User talk:KP-TheSpectre

Welcome!

Hello, KP-TheSpectre, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Keep up the good work on Liverpool F.C.! The Rambling Man 18:03, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changes to History of video game consoles (seventh generation)

Would you please add your opinion to Talk:History_of_video_game_consoles_(seventh_generation)#Worldwide_Sales_table? Thank you. --Kyle_(talk) 18:36, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Doctor Who serials

Can you stop removing The Infinite Quest? There's a massive consensus on the talk page to allow it. Will ^(talk) 15:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assassin's Creed II: Multiplayer

Why did you remove "Assassin's Creed II: Multiplayer" (2010) for the iPhone from the list of games in the franchise? If I receive no response, I may put it back. Agiar2000 (talk) 17:47, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April 2008

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you delete or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia, as you did to List of Doctor Who serials, you will be blocked from editing. —TreasuryTag—t—c 09:15, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Griffo

You're right, I totally missed that one. :) - JuneGloom07 Talk? 18:40, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Charlie Hoyland

In reply to your edit summary on the cast list, he doesn't have a link because I haven't got round to making a 2006 character list yet. I'm working on creating it though, along with the 2008 and 2007 lists (I have to write and source everything, so it takes time). He did have an individual article, but it was deleted. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 21:39, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Game articles

I just wanted to say, good job with your work on gaming articles. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 07:24, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Joyride.png

Thank you for uploading File:Joyride.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 02:43, 7 July 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 02:43, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2010 FIFA World Cup‎

Please don't accuse established editors of vandalism as you did of User:John here. The editor has given his reasons and you have yours for restoring it. Name-calling and accusations is not the way to resolve edit wars like this. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:17, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this. It might be useful for you to read WP:VAND so that you don't make this mistake again. --John (talk) 22:06, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I strongly disagree. provide better reasons than 'nn' as to why you deleted my edit KP-TheSpectre (talk) 22:16, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alright I didnt know what level of editor yor were or if you were just a regular user. However, I called your edit vandalism as your reasons for reversing my edit, nn, made it look like it was simply vandalism. If you really object to what I put on the page, can you please explain it to me in more detail. KP-TheSpectre (talk) 22:10, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By 'nn' I meant non-notable, which is what experience tells me that a lot of these "controversies" will be in a few weeks or months. The source is a good one but it only provides verification for the minister's vague proposals. I have amended the article accordingly and I hope this meets with your approval. --John (talk) 22:17, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Kinect Adventures, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Ironholds (talk) 19:17, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ship pronouns

Hi. You seem to be of the belief that ships ("inanimate objects", as you call them) are genderless. Please read: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Style_guide#Pronouns, so you won't jump to that conclusion again. Although you did get that message a month and a half ago, when you "corrected" a featured article. Manxruler (talk) 17:11, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That might be wise. Thank you. Manxruler (talk) 17:34, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brega

Check time of day on this article [1] rebels had claimed to have taken Brega at 09:21 AM, and I also added another source [2] which clearly confirms the battle for the university was in the morning. EkoGraf (talk) 20:24, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template

With regards to this edit of mine: I lean a bit heavily on the "rollback" button now and then. My apologies. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 16:06, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Liverpool v Brighton

You may have seen the match and had a different opinion to the people who keep the official records, but the official records (and pretty much every independent news source) show Gerrard as having scored Liverpool's fourth goal. Please don't apply your version of events to Wikipedia, especially when we have reliable sources to state the contrary. – Pee Jay 21:55, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you show me the sources that list the goal *officially* as an own goal? The FA says it was Gerrard's goal, and IMO, their opinion is all that matters. – Pee Jay 09:53, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to List of Neighbours characters (2012) does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! - JuneGloom Talk 23:01, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Move of FIFA Soccer 13

Hi there. I noticed you moved FIFA Soccer 13 to FIFA 13. I don't know if you saw, but there was a requested move discussion going on on the talk page of the article, which wasn't due to close for several more days. I agree with the move, and so far there is a clear consensus to do so in the discussion, but in future it would probably be better to wait for such a discussion to conclude before carrying out a bold move such as that. Anyway, like I said, I think it's a good move anyway. Regards Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 12:03, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I did not see that. My bad, I will post there in favour of the move. KP-TheSpectre (talk) 12:57, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I was just going to leave it, but I've reverted the move as the edit histories will probably have to be merged if the article is eventually moved. Regards Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 12:59, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CONCACAF is not just North America

