User talk:JonBroxton

Not a good night for either one of us

Ugh. First round losses for both of our clubs? Really? I see we lost by the same score. Not only that, but if you look at our stat sheets, we both lost in pretty much the exact same fashion. Up late, give up the equalizer with the clock winding down, give up a goal some time in OT, and then get caught off guard with our boys pushing up in the final minutes to seal the deal. I'm so ticked off because we had so many chances late, but their keeper was absolutely OUTSTANDING. It's going to be a LONG offseason. In the meantime, we're going to keep busy holding meetings and trying to drum up support for an MLS Detroit team. I tell ya, being the regular season champ is a curse. No one pulls off the double in the PDL; it's way too tough. Good luck with the Galaxy the rest of the way. At least you have something to fall back on.

Oh, by the way, the team we lost to, Kalamazoo, they're an affiliate of Sheffield Wednesday, so go easy on me. --Otav347 (talk) 04:18, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Past PDL Season box scores

As far as what I'm looking for for past playoff scores, I can usually find the goals easily on the PDL playoff pages, what I'm mainly looking for are cards, own goals (particularly the players charged with them), goals on PKs, and penalty shootout stats. If you can find any of those from '07 on back I'd appreciate it. I'm not in any rush, as I'm sure you're heading to Fresno along with having eleventy billion other things going on. Good luck to your Quakes as well... well, maybe not so much against the Tide! Mtndrums (talk) 01:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PDL Playoffs

Just wanna say congrats on the win tonight and in the process winning the division title. I'm sure you'll be taking a road trip up to Fresno for the weekend, so good luck. In the meantime, I'll be enjoying home games because the Bucks are hosting the Central playoffs (and hopefully more). Hope to see you in the later rounds. --Otav347 (talk) 04:47, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orange County/Ventura County update

I'm guessing you went to this game, as I'm also guessing you live in Ventura Co. based on your user page. When I first noticed you updated the standings, I thought, how the HELL did he get that result already? It's not posted anywhere.

Good to know you're supporting your local PDL club as well as the Galaxy. Have to brag, though. My local club is a lot better than yours. :-) How's attendance out there considering you have teams at the pro level? I know ours isn't bad (about 800 avg.), considering in such a big market it's the only game in town, not to mention no press anywhere outside of an occasional mention of a result. Our new supporters group is growing quite nicely, too. --Otav347 (talk) 05:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Guess I should've read through your user page a little more. I would've noticed the whole working for the San Fernando Valley Quakes part. Anyway, nice job on all the PDL pages this year. It's really nice to see that this effort is continually growing. I was at the Michigan Bucks game against the Chicago Fire Premier last night, and we were talking to a couple of guys who decided to join our group. Turns out they just found out about the team's existence within the past week. (shows how far we still have to go, doesn't it?) How did they find out? Through a Wikipedia search, browsing through teams in the State of Michigan. They must've done some extra research into the team, decided to come out, and found us there going crazy (as supporters groups usually do). Needless to say, we now have a couple of new members. I think this year is really helping with crowds and such for us because we now have a home of our own (as a primary tenant, by the way), rather than bouncing from field to field throughout Metro Detroit. Hopefully word spreads around here about this team and eventually we can pack the place (2,000 capacity). Regarding our playoff chase, we can rest a little easier having clinched the division title already, but I tell you what, that damn Thunder Bay Chill just won't go away. A conference title would be nice, considering there's a first round bye on the line (I know, the Central Conference format is strange this year). Either way, I'm hoping the Bucks want to showcase their new digs to the league and get to host playoff games like last year. You know, people think I'm crazy that I pay attention to American soccer in general. They would probably think I've lost my mind knowing I support a team at this level. But I love it, and I'll be out there to support it. And I gotta say, The Herd (that's our group name) has made things a hell of a lot more fun this year. Breaks off from the fans that put you to sleep, that's for sure. Oh, look who's rambling now. Speaking of sleep, it's past 2 already here in the Great Lakes (I refuse to say East Coast, even though it's the same time), so I'm out for the night. It's been real nice talkin to ya. Hope to see you in the playoffs, and if you do come out here for a match, first pint is on me. --Otav347 (talk) 06:21, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jamie Watson problem

