User talk:03md/Archive 2

Wikipedia:Peer review/List of number-one singles from the 2000s (UK)/archive1

As you requested. Hope it helps, and sorry for the delay! Dabomb87 (talk) 00:09, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Re:FLC

Yes, you should move it, and you should change all instances of number-one to number one. In addition, I see some of my comments unreplied. I like to re-review articles once at least all my comments have been resolved. Thanks.--TRUCO 22:04, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

TennisEvents template edit

Just some feedback on this - the Lipton articles (like this one) now have a slightly clumsy look to them. While it might work for short-titled articles, in cases like these tournaments it just doesn't. Might it be possible to revert your edit? Totalinarian (talk) 20:05, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the permission. If linking the articles as you suggested is possible, then I support any further work you do on the template to that effect. Totalinarian (talk) 20:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

List of number-one singles from the 2000s (UK) edit conflict

Hey Dan, I just went to save an extensive proofreading of this article and found myself in an edit conflict, as you've made three edits in the interim. When you're finished working on the page, would you let me know and if I have the time I'll see about trying to re-add whichever of my edits your reading of the article may not have caught? Cheers, Abrazame (talk) 09:54, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Hey again. My pleasure. In realizing that you're nominating the article for featured list, I re-read some of it and checked another of the citations and had a question. The third reference is for a sentence which states the UK Download Chart was introduced in 2004 when the article actually talks about incorporating downloads into the main singles chart in 2005. This contradicts my edit to another sentence further down in that paragraph, which initially read "Physical single sales fell during the middle of the decade and subsequently revived after the introduction of downloads in 2008." and which I had changed to "Physical single sales fell during the middle of the decade but the overall sales figures for chart hits were subsequently revived after the inclusion of legal downloads to the singles chart formulation in 2008." I'm afraid that's erroneous, as they were apparently included as far back as 2005. Yet what was that sentence trying to say—that the introduction of downloads didn't revive overall singles sales until 2008? It seems to state that physical sales were expected to increase as a result of downloads, but that wasn't the expectation, and the source doesn't support that. I'm going to change the sentence again to reflect my understanding of the situation from reading the cited sources, and if I haven't captured the intent of the sentence (and/or if what I've put isn't better), feel free to alter or remove my edit there and take another stab at clarifying the original point. Best with featured list status, Abrazame (talk) 12:44, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Happy to. Your reformatting makes it so much easier to glean information from the list. Good work with the rest too—congrats on featured list status. Abrazame (talk) 21:53, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Tennis before 1990

Men's tennis before 1990 was divided into two main tours; the Grand Prix tennis circuit and World Championship Tennis (WCT). Until 1978 these two tours were separate from each other, and split again between 1982 and 1984. The ATP's archive (linked to here) differentiates between the two tours by placing WCT next to corresponding WCT tournaments. From 1970 the Grand Prix circuit was sponsored by Pepsi-Cola, between 1980 and 1984 by Volvo, and between 1985 and 1989 by Nabisco. The first WCT event was held in February 1968 and the Grand Prix started in April 1970. There were also two other tennis tours of lesser significance; the U.S. Indoor Circuit, which started in 1971, and the European Spring Circuit, which began in 1973.

Women's tennis before 1988: The only tours before the WTA Tour (which began in 1973) were the Virginia Slims Circuit, which started in September 1970 and concluded in June 1973, and the Grand Prix tennis circuit, since tournaments in the early open era tended to be combined events. From 1970 to 1976 Virginia Slims sponsored the whole Tour; for the months of April to November from 1976 to 1981 Colgate; for the months of December to March from 1979 to 1983 Avon; for the months of April to November 1981 to 1983 Toyota, and from 1983 to 1988 the whole Tour was known as the Virginia Slims World Championships Series. Totalinarian (talk) 15:42, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

New information; from 1972 to 1976 the Grand Prix was sponsored by Commercial Union Assurance and from 1976 to (presumably) 1980 the Grand Prix was sponsored by Colgate-Palmolive. Totalinarian (talk) 14:12, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Grand Prix/WCT tennis articles

Not quite; this article details the tournaments that were under the Grand Prix banner but were actually WCT events. Otherwise, everything else is in order. Totalinarian (talk) 16:51, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Not sure. Since there's no evidence otherwise on Wikipedia, your suggestion is probably correct. Totalinarian (talk) 19:19, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I have started creating templates for the Nabisco Grand Prix such as

