User talk:NewTestLeper79/Archive 4
|This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.|
- 1 Mickey Burns
- 2 Template:R.E.M.
- 3 The Muckers
- 4 Alan Ball, Jr.
- 5 R.E.M.
- 6 Gordon Ramsay
- 7 Michael Stipe
- 8 Academy awards page
- 9 Blackpool Football Club
- 10 He's insane
- 11 Adding Nicknames to Rangers F.C.
- 12 House
- 13 Michael Stipe photo
- 14 Junior football
- 15 Age category
- 16 Page move
- 17 Junior Football
- 18 Image tagging for Image:20070316185729!Ellis.jpg
- 19 Hun
- 20 The return of Doctor Jimmy and his bedazzling e-mails
- 21 One-club man
Thanks for the update/message. The book I used as point of reference only notes Micky Burns Newcastle playing days and not other clubs.
Mick4839 13:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here.
- Replied here.
Hi thanks for the edits which have improved the page. However, I am confused as to why you think that some of the external links were irrelevant? The Muckers are fans of Blackpool FC. And therefore links to Blackpool FC are surely totally relevant? The other link which was to another football club, fair enough, but links to the team that The Muckers are fans of should be there do you not think? Thanks PS: I see that at your first match you saw the great Trevor Sinclair play, I still hope that he will finish his career back at the club! Tangerines 23:14, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here.
- Thanks for replying and explaining. Some of the links could though go on the Blackpool FC wikipedia page as they are relevant to there, so I will add them on there. I'm still learning how to use wikipedia. Tangerines 23:39, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
I have reverted your edit regarding the standalone date. This is needed so that an individual user's preferences re time & date work correctly. some users prefer to see a date as "November 22" and others as "22 November" - I prefer the latter but a lot of US users prefer the former.
Regarding your query on the talk page, I will check my reference books when I am at home and see what "In that Number" says. That's usually fairly reliable. Daemonic Kangaroo 12:46, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- At 4.30, or whatever time this morning I made that edit, I was under the assumption that dates consisting of month and day only shouldn't be linked. Now that I've woken up, I realise that policy applies to months only. - Dudesleeper · Talk 14:23, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
As promised, I have checked in "In that number", which says that Ball was appointed payer-manager at Blackpool in February 1980, and was relieved of his duties in March 1981 when he re-joined Southampton. Also, his sojourn in Hong Kong was with Eastern Athletic, not Bulova. Hope this of some help. Keep up the good work. Daemonic Kangaroo 19:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
And what is your obviously biased problem in continually replacing a far superior image with an amateurish one ?? Dannyg3332 19:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- They're both highly amateurish. If it is your own photo, surely you didn't take just one of Stipe? - Dudesleeper · Talk 19:40, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
The fact I have many more Stipe images I took myself is irrelevant. You're obviously blind, biased or clueless......Dannyg3332 20:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
A report at WP:ANI for your attention
Well, you can stop me all right here in the international sandbox, but once I get to one of the national subwikis, there is little you can do about it, and Stipe could end up child molester. I always thought you footballers are a bit nuts in the head, i.e. fanatic. Plus you're not a Cancerian, but you are a cancer. Consult the Martha Stewart Brain Cancer Center for Recuperation for that condition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miguel Raposo (talk • contribs)
- Keep on smoking that stuff, it's working a treat for you. - Dudesleeper · Talk 16:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Academy awards page
The tables shouldn't be changed to a wikitable, because they are based upon last year's format. For this, I have replaced the wikitable with the correct format. Thanks! Real96 20:00, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here.
- Lack of a reference, mainly. A signature wouldn't go amiss either. - Dudesleeper · Talk 17:56, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here.
- Well then just keep waiting on the side of the road. Accidents are getting spectacular these days. RCS 15:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Adding Nicknames to Rangers F.C.
In your opinion it is inappropriate. Are we not supposed to discuss these things giving the entire community a chance to voice their opinions? Are you the owner of this page? (Rangers F.C.) Are you or Archibald99 in charge of this page? I believe that you are stopping discussion. I believe that to be against Wiki policy. I could have just added the nickname but instead I chose to discuss the potential addition. You will not even let me do that as you insist on reverting my edits...... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk • contribs)
- Aww, is that a tear I see over not being able to vandalise the page anymore? Let me get you a tissue. On second thoughts, I imagine you've got a plentiful supply of them - Dudesleeper · Talk 00:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Vandalism???? I don't know what you're talking about. The proposal is up for discussion under Rangers F.C. talk. You are welcome to join in if you are feeling mature enough to make a contribution other than deletion....
- And yes I see your point! Deleting discussion is in no way vandalism.....
