing. So... goodbye for a while El-Nin09 17:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Arsenal F.C. and Manchester United football rivalry

Arsenal F.C. and Manchester United football rivalry, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Arsenal F.C. and Manchester United football rivalry satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arsenal F.C. and Manchester United football rivalry and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Arsenal F.C. and Manchester United football rivalry during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Captain panda 01:32, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

UEFA Champions League 2007-08

What is this edit summary about "Do not change this order again - order released by UEFA - All revert of this order would be seen as vandalism" - how dare you accuse others who use different table orders of vandalism! For your information, the information off the UEFA website, Champions League standings page has no fewer than 6 of the 8 groups different to you. What is your official source that deviation away from would be considered vandalism? I'm not going to change it back as tables where all the teams have played zero games are completely meaningless anyway. You need to chill and appreciate that not everyone who has a different point of view is a "vandal". - fchd 18:33, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

C. W. Alcock

I hope you don't mind but I've reverted your edit, as I think that the eng-cricketbio template that you removed is appropriate. Though the article is quite substantial, the cricket side is pretty brief and could do with expansion, even though the soccer side of his career is well covered. JH (talk page) 12:59, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Archiving of WP:F1 talkpage

Hi Raymond. I'm a bit confused about what's happening with the archiving of the WP:F1 talk page. I gather you've added a bot to automatically archive the page(?) but it looks as though all the discussions which were previously in archive pages 10, 11 and 12 have been restored to the discussion page. Is that right? Thanks. DH85868993 02:16, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

WP F1 archive edits yesterday

Hi, I noticed that you rearchived http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Formula_One/Archive_10, as well as 11 and 12. The edit appears to have blanked the pages and destroyed things??

I am sure this was accidental, but could you provide technical support or info on how to get them back?

It would be appreciated if you could contribute some info on helping us get them back by posting at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Formula_One#Where.27s_wpf1_Archive_10_gone.3F

Thank you! Guroadrunner 02:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

The bot...

Yes thanks, I do. And I also know that many WP{:F1 discussions often start up again after many more than 21 days! It is arrogant in extremis for you to march in and slap an archiving bot on the page without first discussing it with the other members of the project. Think of that before you leave sarcastic comments on people's talk pages, and learn some manners. Pyrope 07:33, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Well the problem is that archiving neccessity isn't driven by age or size, but relevance. A quick conversation about a discrete issue - clarification of a driver's status or a car's build dates for example - which is resolved can probably be deleted after just one week, so long as the editor who raised the issue as seen all answers and people have had an opportunity to add any additional info. However, a discussion relating to major formatting, project protocols or a controversial factoid might need to be up as long as two months to ensure that some reliable, valuable editors, that may not get to be on the internet as often as they would like, have had the chance to contribute. Pyrope 12:07, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

2008 chassis

  • "Confirmed on Manipe" - By whom? Provide a source from a team that lists the chassis name. Manipe's assumptions do not count as fact. Wikipedia is not here to assume the chassis names for next year, even if they may appear as logical and simply increasing a number by one.
  • "I said that" - Saying they were confirmed on Manipe in your edit summary is not a source. You failed to add any references in the article to this apparent claim that Manipe has all of the chassis names.

Those are two reasons why your edits were removed, and will continue to be removed. If you want to attempt to turn this into an accusation of vandalism, so be it. I'd like to see how far you'd get with it. The359 20:12, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Henrietta badge.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Henrietta badge.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --βandβ (talk•contribs) 09:56, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Missing article

Could you start an article on the Aussie driver Andrew Miedecke thanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 17:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

You annoy me

I understand you obviously feel quite passionately about the use of the English language in football articles, but please don't act like you've won some sort of contest when consensus goes in your favour. It's not very good manners to act so smugly. - PeeJay 17:41, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

No need to apologise. Just take my advice on board for next time. - PeeJay 17:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Moves of articles with football (soccer) in the title

I have reverted a couple of your recent moves, as the established convention is to use football (soccer) in such cases. See the archives of Talk:football (soccer) for more discussion on the subject than anyone could possibly wish for. Oldelpaso 11:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Preview option

Please try to use the preview option when adding templates. Think you'll find it helps!--Egghead06 (talk) 18:56, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Your message

Please do not make offensive comments like "use the sandbox". I understand very well how to use Wikipedia. And just what does "Do you know the rule of Wikipedia, you should not remove anything related" meam? I think you are just making rules to suit yourself. I will continue to make any edits that I feel are justified, thank you very much. WWGB (talk) 11:52, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of UEFA Cup 2007-08 first round

An editor has nominated UEFA Cup 2007-08 first round, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UEFA Cup 2007-08 first round and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 17:29, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

UEFA Cup first round

If the UEFA Cup first round is a "proper round", as defined by players' goals being counted towards the Top Scorer award, as you claim, why is Fernando Cavenaghi not listed amongst the players on five goals on uefa.com? – PeeJay 02:43, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


A tag has been placed on UEFA Cup 2007-08 first round, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as articles for deletion. If you can indicate how UEFA Cup 2007-08 first round is different from the previously posted material, or if you can indicate why this article should not be deleted, I advise you to place the template {{hangon}} underneath the other template on the article, and also put a note on Talk:UEFA Cup 2007-08 first round saying why this article should stay. An admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 4 under General criteria. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please feel free to use deletion review, but do not continue to repost the article if it is deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. We welcome your help in trying to improve Wikipedia, and we request you to follow these instructions. – PeeJay 02:46, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:UEFA Cup Manchester 2008.jpg

Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:UEFA Cup Manchester 2008.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 03:22, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

UEFA Cup 2007-08 first round

After seeing that the article you are trying to create, UEFA Cup 2007-08 first round, got deleted for the second time, I thought that if you decide to recreate it again, you should consider tagging it with the {{underconstruction}} template. Artyom (talk • contribs) 14:09, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Move of Steaua

Why have you unilaterally moved the Steaua Bucuresti page? There was a requested move on that document only a few months ago, which clearly reached "no concensus", which you have no doubt seen as you have just added a comment to the closed discussion. You refer to the new naming conventions, but I cannot see any new conventions between October and now that would support your actions. Please undo your move and if you feel it is necessary, bring it back to WP:RM. Controversial unilateral page moves are never a good thing. - fchd (talk) 07:38, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

