User talk:Qed237/Archive 9

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Qed237. 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.

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

→

Bots and Indef

Two things:

If I want discussions archived by a bot, then how do I do that?
When it says a user has been blocked indefinitely does that mean they are blocked forever?

Thanks TeaLover1996 Lets talk about it 19:59, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

You can look at other editors how they do and there is also information at Help:Archiving a talk page (specially Help:Archiving a talk page#Automated archival. Further innformation describing each parameter can be read at User:MiszaBot/Archive HowTo. Remember that if you want to set up archive on other page than your own talkpage you need discussion and consensus for that.
Indefinate blocks are all blocks that dont have a date when they end. They can both be "forever" and blocks that gets ended. They are issued when the account has done major disruption, but can also be if an editor has returned from a block and continue with same disruptive edits. Then the editor can be indefinately blocked during discussions so the editor can make sure why they are blocked (as they did not understand previous block as they continued. WP:INDEF states Indefinite does not mean infinite: an indefinitely blocked user may later be unblocked in appropriate circumstances. In particularly serious cases where no administrator would be willing to lift the block, the user is effectively banned by the community.

@TeaLover1996: Hope this helps. QED237 (talk) 20:18, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237:When you say that in serious cases when an administrator would not be willing to lift the block and the user is banned by the community, who is the community? TeaLover1996 Lets talk about it 20:52, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Ping only works when you make a new post and sign it, so this ping did not work. About the question, I have no idea but I guess in this case it is Wikipedia that is the community. QED237 (talk) 10:54, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia

Isn't it true that Wikipedia will always be a work in progress and will never be finished? TeaLover1996 Lets talk about it 16:25, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

One might say so yes. QED237 (talk) 17:57, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Position parameter in club infoboxes

Hello. With regard to this edit and similar. You may have missed the bit in the documentation at {{Infobox football club}} that says the |position= parameter is supposed to contain "The league and position to which season refers" (my highlighting), not just the position. I just reverted another user who was removing the league bit, and they pointed out your edit summaries... No harm done, and I've put the leagues back in as per the documentation. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:51, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

@Struway2: First of all thank you for the informative message, not everyone takes the time to write one. Actually it all started when I saw an other user reverting so I looked at the template documentation example and in the example league was not mentioned. I never read the parameter description, so I was a bit lazy I guess (thought looking at example was enough), sorry. Probably the example should be updated so it displays everything correctly. Anyway, thanks for the explanation and for correcting my mistake, lesson learned. QED237 (talk) 11:05, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out the discrepancy between example and parameter description. I've fixed the example. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:23, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the help and updating the documentation (the example). QED237 (talk) 11:16, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Taulant Xhaka

Hello there, is this user ok or it's hacked? If not, its so strange that an admin. here remove all those updates, additional infos, etc. We have talked for many things here, I asked you many times for help, even for the article of Taulant Xhaka (see HERE to remember). Then what the info u mean that I had removed, that reference at | nationalcaps6 = 3? First that's not a reference but a note which is linked with the abandoned match of the football, as for that we have talked early at WikiProject Football, see all Discussion to know more. Eni.Sukthi.Durres (talk) 14:53, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

@Eni.Sukthi.Durres: A few things

Yes this user is OK and not hacked, I meant to do 1 undo but accidentaly reverted all edits. Please assume good faith.
I am not an administrator I am just a regular editor (with some experience).
Yes, I was talking about the ref-tag. Some editors has been using it as a note, and it is not wrong to have a note explaining that one of the matches was an interupted match.

Sorry for reverting all edits, but the note/ref should stay. QED237 (talk) 16:48, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Got it, its Ok thank you and I wish you to have good work. Greetings. Eni.Sukthi.Durres (talk) 20:24, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, you to. QED237 (talk) 20:28, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Questions

Hi,
I have three questions to ask, if you could answer the way I ask them.

When blocked can a user edit their talk page
When blocked can a user edit their user page
Why is a sock–puppet account usually blocked indefinitely?

Cheers TeaLover1996 Lets talk about it 03:43, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: I will try and answer as good as possible.

A block user can edit their talkpage until an administrator thinks they are being abusive on the talkpage. They should be able to edit their own talkpage to discuss the block and make unblock requests.
Same as above, it is their page so they should be able to edit it, at least until they start vandalize it and use it for some sort of "attack" against someone.
Wikipedia does not allow sockpuppets, it is a serious matter. It is seen as a breach of trust to have multiple accounts. Multiple accounts can be used in "voting" to reach the result they want, avoid blocks and so on which is not acceptable. You can read about the reasons at WP:SOCK.

