User talk:J Mo 101/2017

Article deletion

I notice that you put alot of articles up for deletion. I'm not having a pop at you, but as I'm putting together a new proposal for a returned to the previous RLN with a few ammendments, I would like to get the opinion of another person on the other side of the fence to myself. Could I please ask why you believe the current RLN is fit for purpose, more specifically to the UK and European club game. Please feel free to tell me to go do one, or write as little or as much as you like. I genuinely am trying to garner the opinions of those who support the latest revision and trying to put together a balanced proposal that brings us into line with other team sports, but doesn't swing too far the other way. At the same time trying to eliminate loose ends and try to flesh out a few areas to give us a more rounded RLN.Fleets (talk) 08:04, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Challenege Cup

Hi J Mo 101, I'm using 'The Rugby League Challenge Cup - An Illustrated History' by Les Hoole. It covers 1897 to 1998, though the team listings don't have the first names of the players, only the first name initial, and surname. Best regards DynamoDegsy (talk) 22:12, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Melchiot-Wigan.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Melchiot-Wigan.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:50, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Colin Tyrer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scrum-half. 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) 09:54, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, J Mo 101. You have new messages at Mattlore's talk page.
Message added 04:45, 10 May 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Mattlore (talk) 04:45, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Vittoriosa Stars F.C.

The article Vittoriosa Stars F.C. has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced (team website is dead), out of date, and non-top-tier team.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Primefac (talk) 15:08, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FreeBMD

Hi, I've done a lot of work on my family tree, all the way back to Magdeburg in the 1500s and slave-owners in the Carribean in the early 1700s. For the post-1837 stuff, FreeBMD is a useful resource. But that's off-wiki usage.

On Wikipedia, it is a transcription of primary sources and it involves the WP contributor engaging in original research, the more so because it isn't actually complete and the system acknowledges that, despite the checking process, errors exist both in the transcribed data and the original documents. That is why it is not a suitable source at Bob Burdell or elsewhere. While the issue is perhaps more clear-cut for BLPs, the principle will apply to all articles. - Sitush (talk) 06:16, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Askin

Hi, I know you'll think I am being specious at Tom Askin. I apologise for that but we really do have to get a grip on these biographies: they're as subject to our policies and guidelines as any other article, and we have hundreds of them to clean up. - Sitush (talk) 06:00, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My addition was from another source, which has now been cited by your friend below. There was a few instances yesterday where I saw you removed content which didn't need to be. I appreciate you think you're doing the right thing by cleaning up, but all I ask is that you check there isn't an alternative source available before taking such a heavy-handed approach. There's only a small community of editors who work on these articles, and disillusioning them is likely to do more harm than good. J Mo 101 (talk) 07:41, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Askin source

Hi. When someone removes an addition you have made and asks for a source, you need to provide an inline citation to the actual source page that verifies what you are adding, and not just quote a site in your edit summary. In this case, thecastlefordtigers.co.uk (or www.thecastlefordtigers.co.uk) does not seem to have any relevant content. We're not trying to stop your welcome efforts here, just trying to uphold Wikipedia's sourcing requirements. Boing! on Tour (talk) 07:02, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I just found the source page at the Wayback Machine so I've reinstated your change with a citation - see diff. I'm sure there's a better way to cite Wayback archive pages but I can't recall what it is right now, but at least this provides the source. Boing! on Tour (talk) 07:13, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RFC

Please refrain from altering any rls to your point of view, that either will or won't happen in due course. An RFC is being put together, and as such they should remain the way they are, and as before they will either disappear or remain on the the rls template.Fleets (talk) 20:01, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. As I was told, there would be alot of reading from other projects, but no real interest in our sport. Unfortunately the question of primacy wasn't answered by anyone, but the resounding move to a consensus does allow us to move forwards and please do feel free to remove the flags from the current rls squad templates for European clubs. Kind regards.Fleets (talk) 08:07, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Widnes Vikings logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Widnes Vikings logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Malpass⁹₃! (what I've been ^up to/_drop me a ^___) 17:04, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red World Contest

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, J Mo 101. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]