The official name of the club is FC Steaua Bucureşti. There are no new naming conventions as you claim and if there were they should be apllied to all football related articles with this discussion. To get this clear: Bucureşti is the name of Romania's capital city and it is engraved on the club's crest. There is no need to translate into English a word that is used in English speaking world and on all websites and televisions when regarding Steaua. Please do not move that page again until a consensus is reached and rules are clearly defined. Thank you. GabinhoPalavras 13:08, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of 2009 Australian Grand Prix

An editor has nominated 2009 Australian Grand Prix, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2009 Australian Grand Prix and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 16:59, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Dates

Your edits make the dates appear as "19/February 20" and "4/March 5" for those using the American date style, which makes no sense when read. Obviously that wasn't your intention, but writing the dates as "19 February/20 February" and "4 March/5 March" is the only way to get around this little problem. – PeeJay 18:46, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

That could be one way of writing it. See how it goes. – PeeJay 19:00, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

UEFA Cup

To avoid any confusion, no team should be entered until they actually win. The way it's done, you can put Bayern Munich in the articles for next season's Champions League, UEFA Cup and Intertoto Cup. Kingjeff (talk) 03:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Another problem is that we're all puting Cup winners in the article. Shouldn't it be Cup winners or losers with an explanation on why this is the case? Kingjeff (talk) 03:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Then have do we explain how Borussia Dortmund gets in even if they lose the cup final? Kingjeff (talk) 04:32, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Eredivisie 2007-08

You recently made some edits to the article Eredivisie 2007-08 regarding the position of Roda JC in the final league table. For instance [1] and [2]. If I understand it correctly, you have stated that Roda JC automatically qualify for the UEFA Cup if they finish outside the top seven. As far as I know there's no such rule in Dutch football. Roda JC still have two roads to UEFA Cup: the playoffs for P5 to P9 and the cup final. On what information were your edits based? AecisBrievenbus 23:59, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that Roda JC will face Feyenoord, not Ajax. See KNVB Cup 2007-08. Ajax were eliminated in the Round of 16. AecisBrievenbus 11:02, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
I've just come across this explanation by the KNVB, and it's wonderfully complicated. If Feyenoord wins the cup and finishes in the top 5, they enter the playoffs for 1 Champions League ticket and three UEFA Cup tickets. If they then qualify for Champions League Q3, the UEFA Cup ticket will go to Roda JC as the losing finalist. If they don't, they qualify for the UEFA Cup as the Cup winner, P5 to P9 will play for a remaining UEFA Cup ticket and P10 to P13 play for a Intertoto Cup ticket. If the cup winners finishes between P5 and P9, the best they can do is qualify for the UEFA Cup, which they will already have achieved as Cup winner. There is nothing to gain for them in that case, so P10 will be the fourth team in the playoffs for the fourth UEFA Cup ticket. This would mean that P11, P12 and P13 will not compete in the playoffs. P14 and P15 will not be in the playoffs anyway, and P16 and P17 will play relegation playoffs. It's very complicated, but there's no special clause wrt P7. AecisBrievenbus 11:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I've looked at your new edits to the article, and I think it's a bit premature to remove the UEFA Cup playoffs and add the Cup finalists, because Feyenoord can still finish in the top 5. I'm not sure how we could process the details properly though. AecisBrievenbus 21:45, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

There's a bit more confusion surrounding the Eredivisie 2007-08 playoffs. We mention in the color keys and in the hidden comments that FC Groningen, NEC, FC Utrecht and the team losing the KNVB Cup final will qualify for the playoffs for an Intertoto Cup ticket. But just about all Dutch media report that the four teams will play for a UEFA Cup ticket. The largest football magazine, Voetbal International, has the full schedule. A quick summary: Heerenveen will face Ajax and FC Twente will face NAC Breda in the CL playoffs. The winners of both matches will then face each other, with the winner going to the Champions League and the loser going to the UEFA Cup. The two first round losers will face each other as well. The winner will go to the UEFA Cup, while the loser will face the winner of the playoffs down to P10 for the final UEFA Cup ticket. I don't wanna know what the inventor of this system smoked, but as a Dutchman I think I've got an idea... AecisBrievenbus 20:36, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
I think it would be best to use a table similar to the one used in e.g. 2008 Davis Cup Europe/Africa Zone. We would have Ajax, NAC, Heerenveen and FC Twente in round 1 of the first table. The two winners would move to the right, where they would face each other. The two losers would move to the left, where they would face each other. The winner of that match qualifies for the UEFA Cup, the loser of the match goes on the play the winner of the playoffs featuring FC Groningen, FC Utrecht, NEC and the Cup runner-up for the final ticket. I think we need to make a separate template just for these playoffs... I think I'll go and start drafting one in my userspace. AecisBrievenbus 15:47, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Image tagging

Hi, I was wondering why you tagged Image:Play off system eredivisie.png for speedy deletion. I declined the speedy because it is tagged as being Public Domain. Is there some reason I don't know of that you nominated for deletion (like was it copied from a website or something)? Thanks for your time, James086Talk | Email 10:16, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

If the image is not factually accurate that should have been raised on the image talk page or perhaps in an Images for Deletion discussion. The speedy deletion tag you added does not apply to that image. I will leave it up to you to decide what to do next with the image (perhaps contact the uploader about the error if you haven't already). Thanks, James086Talk | Email 16:18, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry

I'm sorry for reverting your changes. I thought it was an IP vandal vandalizing that page. Hope you can forgive me. Cheers, Razorflame 13:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Why "Internazionale"?

I see that you have just changed the instances of "Inter" to "Internazionale" on Coppa Italia 2007-08. Wherever Inter appears on Italian football pages, it always gets changed, and I have never seen a consensus discussion or a good rationale for it. I've never met anybody, English- or Italian-speaking, who regularly calls the club "Internazionale." On the F.C. Internazionale Milano article itself, there are 92 uses of "Inter" and 20 uses of "Internazionale", all but two of which are in the context of the full club name "F.C. Internazionale Milano." This seems to be good precedent for "Inter." And please, don't take this as a notice to do a find and replace on the club's article; it will seriously impact it's readability. —Ed Cormany (talk) 14:18, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

UEFA Cup 2008-09

Hi Kyle, I was editing Partizan's case for Uefa Cup 2008/09, but not logged on, so you could see my IP address instead of username. You are right, allocation list is taken out from Bert Kassies's pages about European football. The main idea is to simplify list as better as possible. That means if some topic or item must be discussed, then we should put reference. Otherwise it's not necessary. also, I have one remark. Most of editing are related to some correction of spelling i.e. Inter or Internazionale, writing Besiktas with correct Turkish letters etc. But I think team name or city name must be always written in original form. So don't write Red Star if team's name is Crvena Zvezda. Such names cannot be translated.

