User talk:Blue Square Thing: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 06:34, 17 May 2011

Welcome!

Hello, Blue Square Thing, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- MightyWarrior (talk) 22:07, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lowestoft

I think your draft is a massive improvement on the hotch-potch that is the existing Lowestoft article. I appreciate the page is currently under lockdown, but how about starting up a discussion at Talk:Lowestoft now for the article's wholesale replacement? In other news, have you considered WP:CT? U+003F^? 10:53, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've never bothered with WP:CT, mainly, I think, because the articles I've tended to work on have been smallish ones without too many references. Would you suggest it as a more effective way of dealing with references in longer articles or just easier in general? Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:25, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree entirely, and would subscribe to the replacement suggestion. Roaringboy 06:32, 25 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roaringboy (talk • contribs)

Thanks both of you for that. I've made a proposal at the talk page to see if that can get a bit more pov - I'm aware of WP:OWN issues on this article for sure! Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:25, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wilby School

I agree i just thought if it would be notable if I put alot of info. Please could you delete it. Thanks Wilbysuffolk talk 15:47, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Barrow AFC

Hello Blue Square Thing, I appreciate your time and effort to try and make this a better page, I only have one problem and that you do upload some uneeded things, like Barrow's defeat to FCUoM. The defeat to Guisely is required, due to Barrow not retaing the FA Trophy. I see where your coming from about the season not being the best, but we don't want the page to be too negative, ok. Next Time just think next time you edit, just think whether it is needed or if it is too negative. Barrovian (talk) 16:54, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll reply to this on the article talk page with some suggestions. Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:58, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Benacre and related pages

Hi. I notice that you moved some of the Benacre articles around back in February. I was wondering if there was any reason you'd object to moving Benacre village back to Benacre, Suffolk - which would fit with just about every other village in Suffolk! I understand why you'd maybe want a separate Benacre dab page (although at the minute the quality of the articles is limited and they could, in theory, all be merged except the Australian one), it's just that the move to Benacre village itself doesn't necessarily follow for me.

I'm quite happy to go about the doing of it all, just wanted to run it by you first in case there was some kind of obvious reason for doing it that I missed. Ta. Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:39, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Originally, the article was at "Benacre", "Benacre, Suffolk" was a redirect to it, "Benacre village" was unused, and there were assorted other "Benacre" entries.

So I moved "Benacre" to "Benacre village" and turned "Benacre" into a dab page.

I don't remember doing any other moves regarding Benacre. (Did I?)

I'm OK with you moving "Benacre village" to "Benacre, Suffolk" if you wish, but you'll need to ask an admin to do it for you. I couldn't move it to "Benacre, Suffolk" myself, so I chose the unused "village".

(BTW: As far as I'm aware, "Benacre, Suffolk" has always been a redirect to "Benacre", so it's not a case of "moving it back".)

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 04:49, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is probable - and thanks for the explanation btw, it's much clearer now! I'm happy with the dab given the Australian page and the handful of other pages about the place. What I'll prolly do is ask for a procedural deletion on Benacre, Suffolk and then move the page across to maintain it's history I think. Unless there's anything obvious you can see that would suggest that's not a good idea? Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:36, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds good to me. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 09:32, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EA derby

I see you reinserted the para about the NCFC win but not the one removed about the ITFC win. Anyway, I have tagged it because it claims to be "important" but provides no verifiable evidence. Just wanted to let you know. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:20, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No worries - it just struck me that a semi-final, even if it was the League Cup, was, by definition, pretty notable. From memory - and I will review it - the other game(s) that were taken out were standard(ish) league games weren't they? I'm *very* conscious of a need for the page to appear balanced fwiw. I'm sure we can find an alternative game to throw in there. Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:27, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've changed important to notable, which I think is prolly fair, and added the Texaco Cup final which was about the best I could do. My edit summary asks whether anyone knows if there's been a game leading to, say, a team winning the league more or less directly. I can't think of any, although iirc the season City won Division 2 to get promoted to the Premier League (it wasn't called Div 2, but I don't remember what it was called that season...) they first went top of the league in a derby game. But that doesn't really strike me as awfully notable. Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:05, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Derby

Sensible stuff. I think the graph of relative league positions would be a useful illustration to accompany it. Even better if it could be brought up to date. I'll drop TRM a line on this. --Dweller (talk) 09:21, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with the graph is that it's more relevant to Pride of Anglia rather than the derby which is a single game thing. I think? Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:29, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed it's more relevant - but what it helps with is seeing instantly the preponderance of years in which there would have been a league derby in recent times, which is nice. --Dweller (talk) 10:37, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's true - I wonder if there's a way we could do a results grid or similar? Might be worth looking on similar article pages at some point and comparing maybe? Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:44, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

