User talk:Spudgfsh

WikiGuide Welcome

Hello Spudgfsh. Welcome to the English version of Wikipedia
Thank you for your participation in this project. We hope that you will stay to contribute and that you will find the collaboration process enjoyable.
Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia that started in 2001 and is free for all to use and edit under certain guidelines and principles that all users should understand and adhere to. These principles and guidelines are listed below. Click on the link next to the images for more information.
	The five pillars of Wikipedia. The fundamental principles of the project.		Help. How to get help.
	Tutorial. This tutorial is a basic guide to editing.		Your user pages and your sandbox. How to experiment and edit in your user space.
	Mentoring program. Request help in your first steps of editing.		How to start a page. Help on creating your first article.
	Things to avoid. How to avoid common errors and mistakes.		Style Guide. How to write in an acceptable style.
	Main policies of Wikipedia. Wikipedia's main policies and guidelines.		Frequently asked questions. Some common questions and their answers.
	Help Desk. Here you can ask other editors for assistance		Quick reference. A handy quick reference guide for editing Wiki.
This is your Talk page where you can receive messages from other Wikipedians and discuss things with them. At the end of your messages you must put your signature by signing with four ~~~~ (just as I have done) or by pressing the button in the editor bar as shown here in the picture. By the way, you don't need to sign edits that you make in the articles themselves as those messages will be deleted. Another valuable page that may provide information and assistance is User:Persian Poet Gal/"How-To" Guide to Wikipedia. My name is Buster7. If you have any questions or face any initial hurdles, feel free to contact me on my talk page and I will do what I can to assist or give you guidance and contact information. Good Luck editing!

```Buster Seven Talk 13:29, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

2012-13 EPL

hello Spudgfsh I want to make it better table Premier Leagie season 2012 2013 188.254.230.210 (talk) 17:50, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I would suggest you use the sandbox facility to create the table as a whole and then when it is correct make the updateSpudgfsh (talk) 17:52, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Okey Spudgfsh 188.254.230.210 (talk) 17:55, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

UserJggjghjg765675 Hello Spudgfsh blackburn rouvas relegated from premier league to championship 2012 2013 Jggjghjg765675 (talk) 17:33, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

UserJggjghjg765675 Hello Spidgfsh well Wigan Athletic as they beat blackburn rouvas and Chelsea beat Blackburn fall Wigan Athletic will beat Blackburn Rovers Jggjghjg765675 (talk) 17:47, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

UserJggjghjg765675 Hi Spudgfsh but if you do not lose points Bolton i QPR Jggjghjg765675 (talk) 17:55, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm curious...

What did this do? --Dweller (talk) 14:11, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

background colours--Spudgfsh (talk) 15:20, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

OIC. Thanks. --Dweller (talk) 17:54, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Why did you revert my contribution to Premier League 2013/14?

I just thought seeing as it was gonna be put there anyway why is it not allowed now?

"Spent 30 min of my life doing something just for someone to delete it in 5 seconds :/"

What is the point of having all of the sections for the statistics for next season when they will provide no useful information for another two months. If you must place them in then you will have to comment them out until later on.Spudgfsh (talk) 20:40, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Re: Warning

Thanks for your contribution to Wikipedia. I do not understand why you still think that my edits are not constructive after my explanation in the Talk page of Carl Jenkinson. I have standardized the stats table according to the template. It is not encouraged to cite too much when only one reference can do the job, so why do you think we have to cite every season's stats? All that I am trying to do is just making the table more readable for the readers and that takes effort and time. Why do you think that deserve a "warning"? --Miunouta (talk) 21:45, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion

WP:PROD is for deletions that can reasonably be expected to be noncontroversial. "PROD must only be used if no opposition is to be expected." Your recent rash of prods don't fit. There is no sign of a consensus at the existing AfD that all attendance charts should be deleted. In fact most editors seem to have expressed the opinion that single-sports attendance charts can be encyclopedic. Please take this as my standing objection to your use of PROD for any further deletions you may seek in this area, and use AfD instead. Thank you. --Arxiloxos (talk) 21:47, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

PROD removal

Interesting to see your removal of this PROD - what do you mean "To delete this requires AfD"? And what do you mean "To delete this requires [...] informing Wikipedia:WikiProject Football"? FYI, it has been listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Nominations for deletion and page moves for NINE days - and informing a WikiProject of a proposed deletion has NEVER been a requirement. GiantSnowman 13:56, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

I felt it required a fuller discussion before it was deleted. The match was a non-league team away at the FA Cup runners up from the previous season which would make it notable. => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 13:58, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Newcastle United F.C. 0–1 Crystal Palace F.C. (1907) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Newcastle United F.C. 0–1 Crystal Palace F.C. (1907) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Newcastle United F.C. 0–1 Crystal Palace F.C. (1907) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. GiantSnowman 14:04, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC Joshua Murphy was accepted

Joshua Murphy, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:17, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Reflinks

Hi, please be careful with reflinks - it's prone to put junk into the ref. For example, the |author= parameter in this edit. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:45, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Same again, with this edit. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:32, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I was paying more attention. It just didn't register. => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 20:34, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Euro Elections 2014

Indeed, I mixed up 2013-2014 with 2012-2013 in this edit. Thanks for the remark! Rubiscube (talk) 18:37, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Linebreak

Hi.