Best regards Mijo34 (talk • contribs) 14:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Invitation to Wikipedia research by CityU HK

Dear KyleRGiggs,

I would like to congratulate you to the fantastic work you’re doing for Wikipedia! Because you’re an expert in your field and a well integrated member in the Wikipedia community, we would like to invite you to participate in our research project on collaboration activities and mechanisms in Wikipedia.

At the Center for Applied Knowledge and Innovation Management at City University we’re currently doing a research project on Wikipedia, and we are inviting experienced Wikipedians in Hong Kong to share their success stories and views on different aspect of the community processes with us. We would thus like to invite you to an interview at your convenience, preferably within the next two weeks if possible. The interview should not take longer than 30-45 minutes and will be conducted at a place and time of your convenience.

We would very much appreciate the opportunity of talking to you and learning about your experiences with Wikipedia, and we hope that you are willing to participate in our research project. Any information about participants will, of course, be kept strictly confidential.

For further questions about the project and to arrange a date for an interview, please contact Dr Andreas Schroeder at aschroe@cityu.edu.hk.

We’re looking forward to talking to you in the near future.

Kind regards, Dr Andreas Schroeder Center for Applied Knowledge and Innovation Management Information Systems Department City University of Hong Kong —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiResearcherHK (talk • contribs) 09:28, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:Logo in competition articles

Copyrighted club logos should only be used on the club's article, so any other use is a violation of WP:FAIRUSE. – PeeJay 07:02, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

May 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Premier League 2007-08. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Tiptoety talk 19:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Please be careful when changing sigs between your two accounts

I have noticed a couple of times while you have edited using your "temporary" account, changing the automatically generated signature to make it look like it has come from your main account. Please do not do this, as these edits only show on the "User contributions" page of the temporary account and what you are doing is leading to confusion and could be construed as being less than ethical. Please let the sig point to the user name active while making the edit. - fchd (talk) 12:40, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Giggs

Mate, if you don't want people to think your surname is "Giggs", then you shouldn't call yourself "Raymond Giggs". Simple solution, really. – PeeJay 07:27, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

no i wasn't

it was clearly a discussion not a forum. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.157.251.230 (talk) 11:36, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Premier League 08-09 Managerial changes

I apologise to say it, but I have to say that I think you're wrong that a discussion would stop these reverts. If you check the edit history, the revert war started because an unregistered user just walked in and made an edit, and took offence when it was reverted, rightly or wrongly. In my experience with unregistered users, especially ones willing to spend two or three hours reverting their changes, they pay no attention whatsoever to discussion pages, either because they don't know they are there or because they don't care. The user Krollkroll almost certainly is this unregistered user registering because he was threatened with banning for vandalism and wanted to protect himself. The simple fact is that it's pscyhology - someone makes an edit then sees their work undone. They are unhappy about it and don't know (or in some cases, care) how Wikipedia works, and so they refuse to see their work undone, and undo changes made because they want their work to remain. Discussion points are beside the point, their only interest is leaving their mark in Wikipedia and not seeing other people remove it.

Now, I will heed your words. If it hasn't already been done then I'll go now and make a discussion. But if I were a betting man, I'd put £1000 on my edit - which I will make after the talk page discussion - being reverted by a user who hasn't made any comment in the discussion protecting his actions. I apologise for my aggressive tone - it's not really aimed at you, but at the farsity of this and the knowledge that this discussion page will make no difference, unless I get luck...I mean, unless the situation changes and that user doesn't return to continue the edit war. I'd be interested to see PeeJay's comments on this matter, out of curiosity, but that's beside the point. Falastur2 (talk) 13:47, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

UEFA Euro 2008

I'm trying to set a new standard. Personally, I think that if there is a sub-article with all the details on it, what's the point in having the same details on the main article. Reducing the amount of info in the main article to the minimum tells the reader everything they would need to know at the first glance. Therefore, instead of pointing to other articles, why not consider the changes on their own merits? – PeeJay 09:29, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Furthermore, {{OneLegResult}} does not allow for the inclusion of the stadium name, which I believe is necessary for this article. – PeeJay 09:35, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

UEFA Euro 2008 knockout stage

Please don't remove the details for the Final from this article. I know that there is a separate article for the Final, but the Final article will cover the match in much more detail, as well as going over other topics as well, while the knockout stage article will simply have the match details and a short summary paragraph. Therefore, there is no repetition. – PeeJay 09:05, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

2008 and 2009 Formula One seasons

I'm not sure what exactly you were trying to pull on these two articles, but don't add "citation needed" tags for things which are not debatable, and do not remove entire charts which are full of referenced material. This is fairly close to being considered vandalism. The359 (talk) 05:49, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Manchester United task force

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 10:24, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey man, thanks for adding those articles to the task force's watchlist. Will you be joining us as an active participant then? – PeeJay 10:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Wondering about a change

Hey. I noticed you've made some edits to The Football League 2007-08 so I was wondering if you would take a look at this and see what you think of it? I'm just looking for thoughts at the moment, it's not a full-fledged proposition for change, but anything you add to the discussion would be great - even if it's just saying whether you like the idea or disagree with it. Thanks. Falastur2 Talk 22:55, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


Our Monthly Collaboration

Hi. The Man Utd Taskforce which you recently joined has selected Alex Ferguson article as the collaboration of the month. We plan that all the members will try to improve this article to be a splendid article or maybe even a featured one. Sincerely, HeLLboy2HeLL (talk) 08:54, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Irish Football

Time to get this kick started again.--Vintagekits (talk) 15:13, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 21:30, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

2008 European Grand Prix

I've reverted your edit here. Don't put headers in the article expecting others to insert content, we are not working to a deadline. If you are planning to insert content, tag the article with {{underconstruction}} to let others know. D.M.N. (talk) 11:32, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

May I ask what the point of doing that is though. Unless you are planning to expand it, adding all the stub templates and underconstruction banner is effectively pointless. And the reason I posted to GiggsforTemporary is because this account (KyleRGiggs) hasn't edited since April. D.M.N. (talk) 11:51, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Do you have any plans to make the article. If not, I consider the edits made in bad-faith as you are expecting others to do the work - again, we are not working to a deadline, hundreds of race reports have not been expanded. I see no reason for the stub-tabs and those headers unless you are planning to expand it. If you just dump headers there with stub templates but don't do anything, in my view it is in bad faith. D.M.N. (talk) 12:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
OK, but please use sources otherwise it'll get removed per WP:OR. D.M.N. (talk) 14:39, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Urawa Red Diamonds

