User talk:SuperJew/2016

Nomination of Gavin Brown Award for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gavin Brown Award is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gavin Brown Award until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Flickerd (talk) 06:01, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Savvyjack23 (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Savvyjack23 (talk) 07:59, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Harry Collier Trophy

Template:Harry Collier Trophy has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Jenks24 (talk) 07:20, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Joseph Wren Trophy

Template:Joseph Wren Trophy has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Jenks24 (talk) 07:21, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Reversal of closure.

Please see this RfC and this discussion for why it is perfectly acceptable for me to close TfD discussions. You are welcome to bring the issue to DelRev, but simply undoing my edits is not proper procedure. Primefac (talk) 22:08, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Gavin Brown Award

Template:Gavin Brown Award has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Jenks24 (talk) 13:07, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

#OneYearAgoToday

we can't sit on our laurels forever. LOL - as will be hammered home in the next FIFA Rankings in a few days time, where our results from that competition are downgraded, and we "lose" 15% of our points and fall 9 places. No longer in the Top 4 in AFC, which might be very important in the draw for the 2018 FIFA World Cup qualification – AFC Third Round. Matilda Maniac (talk)

The FIFA rankings are baloney. Sometimes teams win all their games or don't play and still drop places. I'm really pleased with Ange that he's been using friendlies to blood new players and improve the depth and playing style rather than going for the win and rankings at all costs. --SuperJew (talk) 08:36, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Guangzhou Evergrande Taobao

Hi SuperJew, i see your recent edits and i would say that Guangzhou Evergrande Taobao F.C. uses name Guangzhou Evergrande in the 2016 AFC Champions League as they did in last season [1] and 2015 FIFA Club World Cup [2], to be sure see [3]. Hazel (talk) 16:10, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Template:ICC Cricketer of the Year Award

Hello
I reverted your edit on {{ICC Cricketer of the Year Award}} because it is not necessary to add the same layout in all sports template. If you want to change the layout please discuss it on the talk page of the template but please don't change it before discussing.
Thank you.--Musa^Talk ☻ 16:50, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Musa, It is not necessary necessary, but it is preferable and much desire to create consistency where possible across Wikipedia, and certainly across projects. This gives a more professional look to the site and easier navigating for the users. --SuperJew (talk) 17:05, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

And have no fear about it affecting the template's deletion status. Templates are nominated/not nominated for deletion based on their notability status. If someone is not happy with a format style they will change it or bring it up on the talk page. --SuperJew (talk) 17:07, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Kate Gill

may have retired, rather than is unattached or free agent. I think it happened after she was omitted from the Matildas squad last April or may - I'll have a look later to see whether she was on any players rosters in the Perth metropolitan womens league or not during last winters season. She recently joined the PFA. Matilda Maniac (talk) 12:15, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

She was moved to unattached/free agent status when she was released by Perth Glory, and since then I haven't seen (and can't find now either) any news about her whereabouts. Could well be she's retired, and I will certainly not object to you changing it if you know this, but administrators and bureaucrats would probably want a reference :S --SuperJew (talk) 12:25, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

And based on this article, she joined the PFA while still with Perth Glory. --SuperJew (talk) 12:39, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

i only though she joined PFA late last year.... anyway i will hunt her down from player rosters from 2015 winter season here, and a contact i have at Football West who may shed some light. But i'm about to go inactive again for 2-6 weeks, as am off to Ghana tomorrow and later Egypt in early March - i'm going to be on minesites, and they're often quite hit and miss for whether there's available internet to connect to in the evenings. Matilda Maniac (talk) 13:32, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

No worries! Thanks and enjoy! --SuperJew (talk) 13:50, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Oops - sorry!

My mistake - I meant to remove the agnosia category - sorry! Richerman (talk) 11:36, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

No worries! you're alright :) --SuperJew (talk) 11:41, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Shawn Billam

The article Shawn Billam has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence this footballer meets WP:GNG or has played in a fully pro league.

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. C679 13:37, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Sophie Nenadovic

The article Sophie Nenadovic has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence this footballer meets WP:GNG or has played in a fully pro league.

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. C679 13:37, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Thia Eastman

The article Thia Eastman has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence this footballer meets WP:GNG or has played in a fully pro league.

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. C679 14:51, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Sarah Carroll

The article Sarah Carroll has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence this footballer meets WP:GNG or has played in a fully pro league.

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. C679 17:37, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Invitation

Thank you for your contributions to women's football/soccer articles. I thought I'd let you know about the Women's Football/Soccer Task Force (WP:WOSO), a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of women's football/soccer. If you would like to participate, join by visiting the Members page. Thanks!

Hmlarson (talk) 19:16, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, I joined ;) --SuperJew (talk) 20:24, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Antony Golec

hello,

in regards to my wikipedia page (Antony Golec) im trying to update it and you keep deleting my edits. i've played 8 games for my new club and you changed it back to 8. is there anyway you can allow me to edit my own page without changing what i do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.19.212.5 (talk) 11:17, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

First of all please notice that the infobox has stats only for league caps and goals. If you can verify with a reference that Golec played 8 league games please do. As of now based on soccerway Golec has played 6 league games. Cheers! --SuperJew (talk) 11:23, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

About Mason Cox - maybe a WP:DYK?