, which I have added to the Lipton Championships page. It is not yet complete. 03md (talk) 10:47, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Modifications to the 1987 Grand Prix template are now complete. I changed all tournaments beginning with ATP (except for the Stratton Mountain event) to tournament location Open instead, given that these tournaments would not have been under the supervision of the ATP at that time. Aside from style edits, everything else seems to be in order. Great job. Totalinarian (talk) 09:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, no idea. I tried externally searching but couldn't find anything on the SAP Open in San Francisco. Totalinarian (talk) 09:34, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I finished checking the 1973, 1974 and 1975 templates for the WCT and made just one edit - it looks as though the 1975 Monte Carlo WCT was that year's Monte Carlo Open. Otherwise all the tournaments highlighted as "[Year] [Location] WCT" appear not to have an main article. Great job on the templates. Totalinarian (talk) 18:16, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Apologies: a quick check on this article revealed that Richmond, St. Louis, Quebec and São Paulo all have main articles. Apologies again. Totalinarian (talk) 20:08, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I have finished checking the WCT templates and they all appear to be in excellent order. Just to clear up two points from previous messages; the WCT tournaments did stop after May of 1983 and 1984 because it was the end of the season, and there appears to be no link between the Tampa tournaments of 1981 to 1983 and those held between 1991 and 1993. Keep up the excellent work. Totalinarian (talk) 17:28, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't know what the official name was for the WCT Doubles Finals - there is not even any information about it on the World Championship Tennis page. I think it would be best to put the 1982 Detroit tournament on the 1982 template, namely because the same precedent is used for Grand Prix Masters between 1977 and 1987 on the Grand Prix circuit (that is, the 1979 Masters took place in 1980, and so on). Keep up the good work. Totalinarian (talk) 17:00, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

RE: Last message

Results have been completed for the Donnay and Toronto events and the 1986 Nabisco Grand Prix template has been checked. Bar one very minor edit for the Grand Prix template everything looks fine. Great job. Totalinarian (talk) 18:00, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Fulham

I'll endeavour to take a look over the weekend.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:08, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, slipped my mind completely over a rather hectic weekend. Hang in there..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:56, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, here's a few things that jump out at me:

• We normally refer to competitions by their unsponsored name, so use Football League Cup rather than Carling Cup
• comma needed after "Premier League" in the lead
• Seems to bit pointless to mention how they might have qualified for Europe but didn't, especially in the lead (especially as it isn't mentioned anywhere in the body of the article)
• Brian McBride is not wikilinked in the lead
• Andy Johnson is referred to as Andrew in the lead but Andy in the infobox
• The correct name of the club in Staines is Staines Town, not just Staines
• It would probably be worth elaborating on why the matches against non-league clubs are not in the table with the others (presumably the club fielded reserve/youth teams in these particular games?)
• "stabbing in a cross" seems a bit too much like Soccer Saturday reporting, suggest a less slangy description
• "due to Manchester United's participation in the UEFA Super Cup and international matches" - Man U do not play international matches, suggest this sentence be reworded to be grammatically correct
• Is it really necessary to add a note about Roman Bednar's missed penalty? It seems like trivial detail, and it's not like it would have affected the outcome even if he'd scored. I'd suggest getting rid of it and ditching the "notes" column entirely. You can always mention it in the prose when you get that far
• Don't wikilink dates
• "throughball" is not all one word
• "25-yard screamer" - definitely not an encyclopedic description
• " (the other club being Oxford United" - closing bracket missing, however I'd get rid of this aside, as it is in no way relevant to FFC's season
• "The match looked like it had the potential for an upset" - says who?
• "and neutral fans hoping for a traditional giantkilling almost got their wish." - seems pointless to point out something that didn't happen
• You mention that Kettering's goal was in the 36th minute twice in the same sentence
• The descriptions of the FA Cup matches are extremely long - if 38 Premier League matches are written up at this length the article would be about 100k!
• "Garry Monk's backside" - not sure this is an encyclopedic description, mind you I can't think of a better way to refer to it :-)
• You have a closing double bracket after "Championship" but no opening bracket. As you only wikilinked Championship a few sentences earlier, you do't need to link it again
• no reason for capital on "extra-time" in the Carling Cup section, Or the hyphen for that matter :-)
• "topsy-turvy encounter" - again, a bit too "radio reporter" for an encyclopedia
• "calmly slotted" - how do we know he was calm?
• Pipe Middlesbrough F.C. in the transfers section, no other clubs have the F.C. displayed
• "during the second half of last season" - change this, it won't be "last season" forever
• You use the word "goaltender", this word is not used in English football
• Lots of players and clubs are wikilinked many many times. You only need to make each link once, unless there is a huge gap between uses

Hope all this helps, anyway! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:59, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

No, I think that should be OK..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:00, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Tennis articles

Sorry I haven't been responsive enough to your messages. Although I'm editing on daily basis, my editing frequency is still not back to normal due to some personal reasons. Anyways, what are you working on these days and what can I help you with? ^LeaveSleaves 08:49, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Single articles with infobox field chart position

I noticed that you used an old version of the {{Infobox Single}} template on the pages Baby Get Higher and Best of Order, in which the "Chart position" field is present. This field should not be used anymore, so please use the latest version of the template, and add information about the chart performance in the article itself. If there are any further questions, please leave a message on Template talk:Infobox Single. EHonkoop (talk) 13:19, 19 April 2009 (UTC)