Just to inform you that any reference to Urawa Red Diamonds must be rendered as such, and not any abbreviated version. There is no sense in changing the name of the club to a shortened nickname when the club is correctly referred to as it's proper name across the whole of Wikipedia. To avoid confusion and conflicts of information please be sure to leave all references to this team as the team's official name (as stated on it's badge) and not change it to any other version. Many thanks! --Lets Enjoy Life (talk) 06:31, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Two-column structure, UEFA Cup 2008-09

I have set up a structure for Group A. Enter your content below the second {{Col-2}}. Hth, Hockey-holic (talk) 08:58, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject National Basketball Association

I am here to inform you that this WikiProject is having a callout. If you do not respond in one week after this message, we will automatically move you to the "Inactive list". Thank you for your time and co-operation. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24[c] 00:06, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Argentine football

What are you trying to do with Argentine football articles? There are articles specific to the Argentine Primera such as Primera División Argentina 2007-08 and there are overview articles such as 2007-08 in Argentine football which give details of the whole season in Argentine football, including Argentine Primera, the lower leagues, international club football and the Argentina national team. Many of these details have nothing to do with the Primera División Argentina, so renaming it Primera División Argentina 2008-09 is not helpful at all. Your edit summary here suggests that you do not even understand that the Argentine season runs for August to August, hence the use of "2008-09 in". Now thanks to your "work" we have 2 different articles:

Perhaps you could move the content of the second article back to 2008-09 in Argentine football where it belongs.

if you wish to attempt any more drastic changes to Argentine football articles perhaps you could attempt to discuss them (here) first? King of the North East 17:51, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

  • It has been proposed that Primera División Argentina 2008–09 be renamed and moved to 2008-09 in Argentine football, since you originally moved it you should voice your opinion on the matter at Talk:Primera División Argentina 2008–09.
  • As the creator of the 2008-09 in Argentine football article, and the user that makes the most effort to update the page as much as possible, I believe that you have disregarded disrespected everybody by not discussing the move and just doing what ever you felt like doing, an when I say everybody I mean all the people that visit the article, check the page history stats for 2008-09 in Argentine football an you will see that on Dec. 15 the page got over 700 visits and an average of 200 or more before the move, compare to 22 since you moved it to Primera División Argentina 2008–09 . Bocafan76 (talk) 00:29, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
I think disrespect is probably too strong a word for what seems a genuine mistake, hopefully it will be sorted out soon enough. Please don't feel intimidated away from making constructive edits to Argentine football articles, we are short on substantial editors considering the amount of things that could be done to improve our coverage of an important league that is desperately underreported in relation to Anglo and European football both here and in the wider English speaking media. The fact that many Copa Libertadores links are still red and Copa América editions are nothing more than stubs, while in Europe the UEFA Champions league and European Cup articles have been around for years and Euro 2008 was a featured article candidate shoing that the whole continent of South American football is being neglected. King of the North East 23:18, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Article renamed as per request. -- Alexf(talk) 23:33, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Our "Edit War"?

Hi. Happy Holidays. Please be aware that giving warnings for 3RR when there is no violation, is a violation of WP:GOODFAITH, and can be considered a personal attack. Please provide the 3 diffs from one article where I reverted within a 24 hour time limit. Simply leaving edit summaries, that are not in correct English mind you, does not suffice. Also, if you want to revert some changes I make, make them to the entire article so that it is at least consistent throughout, which is, in fact, all I'm trying to do. Thanks. -- Grant.Alpaugh 04:10, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, unless I'm wrong, you're not supposed to be using Twinkle unless you're an admin. -- Grant.Alpaugh 04:12, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
I left you a message on the main page of the 08-09 article, please deal with all of those issues before further reverts. -- Grant.Alpaugh 04:24, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Happy Birthday, KyleRGiggs/Archive 1, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day!

Willking1979 (talk) 21:49, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Next time...

...before you engage in mass removal of information across several pages (2008 F1 information from infoboxes), could you get consensus on it first? We were going to leave them in until practice in Melbourne, and then remove them, but I have already reverted their removal by another user a few weeks ago and can't be bothered doing it again. Polite thanks, Apterygial 12:54, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Seconded, especially as there were edit summaries to that effect that were plainly visible in the page histories. Pyrope 13:31, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Fernando Alonso

I've reverted your edit at Alonso's article and the related templates, please see this. D.M.N. (talk) 08:10, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Race tables

What is the point in only having half (or less) of a table? Either the full table should be shown or none. Mjroots (talk) 09:43, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

2009 Australian Grand Prix

I'm almost certain what you've done with the GAN thing is not allowed, and thus have queried it here. D.M.N. (talk) 12:52, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

....and its been quick-failed. Please do not do that again. D.M.N. (talk) 13:32, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

2009 Australian GP

I noticed that you added a review to your GA nomination. As a nominator, you are not supposed to review the article but wait for an external reviewer to come in and comment. I'm removing your analysis from the review. LeaveSleaves 12:55, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Europa League

The problem is that it says Champions League and not Europe entirely. What if Arsenal win the FA Cup and finish 5th? Does the 7th place team qualify, or does the losing cup finalist? Resolve this, then change it. -- Grant.Alpaugh 16:19, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

I honestly can't understand what you're saying on my talk page. I think the subtle grammatical nuances are too much for your level of English. Don't get me wrong, you're a very good English speaker, and way better than my Spanish skills, but you don't seem to have the ability to write a section like this that is very specific. Looking at some of your edits and your user page would bear me out on this, like the "managerial acting" thing you did on the Premier League article, or the exploding thermometer caption on your user page that doesn't make the slightest bit of sense, or the AFC Champions League discussion that was in very, very broken English, etc. You are a great editor, and can capably do 95% of things on here with your level of English, but this, I think, is just too difficult. -- Grant.Alpaugh 16:14, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Copa Libertadores

Hello, Since the summary is limited in space, I guess I have to explain my reasons here.