Please see CONCACAF. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:30, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The CONCACAF page itself is misleading. Have a look at the North America page itself and the picture. It includes Central America and the Caribbean, so there is not need to list them separately. Doing so is (as I said in my edit comment) a like describing Europe as 'Europe, Scandinavia and the British Isles'. Scandinavia and the British Isles are a part of Europe, are Central America and the Caribbean within North America. If it continues to be listed like that, it should at least be changed to Northern America so it no longer double up, but then it doesn't include Mexico.

So the full title should be 'Northern, Central America, the Caribbean and Mexico', and that's still omitting the South American countries of Guyana and Suriname that are a part of CONCACAF. Its quite long winded so its better to leave it as just North America, wouldn't you agree?

KP-TheSpectre (talk) 20:01, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So what I hear you saying is that the conference is wrong, the editors of that page are wrong and you are our saviour for correcting everyone's mistake. Thank you for not charging us.

Until you get a reliable source that South America is part of North America, I don't think we'll accept your opinion. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:21, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to have misunderstood my point completely. Look at the picture on the North America page, it includes Central America and the Caribbean. I don't see the need to effectively list them again when they are already included within the description of North America. In answer to your question - yes, yes and yes. Where should I address my bill to?KP-TheSpectre (talk) 21:28, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree you are correct and that I am really, really stupid. We are simply reflecting the conference name, not the geographic location covered by part of said conference because this is the stupid thing to do. You might find a more sympathetic voice, and certainly a larger audience, at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football‎. We are going to leave the page showing the incorrect thing. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:45, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Pritchard

I have added Pritchard's Welsh FA (FAW) U21 profile link to his article. Even though he was born in England, he has declared himself available for Wales, so the country flag beside his name should reflect this. JMHamo (talk) 15:56, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reversal of my edit - Lauren Branning

Ah, I see. I hadn't noticed the duplication, but I did notice that what was removed seemed a little more than warranted by no edit summary! Yes, I agree, removing the duplicated text seems like a good idea... it's odd that the two quotes are almost identical with the sentences in a different order! I agree that keeping the the non-bolded version makes more sense. Stephenb (Talk) 15:04, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2013–14 Liverpool F.C. season, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Yeovil Town and Red Bull Salzburg (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) 11:01, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, KP-TheSpectre. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, KP-TheSpectre. 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]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, KP-TheSpectre. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wales national football team

I take it you haven't seen the discussion at WT:FOOTY then? The consensus seems to be that it makes sense to leave clubs as they were at the time of the squad announcement for the "Current squad" section, but to update them in the "Recent call-ups" section. Not sure what you intended to accomplish by citing other teams and players though. I don't see how what other teams do is of any relevance, especially if what they're doing is wrong. – Pee Jay 23:02, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2024–25 UEFA Conference League

Competition proper [sic] starts from League phase. Previously it started from group stage. I fixed the number of teams involved per Distribution in the table into the page, counting team participating, the same as per previous editions. Normal number into the infobox means teams in the competition, number in italics means teams coming from Champions League or Europa League. I did the same for Europa League. Some information was wrong. Island92 (talk) 12:43, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no ‘competition proper’. Its either the competition or its not.

Calling the league phase the ‘competition proper’ by extension calls the qualifying phase the ‘competition improper’ or in other word, not actually part of the competition. This makes no sense as of course its part of the competition. And if there’s no ‘improper’, then there also is no ‘proper’.

If you want to denote it by teams per stage, makes more sense to write ‘League Phase’. KP-TheSpectre (talk) 22:12, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. The consensus reached is Competition proper. The Competition proper (main tournament) reflects from League phase stage, excluding qualifying rounds. For any doubts ask in the project. Island92 (talk) 10:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dates are split between Qualifying and Competition proper. Teams are split between Competition proper and Total. Island92 (talk) 10:10, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]