Hi SuperJew-bhai.
I note that The-Pope-bhai has also been working on this article.
What do you think about this?--Shirt58 (talk) 12:07, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

I think it's worth trying. The article is only half as long as it needs to be to qualify (1500 article prose characters), but it's unique enough to easily pass the bar. I'll add some info to clarify his uniqueness (well second-uniqueness after Jason Holmes), but you should definitely have a go at DYK. The-Pope (talk) 14:18, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Not sure what the criteria, but he is definitely a unique snowflake :D --SuperJew (talk) 14:21, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Category:Melbourne City FC W-League players has been nominated for discussion

Category:Melbourne City FC W-League players, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Joeykai (talk) 21:24, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Australia women's national under-20 soccer team

I dispute your assertions about your recent edits that "Results" in competitive records are the minimum possible stage that a national team can reach even though the tournament hasn't begun yet. ("Group Stage" for the 2016 AFF Championships). I believe its the contrary, that for future tournaments the norm for national teams for this parameter is either "To be determined", "Qualified" or "Did not Qualified". For example, the senior Australia national soccer team result for the 2017 FIFA Confederations Cup is "Qualified" even though its sure that they will at least go through the group stage.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 07:33, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Have a look around at other national team pages and through the history. It makes sense, as the team has already been drawn to the group-stage and if they don't make it through they'll finish at group-stage. If they do make it through the page will be updated accordingly.

Specifically, Socceroos in the 2017 Confederations Cup are qualified for the tournament but have not been drawn to the group stage yet. Once the draw happens, the result will be updated to group stage. --SuperJew (talk) 07:36, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Template:2015–16 A-League PFA Team of the Season

Hi there SJ, from Portugal,

like I said in my explanatory summary in said article, I was only trying to replicate the approach. If you notice, squad templates for EVERY club season, as well as those for European Championships, World Cups or Copa América, only bear the surname of the player (if that's the way he's known by, that is, sometimes it's the first name or a nick, in the case of POR/SPA/BRA players mostly). Also, I fail to see the coherence of having starters with name/surnames and the subs with only surname.

Whatever, it stays your way, only trying to help. Happy editing --Be Quiet AL (talk) 01:55, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

I'll bring it up for discussion with the Aussie soccer task force. My main reason for reverting was to keep it consistent with the other years A-League PFA Team of the Season templates. --SuperJew (talk) 13:47, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I completely understand your point of view, but maybe the other season templates could be adjusted and not the 2015/16 one. Anyway it may be, i'll respect the task force's decision. --Be Quiet AL (talk) 15:42, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Mason Cox has been nominated for Did You Know

Hello, SuperJew. Mason Cox, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 14:24, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Mason Cox

On 16 June 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mason Cox, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mason Cox. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Mason Cox), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Allen3 ^talk 12:40, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

2012–13 Sydney FC season

Here's why I made those changes to remove piping from stadium links.

The names of venues tend to change because of sponsorship deals with naming rights. A redirect provides a simple way to ensure that all links to an old name will go to the article under the current name. Piping an old name to the current name is pointless because if the name changes again, as it surely will when the current sponsorship deal comes to an end, the piped name will itself become a redirect and the already trivial benefit of a direct link will be lost.

Here are some relevant extracts from guides to best practice in piping and redirects:

1. From Wikipedia:Piped_link#When_not_to_use:

• It is generally not good practice to pipe links simply to avoid redirects. The number of links to a redirect page can be a useful gauge of when it would be helpful to spin off a subtopic of an article into its own page.
• Introducing unnecessary invisible text makes the article more difficult to read in page source form.
• Non-piped links make better use of the "what links here" tool, making it easier to track how articles are linked and helping with large-scale changes to links.

2. From Wikipedia:Redirect#Do_not_.22fix.22_links_to_redirects_that_are_not_broken:

• There is usually nothing wrong with linking to redirects to articles. Some editors are tempted, upon finding a link to a redirect page, to bypass the redirect and point the link directly at the target page. While there are a limited number of cases where this is beneficial, there is otherwise no good reason to pipe links solely to avoid redirects. Doing so is generally an unhelpful, time-wasting exercise that can actually be detrimental. It is almost never helpful to replace [[redirect]] with [[target|redirect]].

Colonies Chris (talk) 08:46, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

That's exactly why the the pages are under the real names and not the sponsorship names. The real name of the park rarely (if ever changes). --SuperJew (talk) 08:51, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm glad to hear it. This is the reverse of the approach that's been taken to North American venues, whose article titles change with each new sponsor. It would still be better to rely on the redirect though, rather than piping, for the reasons noted above. Colonies Chris (talk) 09:42, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

• The number of links to a redirect page can be a useful gauge of when it would be helpful to spin off a subtopic of an article into its own page. - not relevant as the articles won't need a spin-off article.
• Introducing unnecessary invisible text makes the article more difficult to read in page source form - not really relevant as it is in stadium line in a football box.
• Non-piped links make better use of the "what links here" tool, making it easier to track how articles are linked and helping with large-scale changes to links. - again won't be large-scale changes to real name as opposed to sponsored name that might have.
• I'll decide what's time-wasting exercise for me and what's not.

--SuperJew (talk) 10:16, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Continental column

Worth discussing at WT:FOOTY? I'm sure it's come up before where it was agreed the column would be reserved for players like Giggs and Ronaldo, who played 15 games in Europe for their entire career - for players with a handful of appearances (or in Fletcher's case - none!) it could and should be absorbed into 'Other' column. GiantSnowman 07:26, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

If anything "Other" should be the column not appearing as it is rarely used. --SuperJew (talk) 07:28, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Report about 2016 AFF U-16 Youth Championship

The Report of the ASEAN Football Federation about result of the match Myanmar-Vietnam was wrong. The last scorer is Nguyễn Hữu Thắng, not Võ Văn Huy. You should check again quickly, it is important for me.