To start, let me tell you that I know this tournament's rules and regulations better than probably anyone editing this page. That's why I'm usually the one adding all the finer details about the tournament throughout it's progression. But here are a couple things you should note.
1) Previous tournaments (2008 and before) all need some level of fixing from section headings, to stage names, even to the reasoning of why a team advances.
2) You know how confusing it is to have a results table with "Agg." knowing aggregate score has nothing to do with who advances and who doesn't since at least 2005 (in fact, in earlier tournament, it was never decided on aggregate). This is found in the rules in Article 4, section 1: "For every game won, a team will earn 3 points; 1 for a draw, and none for a loss". Article 5 then describes tie-breaking in case of a tie on points, but aggregate score is not mentioned as a tie-breaker. Because of that, I am very tempted to make a different two-legged tie template for this tournament to make those tables more accurate.
3) In this tournament, it is always Team #1 vs. Team #2, with Team #1 as the higher seed (or suspected for further rounds). If you were to read the rules (that's if you know Spanish), it was always going to be planned that way (example of how they are written in the rules):

Equipo 1 vs. Equipo 16
Equipo 2 vs. Equipo 15
Equipo 3 vs. Equipo 14
Equipo 4 vs. Equipo 13
Equipo 5 vs. Equipo 12
Equipo 6 vs. Equipo 11
Equipo 7 vs. Equipo 10
Equipo 8 vs. Equipo 9
(the number refers to their seed, and Equipo is Spanish for team.)

The articles need to reflect that in the table in order to maintain accuracy. Even the names of the legs are taken from Team #1's perspectives: away leg, and return leg (Spanish: partido de ida y partido de revancha). In addition, a reader can not fully tell who played at home or away just by looking at the table and legs scores; that why even in your version you have to mention that Team #? played at home for Leg #?. I understand that all articles on international tournaments need to maintain a high level of similarities, but they don't have to be carbon-copies; some leeway here and there is sometimes necessary to maintain accuracy.
4) Some parts of the page are better suited for having the club's name in a shorter manner. In the bracket, U. San Martin looks better than Universidad San Martin, especially on computers with resolutions at 1024 x 768. That is especially true when a disclaimer for penalties and away goals has to be displayed.

Now, I appreciate the function edits you made to the page, but please leave some of the finer details to those who know the tournament better since since they would know more about the competition than you. Have a good one. Digirami (talk) 15:10, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

(response) Well here comes the inevitable questions: who decided this and on what basis? This policy didn't just come out of nowhere. And if CONMEBOL and CONCACAF list teams a different way than is practiced here, that seems to be a stronger basis to have tables like that in a certain way (at least for their tournaments). Digirami (talk) 20:33, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Eredivisie 2008–09

I didn't vandalize it, now I explained in the hidden comment why this is not correct. Here's the link: knvb.nl (in Dutch) (see that KNVB bekerfinalist speelt ook play-offs part). SonjiCeli (talk) 19:33, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Oh gosh…

I could always use தமிழ் for my signature instead. :-) I never said I was a native speaker. ベリット 話せます 18:01, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Either way, now you know what it is, even if it is a bit confusing at first sight. By the way, the Tamil would be பெலிதொ. ベリット 話せます 18:04, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

J. League 2009

Could you elaborate on this revert? Being "edited regularly" is not a criteria for a current event template. Massive editing or rapid change is. Please see the guidelines at Template:Current sport. The point of a current event template is to warn our readers of rapid changes, it does not exist to merely remind our readers of something that is currently ongoing. Therefore, the article J. League 2009 should not have the template right now, since (as you can see from the article's history) no massive editing is going on. --Conti|✉ 10:17, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Huh?

I guess this was a mistake? SoWhy 07:43, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

UAE League

Could you explain why you edited the UAE League for the 2008/09 campaign and added Japanese clubs? Seem's you made a simple mistake, but please watch what you are editing in the future. Druryfire (talk) 17:44, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I'm glad you have replied and thought you would as you are a sensible user. Experience on this website shows me that 'other' users will amend things for the sake of destroying other peoples work, which generally annoys me.

Thank you for your interest in the article and the amendments you are doing to improve it. Druryfire (talk) 20:38, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, i realised, i recently created one for the Qatari League for next seasons campaign and hope to create for other Asian Leagues for the start of the 2009 / 2010 campaigns. Luckily you have started UAE for me!

I will incorporate these templates into new pages in the future as and when new league seasons commence - but of course they are time consuming, but easier to edit once completed. Druryfire (talk) 09:34, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Flags on Serie A 2008-09

Three parts of MOS:FLAG apply there: namely, 'Do not solely decorate' (only two coaches in Italian Serie A were foreigners this year, and one season ago there were no foreigners at all), 'Do not use too many icons' (30!) and 'Accompany flags with country names'. --Angelo (talk) 13:43, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

If you think flags are necessary, please open a discussion instead of repeatedly putting them into the article, otherwise you are just violating WP:POINT. Thank you. --Angelo (talk) 18:20, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Donald Tsang

Well done. --Deryck C. 20:59, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

The diff is quoted by a few forums. --Deryck C. 11:29, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Welcome to de-prime. --Deryck C. 21:36, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Real Madrid roster

I noticed you have taken Ronaldo, Albiol, et el off the roster saying that they will join in July, but why haven't you placed Cannavaro on the roster? His contract doesn't until 30 June 2009. Raul17 (talk) 14:16, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi! Where exactly does it say in the Real Madrid Shop that Van Nistelroy will wear number 17 for 2009–2010? The only Van Nistelrooy shirts I can find are for last season. As you probably know, his number was unregistered and given to Parejo in January. I say we should go by the list on the official website. –Kooma (di algo) 17:28, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Ah, silly me. I searched with ”Van Nistelrooy” and the new shirts didn’t come up with that (they do with just ”Nistelrooy” or ”V. Nistelrooy”), and they’re not under the New Home Kit section either. Sorry about that, it’s definitely there. The only doubt I have right now is that they seem to have the new shirts up even for the players that might be on the brink of leaving the club, but... what the hell. Fine by me. :-)
About Sneijder; his number is outdated on the official site’s roster, you’re right about that. The Spanish version of the site has it right though. Kooma (di algo) 18:12, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Done. The Spanish (and Japanese) version can be accessed from the top-right corner of the site, and the team is under Primer Equipo → Ver Plantilla. Kooma (di algo) 18:22, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

What is wrong with realmadrid.com as a source? If realmadridshop.com is selling Beckham's 23, does that mean I can list him on the Madrid roster? Gago, Kaká, Ronaldo & Albiol are listed with new numbers, but Diarra & van Nistelrooy have no number. Let's wait until Madrid finishes buying and selling before we read into things! It seems that Diarra and Ruud are not training with the team, yet. Raul17 (talk) 18:29, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I should edit the Madrid roster so that Jerzy Dudek is wearing 13. It looks like Madrid will only carry only two goalkeepers. Raul17 (talk) 18:29, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