Hmm. This is quite a puzzling one. An anonymous user, who hasn't made any other edits than to remove the fact that Jamie Watson plays for the Austin Aztex. Even the Austin Chronicle said that he is the same Jamie Watson (as if there is another one) who played for RSL in a blog earlier this season. [1] In all honesty, I'm not the right person to be asking about this, because I have no more ability to do anything about it than you do. I'm stumped. Sorry, but I got nothing. --Otav347 (talk) 04:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is absolutely amazing to me. I'll see if I can't get some admin help for this because it's just baffling that this person is so dedicated to removing the Austin Aztex from Jamie Watson's playing career. On a side note, I'm guessing the Aztex signed him up now so they can have him on their USL-1 team next year, because let's be honest, there aren't too many former MLS players that go to the PDL (outside of Eric Wynalda, who signed with the Bakersfield Brigade for the season). --Otav347 (talk) 01:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Ela re papara ti leei? Kala eisai? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.73.68.240 (talk) 09:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox to namespace

I was directed to use my sandbox to create player bios before putting them up in the main area. The issue was they were getting tagged for speedy-deletion before I could finish. The question is how do i get it out into the main namespace? is it just a cut and paste? Thanks in advance for your help. Coppercanuck (talk) 16:54, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arizona Heatwave

The use of vulgarity in removing the {{unref}} tag was not necessary. All you had to do was add the references and then remove the tag. All articles must contain verifiable sources as references, see Wikipedia:Citing sources. The tag is there to help improve the article; there is no reason to remove it until the refs are added. Would you please either add the refs or restore the {{unref}} tag. Thanks. Truthanado (talk) 00:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Same comment for New Hampshire Lady Phantoms. Truthanado (talk) 00:16, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Former players / current players

I've read that discussion you linked to about limiting the list to former players, and see no discussion about that issue -- a lot about POV, and opinion, and OR, but not that. Is this consensus somewhere else, perhaps? I don't see why a significant current player shouldn't be on the list if they are plainly notable (it's not repetitive, because it supplies additional information about them not provided by a mere roster listing) and would like to see the discussion! I may be too late to the game but I figure if it's a consensus I will learn something about the thinking. Thanks. JohnInDC (talk) 11:21, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It took a bit of digging but I found it. Had to sort of back into it via Special:Contributions, though. Odd. In any event - that's seems like a pretty weak consensus. As for me, I think a player can be both worth singling out for particular mention in a separate list, and be on the current roster. Why not? It's not redundant, because not everyone on the current roster makes the list. Some players are obviously more valuable than others, and excluding them just because they happen still to be playing for the team is arbitrary. I mean - does it really make sense that Jaime Moreno should on the NY notable list and not DC's? And if he's traded back to NY, he comes *off*? It's no more, or less, POV than a list confined to former players. I don't feel *that* strongly about this, but given the kind of tepid enthusiasm for the change, in a place that most soccer page editors never see, I'm not sure it compels changing lists whenever you come across them. JohnInDC (talk) 12:20, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for restoring that "rationale" paragraph on the DC United page. We may not see quite eye to eye on whether the list should be confined to 'former' players, but I agree that it's essential to supply *some* kind of criteria for inclusion. Facundo Erpen indeed. It had escaped my notice that someone had removed it. (I see BTW that the 'former' qualification was restored by someone along the way; I may be fighting a losing battle there!) JohnInDC (talk) 18:22, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Riverhounds/USL talk

I've started a section on the Riverhounds talk page so that you and I as well as User:JaMikePA or anyone else can discuss it in the same location rather than spread out amongst one another's talk pages. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 20:59, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

USL Notables

For now I was just cleaning up the red links. As a rule of thumb for me, if they're red then they're probably no good since no one has bothered to make a page. Obviously I know that "rule" is ridiculous and that Julian Valentin and a few others deserve articles. Making them should be on our list of things to do, so don't think I'm just going through with a machete cutting every red link in sight. Mostly I was just going through the PDL articles to find players who have pages already who shouldn't. I know a lot of the "Notable Alumni" I have cut out are some of the same ones I have AfD'd or helped in ... so look for a bunch of prod's coming up soon from my dredging today. GauchoDude (talk) 02:35, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, follow me around all night ;) rawr. I'm in the process of doing a semi-decent page for Nigel Marples. Basically I've been on USL Premier Development League and have worked my way down to the Southwest Division. I don't take offense at all, just trying to make the place better like you. GauchoDude (talk) 02:45, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely can do. That bit probably won't be until tomorrow though, but consider it done. I'm on a creating type mood for the time being. GauchoDude (talk) 02:56, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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) 19:25, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

James Horner

Re the Controversy section: Considering the fanboy deletions are mostly the product of anonymous IP addresses, is there cause to semi-protect the article? –TashTish (talk) 13:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SF Glens

Why do the Glens have mention of history in the SFSFL w/link yet it is said they were founded in 2008? Libro0 (talk) 05:22, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Sfseals.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Sfseals.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:53, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]