I went by the match report. When the PDF match report will be published I'll use that and whatever scorer they say there. see WP:V --SuperJew (talk) 07:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

I changed it now per the official report --SuperJew (talk) 08:16, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, but if the official report has wrong information??? You still accept?? Pity! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usainnguyen (talk • contribs) 11:39, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

The official report is the most verifiable source. If you think their information is wrong contact them. --SuperJew (talk) 11:45, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Wrong for sure, not needs to think, no problems -_- I don't care — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usainnguyen (talk • contribs) 13:50, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

I understand what you're saying, but the guidelines here is to have a verifiable source (which YouTube isn't), and furthermore even if I was at the game myself I couldn't put stuff I learned from there because of no original research. --SuperJew (talk) 13:53, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Scorers of the 2016 AFF U-16 Youth Championship

Hi, Nguyễn Hữu Thắng score the last goal at 69', not 79'. The report of AFF is wrong. Please check on again video. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usainnguyen (talk • contribs) 10:42, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

The details are per the official report which is a verifiable source. Please stop spamming my talk page with your nonsense. --SuperJew (talk) 11:18, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

You are as a machine, very fast :P — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usainnguyen (talk • contribs) 13:46, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

2016 AFF U-16 Youth Championship Group A

Hi, Australia has better goal difference, should be in second place according to tiebreakers... Simione001 (talk) 12:08, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Here, I'll quote the tiebreakers for this tournament:

The teams are ranked according to points (3 points for a win, 1 point for a draw, 0 points for a loss). If tied on points, tiebreakers are applied in the following order:

1. Greater number of points obtained in the group matches between the teams concerned;
2. Goal difference resulting from the group matches between the teams concerned;
3. Greater number of goals scored in the group matches between the teams concerned;
4. If, after applying criteria 1 to 3, teams still have an equal ranking, criteria 1 to 3 are reapplied exclusively to the matches between the teams in question to determine their final rankings. If this procedure does not lead to a decision, criteria 5 to 9 apply;
5. Goal difference in all the group matches;
6. Greater number of goals scored in all the group matches;
7. Penalty shoot-out if only two teams are involved and they are both on the field of play;
8. Fewer score calculated according to the number of yellow and red cards received in the group matches (1 point for a single yellow card, 3 points for a red card as a consequence of two yellow cards, 3 points for a direct red card, 4 points for a yellow card followed by a direct red card);
9. Drawing of lots.

The teams tied on 7 points are Australia (AUS), Malaysia (MAS) and Myanmar (MYA). Currently the matches between the teams concerned were MYA 1-1 AUS & MAS 1-0 MYA.

Based on that between the three they'd be ranked:

Malaysia: 3 points, +1 goal difference.

Australia: 1 point, 0 goal difference.

Myanmar: 1 point, -1 goal difference.

--SuperJew (talk) 12:26, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, but aren't the teams concerned all the teams in the group? Simione001 (talk) 12:31, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

No, it's specifically the teams tied on points. All teams in the group comes into effect only in criteria 5 & 6. --SuperJew (talk) 12:35, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

They always have to be different for the sake of being different in the AFC. That is a ridiculous ranking system. First time I've seen something like this. Simione001 (talk) 12:40, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Why only take into account the last match of the teams concerned? What about the rest? Not important??? LOL. Simione001 (talk) 12:42, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

It's not such a unique system. I've seen it used in a few tournaments, most recently Euro 2016. I didn't understand the comment about the taking into accoutn only the last match. The matches I mentioned are the only matches involving two out of these three teams that have taken place as of now this tournament. --SuperJew (talk) 12:46, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

So it's like a table within a table. Simione001 (talk) 12:49, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Sort of yeah --SuperJew (talk) 12:53, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

So Simione001, seems I owe you an apology. I was working according to the tiebreakers listed on the tournament's wikipage, but according to the tournament's official regulations, in this case you were correct (section 9.1.5). Will update the page accordingly. --SuperJew (talk) 15:02, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Changing sources

Hey,

Just a heads up - I'd probably steer clear of replacing reliable sources with sources from the A-League/club official sites as you did here. These pages have an unfortunate habit of going offline very fast (for example, the vast majority of references at A-League transfers for 2013–14 season are now not linking to the correct/corresponding articles. Not only are the articles from public broadcasters (ABC, SBS, Radio NZ and BBC) very relaible, they are also online for way longer (many dating back over ten years) and are not self-published, making them preferable.

Cheers, Macosal (talk) 13:51, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I actually notice that, must of been an edit-conflict issue. Cheers --SuperJew (talk) 17:58, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Edit conflicts

Can you watch out for edit conflicts when editing the list. You've added back in a load that I had removed... Cheers, Number 57 22:49, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Also, you need to be a bit more careful – for example, in the case of Roy Hunter you fixed the links in the infobox and then deleted his listing on the page. However, he wasn't actually in several of the categories (e.g. Category:Nuneaton Town F.C. players). Would you mind checking any that you did in that vein to make sure you haven't removed them without making sure the category was present? Cheers, Number 57 22:53, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I'll try to look out more --SuperJew (talk) 09:04, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

No problem. Somehow this time you removed some of the [[ from some lines?! Number 57 16:54, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello again. Any club that has or can have an article can have a player category. The three clubs you most recently added to the list all have articles, so there is no problem creating categories for them (there is no link between club notability and fully-professional leagues). Although strangely you left a few players on the list with clubs that aren't notable (e.g. Sale Holmfield, Nicholas Wanderers). If there were any players who you failed to categorise into these potential categories, can you go back and sort them out? Cheers, Number 57 09:10, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Done --SuperJew (talk) 11:42, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

