Jump to content

User talk:Coopuk: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
reply to Golden Team
Line 48: Line 48:
=='Golden Team' article needs responsible editors==
=='Golden Team' article needs responsible editors==


Thank you for your belated reply Coopuk. The 'Golden Team' does need a little stylistic revision perhaps but you have eliminated 90% of content with your edits. Again, I must stress all the reference material is provided and I will personally see to it that references are included. Wikipedia editors already acknowledged that this article is "[I]original research[/I]", some of the references are from YouTube.com and other website articles. Please do not revert back the article to your edits till we have an impartial jury audit it; they simply and, in all probability, won't agree with your "pruning methods" and liquidation of 90% content material. I will finish this article as I have set out to in 2005, and am now writing the 1954 World Cup Final. Thank you again for your interest in "Golden Team" and football.
Thank you for your belated reply Coopuk. The 'Golden Team' does need a little stylistic revision perhaps but you have eliminated 90% of content with your edits. Again, I must stress all the reference material is provided and I will personally see to it that references are included. Wikipedia editors already acknowledged that this article is "original research", some of the reference material are drawn from YouTube.com and other website articles. Please do not revert back the article to your edits till we have an impartial editorial jury audit it; they simply and, in all probability, won't agree with your "pruning methods" and liquidation of 90% content material. I will finish this article as I have set out to in 2005, and am now writing the 1954 World Cup Final. Thank you again for your interest in "Golden Team" and football.

Revision as of 02:50, 19 February 2011

Welcome!

Hello, Coopuk, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Qwghlm 20:38, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Although I can understand why you may have thought this it wasn't me that actually removed your edits from the page, however the user was correct in removing them. If you read the comment placed at the top of the history section when you click edit (it's hidden from view on the actual page) it says please make additions to the Leeds United A.F.C. History page not there. Myself and others have gone to some length to reduce the size of the history on the main page as we're trying to eventually get it nominated for featured article status like Manchester City and Sheffield Wednesday's articles. As is wikipedia's policy you are free to edit any page, but if you look at the two afore mentioned clubs pages their history sections on the main page are small. My self and others have agreed on the history section being as reduced as it possibly can, (we feel it cannot be reduced further) but only major new events should really be added to this.

Also as the welcome notice above suggests please sign you comments on talk pages so that people know who is writing them.

Thanks.

--Chappy84 17:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much the reason Chappy84 has outlined in that extensive paragraph he's written. Plus the user before you had added a load of his personal opinion so I reverted back to chappy84's last revert.--86.29.46.214 18:16, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Coopuk 13:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC) OK, I can see why the history can go on its own page - but there are still grammatical errors and typos that need cleaning up on the original Leeds United AFC page. I don't think those should be rolled back.[reply]

thanks

My aim right now it to make this a GA. This has been made a lot harder by Chappy84's persistence to keep the triva section and revert most of my changes. Anyway I've set up a peer review for this article so if you'd like to contribute please do.

Mediation Cabal Request

I have opened your Mediation Request and I would like you to answer the question at User:Natl1/Mediation Case: 2006-12-17 Leeds United A.F.C.--Natl1 22:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ernest Arthur Hart

Thank you for creating the Ernest Arthur Hart article. It would help if you could add verifiable sources as references for the information it contains. Thanks. Truthanado 12:05, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Coopuk! 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 insure 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 751 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

  1. Duncan McKenzie - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 22:17, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'Golden Team'

Hello Coopuk. I'm deeply concerned that you totally re-wrote, utterly pruned and vandalized an article that has taken me 5 years to write and do research on. I invested tremendous energy, and especially research in writing 99% of the article I created (Golden Team). All of the source material are listed on the bottom of the article. One day I went to do some minor edits and the entire article was gutted, you completely erased about 70-80% of my writing. This article was an excersize not only in sports journalism and history but a modern investigative exposition into 1950s socialist sport. I'm not sure what the admins will say about this. Expect me to incorporate some ideas from your edits, but also expect the entire article reverted to its original form. Please limit yourself to doing responsible editing and correction not broadsweeping vandalism. Thanks a bundle. :) (talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by GrandMariner (talk) 04:31, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

'Golden Team' article needs responsible editors

Thank you for your belated reply Coopuk. The 'Golden Team' does need a little stylistic revision perhaps but you have eliminated 90% of content with your edits. Again, I must stress all the reference material is provided and I will personally see to it that references are included. Wikipedia editors already acknowledged that this article is "original research", some of the reference material are drawn from YouTube.com and other website articles. Please do not revert back the article to your edits till we have an impartial editorial jury audit it; they simply and, in all probability, won't agree with your "pruning methods" and liquidation of 90% content material. I will finish this article as I have set out to in 2005, and am now writing the 1954 World Cup Final. Thank you again for your interest in "Golden Team" and football.