User talk:Buffbills7701

User:Buffbills7701 My Talk Page Puns! My Book Anti-Vandalism Hall Of Fame (AV HOF} The World's Lamest Edit Wars! Learn How To Create Tabs!

NOTICE: If you are here because an IP address brought you here, that is because that is my IP address I used before this account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.126.2.161 (talk) 12:58, 21 June 2013 (UTC) Template:Busylife

Ninja

Did you want a userbox like this? Matty.007 18:33, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Adminship

Many thanks for your note Buffbills, I am flattered, but for now I am far too busy in real life. Moonraker (talk) 02:37, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Buffbills7701. You have new messages at Wilhelmina Will's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Reply

After once again going over it after seeing that other consoles not part of certain generations were placed in those templates due to the time of their release, I've decided to place the consoles back in the template. Nintendocan (talk) 20:22, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Admins

Admins, I have noticed that a certain IP address is creating "articles" on Template talk:Serbia-writer-stub. Should I attempt to speedy delete it per G2? Or should we take the "articles", and turn them into the AFC? buffbills (talk)

I took care of it. Thanks for the heads up.--v/r - TP 13:28, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Wycombe Boys

Hello, and thanks for taking an interest. Unfortunately the article you've found is also a hoax on a wiki that appears to allow such things. It says the team reached the last 16 of the UEFA Europa League, and were FA Cup runners up in 2012. These competitions are for major professional clubs, not boys teams. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 12:29, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

I see that I've been inducted into your Anti-Vandalism Hall of Fame. I'm honored to be one of your first inductees, and I thank you for it. Here, have a brownie, fresh out of the oven! Lugia2453 (talk) 19:59, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! buffbills (talk) 20:39, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Secret Page

I found your secret page! Matty.007 17:11, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Congrats! Your treat is coming right away. What treat would you like? buffbills (talk) 17:12, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

How did you reply before I posted the message??? Matty.007 18:25, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

What do you mean? buffbills7701 19:55, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Whoops, I mis-read the times. Sorry! Matty.007 20:29, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: One True Vine

Hello Buffbills7701. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of One True Vine, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A9 does not apply if the artist has an article. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 02:20, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Guess I didn't fully read A9. Thought it was basically like A8. buffbills7701 02:23, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

ANI vs. AIV

Yo, Buffbills! Thanks for reporting the vandalizing IP; I've blocked. Just so you know, though, these kinds of things don't need to be reported at ANI; we actually have a specialized board for them at Administrator intervention against vandalism, or AIV for short. It's a little bit quicker and easier to report them there. No worries, though; thanks again! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:00, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm kinda new here, so I didn't know that. buffbills7701

Yep! Like I said, it's no big deal; it happens a lot, and it gets admin attention either way, so it still works. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:04, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Recruiting Center

Sounds good to me. I'll post the first steps over at Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Recruitment Centre/Recruiter Central/Archives/Buffbills7701 and we will go from there. Wizardman 15:21, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Invitation Digital Ltd, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Guardian and FMCG (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:24, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Some bubble tea for you!

Just wanted to say thanks for your review of Anonymous (group) specifically, and for getting involved in GA reviewing generally--we always need help with the queue there. If there's ever a way I can help in your future reviews, or if you just want a second opinion on one, please don't hesitate to ask. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:07, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I thought that reviewing it was a bit hard, but once I got the hang of it, it was really easy. Again, thanks! buffbills7701 01:08, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Just wanted to offer you two minor technical suggestions, if you don't mind. First, when you create a review, don't change the "reviewer" text up at the top; this confuses the bot that manually updates WP:GAN. Second, don't forget when promoting an article to add it to the main GAs list (not just the recent passes list), like so. Thanks again for your help in reviewing. I particularly appreciate your ambition in taking on some big topics! Those often sit in our queue for far too long. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:28, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Scotland in the Modern era GA