Thanks for the support. I love you. You are my new favorite person. If you ever need a kidney, let me know. Billywhack 04:48, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Please state your reason for having a problem with this photo. It's properly licensed, yet you continue to remove it. Please refrain from this in the future unless you have adequate reason.Dannyg3332 19:49, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Properly licenced it may be, but it shouldn't have made it onto your hard drive. Is that the standard by which you want people to measure your photography skills? (Note: I replied here because I see you have a tendency to wipe your talk page clean of any form of conversation.) - Dudesleeper · Talk 20:39, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- The only image I've erased is the inferior quality one you keep uploading. Take off your blindfold and get some taste. Please inform why the image you removed shouldn't have made it onto my hard drive....Dannyg3332 01:31, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Quality my derelict friend, quality. And there is no "us", simply you......Dannyg3332 01:36, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- But you obviously enjoy licking other's.........Dannyg3332 01:40, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- If I thought I was wrong, would I get into disputes? You pipe links very well; now let's work on signing your posts. - Dudesleeper · Talk 21:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for bringing to my attention the discussion about the proposed deletion of the Jeanfield Swifts F.C. article. Looks like most people are calling for the retention of the article which I am glad to see.
I have posted a wee bit at the VfD bit about Jeanfield Swifts that you directed me to which sets out some of the problems defining "levels" in Scottish football. You can't really do this to any great satisfaction as we don't have a pyramid structure but in so far as you can identify levels I say there are eight (including the four tiers in junior football).
Anyway, this is a long way for a shortcut to say that I think all junior clubs make the notability criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia. Certainly some clubs are better known than others, but if we are to include some of them (which I think only makes sense) then we really have to include them all I think.
Cheers, Big Jim Fae Scotland, 11:28, 7 March 2007
Hello! If you are receiving this message, that means that your user page is in a specific year category. Per a recent user-category per deletion, all specific year categories are to be deleted. If you wish to continue using year categories, you have two options:
- Using an age group category, such as Category:Wikipedians in their 30s
- Using a decade category, such as Category:Wikipedians born in the 1970s.
If you wish, you may do both. Hopefully, this change in categorization will be quick and painless. Happy editing! --An automated message from MessedRobot 12:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, I think you may be looking at the wrong page history. I didn't rename the -Rangeley, Maine- page to -Rangeley (town), Maine- that is some unification process which has been going on long before my involvement.
- Previously as far as I can reconstruct it, that page name was -Rangeley Franklin County, Maine- and someone started the unifying process of eliminating the county name from the title of the various towns's pages name. The only thing I did recently to the -Rangeley (town), Maine- page is to edit a link on it pointing to the -Rangeley Plantation- page.
- I did rename that page from -Rangeley (plantation), Maine- to -Rangeley Plantation, Maine- since the name of the community IS Rangeley Plantation, and the previous editor had interpreted the word plantation as only descriptive, like Rangeley (town) is a descriptive indicating that the name Rangeley is a town. Whereas, to repeat myself, the name of the plantation IS Rangeley Plantation so to leave that word out of it's name is wrong, and to leave the descriptor in after changing the name is redundant and so no longer necessary, ie, Rangeley Plantation (plantation), Maine is unnecessary and that's what I changed and did so for all the plantations in Maine which are not specifically known by a single word, ie, Monhegan is a plantation but is generally and commonly known as Monhegan or Monhegan Island, not Monhegan Island Plantation so I did not alter that page and I believe it's title here on Wiki is Monhegan (plantation), Maine. Hope this answers your question. JackME 21:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here.
Just noticed all the articles you have started on junior clubs. Excellent work my friend. Thought I was going to have to do all those myself!
Also noticed your all time Scotland XI. Gordon Durie makes your team! I can only go on the assumption you never actually saw the guy play! ;o)
Cheers, Big Jim, 13:05, 14 March 2007
- Replied here.
Image tagging for Image:20070316185729!Ellis.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:20070316185729!Ellis.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
- 'Twas uploaded with an incorrect file name. I put it up for speedy deletion accordingly. - Dudesleeper · Talk 00:56, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
I see that you agree with me on its inlclusion on th Rangers page. What action can we take to stop the semi-protect policy, employed solely to stop this addition, being on that page. Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk • contribs)
The return of Doctor Jimmy and his bedazzling e-mails
Now I'm no expert but can you please explain the image I uploaded for Tony Ellis. I have replaced it but I do hope it is OK for you. I can understand you being annoyed at me as i only live 25 miles away from both Preston and Blackpool whereas you are on the other side of the Atlantic. If I uploaded an image of Tony Ellis that you find isn't acceptable then I must be punished. I really do have better things to do than argue with you on what Tony Ellis SHOULD look like. As I said being a Preston fan I have far more reason than most to complain about him buggering off to you lot but along with Dave Nugent he is the best striker I have seen at PNE since Alex Bruce, and that's saying something. Now I'm sure that you also have better things to do so get a grip or just get a better picture. All I am trying to do is make these small articles that little bit more comprehensive and more importantly more interesting. Is it really that important to you. Believe me I will always know more about this particular footballer than you and I really mean that.
- The above was in response to this. Stick again wrong end of got. As an aside, the style of his user page looks oddly familiar... - Dudesleeper · Talk 08:59, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
I've noticed you've edited this article quite a lot, so I wanted to guage your thoughts. In recent days, various anons have been adding current players to the list. What are your views on the inclusion of current players? Personally I think the list should stick to genuine one-club men and only include retired players. It might be worth reaching a new consensus on the talk page. SteveO 12:38, 19 March 2007 (UTC)