Hope this answers your questions. QED237 (talk) 10:30, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Talk back

Hello, Qed237. You have new messages at Acagastya's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

aGastya ✉ let’s talk about it :) 03:42, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Qed237. You have new messages at Acagastya's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

aGastya ✉ let’s talk about it :) 11:31, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Qed237. You have new messages at Acagastya's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Acagastya (talk • contribs)

Thank you for the notifications. QED237 (talk) 18:00, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

your welcome!
aGastya ✉ let’s talk about it :) 18:02, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

QED

I am not making disruptive posts, so I don't see what your problem is. No one else takes care of the page and information that is old is often left on there. So I have taken it upon myself because no one else will and I am updating the players stats and appearances. Not sure why you continue to revert my posts as like I said they are absolutely not disruptive. The information is 100% accurate as I physically watch every game. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.3.83.168 (talk) 22:32, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

@67.3.83.168: As I said to you at your talkpage and in the edits, NO LIVE UPDATES are allowed and continuing to add these live updates is disruptive. QED237 (talk) 22:35, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

You must be joking. That is absolutely not disruptive. In fact I have been doing it for over a full year now and this is the first time anyone has said anything remotely negative regarding it. That proves it is not causing problems. Again, like I said everything is completely factual and if I don't do it who will because no one else has done it for the last two seasons. If I was causing problems and destroying articles I can see you getting upset. But I am being a productive member and bettering the page on which I edit. Get over your power trip man. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.177.144.200 (talk) 17:43, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

No I am not joking. On wikipedia we follow rules and guidelines and I have seen editors being blocked for live updating. QED237 (talk) 17:57, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Please explain to me what actual issue this is causing for anyone other than the fact you are being a scrooge about it? This literally hurts no one so I cannot understand what the problem is. Wouldn't you be better off yelling at people that are actually making inappropriate edits rather than someone who is adding accurate information to the Wikipedia database? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.7.193.80 (talk) 18:05, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

The consensus has been based on discussions where editors has expressed concerns about live updates. For example one of the issues is that a match can get interupted/abandonned and in those cases goalscorers dont exist anymore. An other issue is that one editor may come in and add a goal and 30 seconds later a new editor come in add add the same goal (not seeing it was already updated). Also wikipedia is not a newsticker, we rely on sources and during matches there are no reliable sources that has been updated. You can read more at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football and at the template created for pages with live updating isssue (Template:Livescores editnotice) and the discussions Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 81#Live scoring and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 81#Live updates (again). QED237 (talk) 18:12, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Adding site links to pages

Hi, I recently added a site link to the FA Cup trophies page to the current manufacturer, which you indicated was promotional. All previous maker have links except the current one. The edit was relevant and useful for people reading the page. Please let me know your reasoning why this and not others is not relevant for the user? Thanks, michael — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelwant (talk • contribs) 13:05, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

First of all we never link to websites inside text, those links are wikilinks only and hiding links in the prose/article is considered promotional, if readers should click on link in article you made them go to an other website (not wikipedia). Usually from what I know we never links to special "personal pages", not sure why one link to an other page is there. QED237 (talk) 13:10, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Abuse ?

Recently I have been looking through the talk pages of some users and on a few I have found notices saying You have been blocked from editing for abuse of editing privileges what does abuse of editing privileges mean? TeaLover1996 (talk) 05:05, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Pretty much as it says, someone has not followed guidelines and editied diruptively. At least I think so. QED237 (talk) 11:33, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Again

Hey, the user at the 2015 FIFA Women's World Cup is back adding stuff that is not needed. Maybe if you can help again, would be nice. Already reverted him twice. Kante4 (talk) 12:26, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

@Kante4:

Done I have looked at it and reverted. If the editor continues I believe it is appropriate with a warning for edit warring. QED237 (talk) 12:36, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

请尊重别人的劳动，做了很多其他方面的修改，包括新闻 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 李建兴 (talk • contribs)

English please, this is english wikipedia. QED237 (talk) 12:37, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Merci. Warning does not do anything for him/her. Just wanting to push their style through. So, 3RR or what to do? Kante4 (talk) 12:38, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

@Kante4: I believe the editor must have been warned before reported (even if warning dont help). I will give warning now and if the editor continues then we report. QED237 (talk) 12:41, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

I warned him (you are correct with warning before reporting). Would be nice if you can report him if he continues (which he did) and i chip in. Kante4 (talk) 12:43, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

The editor self reverted, so I will wait a few minutes before reporting. QED237 (talk) 12:44, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

@Kante4: Okay it is time. WP:AIV or WP:AN3? QED237 (talk) 12:46, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

