User talk:Theanonymousentry

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Overlink & Reflist[edit]

You make a fair point about linking a team that is not in the infobox. I personally don't, as I see it fit to just link it once in the article. The reason being, the infobox is for the full notable first-grade teams, when it comes to the junior clubs I just see it fine to link once as they're not notable enough to have multiple links in my opinion. Josh the newcastle fan (talk) 06:27, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

That's cool and the article should take preference of over the infobox every day of the week. I guess if someone is confused they will take the time to read the article and find out that way. Cheers for your feedback.Theanonymousentry (talk) 07:08, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, Theanonymousentry. 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)

James segyaro[edit]

Why have you removed my edit to James Segeyaro. (talk) 16:19, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Because it was less accurate then the previous edit. This has since been further improved, but please feel free to add to the factual information about his desire to remove himself from his Leeds contract and the desire to move home to his adopted home, Australia.Theanonymousentry (talk) 10:24, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
You are less acurate — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:35, 7 December 2016 (UTC) (talk) 18:46, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

I have since further increased the accuracy of the page.Theanonymousentry (talk) 12:35, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Well IT is not accurate as he has left the club (talk) 07:27, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
This edit has been checked by an administrator after difficulties with placing a source on the article, I am happy to stop the edit war if you leave the admistrators edits alone. Thanks (talk) 21:03, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

For your reference the administrator was (user:JustBerry also helped after using help me template twice see my page for help me request) user:Huon.

There is no edit war, a contract is in place and until that is dissolved the status quo was the most correct version in place.Theanonymousentry (talk) 14:19, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
I agree that you're edit is slightly more accurate than User:Huon's edit so I've left it alone. Thanks (talk) 18:18, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
That's cool. Thanks to you too.Theanonymousentry (talk) 15:33, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

'less-than-or-equals' sign, and/or the 'greater-than-or-equals' signs in the rugby league infobox[edit]

Hi Theanonymousentry, I believe its worth noting that when I've used the 'less-than-or-equals' sign, and/or the 'greater-than-or-equals' signs in the rugby league infobox, it's because there is information that indicates that a player was at a club at that point in time, but no information as to whether they were at that club before, or after that point in time. Consequently, just removing the '≤', and/or '≥' signs gives the impression that these area "hard" from-to dates, which unfortunately they aren't. I'm unsure as to what the best solution is… just removing the dates would devalue the article, perhaps adding a'?' to the date would be better, but this seems a little ambiguous, your thoughts? Best regards DynamoDegsy (talk) 21:55, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

I understand where you're coming from with regards to removing it gives it the authoritative position of definition. I would say that perhaps that this could be covered in the body text, alluding to signing and leaving dates. My position would come from one of coding, and the infobox really isn't set up to handle the extra characters.Theanonymousentry (talk) 15:06, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Glenn Lazarus and infoboxes[edit]

Good evening. After you reverted my edit to Glenn Lazarus, I have modified the Template:Infobox rugby league biography/sandbox to satisfy your concerns. I requested on the template talk page for someone to review my changes, but it looks like you might be the right person to approach directly? Thank you. --Scott Davis Talk 12:34, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi there. I will say that your work looks great to me. They have satisfied my concerns, that the rugby league element had shrunk. To me it looks like a good transclusion, although there may be some editors out there who who see the nickname in the wrong place and such small things, but to me it is a great step forward.Theanonymousentry (talk) 14:59, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

No bot[edit]