You missed my point. You used realmadridshop.com as your source for Ruud's jersey number, but there was no statement from Madrid saying he will wear it only a picture. Me mentioning Beckham was a way to say that realmadridshop.com is all about selling goods not for info: saying Beckham's old 23 doesn't give me the right to edit Madrid's roster (which you were doing). The English version of Madrid's site is pathetic because it does have the complete info that the Spanish does (try finding anything about Madrid C or any of the youth teams). Realmadrid.com is reliable, but you have to read the Spanish version (which I considered the official version). Raul17 (talk) 00:32, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Celebrations for 2nd Anniversary of Wikimedia Hong Kong

Dear: KyleRGiggs/Archive 1 ：

Wikimedia Hong Kong has been founded two year ago. Today, we would like to invite you to a great event for our second anniversary celebrations, that is co-host by us - Digital Content Jam 1.0, which is belongs to The 3C Digital Creativity Dialogue Series -- Creativity, Content, Community.


This is the information of the event：

Date: 31, July, 2009 (Friday)
Time: From 7:00pm to 9:30pm
Venue: eTech Centre Meeting Room M2 &3, 4/F Opulent Building, 402-406 Hennessy Road, Wan Chai（Google map）
Language: Cantonese
Free snacks and drinks will be served!


Please register via the link below to tell us if you would like to join the event.

Regards,

Hong Kong Wikimedian
13:37, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

2009-10 Champions League

Please read this page. As you will note, the page says "As from the 2009/10 season onwards, there will be four qualifying rounds (including a play-off round)". While the competition regulations do not entirely support this, this statement certainly vindicates the inclusion of the play-off round in the qualifying phase article, provided that the title of the article reflects this and that it is properly noted in the text. – PeeJay 18:37, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, this is clearly going to get us nowhere, so I've requested opinions from the other editors at WP:FOOTY. Please contribute to the discussion there before making any more amendments. – PeeJay 18:51, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Status

GRRRRRRRRRRR... Yes I know I forget to change my status, but you don't have to make me lost. :) Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 05:23, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Templates for deletion nomination of Template:2006–07 UEFA Champions League

Template:2006–07 UEFA Champions League has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. – PeeJay 10:02, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Flags in articles

Hi there, I saw you edited one of the European GP flags and you got reverted. We're having a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Motorsport#Flags in articles, which will hopefully be the final word on the subject. Please have your say there, thanks. Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:39, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Glock/Kobayashi in Template:Formula One teams

Hello. I have switched Glock and Kobayashi's positions in Template:Formula One teams – I have done this because Glock is the contracted driver, while Kobayashi was just a stand-in during the Brazilian Grand Prix. If you disagree, please see my discussion at WT:F1#Glock/Kobayashi in Template:Formula One teams. Darth Newdar talk 20:15, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Civility

Dude, the comment you made in your last edit summary at 2010 FIFA World Cup was completely inappropriate. That type of language is intolerable, and I would be well within my rights to report you for abusive behaviour. However, I will not do that until you attempt to explain yourself. – PeeJay 21:10, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Interference

Hi there KYLE, VASCO from Portugal here,

I saw your discussion with User:Picolotto about Álvaro Negredo, and i think it should be as he says, because player returned to Real Madrid in the 2009 summer, but only played in preseason - the 2009 Peace Cup does not count officially - so it should not appear in infobox, only in storyline (which is very complete, with REFS and all).

Keep up the good work, cheers,

VASCO - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 02:18, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

  • Yes, R.MADRID rebought the player, i think for €5 million, but he never appeared officially for them, only in preseason. I think it should not go in INFOBOX, but i can be wrong. I think the discussion could be presented at WP:FOOTY.

Until later, VASCO - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 17:39, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

  • Yes there is evidence - please see my message above and read article's storyline. Player was signed for sure. However, i still think the matter needs "expert" discussion, because he never appeared officially.

VASCO - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 18:41, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

四月庚午日

Can you tell me where you found this date for Xiahou Dun's date of death? There's no record of it in the Sanguo Zhi. Is it in the Hou Hanshu? _dk (talk) 21:20, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see. So it was in Cao Pi's biography instead of Xiahou Dun's. Thanks for clearing that up and sorry for the lack of research on my side! _dk (talk) 00:10, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello KyleRGiggs! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 943 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

  1. Lars-Christer Olsson - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 11:58, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

re: UEFA Rankings

Ahh dangit. I've done it again. I've been reading the years in advance - Germany is going to take a huge lead over Italy next season, and I'd been reading it a season ahead. Sorry, I'm prone to make stupid mistakes of this type when I get...shall we say, excited...about major changes such as this. I needed someone like yourself to correct my mistake here and snap me out of it. I feel pretty idiotic now... Falastur2 Talk 13:06, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Alternate account vandalizing

Hi Kyle, your alternate account User:Giggs for Temporary was vandalizing pages as an April Fool's joke (a bad one) and has been blocked for 48 hours. Are you still in control of this account, or could it have been compromised? --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 03:48, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I've blocked that account indefinitely and this account for the original block duration for good-hand/bad-hand socking. If this is a mistake, please let us know. Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:25, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

File:HKCL Tai Hang Scene.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:HKCL Tai Hang Scene.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Raymond "Giggs" Ko 18:07, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: Forced quit

I made no such implication. You are free to edit, as long as you do so in accordance with Wikipedia policies. I cannot delete your account as there is no way to do so. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:35, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel that way, that was not my intention. Blocks are not usually done to ward off editors, but rather to stop what appears to be disruptive behavior. At the time I blocked your account, I did run a checkuser to see if your account had been compromised, as this did not seem to be normal behavior for you. However, I blocked both of your accounts because the technical data available to be showed that your alternate account was using the same computer you've always used for both accounts. This implies that your account was not compromised and therefore under your control. As I said, you are still free to edit the project, however please be aware of our policies concerning alternate accounts. Hersfold (t/a/c) 05:27, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Auto-unblock bug

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

KyleRGiggs (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The block should be expired and no block currently. However, I recieved a "ghost block" which blocked me on "2 April 2010" and said the block would expired on "3 April 2010". Today is "11 April 2010" already, then what is it?