AN3 as it is not clear vandalism, just slightly disruptive. Kante4 (talk) 12:49, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

@Kante4: Now reported at WP:AN3. QED237 (talk) 12:58, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Added and thanks. But what about when he edits again (like he did). Kante4 (talk) 13:01, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

@Kante4: Since it is not clear vandalism, we should wait for it to be decided at WP:AN3 and after that I think we can restore article if an other editor has not done it already. No big harm showing a flag a while even if it should not be there. Reverting again will most certainly lead to an edit war and the editor inserting flag again. QED237 (talk) 13:04, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Guessed the same. Let's wait. Now he can talk english all of a sudden... Kante4 (talk) 13:11, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, lets wait. QED237 (talk) 13:13, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Now he always writes something on my talkpage... Kante4 (talk) 13:51, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Salah

I think you made a mistake salah actually played 7 matches and scored 6 goals — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.44.191.10 (talk) 00:20, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

No mistake, as I said infobxes are for LEAGUE ONLY and he has not played 7 matches in Serie A (according to source and career stats section). Both comment where you edit the numbers (how could you miss that?) and bottom of the infobox clearly states league only. So as I said, no mistake. QED237 (talk) 10:38, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

are you all crazy? i just add a flag.............

are you all crazy? i just add a flag............. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 李建兴 (talk • contribs) 13:08, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

And we explained many times that it is not allowed per WP:MOS and you continue to do so. Kante4 (talk) 13:10, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

No we are not crazy, as User:Kante4 says the flag should not be there per MOS:INFOBOXFLAG and template documentation and you keep on adding it. QED237 (talk) 13:12, 5 March 2015 (UTC

oh so so .I see but why evrything i change的，都被say no ？？ i think you are mechine men 机器人呢，哈哈 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 李建兴 (talk • contribs)

Have we changed everything? The flags should not be there so they are removed. Also there is already a list of teams on the page and we dont need two lists so that is also removed. Why would you need two lists of teams? We remove those edits that dont improve the article. QED237 (talk) 13:22, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

why evrything i change的，为什么我改的，都被撤销了，都被say no ？？its no fair 对我不公平。to me — Preceding unsigned comment added by 李建兴 (talk • contribs) 13:25, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

I get the feeling the english wikipedia is not for you. Kante4 (talk) 13:26, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

As I said, it does not improve the article, there is no need for two lists of teams and flag should not be there. If you made good and helpful edits they would remain in the article. It has nothing to do with editor it is about the content. QED237 (talk) 13:27, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

maybe i am right？if i am right.你们还会撤销吗？— Preceding unsigned comment added by 李建兴 (talk • contribs)

Just so you know that editor is correct, a flag is allowed there by MOS:INFOBOXFLAG "Examples of acceptable exceptions include military conflict infobox templates and infoboxes that include international competitions, such as FIFA World Cup or the Olympic Games." (emphasis mine). -DJSasso (talk) 13:30, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

I always saw it reverted from several users with the link given to MOS, so i went with it. Kante4 (talk) 13:36, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes me to, flags has from what I have ssen always been removed. But that does not excuse the edit warring and instertion of a second list of teams. QED237 (talk) 13:45, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

and i am a Disabled person i have to stay home ok i see i am stupid，i think you are all my best frind and first frind But ...................i am stupid

can you stay with me frind ,thank you.please — Preceding unsigned comment added by 李建兴 (talk • contribs) 13:56, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

No you are not stupid. You just kept inserting same content over and over again without any discussion or argument. If you have any questions I am happy to help. QED237 (talk) 14:43, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

you are welcome and i am sorry my wrong and thank you for teach me what I dont know . I will study hard how edit

and i am sorry to say crazy my frend I am thank for help.if you agree,please cancle the crazy 字这很不好 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 李建兴 (talk • contribs) 05:10, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Dont worry about it, crazy is not a bad word I usually dont change headings so it will stay. Dont worry about it. QED237 (talk) 10:40, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	I'm giving you this award for your phenomenally wide-ranging editing on football, excellent knowledge in sourcing and BLP policy, and ability to tell new users about our policies (you must get tired of telling them it's "league goals only"!) '''tAD''' (talk) 16:42, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much!, You are making a lot of good work to! QED237 (talk) 16:48, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

2005–06 UEFA Champions League

Yes, I think you made a mistake. I made these four changes:

removed WL to FC Artmedia Petržalka – page was moved
removed WL to MFK Petržalka – page was moved
removed WL to FC Petržalka 1898 – page was moved
fixed WL to "Real Madrd"

So, revert your revert! 213.151.215.195 (talk) 15:41, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

