User talk:Officially Mr X: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:04, 26 June 2008

Speedy deletion of Mike McGinnity

A tag has been placed on Mike McGinnity requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. PyromaniacTom (talk) 21:05, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

February 2008

Your recent edit to Coventry City F.C. (diff) was reverted by an automated bot. The edit was identified as adding vandalism, or link spam to the page or having an inappropriate edit summary. If you want to experiment, please use the preview button while editing or consider using the sandbox. If this revert was in error, please contact the bot operator. If you made an edit that removed a large amount of content, try doing smaller edits instead. Thanks! // VoABot II (talk) 22:55, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Mike McGinnity

A tag has been placed on Mike McGinnity requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia 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. Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 15:22, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Bablake School, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Snowman (talk) 21:06, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The wiki

Here are a few good links for to help you get started:

SA drivers

It appears that you have put in drivers for Super Aguri with no proper references. I give you an invitation to join the talk page Formula One season#Super Aguri Drivers. Chubbennaitor (talk) 17:36, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but you were the last person to do anything to that area and the page history didn't make sense. Sorry. Chubbennaitor (talk) 22:05, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding John Harbin and Frankie Bunn

Hello. I notice you have removed all references to Frankie Bunn being joint caretaker manager of Coventry - twice. According to these BBC articles [1] [2] [3] Harbin and Bunn were in joint charge following Dowie's dismissal, so unless you can provide sources that suggest otherwise, please do not change this information. Thank you. --Badmotorfinger (talk) 22:09, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now That's What I Call Music! 70 (U.K. series)

A tag has been placed on Now That's What I Call Music! 70 (U.K. series), 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 Now That's What I Call Music! 70 (U.K. series) 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:Now That's What I Call Music! 70 (U.K. series) 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. Kinitawowi (talk) 00:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Mike McGinnity

A tag has been placed on Mike McGinnity requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Ejay (talk) 06:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Coventry City F.C. assessment

I've left some comments for you here. I hope you find them useful. West Bromwich Albion F.C. was probably in a worse state when I started work on it, and I managed to make it a good article, so there's no reason why someone couldn't do the same with the Coventry City article. Cheers. --Jameboy (talk) 20:18, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Chris coleman.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Chris coleman.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) 21:59, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Harry Warren (football manager)

A tag has been placed on Harry Warren (football manager) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Mr Senseless (talk) 21:07, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2008 Formula One season

This regards you and User:Linczone. I know you two have been reverting each others edits in regards to F1 test drivers, and there seems to be no end in sight. You have an actually valid source (F1.com) which claims these people are test drivers, and he has a valid claim that F1.com is mistaken. So I recommend, if possible, that you two stop editing warring with each other, and discuss this on either of your user pages, or the article talk page, and find a solution. This constant reverting is not helpful.

I am not trying to blame anyone or accuse someone of wrong doing, just simply trying to find a solution that works best, and some discussion between you two as it seems there might just be a lack of understanding. The359 (talk) 20:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

page assessments

Hi, an individual editor can not grade an article above class B. There is a process for assessing article beyond this; see Wikipedia:Good article nominations. It would be best to put the football page back to B, and I guess that the page needs a lot more references to reach the GA standard. I wonder if you can coordinate work on the football page using Wikipedia:WikiProject Coventry. Some of the football teams in Birmingham have got their pages to FA status, I think. Snowman (talk) 19:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CCFC History

The takeover was agreed on the 14th of December 2007. The following links prove this:Official Website and BBC Sport Website. I shall therefore revert your edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.5.129.43 (talk) 16:36, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Coldplay

Please add a reliable source for your claim (at the best selling artist article), otherwise it must be deleted, cheers. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 16:13, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

UK mix, is a blog, music fan site, very unreliable, try sources like BBC, CNN , MTV etc. Ill give you some more time, otherwise it will need removing. Cheers. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 16:25, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Thanks for uploading Image:Castles.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) 11:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting

Stop reverting on Coldplay discography, we don't need pathetic, silly little flag graphics for each country. Stop reverting, and by the way, your attitude could use a little work, as your lack of willingness to discuss rather than revert on a whim has so far been shocking. Qst (talk) 20:29, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems none of us are willing to back down, and as your willingness to communicate is low as it is, I'm asking you to discuss this on the talk page, as we don't need flags, and the page is just going to get protected if we keep bickering. Qst (talk) 15:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't use that attitude with me, as you did on Talk:Coldplay; it will get you nowhere in life, and further confirms my belief you're unable to communicate properly. Qst (talk) 16:23, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of best-selling music artists

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Contact me if you need assistance adding references. Thank you. Any material without proper citations will be removed immediately. The burden of proof goes to the original contributor. Thanks --Madchester (talk) 16:07, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Coldplay Awards

The article currently lacks sources (no in-line citations or references) and has not made any assertions of notability (no indication of the importance/relevance of each award listed). Unless both issues are properly addressed, the article should be re-directed to the main Coldplay article for the time being.

I've also noticed you've been showing a lot of ownership towards Coldplay articles and have not allowed other editors to make changes to your edits; that's not permitted on Wikipedia. I'd suggest collaborating with other editors, instead of calling them out, like you did here. Thanks. --Madchester (talk) 22:31, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Coldplay discography

Hi, I felt I made reasonable edits to the Coldplay discography page that you have reverted 3 times now. Please explain your reasons for reverting back. --Wolfer68 (talk) 19:44, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Coldplay discography. 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. --Wolfer68 (talk) 21:08, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Coldplay discography - Lost?

Hi, i notice you've reverted my edits regarding 'Lost?' on the Coldplay discography a number of times now and am left wondering why as you have left no description in the edit history. I assure you that the 'Lost?' is the track that charted, not 'Lost!' and overall i am just left bemused as to why you keep changing this back.

Please can i direct you to the talk page:

[4]

as well as this article which confirms what i say:

http://new.uk.music.yahoo.com/blogs/chartwatch/232/week-ending-june-21st-2008/

If we can discuss this sensibly instead of just reverting edits it will be of far more help to the article in question

Winterspell (talk) 21:04, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]