Decline reason:

Clearing an autoblock

Due to the nature of the block applied we need additional information before we can decide whether to unblock you. It is very likely that you are not personally blocked. If you are prevented from editing, it may be because you are autoblocked or blocked because of your IP address. Without further details there is nothing further we can do to review or lift your block. Please follow these instructions:

  1. If you have a Wikipedia account, please ensure that you are logged in.
    Your account name will be visible in the top right of this page if you are.
    If it isn't, try bypassing your web browser's cache.
  2. Try to edit the Sandbox.
  3. If you are still blocked, copy the {{unblock-auto|...}} code generated for you under the "IP blocked?" section. This is usually hidden within the "What do I do now?" section. If so, just click the "[show]" link to the right hand side to show this text.
  4. Paste the code at the bottom of your user talk page and click save.

If you are not blocked from editing the sandbox then the autoblock on your IP address has already expired and you can resume editing. Closedmouth (talk) 16:12, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

KyleRGiggs (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I don't know such problem has to be occured how many times. File:KyleRGiggs expired still block.jpg It has expired already, but it keeps showing here.

Decline reason:

Please follow these instructions, otherwise there is nothing we can do to resolve this: Clearing an autoblock

Due to the nature of the block applied, we need additional information before we can decide whether to unblock you. It is very likely that you are not personally blocked. If you are prevented from editing, it may be because you are autoblocked or blocked because of your IP address. Without further details, there is nothing further we can do to review or lift your block. Please follow these instructions:

  1. If you have a Wikipedia account, please ensure that you are logged in.
    Your account name will be visible in the top right of this page if you are.
    If it isn't, try bypassing your web browser's cache.
  2. Try to edit the Sandbox.
    If you are able to edit the sandbox, you are not blocked from editing. Either the autoblock on your IP address has already expired, or you weren't blocked in the first place. Either way, you can resume editing.
  3. If you are still blocked, follow the directions below:
    1. Copy the {{unblock-auto|...}} code generated for you under the "Unblock request" section.
    2. Paste the code at the bottom of your user talk page, and click save.
      If you cannot edit your own talk page, use the Unblock Ticket Request System to make your request.
 Beeblebrox (talk) 20:05, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

{{unblock-ip|1=61.18.170.74|2={{blocked proxy}}|3=Enigmaman}}

I have forwarded your request to Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies/Unblock. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:01, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Block of 61.18.170.74 lifted or expired. I see that you have been editing while the unblock request was in place, but I've unblocked the IP anyway as it no longer appears to be an open proxy.

Request handled by: -- zzuuzz (talk)

Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

File copyright problem with File:KyleRGiggs expired still block.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:KyleRGiggs expired still block.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. FASTILYsock(TALK) 02:43, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

2009–10 Premier League

Kyle, I have to disagree about the removal of the Carling Cup explanation. That's important to understanding why the table looks the way it does. I don't think we would be removing it at the end of the season. Surely they will the clarified as Pompey's situation is clarified, but they should not be removed. -- Grant.Alpaugh 21:25, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: Blocked message abusing

I'm not sure what you mean - you're not blocked, so there's nothing indicating you are on Special:Contributions/KyleRGiggs for me... Hersfold (t/a/c) 22:35, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Never mind, I see the image above. I'll try blocking you for one second; when I blocked you account last, I copied over a timestamp from the block of your other account, which may be confusing the system. Hopefully this block will force the system to clear that status out. As I said, though, I think this is only appearing for you; I can't see it, and the comments above seem equally confused. Hersfold (t/a/c) 22:37, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
An IP address posting on my talk page figured out the problem, I think. If you're getting faced with blocks, it's because you keep logging into User:Giggs for Temporary and editing. This triggers the autoblock on that account. If you stop editing with that blocked account, you shouldn't have any more issues. Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:13, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Harry Potter: Evanna Lynch

WikiProject Harry Potter has been rather inactive recently. I've been working on the Evanna Lynch article lately, and have based it off the featured article Emma Watson. I thought I'd ask if you would like to collaborate on the article, as part of a possible WikiProject revival. Leave your response at the article's talk page. Thanks! Alex Douglas (talk) 11:34, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Removal of kit maker logos in Premier League 2010-11 article

Kyle,

I saw you removed the table of kit makers from the Premier League season article. I don't disagree with your actions but, finding the entire rational of WP:FAIRUSE to be one huge poorly-explained mess, I was wondering if you could give me your reasoning for doing so. As far as I can see, I looked into it and WP:FAIRUSE protects use of corporate logos, while WP:LOGOS recommends their use only for identification of the corporate entities they represent. To the best of my understanding, the table you removed suited those criteria, so I was wondering if you could give me your side of the story? Thanks Falastur2 Talk 13:31, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, alright, thanks. Maybe I'll give PeeJay a bell and see his view on the matter. Falastur2 Talk 14:03, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: File:2009–10 UEFA EL.PNG

Hello KyleRGiggs. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of File:2009–10 UEFA EL.PNG, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: You need to specify a reason why this should be considered a uncontroversial maintenance deletion. Thank you. SoWhy 17:09, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

File:KyleRGiggs expired still block.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:KyleRGiggs expired still block.jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:59, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Hong Kong meetup

You're invited to the next Hong Kong meetup on Friday 22 July 2011! It'd be great to see you there. Deryck C. 17:55, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:2010–11 UEFA CL.PNG

A tag has been placed on File:2010–11 UEFA CL.PNG requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Raymond "Giggs" Ko 22:05, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

2011–12 UEFA Champions League

Hello Raymond!! Yes, too many people were vandalising this page last month because Real Madrid and Barcelona were playing each other. It was recommended on WP:RFP that the whole page be semi-protected until the entire season ends, so I did. Deryck C. 10:37, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:2010–11 UEFA CL.PNG

A tag has been placed on File:2010–11 UEFA CL.PNG requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F10 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a file that is not an image, sound file or video clip (e.g. a Word document or PDF file) that has no encyclopedic use.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Raymond "Giggs" Ko 07:31, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

WT:WikiProject Harry Potter#Turning this Project into a task force?

