User talk:NewTestLeper79/Archive 15

Malcolm Barrass

Something strange going on here - according to the article he played for Blackpool before he was born. Presumably there are two players of the same name. Would you happen to have sufficient source material to untangle it? Oldelpaso (talk) 13:04, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

It was indeed Matt Barrass, who is listed as MW Barrass in my book. I am convinced the two are father and son, they have the same middle name, and Malcolm was born in Blackpool while Matt was playing there. The error originates here, perpetuated when I used the page while creating List of Manchester City F.C. players. Oldelpaso (talk) 20:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Your Edit Featured on Wikipedia Russ Abbott Article

Your slanderous edit of legendary TV mega star Russ Abbott has been noted and Im instructed by my client to sew you. Mr Abbott was not killed when his kilt fouled some woodchipping machinery but we will concede he did cause the Watford photon torpedo disaster after accidently mixing domestos with gerbil kak. Several carrots died and for that he is truly sorry. But to suggest Abbott died is just ludicrous and made Bella Emberg cry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.149.6.38 (talk) 02:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Keeping Up Appearances

I've been having a recent dispute with user "Updown" regarding K.U.A. You see I think there's no real point in repeating the same thing on the same page, that's why I either delete the airdates in the episode section or info box. I'll welcome your opinion though. Thanks. Edito*Magica (talk) 11:30, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied here.

Fair enough, and I agree, he does seem to think he owns the page! Aside from that, you’ve probably noticed how he and his little friend Collectonian (excuse the spelling) keep reverting my edits on the episode page. I aim to put the lead underneath the technical details in bullet points, making it easier for the users, but neither of them are accepting this, to them its vandalism, and they’ve reported me on the admin page.

So I’m interested in another opinion, do you think the bullet point layout that I’m in favour in, which can be seen in the edit history, is more appropriate? To me it’s concise and quicker to find key details, but I’d be interested in further opinions. Thanks. Edito*Magica (talk) 23:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi again,

But don’t you think bullet pointing the key points is useful? You know just to summarise a few technical details? Then have the rest in prose? I agree, most of the content should be in paragraphs. And I was a little confused where to post this message, sorry for any inconvenience. Edito*Magica (talk) 22:28, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Late Show with David Letterman (R.E.M.)

An editor has nominated Late Show with David Letterman (R.E.M.), an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Late Show with David Letterman (R.E.M.) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 13:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Table layout

Hello, We’re just trying to solve a dispute with another user about the Keeping Up Appearances tabular layout , and would like your opinion on the subject. Do you think, on the K.U.A episode page, the original yellow tables were better than the new format? Or not? Your opinion is appreciated on the Keeping Up Appearances list of episodes discussion page, thanks. Edito*Magica (talk) 01:53, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Cologne Cathedral

I removed the edit about the square, simply because it didn't appear to connect with or add any value to the introduction. I want to know the the significance of the square so I followed the link and discovered that a rock band had once performed there. So?

The point is, giving the name of the square is relatively meaningless. The building is also near a river, near a bridge, near another church etc. What is it about the square that can be said with relevance to the cathedral? Is it a large square that provides a great view, is it the main entrance, is it surrounded by old buildings and therefore part of the World Heritage site, or what? Is the square famous in some way that relates to the cathedral? Gimme a sentence that describes its relationship meaningfully. Amandajm (talk) 10:10, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied here.

Wikipedia:Three-revert rule

I should draw your attention to the rule that you have violated with your recent edits to Rafa Benitez.Londo06 09:22, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied here.

Apologies, come close to violating.Londo06 09:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

WVPN

Thank you for letting me know, Dude, but anyway yes, WVPN is the home station for Mountain Stage. You can edit it if you like. The Punk (talk) 07:19, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Portland Government added

Yeah sorry for the confusion... my session expired when i saved the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rigby27 (talk • contribs) 19:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

FC reverts

Apologies I ended up reverting your recent change to Kirkcaldy YM F.C. I've reverted back in favour of your changeTmol42 (talk) 15:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Goffs Oak

Hi. Perhaps you could help then. How do I make an entry about Rememberance Sunday relevant ? --Nwgxw57 (talk) 12:26, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Pardon ? How is Remberence Sunday not relevant ? Try searching for the topic. --Nwgxw57 (talk) 21:34, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

IMDB

It's not on the list of unreliable sources and it's allowed to be used. Removing information just because you want to is unacceptable. Stop removing the information on Holly Marie Combs' sisters. It's got a reference and IMDB does count. And rather than deleting information, request citation but don't just delete because you have an issue.KellyAna (talk) 02:41, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

It is, actually. - Dudesleeper / Talk 04:08, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Add a request for citation but don't remove it. And your link doesn't substantiate your claim. KellyAna (talk) 04:30, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

From the above link: Trivia on sites such as IMDb or FunTrivia should not be used as sources. Which bit is confusing you? - Dudesleeper / Talk 04:33, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't even try. I haven't violated anything and I've added two references so don't even try, you'll be called out for attempting to issue false warnings and I've tried to talk to you and you're being impossible. KellyAna (talk) 04:32, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

And use of the term ignorance is gross incivility. Try not to do that again. KellyAna (talk) 04:34, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