No mistake, the links you left were still not proper links, instead yhou made links to "Artmedia Petržalka" which is a redirect. QED237 (talk) 15:46, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Okay, I'm gonna create this WL: [[Artmedia Petržalka|FC Petržalka akadémia]] which is the new name of this club. 213.151.215.195 (talk) 16:13, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

That is still not a good link since article "Artmedia Petržalka" is a redirect. Without knowing everything about club it should probably be the other way around [[FC Petržalka akadémia|Artmedia Petržalka]]. QED237 (talk) 16:16, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Done. 213.151.215.195 (talk) 16:25, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. QED237 (talk) 16:44, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Premier league

I am not doing it and I get annoyed when u tell me off

Wenno123 (talk) 20:50, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

@Wenno123: It was not the first time you edited against consensus see this diff and also this diff. Trying to change same content several times against consensus and without discussion is dorsuptive. Given your history you should be glad you have not been blocked before and removing warnings at you talkpage is not helping you, they exist anyway. It is nothing personal. QED237 (talk) 22:34, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

PL Positions by round

Does the consensus allow creating a separate page with just positions by round? Oldstone James (talk) 08:47, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

I gave you long answer at your talkpage. There is no use for such article. Also we use MATCHDAY because there are no such things as round in England, so we use the position at the end of the day that team played. And we have statto source that is just that, so dont add PL as source were you have to look up all dates by yourself. QED237 (talk) 12:01, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Noting

Hi,
Why does something need notability to be on Wikipedia? TeaLover1996 Lets talk about it 22:17, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

@Tealover: Because it is an encyclopedia of facts. Otherwise people could just create a page as a personal blog or something. QED237 (talk) 22:19, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Danilo

You take yourself way to seriously , please fix Danilo's page when you find out what team he really just signed with :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soleair (talk • contribs) 12:54, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

How can he change club when transfer window is closed (at least in many league)? And if you make unsourced edits they will be removed, it has nothing to do with me, no need to write about me as editor. QED237 (talk) 13:33, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Do you have any source for the change of club? QED237 (talk) 13:36, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

STOP!

Stop vandalizing my page! Either give full explanation for the reverts or dont touch my page!SupernovaeIA (talk) 21:18, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

@SupernovaeIA: Your page? Perhaps read WP:OWN? We follow source for result by MATCHDAY table (and other stats) and dont predict the future. It is posssibly the next matches for Chelsea is postponed so when they play their 28th match they are not first. I gave you explanation, you just refuse to listen. QED237 (talk) 21:21, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

WP:ADMIN & WP:BLOCK

If an editor has been blocked in the past, would it affect there chances of succeeding an application for adminship? TeaLover1996 Lets talk about it 09:31, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: That is hard to give a good answer to, but there is nothing that says you can not be an admin if you have been blocked. If you have learnt from the block and changed the way you edit to avoid blocks you could probably be a administrator in the future (as long as you dont have many blocks or a block in recent history). QED237 (talk) 17:11, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Italy national football team

Why did you cancelled the kit of Euro 2004? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.182.109.25 (talk) 00:16, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

I reverted you because you changed the names of the kits, the articles and tournament names are 2014 FIFA World Cup and UEFA Euro 2012 so we name in the order of the tournament. I did not notice anything special about Euro 2014. QED237 (talk) 17:14, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Admin's Advantage

What does it mean when it says at Wikipedia:Administrators, that Administrators are users trusted with access to certain tools and never to use them to gain advantage in a dispute,also what does it mean to use the tools to gain advantage in a dispute,
any help appreciated TeaLover1996 Lets talk about it 10:48, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Not sure if I can explain it more clear then the text above. Shortly it can be explained like an administrator should not protect a page or block a person just to get their content on a page. If they argue with IP and protect page, then IP cant edit so the admin can choose what to write in the article, and a user block can work in the same way. They should not take advantage of their position. QED237 (talk) 14:56, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Userpages

Who should edit another users userpage, the user themself or another user under particular circumstances? TeaLover1996 Lets talk about it 21:06, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: There is probably a page for that, just try WP:USERPAGE or something. In my mind the editor should edit their own talkpage and no one else should edit it, unless there are clear vandalism and/or personal threats on the page. QED237 (talk) 22:32, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Don't you mean an editor should edit there userpage and no one else should edit it unless there is clearly vandalism, you said the talk page but I assume you meant userpage TeaLover1996 Lets talk about it 10:06, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I meant the userpage. QED237 (talk) 12:32, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Blocking on Wikipedia?