Many thanks for your review of the article. I also appreciate you taking on some of these long articles.--SabreBD (talk) 18:22, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I just want to get the longer ones out of the way so they don't have to wait 4 months before getting reviewed. buffbills7701

GA reassessment of C.A. Peñarol

I do not believe that an article you listed earlier today, C.A. Peñarol, meets the GA criteria, and I have consequently opened a GA reassessment, which you can find here. Eric Corbett 21:33, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

• I agree with this request. Eric's previous comment, which you removed here, can in no way be construed as a personal attack. Drmies (talk) 21:59, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
• And seriously, you made that claim again, here--come on now. That article has problems, the GA review was not thorough enough, those are facts. Stating obvious facts is not an "attack". Drmies (talk) 22:00, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm not arguing with the review, it's just the attack that really annoys me. He said that he's just stating the obvious, but as an old saying goes, "If you've got nothing nice to say, don't say it." buffbills7701 22:03, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Huh? He can't say nothing. Eric (and me too) is a Good Article writer and reviewer. If he sees an article that's listed as a GA and it does not meet the standards, how can he say nothing? It is not an attack. Drmies (talk) 22:07, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm pretty positive that there is a nicer way to say it than basically, you stink. buffbills7701 22:08, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

I didn't say that you stunk. I said your GA reviews are sub-standard, which they are. You rush them, you don't read the article properly, you insist on things that are not part of the GA criteria such as citations in the lead ... in short you're not a very good GA reviewer. And the consequence of that is that you make the GA process a laughing stock. Eric Corbett 22:13, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

How about a deal. I take a short WikiBreak from GA, until I can be better at reviewing. Deal? buffbills7701 22:16, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

In what way would a short break magically transform you into a better GA reviewer? Here's a different deal. Let me help you with your next GA review. I'd also suggest that you might like to try writing a GA yourself before reviewing the work of others. Eric Corbett 22:27, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

I'll take your deal about helping me. I don't want to create one because I know how hard it is, and I really felt that C.A. Peñarol deserved the GA. Also, I'll just tell you that I'm too busy today to review another one. How about tomorrow? buffbills7701 22:33, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

You're rushing it again. Take some time to try and write a GA yourself. How can you assess the work of others if you've never done that work yourself? Eric Corbett 22:37, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Fine. I'll try writing one. buffbills7701

GA reviews are hard. If they wouldn't be, we wouldn't have a backlog. Any help is much appreciated but, as Eric points out, it requires experience--which can be gained by writing and by studying the comments on one's writing. There's ins and outs (I pointed out the flag issue), and in this case the prose really wasn't up to par. It's not your fault that it wasn't, but you can't pass it without doing a really detailed review/copy edit. If it were me, I'd have turned it down for prose issues: just look at this edit I just made, and I'm not even convinced that I brought the level up to GA status, consistently. Lots of the ins and outs go well beyond that, and knowing that takes fairly intimate knowledge of WP:MOS (the earlier remark on citations in the lead are a case in point). I think that Eric and I both have a reputation for being hard-asses (or, in Dutch, "comma fuckers), but GA level requires that, in my opinion. The thing to do, if you want to continue reviewing (and again, we welcome the help), is to learn. I've been here for years and I'm still learning, and Eric is the best there is. (I'm not buttering him up--he don't need no more butter.) You made friends with Wizardman? Good--Wizardman is a pro as well. And feel free to ask us; you might not always hear what you want to hear, but we'll give it to you straight. Best, Drmies (talk) 22:49, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

• C.A. Peñarol looks good to me, being a well informed football-soccer fan, but I don't really know what GA means. What's exactly the problem with it Mr. Corbett? Listing specific errors means something, but just saying your opinion is just that, your opinion.Fussballspieler11 (talk) 03:57, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

VisualEditor

Hey Buffbills7701,

I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).

So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy the VisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.

What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.

The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with a list of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on the Feedback page.

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:52, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

You have a new message!