About Vietnamese names

The user User:Hugopako are trying to write full Vietnamese names at the page 2016 AFF Women's Championship. Please help me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usainnguyen (talk • contribs) 16:43, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Looks good right now. I'll keep an eye on it, thanks. Tomorrow our Young Matildas kick off :D --SuperJew (talk) 16:50, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

I will kiss you for a win for Young Matildas :)) LOL.GL — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usainnguyen (talk • contribs) 17:24, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Can't watch the match of Y. Matildas :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usainnguyen (talk • contribs) 08:41, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately it's not being livestreamed, but we're leading by a 12th minute goal to Vine :) --SuperJew (talk) 09:04, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

About Vietnamese name at 2016 AFF Women's Championship

Why "Tuyết Dung", then not "Dung" as a short name? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usainnguyen (talk • contribs) 19:11, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Because for 4 syllables, the last 2 are used. See WP:VIETCON: "For four-syllable names, use the last two syllables as the short form." --SuperJew (talk) 19:13, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Kisses you :* :*

Project

Hi, I recieved your message about sub editing i will look into it, thank you :) JackETC (talk) 01:57, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

formatting FFA Cup

In refrence to the new easier formatting on 2016 FFA Cup back to the outdated one on (J man708's talk page), BOTH formats are supported. Some discussion here . . . New syntax for penalties list and here . . . Accessibility update. Rather than simply reverting, it is definitely more helpful to send these links to the other editor(s) to show the differences, which will get more traction with the different format IF it turns out to be easier. I am personally happier with line breaks, there's only opinions that this format is 'outdated'. But I'm going to give the line listing a go for penalties at least. Matilda Maniac (talk) 23:45, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Out of interest, why do you prefer the line breaks listing? I see no advantage to it apart from it being familiar. I also thought I wouldn't like the new syntax, but after a couple of boxes I love it and it seems to be much more readable and intuitive. --SuperJew (talk) 07:34, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

I'll give you feedback once I've tried it a few times. Cheers. Matilda Maniac (talk) 07:52, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

East Timor 0-20 Australia . . . . in the AFF Women's Championship !!! I AM NOW CONVINCED !!! Matilda Maniac (talk) 10:00, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Question

So let me get this straight, we only put the new club if its a direct transfer? I just thought we put the new team regardless and the "type of move" would show whether it was transfer or just a free move. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 08:44, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

The consensus right now (there were discussions about this 1 or 2 years ago) is that we only put in new clubs if it's a direct transfer. If it's a move between A-League clubs which is obvious the release from one club was done for a transfer (like Mitch Austin and Connor Pain this season) then it's also written in (as there are no official direct transfers between A-League clubs). To my understanding this is done like this because the relevance point is the club, not the players. For example, it is irrelevant to Melbourne City that Hughes moved to Kerala Blasters 3 months after his release from City. --SuperJew (talk) 08:50, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Linking you to some of the discussions: April 2015, June 2015, June 2016 --SuperJew (talk) 09:00, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

That makes sense. Gotcha. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 22:45, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Australia women's national soccer team results (2000–09):

Please explain your reversion. An edit summary of 'linking' is not sufficent explanation. My edits are in line with WP:OVERLINK.

What generally should not be linked

A good question to ask yourself is whether reading the article you're about to link to would help someone understand the article you are linking from. Unless a term is particularly relevant to the context in the article, the following are not usually linked:

• ...
• The names of major geographic features, locations (e.g. United States, London, New York City, Latvia, Berlin...), languages, nationalities (e.g. English, British, American, French, German...) and religions (e.g. Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism...)

Colonies Chris (talk) 17:46, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

In footballbox match results all over Wikipedia the countries are linked.

And in general your edits are erratic. Some countries unlinked, but some kept linked. Tokyo unlinked but all other cities kept linked. Stadium links being changed to redirect like Home Depot Center to Home Depot Center or Etihad Stadium to Etihad Stadium (that's definitely the oddest one I've seen ever). --SuperJew (talk) 17:57, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Infobox statistics

Hi, with regard to your recent edit at James Meredith, please note the infobox accounts for league statistics only. Mattythewhite (talk) 19:39, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Yeah. I put league stats only. please note that playoffs are counted as league statistics. Cheers, --SuperJew (talk) 20:14, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

And btw Mattythewhite, how about instead of getting your knickers in a twist about whether 6 play-off appearances count as league or not, how about you help out with leagues which don't get editing for stats. For example, I'm working right now on the Premier Soccer League, where a majority of players haven't been updated since 2013. --SuperJew (talk) 20:24, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

No, play-offs are not counted with league statistics, as has always been the case. And thanks, but I'm not looking for advice on what articles to edit. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:26, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Based off what? Soccerway has them grouped together. --SuperJew (talk) 20:28, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Based on 10+ year consensus. If you don't believe me, enquire at WT:FOOTY. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:31, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Well if there's 10+ year consensus I'm sure you can easily refer me to a page about it. --SuperJew (talk) 20:36, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

and just trying to help you to become a better editor and person instead of wallowing as a pretentious nob. --SuperJew (talk) 20:36, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Touched a nerve, have I? Mattythewhite (talk) 20:40, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

What nerve? you think I care that much if Meredith has 142 or 146 appearances listed? Doesn't take away from his performances or from his quality. Just annoys me a little all the people who sit and waste their time tens of people on one league when so many other leagues hardly have editors and are in shambles. Then you actually wonder why the only good quality stuff is a handful of leagues. --SuperJew (talk) 20:44, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Because they actually care about getting appearance data correct, perhaps? Mattythewhite (talk) 20:47, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

yes these look very correct --SuperJew (talk) 20:56, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Red/Yellow cards