Per this (repeated) reversal I am not using a bot - my edit is a considered edit pointing to numerous policies and guidelines. We generally list only one official site, and for most subjects that is their official website. This subject seems not to have one, so we have to chose one of the social networking sites. This person is not specifically known for either facebook nor twitter, so one is enough, and the facebook is giving enough information. No need for a linkfarm, unless you have reasons why both the twitter and facebook of the subject are pertinent. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:43, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Ok, I've seen you do it to others with only the one social media link, so I assumed that is was a misfiring bot, rather than human error.Theanonymousentry (talk) 10:12, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
It is not human error - our policies, guideline and template instructions advice against the inclusion of these links, and I am therefore deliberately removing them. They do not add anything in by far most of the cases. These links do not belong as per repeated discussion in many places. I have therefore reverted your last reversion - the official website is linked (already making other official links not needed), moreover, both the twitter and facebook are rather prominently linked from the already listed page. All that the facebook and twitter are adding is hence already provided by the already listed external link. We are not writing a linkfarm.
If you think that they belong, then you obviously seem to disagree with our inclusion standards, and hence I would suggest that that consensus gets re-established. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:45, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
I found a page where all two were removed. Again, the olive branch was that it was human error, and not a misfiring bot after all.Theanonymousentry (talk) 10:47, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Yes, all social networks are removed .. can you point me to the error? The choice is not 'one official website, and one social networking site ..'. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:56, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Then that is not per the links you are using to mark your edits. I would advise you to re-read the linked pages in a rationale manner and see things in a purely dispassionate way because at the minute you are linking pages that do not support your edits, or more correctly do not wholly support them, only partially, or only up to a point.
I've been there, this has been thoroughly discussed with others, and my viewpoint, that these links do not belong here, is supported (on my talkpage, on the talkpage of the EL guideline, and on several noticeboards. If you think that inclusion of social networking links, especially next to already mentioned official site, is supported, then I would like you to explain that to me, to me, it does not say that at all. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:26, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
I have again brought this to wider attention, as I do not think that our policies and guidelines support inclusion of twitters, facebooks, instagrams, google+s, etc. etc., especially not next to already listed official sites, and especially not next to already listed official sites that prominently link to said social networking sites. Please join the discussion here. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:31, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jack Bussey[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Jack Bussey has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

fails WP:RLN as hasn't played in a Super League match, and not enough sources to meet GNG

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Mattlore (talk) 01:54, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

{{nowrap|Hull Kingston Rovers}}[edit]

Hi Theanonymousentry , could I please ask a favour of you? I'm using the Chrome browser, and the {{nowrap|Hull Kingston Rovers}} in the infobox appears to cause the years of the Mickey Paea to wrap onto 2-lines. However, on other similar articles, e.g. Sam Smith (rugby league), {{nowrap|Hull Kingston Rovers}} doesn't appear to wrap the years. Would it be possible for you to have a quick look, to see why this might be the case? Best regards DynamoDegsy (talk) 18:13, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Flags in European current templates[edit]

Hello there, I have been asked by another member of WPRL to widen the conversation on "Flags in European current templates", in the hope to gain a wider consensus. I imagine that this message may well never be read, dismissed, see me lose support, potentially gain some or take the discussion forwards. Please do take the time to read the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Rugby_league#Flags_in_squad_templates if you can, but the crux of my position is that the flags are prevalent elsewhere, are consistent with usage by the MOS, and their implementation for their rugby league national squad/team or representative nationality, is in line with their intended purpose. The crux of the remove side would be an IP editor may interpret a flag as indication of birth, give too much credence to the nation, and the decision was made previously. To remove them from all rugby league templates when there is a limited conversation would seem more than a little unfair I would say, hence the attempt to reach out. I'm quite happy to voted down, but would appreciate a few more voices to the discussion, else it would seem quite wrong to move from the majority into the minority.Fleets (talk) 19:53, 13 July 2017 (UTC)


Hi, what is your rationale for including an out of date navbox that doesn't include the player. It will confuse readers as they will think the player is not in the current squad. Mattlore (talk) 19:52, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Probably not the way I would have phrased that, but surely they would be more confused by the current club not having a navbox at the bottom.Theanonymousentry (talk) 20:04, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
I disagree because I think the average reader wouldn't expect a navbox (or even know what one is). Only the editors like us would expect one and be potentially confused until they see it is still there but hidden.
Either way its a relatively minor disagreement as we both agree on what the endgame is - an updated navbox that is included in all the relevant articles! Unfortunately some of the English ones are very out of date and I don't have the local knowledge to be able to fix them. Mattlore (talk) 20:08, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
I would like to think that the average reader would see it and understand. At that point it would raise the question and yes some would be confused and others would see it as out of date. Regardless they should be updated and perhaps that is something that people can be encouraged to do. The only negative to that is that you may find that people don't want to do mass club updates now, and then again in two months time with fresh squad numbers. But agree that they should be updated.Theanonymousentry (talk) 20:11, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

"present" in infobox[edit]

As I understand it, "present" should never be used in the infox for a rep player.

