Jump to content

Talk:Billy Mckay

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 29 March 2015

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Andrewa (talk) 05:16, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Billy MckayBilly McKay – Submitting this request on behalf of PellèLong (talk · contribs). User believes the correct capitilasition for the surname is McKay rather than Mckay JMHamo (talk) 17:16, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. GiantSnowman 17:32, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Mark McKay Fotheringham - is it an extra surname or middle name? Even so why has nobody requested Mckay? It would be wise to revert to McKay, seeing as it's the correct spelling and otherwise you appear somewhat stupid in the eyes of visitors! Well, that and the fact that you pointlessly added a new surname category "Mckay" which doesn't exist as no other person falls under that category across the whole of Wikipedia except Billy. Whether someone wants to spell their name incorrectly shouldn't have anything to do with what he goes by on here. Also Fotheringham may be a Scotsman with Irish ancestry.

JUST TO CLARIFY!

see McKay — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.22.82.68 (talkcontribs) 13:01, 25 August 2015‎

I remove the whole code for the surname page McKay and replaced it with a link to the page -- GB fan 13:16, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you think it should be moved to a different name you need to follow the instructions at WP:RM and start a new move discussion. -- GB fan 13:19, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Are Wikipedia going to do away with the consensus thing any time soon, because it didn't exactly work out for F.C. Internazionale Milano, one user stupidly said that the club shouldn't be recognised by its full name because this is the English language wiki (English of course being a West Germanic language). Funnily enough a German user said it was a mouthful to say ... as if some German clubs don't have long names ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.22.82.68 (talk) 13:26, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Don't expect consensus to go away any time soon. -- GB fan 13:32, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Billy Mckay. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:10, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]