Hi, I don't see the need for you removing the red/yellow cards from the 2016–17 Huddersfield Town A.F.C. season page. The link you posted in the edits page showed a link which led to nothing, and I think it's well informative. JRRobinson (talk) 21:33, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Sorry about that JRRobinson, must've been archived. Try Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 104#Red cards in football box. --SuperJew (talk) 21:37, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Collingwood 2006

Hello and no, that is not a typo in the section header. 2006 Collingwood Football Club season has been tagged as an unreferenced article since April 2007 and is in desperate need of some TLC; some of the sections were written before the season started and haven't been touched since. I noticed you have kept the more recent articles up to date, so perhaps you'd like to take on this older article when you have some free time. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 06:41, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the message AtHomeIn神戸. I'll have a look when I have more free time :) --SuperJew (talk) 06:43, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Collingwood players

I fully understand the point you're making about it being two separate stints, the years cover that and it is still shown as two separate periods but the games are shown as one. Pages across the project have it that way if it's all at the same club, and other editors have done it in this way too, (for example [4]). Apart from it being completely unnecessary to break it up at the same club, we should have pages across the project consistent. Flickerd (talk) 07:20, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

It's relevant to show which games are in which stint imo. Like if there's a club in between (instead of free agency) the games will be separate too. --SuperJew (talk) 07:24, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

I agree with you completely if there is a club in between and that is the case across the project, but there isn't for these players. I have opinions too about the way certain things should be presented, but we should have things consistent across the project. Flickerd (talk) 07:26, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

U16

You said, Also plenty of them will go on to play for senior, and it'd be a pain to retroactively link when they do. That's just pure guess work. Maybe a few per country might and even then how many women's football player articles actually get created for these minnow nations? Again, very few, if any at all. InternacionalFutbolista (talk) 10:06, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Look at any senior team, and you'll see that the majority of the squad played in the youth teams. Coaches and federations want to build their players up from the bottom. So no, it's not pure guess work. The fact that the articles don't get created doesn't reflect on them being articles that should be created, so no, not a valid point. --SuperJew (talk) 10:11, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Whether coaches and federations want to build their players up from the bottom or not is irrelevant to this discussion! These qualifiers are only one generation of each nations women's program. Saying that plenty of them will go on to play for their senior team IS pure guess work. Since this about player articles being notable or not, when you mention "them", you are referring to the goal scorers since those are the ones being wikilinked. Trying to argue that plenty of them will eventually go on to play for their country's senior team is again pure guess work! As I have also said, even if some of them do, how many of those players will actually get an article on Wikipedia? Barely any, if at all. So no it wouldn't be a "pain" to wikilink them in the future if they become notable and if they end up getting an article created about them. And yes this is very much a valid point. Adding wikilinks to names that are clearly not notable only encourages them to get created. Look at two of Vietnam's scorers. Articles have been created for them even though they're clearly not notable. First names also can be seen in the goal scorers section! Your argument is based on guess work and a bit of laziness. InternacionalFutbolista (talk) 10:22, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Good talk there with the personal attacks. The linking of names in football boxes happens all over wikipedia, regardless of notability. Furthermore the fact that a player didn't have an article created about them is not a reflection of their notability. Regarding the two Vietnam scorers, I have had previous experience with this user and they'd create those pages regardless if it was linked before or not. Oh wait, that's guess work. --SuperJew (talk) 10:53, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Personal attacks? haha! Where? You've got serious issues! If you're referring to me saying what you're doing is "guess work" is a "personal attack" then you really do have serious issues! You're right though, if a player didn't have an article created about them it is not a reflection of their notability. But you need to properly look at what you're adding wikilinks to! These players who scored are no older than FIFTEEN YEARS OLD, 15, ONE-FIVE! In general they're nowhere near notable at this point. Name me a scorer so far in this tournament who is actually notable? I bet you won't be able to name one. So yes, for the record, you saying that "plenty of them will play for their senior" is pure speculation or as per the term of the day, guess work!! Even if some of them do, that doesn't make them notable NOW, which is what is relevant and what this discussion is about! You even said yourself in your edit summary, that it would be a "pain" to link these players later on. That's laziness combined with your speculation that a majority of these scorers will be full internationals later and thus have a Wikipedia page. Yes, linking of player names in football boxes happens all over WP but does that you should continue the trend when clearly what you're linking isn't anywhere notable, perhaps a good chance they never will be? That's just more evidence of laziness. InternacionalFutbolista (talk) 14:06, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

A player doesn't have to be notable to be linked to, only to have a page created. So yes, they are currently not notable, but most likely many of them will be. This isn't guess work, it's the natural development in the football world. And I'm not being lazy, I'm being efficient so future me and other editors won't have to retroactively link every player. And with my experience of Wikipedia, if it's not linked now, it won't be linked retroactively. --SuperJew (talk) 14:09, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Clearly you don't seem to comprehend what I'm saying!! What you're saying about "natural development" is true but that's just in general and that refers to a nation's entire football program! You on the other hand are saying that "plenty of them" (meaning plenty of the players of the squad from this tournament) will eventually go on to play for their senior team! Now THAT is pure guess work! As for efficiency, that isn't an issue because if you look back at previous editions of the tournament, it's just a bunch of red links to players with the main reason being that the scorers are not notable are still aren't! InternacionalFutbolista (talk) 09:55, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

You've got serious issues! Even trying to insist on the Jordanian scorer as "Lina (footballer)" when he full name is known! It's Lina Al Maiah [5]. What's next? You're also gonna insist that two of Bangladesh's scorers should also be "Marzia (footballer)" and "Tohura (footballer)"? InternacionalFutbolista (talk) 16:11, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the reference. The official match report linked on the wikipage has only Lina listed. Sorry I'm not knowledgeable in all of Jordan's soccer players. And again, tone down on the personal attacks or I'll report you. --SuperJew (talk) 18:54, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Hutchinson / head coach role