Hi mate,
According to the blocking policy, blocks are not punitive (punishments) but are preventative (to prevent disruption and damage to Wikipedia), but wont some users think or feel that the block is punishment for their editing? TeaLover1996 Lets talk about it 17:05, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996:, It is hard for me to know how others think, but i guess that is a possibility. QED237 (talk) 22:13, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Simon Mignolet

Hi Qed237, Just wondering why you removed my edit on Simon Mignolet's page? He does have 11 clean sheets in the premier league; you can look here http://www.liverpoolfc.com/match/fixtures Just need to get the actual 2014–15 Premier League page to correct it and i'll be happy haha :p — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ccoogan100 (talk • contribs) 14:15, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

@Ccoogan100: Hi, I removed it because there was no source. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and the content should be sourced. QED237 (talk) 15:26, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Talk 2014-15 UEFA Champions League

If the creator of the topic wants to explicit or implict remove or change his own comments (when reasonbly it is jistified) noone has the right to undo them. So it is UNFAIR and it is not in the spirit of the freedom of speech to maintain something that someone has wanted to change in order to improve the talk. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.25.238.87 (talk) 23:06, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

You can not remove the comments you want in a conversation becuase when others read it they can follow the discussion if edits has been removed. On talkpages we leave comments as a record of the discussion. QED237 (talk) 23:24, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Italy national football team

Why didd you cancelled the kit of Euro 2004 from Italy national football team? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:A03F:141C:8900:1072:8E09:D185:13D8 (talk) 10:16, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

I have already responded to the same question above, I reverted unexplained changes of all names (movin around the years). QED237 (talk) 20:44, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

2014–15 UEFA Champions League knockout phase

What is the criteria used for ordering teams in the quarter-finals? If its by league ranking then Porto should be before the French teams. Thanks for your attention. The Replicator (talk) 22:46, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

@The Replicator: The order (and criteria for the order) has not been discussed as far as I know (I added the list last week and no one has opposed or wanted to discuss the order). To me it seems logical that teams from the same association (country) are put together. To order the nations I use nation ranking for this tournament (which is in order Spain, England, Germany, Italy, France, Portugal and so on). After that the clubs from same country are ordered based on their team ranking. That is how I have done it and how i believe it has been done in the past, but it really does not matter that much as list will be removed after the draw on friday. QED237 (talk) 22:52, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

I made a mistake, Portugal was ranked above France, I corrected the order. QED237 (talk) 22:58, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I just wanted to be sure it was by league ranking. The Replicator (talk) 23:00, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

No problem, it is always good to ask questions. QED237 (talk) 23:02, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

uefa coefficent

Serie A is at 15 now.

ACTIVE QW QD W D BONUS Juventus Yes 0 0 5 1 10 = 21 Roma Yes 0 0 2 4 4 = 12 Napoli Yes 0 1 7 1 0 =15.5 Fiorentina Yes 0 0 5 3 0 = 13 Torino Yes 3 1 4 3 0 =14.5 Inter Yes 2 0 4 4 0 = 14

Which adds up to 90 =90/6 =15

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.246.170.236 (talk • contribs)

We update according to sources when that source is updated. Also update ENTIRE table, including timestamps and not just the part you like. QED237 (talk) 23:39, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Did you compare the source table line by line from the reference link? It was updated at 23:44:47 CET 18 Mar 2015, so I edited the table and retrieving date, but you reverted my edit with comment 'unsourced'. Shineyhj (talk) 00:22, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

@Shineyhj: Thats weird, it was not updated when I looked at it. Anyway the date should not have been 19 March, Europa League matches are played 19 march and they had not been counted as readers may think if we write "19 March". QED237 (talk) 00:34, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

"RVV"

"RVV" typically means reverting vandalism. Please exercise more discretion when you revert or use such terms. --BDD (talk) 17:55, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

@BDD: Sorry about that, I will think about that, but you did remove Diego Costa without reason and instead added a player who has not scored 18 goals as of 16 March (you did not update timestamp). The statistics in infobox (all stats) should be updated together with updating the timestamp which is often done at the end of matchdays when sources has updated. QED237 (talk) 17:58, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

I won't bother with this, but this is a very peculiar way of editing that doesn't happen anywhere else, as far as I can tell. I should've updated the timestamp and the goal count, but it would've been far more constructive of you to do so yourself than to simply revert me. --BDD (talk) 18:01, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Italy kit Euro 2004

Why did you cancelled the Euro 2004 kit from Italy national football team page? You did not give any reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.128.154.122 (talk) 12:47, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Try reading my talkpage and you will see the answer. I reverted because the name of all other kits where changed when they were not supposed to. QED237 (talk) 12:58, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Sources

If a player scores against a team in a football match and the source is an article on the BBC Sport website, is this a primary, secondary or teritary source? TeaLover1996 Lets talk about it 18:22, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Since it is not coming from the player himself it is not primary so I would say secondary source. QED237 (talk) 23:09, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Ok thanks TeaLover1996 Lets talk about it 04:24, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

No problem. QED237 (talk) 10:28, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Confused?