It is perfectly allowable to remove any comment from your own talk page. I don't know what you think I've done wrong, but stop adding the same thing to my talk page 4 times after I've removed it allowably under Wikipedia guidelines. Stop re-adding the same thing over and over. There's no need. KellyAna (talk) 04:47, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Before I post my request for arbitration, did you see the light and purposely revert the article back to my revision or is that an oversight on your part? - Dudesleeper / Talk 05:06, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

IP adresses

Hi, I think someone may have the same IP address as me or something, because I did not vandalise some article about Bondi and some other member sent me a message about changes to a mathematical article, which I also did not do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.139.131.46 (talk) 05:49, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Aye. - Dudesleeper / Talk 06:12, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

BFC player stats

Ah right thanks, bugger. What I will do then is carry on with this so that I get at least continuity and then I will check on soccerbase and update them correctly. Thanks for letting me know.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 17:39, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I've added now todays stats. The previous update then was yours from 3rd February so presumably the matches (Wolves, Hull and Ipswich) between then and today need adding which I can get from todays match programme which I have, as it contains all the info needed of who played and scored in those games. Is that right? Though with Paul Dickov someone seems to be adding his stats after every game so his stats seem to be accurate.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 17:45, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Just to let you know all the stats are now up to date. I cross-checked them all with soccerbase and todays match programme, and they are all now correct (hopefully).♦Tangerines♦·Talk 19:49, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Article ownership

I've been rather busy and haven't got back to you about Roncalliplatz. I observe that someone independently deleted the article which now redirects to Cologne Cathedral where it simply hung in the air, until I fixed it.

You seem to be quite competent at writing, when it comes to levelling insults. I'm not interested in ownership, but like many other editors who are a) knowledgeable b) prepared to do research c) write well, I have an aim to make the encyclopedia as good as an encyclopedia can be. Basically, if you don't want what you write to be assessed, altered or even cut out by other editors, don't do it.

Here is the end of the introduction. This is what went before your sentence: Cologne Cathedral, despite having been left incomplete during the medieval period, eventually became unified as "a masterpiece of exceptional intrinsic value" and "a powerful testimony to the strength and persistence of Christian belief in medieval and modern Europe",[1] as was befitting a worship-place of the Holy Roman Emperor and the traditional shrine of the Three Kings.

Here is your addition: The cathedral is bounded on its southern side by Roncalliplatz.

The statement is perfectly true, and utterly banal. After using a quote with terms like "masterpiece" and "exceptional intrinsic value", your bald, uninteresting statement comes as a total anticlimax to the introduction.

In other words, if you, as an editor care twopence for the article you are adding to, then read the article, and put the info in the right place. If all you are trying to do is make a link to the R.E.M. concert, then put it in the See also. If you are giving the significant location of the building, put it in the first or second sentence.

I followed the links, found that the concert was for a charitable cause and was, (I suppose) organised under the auspices of either the cathedral or the town council. Since it seemed (to me anyway) to be a "big deal", I wrote it into the historical section, which you could have done, just as easily as I did.

Amandajm (talk) 10:20, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

(Minus) FC

Hey Dudesleeper, hope you're well and didn't fall asleep in the middle of the Carling Cup final today. Just wanted to let you know that, once more, I've waded in on the latest round of Sarumio edits. If, for some reason, I miss the next lot, let me know - the block button is there for a reason and Sarumio is really pushing the boundaries of WP:AGF right now... All the best to you, The Rambling Man (talk) 18:21, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

More than happy. Frankly I don't give a damn either way on the FC issue, but it's the objection to resolving a consensus and the introduction of incorrect information that has really got my goat. Fight the good fight. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:27, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Alan Shearer

Thanks for the note - as far as I can see, his arithmetic is wrong. If you look at the 2001-02 results at [1], Shearer did score 27 goals in total but 4 of those were cup goals; 2 vs. Ipswich & 1 each vs. Palace and Peterborough. Thus, his league goals in 2001-02 were 23, not 24. This ties up with the totals at Soccerbase and www. allfootballers.com. I was meaning to leave a note on the talk page, but family life got in the way. I'll do it straightaway. If you don't agree, I'll have a closer look at the individual match results. Cheers. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 20:29, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Tulloch (racehorse)

I see that you have created a disambiguation page for Tulloch and moved the original article to Tulloch (racehorse). The convention in disambiguating horse names (see Category:Thoroughbred racehorses) seems to be to append (horse) rather than (racehorse) to the name. I have tried to move the article to Tulloch (horse) but got an error message. I wonder if you able to do this. Also could you amend all the links to the original article. Thanks. - Cuddy Wifter (talk) 02:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Good job. Many thanks. - Cuddy Wifter (talk) 21:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Surumio again

No, I don't believe the consensus was achieved over at WP:FOOTBALL. Do you want to try with him again or do you want me to bash my head into next week?? The Rambling Man (talk) 17:06, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I've nudged him again. I'd run out of tabs if I kept reverting him... I wonder if WP:FOOTY is the only project plagued with people who make hundreds of edits at a time, despite being advised not to... The Rambling Man (talk) 17:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Goffs Oak

Excuse me. I am just stating the fact that the lodge is named after the village. A large number of lodge founders came from Goffs Oak. In fact, quite a lot of the current members actually live in the village.
Question: who are you to start giving out 'warnings' ? That smacks a bit of self-rightousness. --Nwgxw57 (talk) 20:36, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Replied here.

Repeat - Question: who are you to start giving out 'warnings' ? That smacks a bit of self-rightousness.--Nwgxw57 (talk) 19:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Replied here.