Template:Infobox rugby league biography states: For RL players who have also played representative football Note: Don't use "present" for the year end, as a representative team by its nature is not continuous.

At very least, discuss before changing any more. Doctorhawkes (talk) 10:48, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Thought it would be logical with the World Cup starting this week, but if you want to wait a day or two I can live with that.Theanonymousentry (talk) 11:02, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
I think you misunderstand. Present is never used, even in the midst of a World Cup. Doctorhawkes (talk) 11:07, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Why?Theanonymousentry (talk) 11:10, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
I can't say for sure, as I believe the format was agreed upon before I started editing. To me, it seems silly to change them all to present and then back. It also seems strange to have players listed as current members of the team before they have even made their debut. But that's just me.
Look, there may be plenty of support for changing the MOS, but you need to get consensus first.Doctorhawkes (talk) 11:49, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
I had stayed away from players who had only played in the recent warm up games. Can I please ask for a link to the MOS as I cannot see one for this.Theanonymousentry (talk) 11:52, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
It's in my first message.Doctorhawkes (talk) 12:00, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Scanned it again, but cannot see it on that page.Theanonymousentry (talk) 07:34, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Like the good Doctor said, it's a well established convention - since before even I started editing I think. So if you want to change it for the RLWC, then it will definitely require a discussion and consensus. Mattlore (talk) 20:11, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
I would have said it would be logical for it to remain open for the pre-determined period and that it would counter-intuitive for it to close. Would confuse immensely more to close, rather than remain open. If the confused would be the initiated, then the hidden note would clearly cover that. I would expect thanks, not just following orders, but you can raise it if you want to go to the Eastern front angle.Theanonymousentry (talk) 07:33, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
More than happy to go through the box ticking exercise though if it was the common courtesy angle you were pumping.Theanonymousentry (talk) 07:42, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Yes, the way Wikipedia works is you need to establish consensus if you want to change a long standing consensus, so I do think it is something we need to discuss before it happens. Mattlore (talk) 19:55, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Couldn't see it as a consensus, merely something resembling an unwritten rule, but as before more than happy to box tick.Theanonymousentry (talk) 07:32, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Unsourced nicknames[edit]

Hi, like everything you add to Wikipedia, you need to have a reference for the nicknames you are adding to infoboxes. In the past we have had problems with editors making up nicknames and adding them and that is why they need to be sourced. Mattlore (talk) 19:25, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Thought you were just being petty, but if there was a reason behind it, then I can understand.Theanonymousentry (talk) 08:26, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
If we both AGF then we'll be more productive for the project :) But yes, nicknames can be a touchy subject and there was a push a while back to remove the field from the infobox, so I just want to make sure we don't "abuse and lose" it! Having them well referenced is the best way to show we are using it responsibly. Mattlore (talk) 20:15, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
True, and I was unaware of them being a touchy subject. Make sense.Theanonymousentry (talk) 08:36, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Small text in infoboxes[edit]

Hi, it is not very helpful to make text in infoboxes too small to read. It is not a problem at all if the captions go into "four lines". FunkMonk (talk) 16:54, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Queensland Cup[edit]

Hi, why are you edit warring to include Queensland Cup statistics in some infoboxes but not others? You should discuss, explain your logic and seek consensus to achieve this change if you want it to happen rather than randomly trying to insert them in some biographies and not others. Mattlore (talk) 19:02, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Because of the wholly justifiable reason for their input. It was explained. There is no sense of randomness, but their certainly appears to be a fair bit of creep, after reading where the directive on Qld and NSW cup teams come from, and not creep that plays in your favour dear brother.Theanonymousentry (talk) 08:41, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
What is that reason? Can you also link to the "directive" please. Mattlore (talk) 21:37, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Please do your research, then come back to me and at that point we can have an informed conversation. I do not feel the need to educate you, talk down to you or lecture you. I have taken the time to do my research, please feel free to do the same.Theanonymousentry (talk) 08:56, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, Theanonymousentry. 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)