I recently received notification my page was patrolled on Wikipedia, I am confused though because the page is Ραφ13π, so why I have been notified of it being patrolled when it is someone elses userpage, can you help me? I'm really not sure what is going on. TeaLover1996 Lets talk about it 15:00, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: It is easy, just look at the edit history. It was you that created that page (dont know why, but you did). QED237 (talk) 21:26, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

@Qed237:, I created the page by accident I intended to place the {{Talkback}} template on the talk page to let the user know I had left a message for them on my talk page but I created the user page instead of the talk page, so I blanked the userpage and placed the template on the talkpage instead :) TeaLover1996 Lets talk about it 00:59, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Okay, anyway that is why you got the notification, you are the page creator. QED237 (talk) 11:41, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Viva Mexico Amigo!

Mereciamos el tercer lugar!

I have no idea what you are saying, please use english on english wikipedia. QED237 (talk) 22:29, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

What I tried to say is Viva my Dear Mexico friend! We deserved being in third place but if Robben would have dedicated to swimming as he is a professional in cheating the referee, we were out and FIFA did not do anything about it. But in Russia, there world will see us and El Piojo stronger than ever! Viva la Patria! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.151.62.72 (talk) 22:25, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

I am having a hard time seeing Mexico going far and they would probably have been eliminated by Costa Rica. They had an easy group and it is one thing to be good at your own area "south america" and then come to europe. It would supprise me if Mexico go passed group stage if they even manage to get through qualification. QED237 (talk) 22:52, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Kosovo-Albania match - 2010

Hi Qed237, thank you for your cooperation. I'm thinking something and I need your help. You know the Kosovo national football team's case of being not full recognized by FIFA and UEFA, but it's permitted to play international friendlies with the FIFA members. The question is, should we count the Kosovo's matches before being permitted by UEFA and FIFA (before 2014) as a cap for their players who participated in all matches also the opponent players even? For example one of the "big" website for national football teams, the national-football-teams.com count the match Kosovo-Albania in 2002 and award caps to both sides players. Such as this match, another was played between the same countys in 2010 but it's not published at the National-football-teams.com, but can I use this source to add caps to respective players who played in this match. Thank you. Eni.Sukthi.Durres (talk) 13:20, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

@Eni.Sukthi.Durres: Hi, I am glad to hear from you. Unfortunately in this case I am not very sure, it is a special situation. In my mind I think the most important thing is some sort of note to explain what matches are counted, but I dont know what matches to count. Perhaps a new discussion at WT:FOOTY is the best? Sorry I could not be of much help. QED237 (talk) 15:42, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

You are honored, thanks for that and yes I will going to a new discussion at WT:FOOTY to know more, greetings. Eni.Sukthi.Durres (talk) 19:26, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Must we protect the 2014–15 La Liga article?

Hi, Qed. As you can see the IP editor continues adding his stats and changing referenced contents (like the lowest attendance data). Must we request a semi-protection for the page? Greetings. Asturkian (talk) 13:00, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

@Asturkian: I have tried asking for protection of that article in the past but for some reason without much luck, but I definately think you should try. QED237 (talk) 13:39, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

@Asturkian: Taking a second look I reverted and warned the user and since it is only one IP it is not enough for a protection. However that user should stop removing maintanance tags saying section is unsourced without adding a source and also not add new unsourced content. QED237 (talk) 13:46, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Javad Nekounam - Assistance

Hi there QED, (former) ALWAYSLEARNING "speaking",

can you assist me in adding (someone suggested me that at WP:FOOTY) a hidden message in this player's infobox, saying that THREE caps are considered unofficial by FIFA and thus he has 148 appearances, not 151? I tried, but my display was very poor :(

Ah, and note this: AFTER my insertion (and talkpage explanation), people continue to add "151", without one word in summary of course. Cheers, thanks in advance --84.90.219.128 (talk) 22:42, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Nevermind, hidden message disregarded and REMOVED, now I add a ref where the player says he is not thinking of retirement as of today, they go to his box and write "2000-2015" in Iran spell. They will get tired first believe me, maybe I get a block for 3RR, but they will too I presume no? --84.90.219.128 (talk) 23:31, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