Hello, Buffbills7701. You have new messages at Talk:WhoBob WhatPants?/GA1.
Message added 02:36, 29 June 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mediran (t • c) 02:36, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

C.A. Peñarol GA Reassessment

I wanted to let you know I revised the article and copy-pasted the text to Word so as to check any typos and spanish words that could have remained. I corrected every mistake I saw. I reckon its prose is good enough to be GA, though I think those mistakes had to be corrected. I have also taken away unnecessary flag icons. I've replied saying this same thing, in Talk:C.A. Peñarol/GA2, but just wanted to make sure to inform you.—Nuno93 (talk) 03:06, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

GA reviews

Hey buffbills, I notice you closed another review today, Talk:Steve_Bégin/GA1, and while I haven't dug into the validity of the complaints there yet, it looks like it may have been a bit hasty. I know you're training with User:Wizardman--could I suggest that you wait for him to comment before closing your next review? This is what the mentor system is there for, after all. It might avoid some conflict like the Eric/Drmies thread above to have an experienced user look at these and comment prior to closing. It's common for GA reviews to say open for one to two weeks while various points are being discussed, so there's no harm in waiting. I'm glad you're interested in the project, and hope you stick with it--I just think you should slow down a bit and get some second opinions while you're getting acculturated. Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 17:32, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Replied on the mentor page, but agree with Khazar. That should not have been failed, so I undid that. Articles should only be failed if there's serious issues too great to address in a week. A couple unsourced sentences is entirely within the guidelines of a hold, and a writer could address those within an hour, realistically. Wizardman 17:40, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Revert at your talk page

Sorry for reverting you talk page. I saw that at huggle and became curious. Anyway that looked like personal attack and I reverted that. But that edit maybe gone to Gilliam cause I made a late. But never mind that was reverted. Happy editing. Also you are doing great. Go like this. Cheers.--Pratyya ^(Hello!) 09:34, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 June newsletter

We are down to our final 16: the 2013 semi-finals are upon us. A score of 321 was required to survive round 3, further cementing this as the most competitive WikiCup yet; round 3 was survived in 2012 with 243 points, in 2011 with 76 points and in 2010 with 250 points. The change may in part be to do with the fact that more articles are now awarded bonus points, in addition to more competitive play. Reaching the final has, in the past, required 573 points (2012, a 135% increase on the score needed to reach round 4), 150 points (2011, a 97% increase) and 417 points (2010, a 72% increase). This round has seen over a third of participants claiming points for featured articles (with seven users claiming for multiple featured articles) and most users have also gained bonus points. However, the majority of points continue to come from good articles, followed by did you know articles. In this round, every content type was utilised by at least one user, proving that the WikiCup brings together content contributors from all corners of the project.

Round 3 saw a number of contributions of note. Figureskatingfan (submissions) claimed the first featured topic points in this year's competition for her excellent work on topics related to Maya Angelou, the noted American author and poet. We have also continued to see high-importance articles improved as part of the competition: Ealdgyth (submissions) was awarded a thoroughly well-earned 560 points for her featured article Middle Ages and 102 points for her good article Battle of Hastings. Good articles James Chadwick and Stanislaw Ulam netted Hawkeye7 (submissions) 102 and 72 points respectively, while 72 points were awarded to Piotrus (submissions) for each of Władysław Sikorski and Emilia Plater, both recently promoted to good article status. Collaborative efforts between WikiCup participants have continued, with, for example, Casliber (submissions) and Sasata (submissions) being awarded 180 points each for their featured article on Boletus luridus.