<-Good idea. I'd be surprised if there weren't some well-developed derby articles in different sports and countries --Dweller (talk) 10:46, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi guys, the Pride of Anglia website (subscription required, albeit a tiny one) has this information. I could reasonably easily knock up a graph of this data, providing, once again, someone tells me how many clubs were in each league every season since 1938!! The Rambling Man (talk) 11:54, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It also has every match between the two with (I'm afraid) only Ipswich scorers noted (so not too many of those lately...!) The Rambling Man (talk) 11:56, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was vaguely looking to see if I could find a City top scorer, but the information isn't easily available. Looking at a few other articles, btw, there doesn't seem to be either a consistent or simple solution to showing stuff like this. I remain unconvinced a graph helps on *this page*, but it might make sense to try to do something vaguely visual. Hmmm... Blue Square Thing (talk) 12:30, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On the graph front, I think it'll help. On the top scorer front, I've dropped an email to the EDP to ask for help. --Dweller (talk) 13:04, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You guys do know there's already a ncfc v itfc finishing position graph here don't you? It overlooks recent unpleasantness which I think is just fine... The Rambling Man (talk) 13:57, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's lovely. Just four or so years out of date. --Dweller (talk) 14:00, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks perfectly fine to me. A good start, shall we say? In all seriousness, Perhaps Burwellian has the original data that can be updated? Would be a whole heap easier than starting from scratch... (oh, and Dweller, see that peak which gets right to the very top of the graph? You don't seem to have one of those, right?)... The Rambling Man (talk) 14:03, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed the ITFC site wasn't showing this years results either actually... :-)

I've tried to find an alternative list to the one that needs to be paid for (it's not all that helpful to have that as a ref if most people can't verify it) and the ITFC one was about the best I could find. There must be somewhere which has all this information? I'm still dubious on a graph of league position fwiw - I don't know, cumulative wins/wins per decade/some kind of rolling 5 year mean chart might be more targeted at this article? But far too complex no doubt!! Blue Square Thing (talk) 14:15, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, it's awkward having the information behind a paywall. Sign of the times. Cumulative wins would work for me, the rolling mean is to complex and probably doesn't make too much more sense than a simple cum. win graph. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:19, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Probably easier to produce and keep vaguely up to date as well I imagine. I think it's defendable given the article (i.e. someone will moan that the Binners are on top, but I think it's a logical thing to include and I'd defend it as balanced).

I was wondering about a bit that starts something along the lines of:

One side has scored five goals in a game in the fixture on X occasions ... (list in here?). Six (or more??) goals have been scored in a game on Y occasions (list...).

It's a bit clumsy, but I think there's some mileage maybe in something like that.

I was also wondering if there's mileage in a bit on crowd trouble? Given that the recent game created quite a lot of press and I know there have been issues in the past, including along a fairly organised line iirc. Thoughts? Blue Square Thing (talk) 14:27, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, yes etc, all good ideas. Once again, the PoA website has all the individual results, all the attendances (where available) etc, just a shame it's deemed negative to sit behind a cheapo paywall. Crowd trouble should be easily sourced given recent "events". The Rambling Man (talk) 14:30, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Need to try and find some more historical stuff as well if possible. I may be able to look at some archives through a uni account - I'll see. Blue Square Thing (talk) 14:35, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Username

How the heck did you end up with the word "blue" in it? --Dweller (talk) 15:18, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, it's one of those things you do when you need a name for a website (a teaching one in my case) and you don't want to call it "Mr X's Website" :-) It has, obviously, nothing to do with "them"! Comes from an old rag mag joke from 25 years ago I think - I forget now Blue Square Thing (talk) 15:49, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably because the Budgies started in blue-and-white. Job done. All good teams play in that livery. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:53, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gunny

Please see my latest post at WT:FOOTY. PS Are you in Norwich today? --Dweller (talk) 11:31, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ta - will have a look and a dig about. Not in the City - floor being relaid today :-) Blue Square Thing (talk) 11:35, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

henrypeter21

If you would like me to revert, it, i Can, but i only shortened it to make it simple to read so everyone can understand it. that way more people will view the page.

@@ Line 106: / Line 106: @@
 :Ta - will have a look and a dig about. Not in the City - floor being relaid today :-) [[User:Blue Square Thing|Blue Square Thing]] ([[User talk:Blue Square Thing#top|talk]]) 11:35, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
+== henrypeter21 ==
+If you would like me to revert, it, i Can, but i only shortened it to make it simple to read so everyone can understand it. that way more people will view the page.