I will take a look when I have the time, but WT:FOOTY is probably the best help you can get. QED237 (talk) 12:13, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Do not understand the problem with my first message: I consulted WP:FOOTY, the only reply I got was that infobox suggestion, which I inserted only to be removed without one word in summary. Nevermind i'll fight this battle alone, reverting and ignoring. --84.90.219.128 (talk) 15:31, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

I am sorry if I came across as aggressive or similar, but I am feeling very frustrated by this wiki-situation. Thanks for your time and attention. --84.90.219.128 (talk) 17:39, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

I totally understand you, it can be frustrating. I just have not much time to help at the moment. QED237 (talk) 19:49, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Newspaper

Although Wikipedia is not a newspaper, it does report small news in articles am I right? TeaLover1996 Lets talk about it 23:01, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Yes, small news can be seen in articles but the idea is that just because it is mentioned in news does not mean it is notable enough to include on wikipedia. QED237 (talk) 10:42, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes that confirms what I thought, cheers :) TeaLover1996 Lets talk about it 12:48, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Carl Framton

just wondering why you cautioned me for editing Carl Framtons nationality to British as he owns a British passp and regards himself as british — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yygghmmmdeyhxd34514 (talk • contribs)

@Yygghmmmdeyhxd34514: You changed the same content twice without any motivation and discussion. Take it to the talkpage and provide sources. QED237 (talk) 21:48, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

WP:EDITWAR

When dealing with an edit war shouldnt you sit on the fence? TeaLover1996 (talk) 01:54, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: I am sorry but this time I dont know what you mean. QED237 (talk) 10:07, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

If you click here this may help TeaLover1996 (talk) 12:56, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Thanks for the link, I think I understand now. In general yes it is a good idea to be neutral, but there are situations if you clearly have provided good arguments you can report someone for edit warring, but then you are walking on a "thin rope" and have to be very careful. Neutral is the best. QED237 (talk) 13:18, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Shaun Maloney

Hello. Saint Ètienne 920 had already notified Mattythewhite that Maloney indeed played 29 matches for Aston Villa and 81 for Wigan Athletic. Please take a look at his page for the reference. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RM48 (talk • contribs)

@RM48: I need source when you edit article I cant be expected to look around for source myself. QED237 (talk) 22:19, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

I hope this pleases your demands, sir. Next time, please use proper English grammar. I can't have someone like you be telling someone to add cites when indeed you can't use proper grammar. Thanks. The cite for Shaun Maloney is as follows: [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saint Ètienne 920 (talk • contribs)

@Saint Ètienne 920: No matter what my grammar is, you still must source everything you do. Wikipedia relies on sources. QED237 (talk) 22:46, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

I got your point, sir. Thanks for the feedback. You shall thank me for my feedback as well. Proper grammar and sources are what Wikipedia relies on, even if you must talk to someone on a comment.

Wow, I missed a dot or two when writning at a talkpage, but you understood me, right? As I said that dont make you right to add content without source. I will think about it next time, but my time is more important elsewhere then check my spelling at talkpages. Sorry if you could not understand what I wrote. QED237 (talk) 21:52, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Salah

Salah has 4 goals for fiorentina can edit it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unbeatable321 (talk • contribs)

If the timestamp is updated to the current date it is okay but he has not scored 4 goals "as of 9 March". QED237 (talk) 10:02, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Status letters

Hi, what would be the correct status letter to use for teams such as Barnet, who have qualified for at least a play-off place in the Conference Premier, but are currently not in a play-off position, instead in an automatic promotion place? My guess would be T, but I don't know xD ChrisMorris1234 (talk) 22:49, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

@ChrisMorris1234: I am not sure, last season no letters were used until they secured the spot they were in. But I see T is now used in Dutch tables and may be good. I opened a discussion at Module talk:Sports table#Statusletters on league tables QED237 (talk) 11:30, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

April 2015

thank you for the warning I will pay attention to here. But I don't mean it.I see the Chinese version I thought it might be true李建兴 (talk) 11:31, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

I see now it decision to be made around 30th MAY（AFC have 4.5 or 4 place）李建兴 (talk) 11:31, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

You can not add unsourced content. And please learn how to communicate without making 28 edits and clogg the page history. QED237 (talk) 11:45, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

ok,I will learn.I am afraid to be blocked from editing.How should I do？李建兴 (talk) 14:08, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

