Jump to content

User talk:99.169.250.133: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Line 50: Line 50:


Just to let you know, I reveted again, It's not the issue of noteablity that I have, it's the issue of removing the info. Maybe a list or something, but blanking all this is excessive. If you don't want the word "notable" then remove it, not 13k chars of good info. -- [[User:DeltaQuad|<font color="green">DQ]][[User_Talk:DeltaQuad|<font color="red"> (t) ]] <font color="blue">[[Special:EmailUser/DeltaQuad| (e)]]</font></font></font> 03:53, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Just to let you know, I reveted again, It's not the issue of noteablity that I have, it's the issue of removing the info. Maybe a list or something, but blanking all this is excessive. If you don't want the word "notable" then remove it, not 13k chars of good info. -- [[User:DeltaQuad|<font color="green">DQ]][[User_Talk:DeltaQuad|<font color="red"> (t) ]] <font color="blue">[[Special:EmailUser/DeltaQuad| (e)]]</font></font></font> 03:53, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
:Please read [[WP:3RR]]. My comment [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:99.169.250.133&diff=prev&oldid=408921763 here] that you removed clearly said "at the brink of" and "on the verge of" 3RR. Two reverts of the same material in just over an hour is indeed on the brink of 3RR, and it certainly can be seen as edit warring. And 3RR is not an entitlement to make 3 reverts, as I said. Thank you for bringing it to Talk now however. <strong>[[User:Tvoz|Tvoz]]</strong>/<small>[[User talk:Tvoz|talk]]</small> 07:23, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 07:23, 20 January 2011

September 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from List of Navy SEALs. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Atlantabravz (talk) 18:12, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lassana Diara

Everyone knows his legal name, but in the the Spanish league players can register under "playing" names or nicknames. When came to play for Madrid Lass was name he chose to be called. The official website (both English & Spanish) and the Spanish sportspapers use "Lass", but I do not understand why Wikipedians seem to have a hard time with this! Raul17 (talk) 22:26, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Who will be confused? I think that it's more confusing when someone looks at the website, sees the player as one wat and then sees it in wikipedia as something else. Furthermore, people do not use a squad page to find out about a player, they would go to that player's page. If someone "wondered" in on the roster, saw "Lass" and clicked the name, that reader would be taken to Lassana Diarra and explanation would be given to as why the player is called by that nickname. I think wikipedia has some sort of a search-engine where you can type in the name and would be directed to the player's page. I thought that Wikipedia article needed resources to verify statements or claims: team websites, newspapers, etc. But it doesn't matter.

Maybe you can answer why some readers delete the Real Madrid logo from the two reserve teams' articles stating something about the fair use policy or some such, but leave the other reserve team articles that also using the parent team logo alone? In fact, one deleted the logo from Barcelona C but left Barcelona B alone!Raul17 (talk) 01:33, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The logos question was to ask for your opinion/theory. Kaká, Guti or Pepe aren't a nick-name? Raúl was never called Raúl González in his playing career, but he kept listed as that. Anyway, who cares? BYB, are you Devoindahouse? Raul17 (talk) 22:07, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, I am not. There's a difference between "Kaka" which is a cultural brazilian normalcy, and taking someone who has been known as Lassana Diarra his entire career, and referring to him only as Lass. 99.169.250.133 (talk) 22:14, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

September 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to John Motson, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: John Motson was changed by 99.169.250.133 (u) (t) deleting 9830 characters on 2009-09-22T06:25:11+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 06:25, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Charlie Davies article

I have reinserted the information about the curfew into this article. However, I believe that, rather than engaging in an edit war, you might have gotten a better response from the other user had you been less abrasive in your message on his talk page, and in your edit summaries. I have encouraged him to discuss the matter on the talk page of the article, and encourage you to be constructive if said discussion takes place. SpartanSWAT10 (talk) 03:57, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I began the discussion on the page! Hopefully he'll come talk about why removing sourced material isn't vandalism...cause that's what it is! 99.169.250.133 (talk) 04:14, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Tonight Show w/ Conan O'Brien

Well, for some reason, the {{Talkback}} template doesn't work with this page, but I responded to your post on the Talk:The_Tonight_Show_with_Conan_O'Brien#Final_Episode page. –Kerαunoςcopiagalaxies 04:37, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of United States soccer players playing abroad

Why would youth players be considered "non notable"?? If they have their own Wiki they are most definitely notable in terms of the development of US Soccer. And even if they don't, it's still notable because so few Americans play abroad. Perhaps if there were a larger amount of Americans playing youth ball in foreign countries but the likes of Sebastian Lletget and Zak Whitbread happen to be very notable in the United States and thus deserve to be included in this list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.174.210.100 (talk) 00:25, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:

You are welcome to continue editing articles without logging in, but many editors recommend that you create an account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits such as the ability to create articles. For a full outline and explanation of the benefits that come with creating an account, please see this page. If you edit without a username, your IP address (99.169.250.133) is used to identify you instead.

In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page. Again, welcome! Literaturegeek | T@1k? 14:26, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Colts

I was assuming you saw it on the roster page or the ESPN player profile. ESPN articles are reliable. Anyway, Pats1 explained it. If he got #80, he's primarily a TE for now. If he still had #65, he'd be primarily a G. Gs are never allowed to wear 80s numbers except when there is absolutely no other available number for his position. RevanFan (talk) 02:06, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pats1 happens to be one of the best NFL editors on here. Anyway, normally, they would just keep him at #65 and have the refs say "#65 is reporting eligible." Switching him would make it easier, but it's normally not done. RevanFan (talk) 03:05, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know, I reveted again, It's not the issue of noteablity that I have, it's the issue of removing the info. Maybe a list or something, but blanking all this is excessive. If you don't want the word "notable" then remove it, not 13k chars of good info. -- DQ (t) (e) 03:53, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:3RR. My comment here that you removed clearly said "at the brink of" and "on the verge of" 3RR. Two reverts of the same material in just over an hour is indeed on the brink of 3RR, and it certainly can be seen as edit warring. And 3RR is not an entitlement to make 3 reverts, as I said. Thank you for bringing it to Talk now however. Tvoz/talk 07:23, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]