Talk:Gastón Ramírez

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

Liverpool (0) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.191.10.223 (talk) 16:18, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

LOOOOOL he does not play for Southampton. He plays for Bologna. No transfer has taken place and the article you link to on ESPN has nothing to do with an official transfer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.1.208.230 (talk) 07:51, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Still plays for Bologna not Southampton[edit]

Despite being semi-protected to prevent edits about transfer rumours that is what has happened. At this point in time Ramirez still plays for Bologna, and any transfer to Southampton has not been confirmed. Richardthe3rd (talk) 10:51, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 18 August 2012[edit]

Actual team is Bologna FC 1909, no one of Bologna responsible has already accepted Southampton offers, just a talk betweek Ramirez manager and Southampton responsible, at the moment this wikipedia post is wrong and it's not representing the reality.

Think twice before write wrong things just to push up an eventual passing of Ramirez to Southampton

Check many newspaper news about this: http://www.tuttomercatoweb.com/bologna/?action=read&idnet=emVyb2NpbnF1YW50dW5vLmNvbS02NjM2 http://www.tuttosport.com/calcio/serie_a/bologna/2012/08/17-207254/Ramirez,+manca+accordo+Bologna-Southampton http://it.eurosport.yahoo.com/notizie/ramirez-southampton-bologna-blocca-tutto-164250858.html Matteo.stagni (talk) 12:05, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Closing 2 requests to clear backlog. The article won't say anything about a transfer until it actually happens per WP:CRYSTAL. A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 13:00, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Middlesbrough[edit]

He signed for middlesbough yesterday DavidMc11 (talk) 22:50, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That is not correct as he has yet to receive a work permit. Wait until the deal is officially confirmed on the MFC website &/or the BBC. 92.26.167.160 (talk) 11:27, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They've already confirmed it. Middlesbrough have released pictures of him signing. DavidMc11 (talk) 13:39, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is still very dubious. There is nothing on the MFC website to actually confirm his signing. The only article refers to him re-joining Boro on a permanent basis but no article saying that he has acually been signed. Likewise, BBC Sport have nothing. This article in the "Gazette" says that he "is now a Boro player, subject to the final bits of paperwork being ratified" so at present he is still in limbo. There has been a lot of jumping the gun here/ Hopefully. it will all sort itself out over the weekend. Cheers. 92.26.167.160 (talk) 18:46, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Gastón Ramírez. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:15, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]