You have to follow all wikipedia guidelines which includes using proper English and use source for all the content you add and change. QED237 (talk) 14:45, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Reverted to revision 655046259 by Kaiser matias (talk): Go away. (TW)Kante4 said, can you help me?however what I said Kante4 is delect all. can you help me?李建兴 (talk) 14:52, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Not sure what I can do to help, it does not seem like he wants to talk to you. It is hard to understand what you are saying, maybe that is the reason. QED237 (talk) 14:57, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

oh,Thank you very much!李建兴 (talk) 14:59, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

No problem QED237 (talk) 15:02, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

哈哈，尽管你一直警告想要封了我的号，但是我还是把你当作好朋友，因为你认真而友善my friend

And once again, ENGLISH PLEASE. To me it seems like you are not ready to edit on English Wikipedia. QED237 (talk) 15:05, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

mean： You are my best friend，what the said is in my heart so speak Chinese.You also always use English（because what the said is in your heart）李建兴 (talk) 15:15, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

I try and be kind and friendly and try to help, but your English skills are not helping English wikipedia. QED237 (talk) 15:16, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

No problem李建兴 (talk) 03:35, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

first of all.this is not for you.is to kant4 maybe he delect.Jesus loves you.I really don't want to angry.

stop to talk my name again.wiki is free.maybe I have some mistake，But I didn't make it on purpose.you cant block me！Stop insulting me. Destroy my reputation.

You can not Delete or undo this warning！Please respect others！！李建兴 (talk) 08:21, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

thank you for teach me edit and everthing,I am very happy,but then you had gone too far.Don't think I cannot read English.

Jesus loves you.I really don't want to angry.Always think of you as a good friend.my brother in Jesus.talk my name again and again insulting me.think I cannot read English？

If you can bear it？

I am sorry to Say these.Cause everybody unhappy.But I could not bear it.sorry！！李建兴 (talk) 09:01, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

If this is for @Kante4: then why do you write it on my talkpage? Also, I have not said you can not read English and it seems like you can, but you can not make yourself understood, it is very hard to read what you are trying to say. And once again I dont try and insult you, I try and do what is best for wikipedia and there is no need to bring religion into this. QED237 (talk) 10:28, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

stop to talk my name again

stop to talk my name again.wiki is free.maybe I have some mistake，But I don't mean it.you cant block me！Stop insulting me. Destroy my reputation.

You can not Delete or undo this warning！Please respect others！！李建兴 (talk) 08:21, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

I removed the final warning icon as a reason for being warned was not given and I have no previous warnings. Clearly you have no knowledge of the warning system. I can understand that you dont like other editor to talk aabout you, but sometimes we have to consult eachother as your edits has been problematic. Wikipedia is "free" if you follow the guidelines and rules and we are not trying to insult anyone, we try and keep the articles as good as possible with reliable source and informative content. Also you can not archieve and remove comments at my talkpage, it will be archieved in due time. QED237 (talk) 10:18, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

thank you removed the final warning李建兴 (talk) 10:28, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

If you dont mind I would like to do some work now and these attempts to discuss is not going anywhere. Have a nice day. QED237 (talk) 10:30, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Have a nice day.I am sorry,I am angry justnow.Have a nice day all of us.李建兴 (talk) 10:31, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

No worries, I have some understanding, but I am not trying to make you angry, I try doing what is best for wikipedia. QED237 (talk) 10:50, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Jesus loves you,my brother.and thank you 李建兴 (talk) 13:43, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Okay. QED237 (talk) 13:45, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Netherlands' ponits in the 3rd place template

I am a fan of Netherlands national football team and I DON'T ACCEPT that you undo my edit on the 3rd place template for UEFA Euro 2016 qualifiers. Netherlands has 7 points, not 4. There are also other teams that had their points unchanged in this template. I don't make edits without a reason, so please bring the edit back and change the template points! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.76.186.28 (talk) 10:54, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

@95.76.186.28: Then I am afraid you have not read the rules. The match against the last placed team (6th) do not count so for all teams only 4 matchers count (against 1st, 2nd, 4th and 5th placed teams). QED237 (talk) 11:03, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Netherlands have met Czech Republic (1–2), Iceland (0–2), Turkey (1–1), Latvia (6–0), Kazakstan (3–1) and since Kazakstan is last place in group that match dont count according to UEFA rules and only the first four results (against Czech Republic, Iceland, Turkey and Latvia is counted) and those results are used in the third-placed table. QED237 (talk) 11:10, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for this information, I never know about this. I'm sorry if I annoyed you and I will be more carefull in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.76.186.28 (talk) 13:54, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

@95.76.186.28: No problem, you are not the first and not the last one to be confused about these rules from UEFA. I think the reason is because there are only 5 teams in the last group and all teams should have the same chance (same amount of matches). QED237 (talk) 14:00, 10 April 2015 (UTC)