Hi,

For a few reasons I think it's a bit of a stretch to describe Hutchinson as CCM's head coach for the past 3 weeks. Firstly, to me that is a position which must be designated by the club - and no such thing ever happened. In fact, the club deliberately steered away from suggesting that Hutchinson had that role, saying "John Hutchinson, Matthew Nash, Brice Johnson & Ben Cahn will continue the club’s pre-season preparations until a permanent Head Coach has been appointed". Yes that source you list does suggest that Hutchinson was made interim coach, but I think this is one scenario where a primary source is more useful than a secondary one, and I can't see any widespread confirmation that he was made head coach, even for the interim only. Yes, he probably did lead friendlies / training but I think it would be more accurate to describe the head coach position as vacant over the past few weeks.

Cheers, Macosal (talk) 13:19, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

If he lead friendlies/training than he was the caretaker coach. I agree with you it's not the same as Wamsley or Okon's coaching status, but that is why I added in brackets "a.i.". --SuperJew (talk) 13:27, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Under-17 players

Hi SuperJew, The players positions below were incorrect on the AFC website, start sheets and match reports. Both girls are Fowards.

Julia Vignes (no.22) is a Forward (FW) not a Defender Courtney Nevin (no.11) is a Forward (FW) not a Midfielder

The information on the AFC website in the Match Stats section had their positions down as incorrect.

LucySoccerplayermad (talk) 14:24, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I saw you wrote that. Do you have a reference website backing that up? --SuperJew (talk) 14:29, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi SuperJew, I'm going to bed now because it's late, can you advise how the changes that I have made can be accepted without you reverting them back all the time. The information I have given you is correct, the information on the AFC website was incorrect, the girls positions were wrong on the match sheets at the tournament. They are both forwards, they both play for FNSWI and both are strikers, i.e Forwards.. Actually I might have one reference, if you know about soccer you'll know that no.11 is usually left striker and no.22 is the 2nd left striker.. Cheers Lucy

Soccerplayermad (talk) 14:46, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

If you have a reference which backs your claim, a website (could be a player profile, a match report, an article, etc.), a verifiable newspaper or book. You can read more in depth at WP:RS and WP:V

Regarding the squad numbers, that is true historically, but these days squad numbers don't necessarily reflect the playing positions. Also number 22 is often given to goalkeepers. For example: The Socceroos' #11 and #22 are Chris Ikonomidis and Jackson Irvine who are both midfielders. Another example: Osvaldo Ardiles wore #1 for Argentina (as opposed to the classic goalkeeper wearing #1). So while it is a good estimate, if there other references saying otherwise, Wikipedia goes with the reference.

I realise as a new user it's a bit of a lot to take in, and I hope you don't feel I'm against you personally. It's just the policy and is done to prevent people mistakenly or on purpose adding wrong information. --SuperJew (talk) 15:18, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Sorry!

I just started using lupin's anti-vandal tool, and it looks like I goofed on that one. Joel.Miles925 17:56, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

That's the second time today. Maybe you're the one who should test in the sandbox. --SuperJew (talk) 17:59, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

While I may have slipped up, that doesn't mean you can insult me. I bet when you were using a new tool on wikipedia, you made mistakes at first as well! Joel.Miles925 18:04, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

No more insulting than you templating a 7 year active user. And then continuing to revert my edits. --SuperJew (talk) 18:08, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Have you ever used Lupin's Anti-vandal tool before? The interface is confusing at first. I will think before I revert in the future. Now can you stop acting like a seven-year-old instead of a seven-year user? This is an altogether silly and avoidable argument and I think you would agree it's best we just go back to what we were doing and simply learn from our mistakes? Joel.Miles925 18:23, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

HI

Ok, thank you Kurdistantolive (talk) 23:46, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

No worries. What are you thanking me for? --SuperJew (talk) 14:29, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

"Caretaker" managers

Hi again,

Still on the assistant manager issue. Look at a (well edited) page like 2015–16 Premier League#Managerial changes and it's clear that "caretakers" (nb: I still disagree that is a valid term for coaches who watch over training while the position is vacant with no official statement by the club) who never manage a competitive match are not considered notable enough to list in season articles, coaching lists etc. See also Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 40 (under "Burnley F.C. Managers"). As a result have reverted a couple of your edits. Raise it at WT:FOOTY if you want to change what definitely appears to be the existing consensus. Macosal (talk) 08:52, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Hey, if you'd look at my recent edits you'd see I actually removed the caretaker status on Jets after Triani was sacked today and it's Rjbsmith who added it. But never mind, don't bother with checking facts, just go write on whoever's talk page. Cheers, --SuperJew (talk) 08:57, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

I was actually referring to 2016–17 A-League re both the Hutchinson and Zane / Trani issues. No need for sass here :( ... Macosal (talk) 09:12, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

hello SuperJ

Someone made Avram Grant a Polish-Israeli, even though he has never lived in Poland. Can you change that back? 79.179.38.44 (talk) 13:16, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

It's actually correct. He received a Polish passport due to his heritage. It's explained in the prose of the article and referenced to. You can read it here. --SuperJew (talk) 13:25, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

In that case Albert Einstein is American-German. Please add his passport to the opening sentence. 79.179.38.44 (talk) 16:27, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

