User talk:The Almightey Drill

YOU TRUSTED A GUY ORIGINALLY CALLED THE ALMIGHTEY TROLL FOR FIVE YEARS! I AM BUT A BRANCH, THE TREE WAS PLANTED OVER 7 YEARS AGO! :p

Please note: To keep this page tidy and reduce risk of lag/crashing I will remove conversations which are dead for over a week. Awards will be put in an appropriate place. For reasons of transparency, all past conversations will still exist in the history, if you really need to look.

Further note for ITN awards: I appreciated these but I do not store these because the awarding is inconsistent. Sometimes I have not been awarded for the nomination, sometimes I have been awarded just for editing. I don't think that nominating something is a meritous act, possibly the only nomination where I was even a major contributor would be the sudden and shocking death of Patrick Ekeng.

Disambiguation link notification for July 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Demba Ba, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tianjin Teda (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) 10:24, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Various (OK, just two)

What a fall from grace! Speaking about his article, why do I see sometimes the quotation marks being altered from their original form in articles? I suppose it's some technicality, no?

Don't they have any limits on stupidity in Cyprus? They should (and ONE MONTH AND A HALF before the market closes still)!!

Keep it up --Be Quiet AL (talk) 16:36, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Fábio Coentrão

Hello, why do you believe that his loan move to Monaco should not be it's own sub-section?

Wshjackson(talk)

Loans

Yes I see that he had earlier loans as well but there is some gray area since those deals included percentage rights such as Rio Ave own like 20 or so % and Benefica etc. There is no need of doing a return heading if he does return and stay at RM as shown with Julian Green's page. While others such as Gerard Deulofeu, Víctor Valdés, Adnan Januzaj, etc. In most cases, loans due get their sub-section.

Wshjackson(talk)

ITN recognition for Kate Granger

On 25 July 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Kate Granger, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 00:49, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Doubt

Was I unpolite in any of our recent exchanges (direct or - summaries, etc - indirect)? If so, I sincerely apologize --Be Quiet AL (talk) 23:54, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Be Quiet AL. Not at all. You ask this quite often, which is the sign of a good moral compass. But if ever I feel insulted, I will tell that person. '''tAD''' (talk) 23:56, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

That (good moral compass) may be, but also not playing with a full set of marbles :) Okeydokey, I know you will tell it like it is if I ever am a wiki-asshole to someone that does not deserve it (as in this case). Thanks! --Be Quiet AL (talk) 00:20, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

• No, I frankly did not know about Geraldo Alves (and strangely enough, I only saw this today, no notification received that I am aware of), but I'll tell you this: if it was similar to what this manager did whilst at Real Madrid (I followed this so I know what the hey am I saying) it amounts to nothing, giving players five or ten minutes when the score was at 4-0 or higher, for example Dani Carvajal received the grand total of ZERO SECONDS during Mourinho's tenure (compare that to what "hated" (with or without quotation marks!) van Gaal did in the early 90s at Ajax, "only" won one European Cup with a squad of kids against Milan). Leaving a comment on a Portuguese web report titled "Mourinho has promoted 26 canteranos" and noting precisely what I wrote before, I was handed the following response: "You are pathetic!". Of course I am, I dared to attack one of the two demi-gods of Portugal... --Be Quiet AL (talk) 17:48, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Be Quiet AL Given the MO at Chelsea in both of his spells (and unfortunately inbetween as well!) I am fully aware that most of the players in that reference were just filling temporary gaps. Right now, there's Ruben Loftus-Cheek, but to stake a claim into Chelsea's attacking midfield is a monumental task if they can buy any player who is better than you '''tAD''' (talk) 18:23, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Be Quiet AL, well LvG did build another team with an Oranje spine to it - his turn-of-the-millennium Barcelona '''tAD''' (talk) 19:11, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

• Indeed, nobody's perfect is the lesson here... --Be Quiet AL (talk) 20:13, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

What the fuck (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carles_Gil&diff=next&oldid=730692106)?! Hate edit (regarding soccer of course, there are far worse out there) if I ever saw one! --Be Quiet AL (talk) 22:02, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

About the reversal

Some of the guys get ticked if you remove a nice article for one that isnt as nice but has the CoD. When we do that, we state that the CoD can be found at such and such link. To check that go to history and look at the remark section. You will find:

16:39, 29 July 2016‎ Sunnydoo (talk | contribs)‎ . . (133,190 bytes) (+6)‎ . . (→‎29: type of cancer for Barrie from http://www.southwales-eveningpost.co.uk/ken-barrie-the-postman-pat-8217-s-voice-has-died-aged-83/story-29565499-detail/story.html) (undo)

Just a heads up as some dont like to be reverted either ;p. Cheers. Sunnydoo (talk) 21:06, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

One other thing is that you can put the person in question...in this case Barrie along with Liver Cancer into your news search engine just to check it out. There are a couple more out there now that say the same thing. So if you want to check out for veracity sake, you can do it that way also. Keeps everything on the old up and up.Sunnydoo (talk) 21:11, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

2014 ISL Final Update

Hey mate, added the section and some other stuff. Cheers. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 07:57, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Tom Mendelsohn for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tom Mendelsohn 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/Tom Mendelsohn 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. _Muffled ^Pocketed 13:37, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

July 2016

Your recent editing history at Tom Mendelsohn shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 17:58, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2015 UEFA Champions League Final

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2015 UEFA Champions League Final you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Boca Jóvenes -- Boca Jóvenes (talk) 15:41, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2015 UEFA Champions League Final

The article 2015 UEFA Champions League Final you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:2015 UEFA Champions League Final for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Boca Jóvenes -- Boca Jóvenes (talk) 18:20, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Mr. Rice's Secret

On 10 August 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mr. Rice's Secret, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a reviewer from The New York Times called the film Mr. Rice's Secret "bland and ordinary", apart from a scene where children exhume their neighbour's coffin? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mr. Rice's Secret. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Mr. Rice's Secret), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 11:13, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2015 UEFA Champions League Final

The article 2015 UEFA Champions League Final you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2015 UEFA Champions League Final for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Boca Jóvenes -- Boca Jóvenes (talk) 11:41, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

The Almightey Drill (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I admit that what I did was foolish and childish. However, sock puppetry is worse when it is used for vote-stacking or restoring reverted content, and I did none of that. The sock was not voting the same way as me. I was blocked for having other unrelated accounts on my IP address. However my behaviour before had been inappropriate and I will take more care to stop edit warring and swearingin summaries. I will also accept a ban on creating BLPs tAD (talk) 23:11, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This isn't the first time you've been caught using multiple accounts. Nor is it the first time you've been caught violating WP:BLP. After reviewing your edits, I think Wikipedia is far better off without your contributions here. Yamla (talk) 13:36, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Yamla You haven't reviewed my edits at all. The first SP was collateral, there isn't a casepage. The second, I was not using socks to bolster my opinion, they were not connected. As for the BLP block two years ago, that was an arbitrary decision by one editor who received a lot of flak for it. "Far better off without me",have you even checked my edits? I demand a second opinion '''tAD''' (talk) 14:10, 15 August 2016 (UTC)