A rules reminder: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on the 29/30 June, which may be claimed in this round. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. We are currently seeing concern about the amount of time people have to wait for reviews, especially at GAC- if you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 10:01, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

VisualEditor newsletter

Hey Buffbills7701. We've just rolled out a new version of the VisualEditor :). Changes and patches include:

• Newly added templates now list their available parameters if TemplateData is available;
• The load for the VisualEditor on apages is now 4 KiB, down from 119 KiB;
• Feedback dialog is no longer chased off the screen by typing (bug 50538)
• Fixed the Monobook issues around z-indexes (bug 50241)
• Undoing an image resize doesn't make everything look bad
• In the image dialog, "Caption content" is now just "Caption"
• Tweaked tooltip references to VisualEditor to instead talk about "source mode"

Those are the big ones; more coming at the end of this week or early next week :). It's a short list, but the load issue took up a lot of time, as did TemplateData, and are both pretty big changes. If you've got any questions, drop them on my talkpage. Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 01:16, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

WP:MOTD

Hi buff, and welcome to the Motto of the day project! benzband (talk) 09:15, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Articles_for_creation/Marie-Françoise_Roy

Hello Buffbills7701 You have rejected the above suggested article, saying it lacks references. (Or reliable references). I would very much like to correct that, and have indeed tried a few times, but could you be more specific, please? I have linked to a portrait of Ms Roy, Women in mathematics. Why not you where most of the facts may be found and to the list of presidents of the French math soc. for the fact that she was a president. Would it help with a reference to the interview Marie-Francoise Roy. Profession mathematicienne (in French) LFajstrup (talk) 15:18, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

OK, although it's too late for me to switch it. It already has been accepted. buffbills7701 16:38, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Jordan Older

You just moved a terrible and promotional hoax from AfC to main space. Please check the log for the AfC page (here), and be more careful in the future. FYI, the article was turned down seven or eight times in a row, and it was no better than the piece of crap you just promoted to encyclopedic status. Mindy Dirt (talk) 01:42, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Just a curious onlooker here, but what makes you say this is a blatant hoax? The claims are sourced, and links like [1], [2], and [3] seem like they'd be difficult to fake. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:58, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

• How's your Swedish? This has nothing, just that he at one point was a 33-year old soccer player who played in Brazil. This--well, it's not the New York Times, and it says nothing more than he "played professionally in Brazil and Europe, had founded King Sports Management and Ventura County FC to help young players realize their dream of playing professionally in Europe". And does that Brazilian site look reliable to you? Mindy Dirt (talk) 02:38, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

• Dear Mindy, Actually it says "top division in Brazil" on an official professional Swedish team web site, and the Brazilian site Futebol Interior is the top news agency for the Sao Paulo area and one of the top news sources in Brazil, it is very reliable, very high reputation. There should be no question about the facts, I can understand if you don't like the way the article is written, but again it's my article, not yours and all the guidelines of Wikipedia noteablity are met. Notability for Association Football is outlined here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28sports%29#Association_football and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Football/Fully_professional_leagues and says: 2. Players who have appeared, and managers who have managed, in a fully professional league, will generally be regarded as notable. See a list of fully professional leagues kept by WikiProject Football. The list of fully professional leagues list all 3 leauges (serie A in Brazil and serie A in sao paulo and USL Professional League) which there are official stats verifying the data in the article. There is an abundance of evidence so I'm really perplexed as to why this article is being attacked by you when the facts are shown to be true in 2 news articles written in reputable newspapers, 2 official professional team web sites, 1 offical league game day report from the USL Professional League, and I found these additional references listing and backing up and corroborating the subject as appearing in the USL Professional Leauge:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Football/Fully_professional_leagues Defunct Leagues

   Canadian Soccer League (1987–1992) (defunct) [70]
   (USSF Division 2 Professional League, USL First Division andUSL Second Division [70], and North American Soccer League[71] were also fully pro leagues, but are now defunct).
   Women's Professional Soccer (2009-2011) [72][dead link]; Women's United Soccer Association(2001–2003) (defunct) [73];
   National Soccer League (1977–2004)[71][72][73][74]

http://soccerstats.us/bios/jordan-older/ and http://soccerstats.us/teams/san-diego-gauchos/stats/