I noticed that when you edited 2013–14 Norwich City F.C. season you used an incorrect linebreak when adding goals. Instead of using <br/>, that does not work in some wikipedia you should instead use <br /> (or <br>). For more information please read WP:LINEBREAK (and note that they use <br /> in their example). Thank you. QED237 (talk) 01:23, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

There is nothing technically wrong with <br/> - the space is optional. Its absence has been known to cause trouble with some versions of Internet Explorer, but Wikipedia pages are put through HTML Tidy before being served, and this adds a space at that position yielding <br />, so IE browsers never actually see the unspaced form.

What is incorrect is </br> with the slash first instead of last. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:18, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

From WP:LINEBREAK: "Wikipedia currently renders HTML5 where <br> and <br /> are both valid. Normally HTML Tidy will convert a variety of versions of the break tag to <br /> including <br>, </br>, <br/> and <br.>. This conversion does not work in a number of MediaWiki interface pages and can cause invalid HTML and problems rendering the page. Other wikis may not have HTML Tidy enabled, thus exported pages using an incorrect break tags will result in invalid HTML."

Recently I saw the <br/> being remove with a link to a page saying it was wrong, I will see if I can find it. QED237 (talk) 15:34, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

WP:LINEBREAK has recently had a content dispute. There have been several discussions about exactly which variants are fine to leave alone, and which should be altered, on several different pages, sometimes simultaneously. Some of these were on user talk pages, so I don't know just how widespread the discussions have been, but see for example Wikipedia talk:WPCleaner#.3Cbr.3E tag, Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 117#Text colour coding breaking down after line breaks in infoboxes and Wikipedia talk:Line-break handling#Line breaks, October 2013. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:55, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the links, I were not aware of those discussions and I will read them when I have rested my eyes. Anyhow to me it seems better to use <br> or <br /> from the start, when editing an article instead of the others. QED237 (talk) 23:26, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

What I saw was a bot (I think), making edits according to error no.2 at Wikipedia:WikiProject Check Wikipedia/List of errors QED237 (talk) 22:36, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Next matchday scenarios

Hi. Thank you for participating in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Next matchday scenarios. I have proposed a conclusion that addresses your concern regarding reliable sources. Would appreciate a comment. Ivan Volodin (talk) 10:50, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

League tables in season articles

Hello. Noticed your addition of the new league table template thingy to 2013–14 Birmingham City F.C. season. Pity you removed the named reference for the original, which was used elsewhere in the article, but don't worry, the bot recovered it. Was wondering if there's any way of restricting the lines of boilerplate underneath to relevant stuff, such as abbreviations actually used in the table section, as-of date and reference?

But what really bothers me, is that the league table section replaced was up-to-date and accurate, according to its heading "as of the date of Birmingham's last game" (which was 21 Dec). The section transcluded, despite the boilerplate claiming "Updated to games played on 21 December 2013", isn't up-to-date and accurate as of that date: it includes some games played on that date, but certainly doesn't include Middlesbrough v Millwall. If the table is being updated piecemeal, but the as-of date is updated as soon as any games are added, it doesn't strike me as much of an improvement for the reader. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:53, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

I made the bold assumption that the table included in the season article was correct (which is where I copied the info from). I'll correct it shortly. => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 12:04, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I have not looked at the table in question but if the template is updated but not the article page it could have something to do with the cache of that page. More can be read at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 121#Purging pages when updating template. QED237 (talk) 15:19, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Cheers, the table was wrong on the season article when I started to create the new template. I spotted the purging thread while wondering why nothing was fixing the errors last night, I now edit my sandbox and keep doing preview. => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 15:23, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Mohamed Salah

Dear Spudgfsh, Please read the text Mohamed Salah before you revert Edits (!!!) FC Basel won the Swiss Super League in 2012–13, they were Swiss Cup Runner-up 2012–13. and won the Uhren Cup 2013. Salah was awarded the CAF Most Promising African Talent of the Year in 2012 CAF Awards. How many more refs do you need (???) Bye --Huligan0 (talk) 23:21, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Expand sect

I've just reverted your mindless tagging of the lists like List of British films of the 1950s. If you'd read the text at the top you should have realized that the section are not intended to be added too and they function merely as dab pages. If you've done this to other country film lists please self-revert. Thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:26, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Upgraded league table templates

Hi,

Thanks for creating Template:2014–15 Premier League table/p and fixing the template.

There is a reason why I had not created the templates on my own in the past and I thought I should mention why, since you have been a bit involved in the past.

First of all 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.

Secondly this templates use helper templates such as template:PL13 which is used and this template is maybe to be removed. The templates has had a lot of problems with editors not updating the helper template so that is why a new solution is considered. There has been a new solution presented to me at User talk:Qed237#League tables (by an other editor working hard with these templates) where helper template must not be updated. This can currently be seen at {{2014–15 Eredivisie table}} and Template:2014–15 Eredivisie table/layout. I am/was strongly considering implementing that when a few minor "issues" is solved.

Thirdly the template:fb cl team is supposed to be replaced by template:fb cl2 team by WT:FOOTY consensus and a TfD. This since a lot of uneccessary fb team templates should be removed. I have wikilinks to consensus somewhere if you need them.

Just letting you know so that you dont get surprised if the template gets a major overhauling or even gets deleted (via TfD). If you have any questions or thoughts that is very appreciated. For example do I need do go to WT:FOOTY (dont feels like it)? QED237 (talk) 20:53, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm happy with anything that makes it easier to update. once you have a solution you are happy with take it to WT:FOOTY to tell people about the change. => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 21:19, 11 May 2014 (UTC)