About page 2017 AFC U-16 Women's Championship qualification

At the page 2016 AFC U-16 Championship qualification, Wikipedia did not use the status (E (Eliminated), Q (Qualified)) for the teams when the competition finished. So, why did at the page 2017 AFC U-16 Women's Championship qualification, you use the status (E, Q) for the teams when the competition finished? User talk:Usainnguyen —Preceding undated comment added 07:26, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

It shouldn't. Probably just an oversight. I'll fix it. Thanks for pointing it out. --SuperJew (talk) 07:31, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Removal of content from Italian club football articles

I noticed you removed quite a bit of material from all of the Italian club season articles. I want you to know that I and my colleagues will accept the removal of the assists, but will be re-adding the goalscorer table for several reasons: (1) it's a ranking; (2) it includes own-goals; which brings me to point (3) it's supposed to be an overall tally of all the goals scored during the season in the various competitions, and this information is not presented in the appearances table. Oh and by the way, thank you for discussing this with the people who actually contribute before-hand. Italia2006 (talk) 16:07, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

I restored all of the goalscorer tables for the reasons given above, but I agree with the deletion of the assists tables. Cheers. Italia2006 (talk) 16:27, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

The removal of assists is not acceptable either. Your reason is a non-verifiable source, when all league websites have the information. It's the same source as goal scoring. You seem to have gone completely overboard to remove all goal scoring and assists tables from every page. Ridiculous. Bigdottawa (talk) 12:27, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Actually what he means by non-verifiable is that different sources give different numbers of assists, and have different definitions of what an assist is. I don't object, as I said, to removing the assists, but the goalscorers table remains, definitely. Italia2006 (talk) 14:11, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

The assists issue has been hashed so many times already at WT:FOOTY and the consensus is not to accept them, but since you are persistent I will bring it up there once more and link you.

Regarding the goalscoring tables, I don't think the extra line of own-goals warrants repetition of all the info. Regarding the ranking, it would be much simpler to make the apps+goals table sortable and have the info once instead of twice, and also not require editors to rank by themselves (which is slightly more work and more susceptible to human error). --SuperJew (talk) 17:19, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

It's also a tally of the goals, again. Leave it alone. Italia2006 (talk) 17:47, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

That tally of goals appears in stats table too. --SuperJew (talk) 17:48, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

No it doesn't, what are you blind? Why are you, someone who has never contributed to any of the Serie A articles so concerned about deleting information? I'm done arguing, if you remove it again I'll revert it as vandalism. Italia2006 (talk) 17:51, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the personal attack and "threat". I'm concerned about making Wikipedia more consistent and in-line with the consensus. Didn't realise I need a degree in contributing to Serie A articles before making edits. --SuperJew (talk) 18:01, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Italia2006, is this enough of a contribution or do you require more? --SuperJew (talk) 11:11, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Goalball at the 2016 Summer Paralympics

Thank you for your vast number of edits to the goalball tournament! -- Lejman (talk) 14:27, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

My pleasure! It pains me that the Paralympics are not getting as much attention as the Olympics (where every tournament was updated within seconds of happening). I'll work on it more next week when I have more free time! --SuperJew (talk) 16:13, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

About Vietnamese names on Wikipedia

Hello, SuperJew! You always tell me that we must write the shorten names for Vietnamese people in the scorers board, but in the 2016 FIFA Futsal World Cup, they wrote full Vietnamese names below the score. Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usainnguyen (talk • contribs) 03:49, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Probably because people are unaware. I fixed it. And you are welcome to fix it yourself if you come across. --SuperJew (talk) 17:58, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

I edited but someone edited to the full names or the shorten names by "T.V. Vũ" and "T.L. Vũ",sir? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usainnguyen (talk • contribs) 06:35, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Someone continued to edit Văn Vũ to T.V.Vũ and Long Vũ to T.L.Vũ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usainnguyen (talk • contribs) 07:33, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Aziz Behich

Hey mate, there's some fuckery going on in Aziz Behich's page in the infobox. It says he was loaned to Melbourne Heart after 2013 and had 24 caps, when in fact he had a contract extension at bursaspor. Any idea what happened there? I don't have the statistics to fix it up.

It's correct. After making only one appearance in his first season at Bursaspor, Behich was loaned back to Melbourne Heart for the 2013–14 season. You can see a few references here: Goal.com, Melbourne Heart, ESPN, The Advertiser, FourFourTwo. And he had 24 caps that season. You can see his stats at Soccerway. Cheers, --SuperJew (talk) 17:54, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Emily Henderson

The article Emily Henderson has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Hasn't been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources. Hasn't played in a fully professional football league or at Tier 1 international level.

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. Hack (talk) 01:54, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Emily Henderson for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Emily Henderson is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emily Henderson until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Hack (talk) 13:38, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

2014 W-League player stats

Do you by chance know where I can find player stats from the 2014 W-League season? They seem to be missing from soccerway. Hmlarson (talk) 03:33, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

It seems they've listed it under 2014/2015 (or is there still stuff missing there? I didn't look comprehensively). Anyways another good source is worldfootball.net. Good luck, --SuperJew (talk) 09:11, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues

This is some of the worst logic I've ever seen in my 10+ years here, and that's saying something. Please do not add anything to that list without robust sourcing. GiantSnowman 06:49, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: Wow mate, thanks so much for taking the time out of day to come over here and let me know personally. --SuperJew (talk) 08:12, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