The above two are not 100% complete because they didn't track the other teams overseas or even the other USL teams that the subject played for so I didn't include them in the list but do you really think that I created soccerstats.us and entered all statistics of all the players in the history of American soccer from 1986 to 2013 as a HOAX? Do you really think I hacked into the USL soccer league's official web site and planted the game day stats there? Do you really think I traveled to Brazil and the Palos Verdes News and planted two independent news articles in two different newspapers in two different countries that backup the claims? One reference should be enough, but I have over 10! Please give up your attack of my article and use some common sense and logic. Just take a look at some of the other soccer player articles from players in the 1990's (there are thousands in that category American Soccer Players, it looks like) 99% of them have far less references but are not being attacked so I'm wondering if someone has a personal agenda here? Just seems a little odd. This is my first article I've written and it's being attacked with a different reason every day since I wrote it, is this normal? Based on the daily negative attention the subject MUST be notable, ha ha :) I want to thank everyone who has taken time to think logically and support the article and hope you keep watching it for more of these harassing attacks that are based on thin air. Thanks again everyone. Fussballspieler11 (talk) 02:16, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

thanks for approving my article

Thank you for approving my first article! How can I get the vandalism off my article?

I honestly don't know how to answer that for you. It is obviously not a hoax, because there are reliable sources, and I don't know what Mindy Dirt was thinking. buffbills7701 02:22, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Could you post that it is not a hoax/vandalism on that particular talk page so that no one accidentally deletes it? Then, I've just read, all you have to do is remove the code that references the hoax/vandalism from my article. You can do it but I can't do it on my own article. If this doesn't make sense then let me know and I can explain it for you.

Disambiguation link notification for July 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jordan Older, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Undefeated and The Cove (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Adel Shirazy page

hello . i need your help for adel shirazy page . (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Adel_Shirazy) all my sources are used in Farsi wikipedia as reliable sources . plz help me buffbills7701 ! - Adelsoft (talk) 13:38, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

I feel that there just isn't enough information. What I meant to put was not enough context. There just isn't enough to satisfy someone who doesn't know the topic. I also noticed that it didn't sound very encyclopedic. If you could fix those, I would happily accept it.buffbills7701 13:41, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

tnx ! but i think Adel Shirazy Fan page on Facebook is a good source for "known person" link = https://www.facebook.com/sensei.shirazy

plz help me ! What kind of resources can I add? For example, can I use Adel Shirazy link in Google Search ? tmx for every things - Adelsoft (talk) 14:11, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

You don't need more resources. That was my error. You need just to expand the article a bit more, and change the wording into something more encyclopedic. buffbills7701 14:18, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Tnx ! I've changed it & expand ! Please check and verify if it is correct.

Thank you for your wonderful support. - Adelsoft (talk) 15:57, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

thanks again, but...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Older I hate to bother you but there is another note on the article I created. Could you remove it? The subject was one of the pioneers and most elite players in American soccer history and qualifies for notability "officially" based on the USL Pro Leauge official game day stats link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28sports%29#Association_football Players who have appeared, and managers who have managed, in a fully professional league, will generally be regarded as notable. See a list of fully professional leagues kept by WikiProject Football.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Football/Fully_professional_leagues Defunct Leagues

Canadian Soccer League (1987–1992) (defunct) [70] (USSF Division 2 Professional League, USL First Division andUSL Second Division [70], and North American Soccer League[71] were also fully pro leagues, but are now defunct). Women's Professional Soccer (2009-2011) [72][dead link]; Women's United Soccer Association(2001–2003) (defunct) [73]; National Soccer League (1977–2004)[71][72][73][74]

...