This Project is proposed to be a task force. Feel free. --George Ho (talk) 02:30, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

2013 Fifa club world cup

We have to wait until the end of the match... It doesn't matter how many goal Barcellona has to do and how many min. Stigni (talk) 20:34, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

List of AKB48 members

Please do not switch the English alphabetization to the Japanese gojūon order. This is the English Wikipedia and an English ordering system should be used. The order that you see on the AKB48 websites is not an "official order" but just the Japanese ordering system.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 19:26, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Oh thanks for your message. However, I'd like to remind you that, "Represent number" has been totally forgot. That's the reason why I used the Japanese ordering system as it has been made official two years ago. Raymond "Giggs" Ko 19:47, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
This is the English Wikipedia. The gojuon order is not "official". It's just a Japanese ordering system.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 19:55, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Please look at the article provided in the link carefully. The official has made the gojuon order as the official order. I have an idea to separate the English and Japanese names but it is a major edit, of course. Raymond "Giggs" Ko 19:59, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
No. This is a bad idea. This is the English Wikipedia. We are using the English alphabet to order these members. There is already a consensus for this at Talk:AKB48.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 20:06, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Seems you have already not wanting to care about that passage. Then I have totally nothing to say. Raymond "Giggs" Ko 20:12, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
It says "the order is alphabetical by last name" which is what we're doing here, but in English rather than in Japanese. And you and Moscow Connection suddenly disagreeing with the existing consensus and outnumbering me today two to one does not mean that it is overturned. Plenty of other users in the debate saw that the English alphabetic order is the one that should be used rather than the Japanese gojuon one. Do not restore the gojuon order, again.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 21:55, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Do not log out and say "WP:3RR" when reverting anyone. That is edit warring plain and simple. Wait for the discussion to come to a conclusion. If people other than myself who were part of the original discussion regarding the order agree with you rather than me, then I will acquiesce and Wikipedia will use the gojuon order. Right now, English alphabetical order is in use because it's essentially a translation of the Japanese gojuon.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 08:14, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
I've added a version that shows how the sort key would work with gojuon (or whatever arbitrary) order in my sandbox. User:AngusWOOF/sandbox#AKB_members_list -AngusWOOF (talk) 17:32, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
That's what I mean. But seems wrong sorting there…… Anyway, I'd do it, thanks. Raymond "Giggs" Ko 17:46, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
We'll have to see how the discussion settles (they're arguing more over what should be initially presented). If someone wants gojuon they could easily click Japanese name column and get the members in that order or the reverse. Whether the sort key should be labelled "a1-a26" or "aa-az" will depend on how Wikipedia handles things technically. The recent IP's comments are pretty good; the article should help English readers understand the group without having to learn all that terminology associated with the group. -AngusWOOF (talk) 18:36, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Just do it technically. Simple. Raymond "Giggs" Ko 18:42, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

League tables and names

Hi,

I just saw that you moved the bundesliga table so I am asking you why? Are you aware of the consensus we should not have a new template for every season since they are substituted and deleted after being used. Instead we are supposed to subst them and restart the template. I give you the same info I have given other editors who have missed this.

There is consensus at WT:FOOTY to remove the years name it only "Premier League table" or "Current Premier League table" so we can use same template season after season without creating new one s every season. Just substitute the template on the pages it is used and then reset it with new teams. This can be read at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 84#Template:2013–14 X league table‎ or Template:Current X league table and this TfD. Already renamed template are for example Template:Current Fußball-Bundesliga table‎.

I understand it is not a very wide consensus that may need to be discussed more but at many TfD of old table this subject pops up.

QED237 (talk) 19:38, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Brazil v Germany (2014 FIFA World Cup)

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:49, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

August 2014

Information icon Hello, I'm LGA. I noticed that you made a change to an article, 2014 International Champions Cup, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. as per the talk page and the maintenance template, the Top goalscorers section is unsourced; please only re-insert when you have a source for the table. LGA talkedits 03:12, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

You are getting the "blame" (as you call it) for the Top goalscorers section as you re-inserted it with this edit. LGA talkedits 21:49, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

David Villa.

Hello. About David Villa. In the bottom of article "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Villa" in Spain squads - only family name.
Please, open "David Villa", "Spain squads".
There in "Spain squad – 2006 FIFA World Cup" - "Villa", in "Spain squad – UEFA Euro 2008 Winners (2nd Title)" - "Villa", in "Spain squad – 2009 FIFA Confederations Cup Third Place" - "Villa", in "Spain squad – 2013 FIFA Confederations Cup Runners-up" - "Villa".
And another players, for example: Casillas (not Iker Casillas), Piqué (not Gerard Piqué), Silva (not David Silva), ...
Only family name, without name.

Please, say why you undid my edits?
GAV80 (talk) 14:13, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer about FIFA.com.
If you want, I may do other Spain squads for David Villa.
Please, say. To do or you to do yourself?
GAV80 (talk) 17:00, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Wikipedia:Peer review/Lionel Messi/archive2

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Peer review/Lionel Messi/archive2. It would be great if you review it. Thanks. Thanks. Abhinav0908 (talk) 19:04, 15 March 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) 16:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, KyleRGiggs. 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)

Happy Birthday!

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, KyleRGiggs. 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)

Happy Birthday 2018!

Nat965 (talk) 03:35, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:UEFA Cup Manchester 2008.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:UEFA Cup Manchester 2008.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:38, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Request to help in Discussion

Please help us in this Discussion. Shahin (talk) 13:04, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, KyleRGiggs. 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)

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) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Happy Birthday!

Have a very happy birthday on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:55, 5 January 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) 01:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

December 2020

Information icon Hello, I'm JalenFolf. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, 2022 FIFA World Cup qualification (UEFA), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jalen Folf (talk) 10:02, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Happy Birthday!

Have a very happy birthday on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 01:40, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

2022 FIFA World Cup qualification – AFC Second Round

You understand correctly. It is possible that China (2023 Asian Cup host) finish this round outside top 12, then 13th-placed team will have to play 3rd qualifying round. But I think the definitions in group tables already cover that case - they say "Asian Cup or 3rd qualifying round". Just duplicating them does not make things easier to understand. I will revert that edit and fix the runners-up ranking :) Centaur271188 (talk) 09:21, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

The runners-up ranking definitions are fixed now. Thanks for pointing out that flaw. Damn it, at the beginning we did it correctly [3], I do not know when it went wrong :| Centaur271188 (talk) 09:34, 9 June 2021 (UTC)


2022 world cup

Hi friend. you wondered about some teams who played 7 matches. each team has 8 matches (home and aways) but some teams are one match ahead because of the changes in the timelines due to corona issue. North Korea withdrew though. you can use espn's table which is very easy to read.:Ergenekon1 (talk) 01:01, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

https://www.espn.com/soccer/standings/_/league/fifa.worldq.afc

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) 00:14, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Wishing KyleRGiggs a very happy birthday on behalf of the Birthday Committee!   CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 18:23, 5 January 2022 (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) 00:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nippon Professional Baseball, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kitahiroshima. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:08, 7 November 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) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:KyleRGiggs/Archive_1&oldid=1222215254"