December 2017[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Mattythewhite. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Mitch Achurch, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mattythewhite (talk) 14:39, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

No worries. I saw them as uncontroversial, and got sidetracked before I could come back to them, or anyone else had updated them, they had been removed again.Theanonymousentry (talk) 08:56, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Rugby league player biography introductions…[edit]

Hi Theanonymousentry, I believe the addition of the word 'former', and change from, e.g. '…1960s, playing at club level…' → '…1960s. He played at club level…', could likely be achieved using AutoWikiBrowser (AWB) on the majority of the rugby league player biography introductions, as I initiated the articles in a boilerplate fashion. I had previously considered using the word 'former' in the introductions, but as the playing decades were generally in-the-past I decided 'former' was sort of inferred, so I decided against using it, but 'former' does confirm that the player is no longer a current player, and I feel 'former' is much better than the use of the word 'retired', as that to me indicates they're a Pensioner. Best regards DynamoDegsy (talk) 17:12, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi there DynamoDegsy. I will certainly look into that, and had considered it, but didn't look in too much detail as there are so many different styles out there. I try and fit a word or phrase that works as a suitable sentence. Trying not to make it too long or short, and also try to consider that we write for the fans and those are just looking at a page for the first time. I totally agree, when I see retired I see pensioner, and that does not work for a 40 year-old former rugby league footballer. I'm not sure anyone can retire from this game straight after playing. Cheers I will look into the AWB angle over the coming weeks.Theanonymousentry (talk) 08:41, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi Theanonymousentry, I've run AutoWikiBrowser and it appears to have made (hopefully) constructive edits to 7500+ rugby league biographies. It'll have likely missed some that are in a non-boilerplate style. Best regards DynamoDegsy (talk) 18:48, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi Theanonymousentry, I've manually searched out and edited a few stragglers... please let me know if you spot any others. Best regards DynamoDegsy (talk) 14:27, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
Wow that is real great work. I looked into AWB over the last few weeks, and yeah it looks like alot of the wording has been improved on a vast number of rugby league players articles. That might have taken me a decent amount of time to do, so AWB has done the trick. Massive thanks for putting in the work to put that into action.Theanonymousentry (talk) 08:56, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 23[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mark Edmondson (rugby league), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lancaster (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:29, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 31[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Craig Wing, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rugby (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

I could remove the comma from, e.g. 1900s, and 1910s, etc. via AutoWikiBrowser…[edit]

Hi Theanonymousentry, I could save you a job, and remove the comma from, e.g. 1900s, and 1910s, etc. via AutoWikiBrowser the next time I do a "big run". Best regards. DynamoDegsy (talk) 16:20, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

That would be cool. My thoughts were that it couldn't be targeted in that way, ie only in a list. If it can be targeted then that would be super.Theanonymousentry (talk) 08:28, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
I believe I should be able to target it accurately, so I'll add it as a minor change in my next AutoWikiBrowser run. Best regards DynamoDegsy (talk) 11:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Sounds cool.Theanonymousentry (talk) 12:02, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
I think I've removed all the serial commas, e.g. 1900s, and 1910s from the rugby league articles. Best regards DynamoDegsy (talk) 19:11, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Serial commas[edit]

I notice that you have been removing serial commas from several articles without explaining why. In general there is nothing wrong with such commas. I have reverted your unexplained action for several articles. Removing such a comma seems especially strange for the Oxford spelling article, since such commas are also known as Oxford commas because – like Oxford spelling – they tend to be used in the Oxford writing style. —BarrelProof (talk) 17:22, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

It may well have been correctly placed in that article. In others, not so.Theanonymousentry (talk) 08:27, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Sister project links[edit]

I noted that in Periodic table and Iron you moved the {{Sister project links}} and {{Commons}} templates to a different section. However, per their documentation they were in the right place. So I reverted. Did you find other placement rules somewhere? - DePiep (talk) 17:25, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 6[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Paul Sterling, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page West Midlands (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 6 April 2018 (UTC)