Brazil BRA CONMEBOL Campeonato Brasileiro Série A[17] Yes Campeonato Brasileiro Série B[17] Yes Campeonato Paulista Série A1[18][dead link]

The previously provided references are engouh but you can personally, maybe not officially, satisfy your own curiousity about the veracity of my article by looking at the additional references that I didn't think were good enough to include and there are some old newspaper clippings and photos on the subject's Facebook, these show even more professional teams and information about the player but it was never available online. I was able to email him and get him to place them under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license outlined at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/. This was C.Fred's suggestion. I think you "can" use these pictures but they shouldn't be needed. He's also played in the Swiss Cup (which qualifies him as notable) and other fully professional teams in the USL but there are no records online because these were before the time of the Internet, but they are references in the articles on his Facebook. Thanks for your time (again) :) So I was wondering if you could delete the request for notability proof and keep a watch on my page for these hackers since you are the one who official approved my article in the first place? Fussballspieler11 (talk) 03:35, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

VisualEditor newsletter

Hey Buffbills7701! We've just deployed some fixes to the VisualEditor. These include:

• "Edit" will load the latest version, not the version you're looking at (bug 49943)
• "Edit" will load the latest version, not the version you edited last time if this is your second edit (bug 50441)
• VE edit section links will load the latest, not original, version in diff view preview (bug 50925)
• <big><big>Foo</big></big> and similar repeated tags will not get corrupted any more (bug 49755)

In the meantime, testing is proceeding well, and hopefully we can get some more fixes out over the next couple of days. If you're interested in helping out, we have a set of open tasks we'd really appreciate your assistance with :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 07:53, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Good article reviewing

Hi, I saw one of your comments "GA on hold, lead is unsourced" which struck me as rather odd. you do realize that according to guidelines the lead shouldn't really be sourced? I suggest you read Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section to avoid making this easy mistake in future. Cheers, and happy reviewing!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 10:17, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

History of AlphaLAW products

Hi there! You have reviewed and declined a new article I have written on the history of AlphaLAW. I think you comment was something along the the lines of reads like marketing rather than an encyclopaedia entry. I would disagree especially as this is history and not a current product. All of the references are to external publications such as The Law Society of England and Wales. There are no references from AlphaLAW as it does not have anything from itself published on the web.

Please can you review the article again bearing in mind that it is not a sales piece (as this stuff is no longer sold) and all of the references are from respected publications and NOT from either MSS or AlphaLAW which are no longer trading.

Many thanks.

AfC!

Hey, Buffbills, and welcome to AfC. I'm theonesean, and you'll see me around AfC and the Teahouse a lot. First off, thanks so much for spending your time on Wikipedia, and especially on AfC. However, it's generally good policy not to re review the same article over and over, like you did with AlphaLAW. It's fine, no harm done, just wanted to inform you about it for future endeavors. That said, I wanted to give you this.

A barnstar for you!

		The Excellent New Editor's Barnstar A new editor on the right path
		Wanted to give you a shoutout. You're doing great work here on AfC, so keep it up. Thanks, theonesean 14:23, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! First barnstar I've gotten! buffbills7701 14:26, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Medopad article rejected

Hi Buffbills7701,

You have just rejected the article for Medopad. Could you perhaps give some more detailed reasons why? (i.e. which sentence you find not objective)

Thanks a lot in advance!

The company's strategic partners include Intel,InterSystems, and Vodafone. Investors are Sandbox, Bupa, Guys and St Thomas Charity, as well as Bayer. That sentence is very advertise-like, because it isn't very important, and, it just sounds like an advertisement. If you could fix that, I'm sure someone else will be able to accept it. buffbills7701 14:36, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Help me admin !!

hello ! thank you for every things ! plz check my page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Adel_Shirazy) and tell me more about how to verify it ! all informations on it are correct with sources ! i can expand it but i don't have enough source for additional information ! wikipedia users are not read carefully my article & just trust to previous user decision ! can you help me ? i need your help ! - Adelsoft (talk) 19:38, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Adelsoft, I'm not an admin. In fact, you can do every single thing I can right now. I'll see if I can help you. buffbills7701 19:40, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

AFC/R

Thanks for helping with all my redirect requests! 2001:18E8:2:1020:2471:1719:86D3:F5A6 (talk) 20:57, 10 July 2013 (UTC)