You've repeatedly added unsourced content to a page you know needs to be robustly sourced. What were you thinking? And it's not a personal attack; your edits were terrible. I'm commenting on them, not you. GiantSnowman 20:19, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Is that seriously the way you talk to people GS? It's an essay. Don't take it so seriously. Hmlarson (talk) 20:34, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Oh wait, how could I forget? It is in fact the way you choose to talk to some editors year after year. Quite a precedent. Hmlarson (talk) 20:44, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Lol GiantSnowman, repeatedly? Twice with explanations. And it's not a personal attack; your edits were terrible. I'm commenting on them, not you. Yet you felt compelled to come over to my talk page 12 hours after it'd been reverted and explained by Fenix. I'll just warn you now that if you attack me again I'll report you. --SuperJew (talk) 21:18, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

More than once = repeatedly. You were told the first time you were reverted that you needed to add sources? Yet you chose to ignore that and re-add the unsourced material a second time. You were reverted again and, given your edit history, I thought I would step in to prevent this devolving into WP:3RR and you getting blocked. PS @Hmlarson: asking if you were ignorant of WP:RS and WP:V after you had added unsourced material is not "bullying" as you claimed, and that interaction was nearly 4 years ago, how is that "year after year"? GiantSnowman 06:58, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Page histories. And yet, you are back here providing more evidence. Hmlarson (talk) 09:08, 7 October 2016 (UTC) See also WP:OWN. Hmlarson (talk) 09:22, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Vietnamese full names

Some Wikipedia users always try to write full names below the score at the page Vietnam national football team#2016. I can't edit at every time when they always try to edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usainnguyen (talk • contribs) 13:19, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

November 2016

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Survivors (Supergirl). Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.

Your comment here telling another user to shut up for tagging a plot summary as needing sources was uncalled for. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 16:35, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

@Jack Sebastian: I was attacking a user (you) because he was acting pretentiously, changing all edits back to his preferred way, making changes while ignoring replies to input on the talk page discussing the matter (you could've easily just added the sources yourself instead of tagging it), and needlessly threatening with blocking. On the content I had already commented, but you ignore that. So get off your high horse mate. --SuperJew (talk) 16:47, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, bub, but there's no excuse to attack another user. Just because you disagree with their point of view doesn't give you a pass in the civility department. There is not a thing wrong with asking for a reference when people keep editing in a contested piece of material. That's not WP:OWN; that's being a responsible editor. If I had the time to search out refs, I'd do it. I don't, so I work on articles to tighten the work that they have done. I add when i can, and tweak when I don';t have a lot of time.

And yeah, I was aware of the discussion at List of episodes, but the discussion wasn't concluded there. Your edit seemed like you were gaming the system to sneak in an edit, sans discussion. And yet, I didn't call you out as an opportunist for doing so. I was polite. I expect the same. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 17:33, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. - J man708 (talk) 20:00, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Great job J man708, that was very productive! --SuperJew (talk) 17:06, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

No. Correct decision to seek a third party assistance in such a matter. Matilda Maniac (talk) 16:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

I bet you loved coming back and seeing your talk page covered in shit! Hahaha. Sorry about that! - J man708 (talk) 07:07, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Haha, yeah not the ideal good morning :P It's alright not your fault J man708. I'm anyways gonna be much less active over the next month because of semester exams... --SuperJew (talk) 07:14, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

That reminds me, I had a question for you ages ago, which I'd forgotten til now. The locale of the Hebrew University. Is that a massive bitch to get to, with the whole political-border issues going on? I mean, Google Maps says the campus itself is more or less an enclave? - J man708 (talk) 07:18, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

You're referring to the Mt. Scopus campus I suppose (I'm most of the time at the Givat Ram campus). For Israeli citizens it's not an issue to get to, there are shuttles between the two campuses and a bunch of bus lines get to the campus. I also assume it's not a problem for tourists/visa students, especially as the Rothberg International School is there. Regarding non-citizen Palestinians, I don't know if there are any issues, though there might be because of the political-border issues. --SuperJew (talk) 07:39, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, Google Maps says that's the one! Are there any places that are really difficult to travel through in your day-to-day life? - J man708 (talk) 07:53, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Not really, I think the only time I personally was stopped was when I escorted a group of students from an Arab school on a trip to the Old City, which included the Temple Mount. I was told at the entrance to the Temple Mount that I couldn't enter with a gun, and I had to detour to meet the group at the exit. The guards told me I couldn't come in, as I was carrying a pistol and no weapons are allowed there, which is fair. But regardless it is very difficult currently for Jews to get permission to visit the Temple Mount. --SuperJew (talk) 08:07, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I just leisurely carry a pistol around temples all the time. Hahaha. Dare I ask? - J man708 (talk) 08:14, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Hahaha :D I sometimes forget that not everywhere people carry weapons as leisurely as here or as in America (though we have much more of a vetting process to get one). I was the security guard for the trip. The Ministry of Education requires every school trip to be accompanied by security guards. --SuperJew (talk) 08:19, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, guns here are only ever really carried by cops. The perks of living on an island, huh? Come to think of it, I don't know if I've ever even seen an assault rifle outside of a video game. Also, anytime I hear of the "Ministry of X", my brain immediately connects it with some form of Orwellian dystopia... Except for the Ministry of Sound - J man708 (talk) 08:24, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Really? What do you call the government branch responsible for education in Australia? --SuperJew (talk) 08:32, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

It was DECS here in SA, but the acronym has changed. Department of Education and Children's Services. - J man708 (talk) 08:40, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

2016 Season Summary

Dear Mr Jew, I politely disagree with your decision to undo my edits on 2016 Australia national soccer team season. This page contains a statistical summary including players for the calendar year. Players that were called up to the squad that ultimately did not take to the field, have no statistics. Therefore, they have no place on this page. This is consistent with all the other season summary pages that currently contain appearance data. I would like you to re-consider your edit so that we can maintain consistency across the various season summary pages as I slowly work through cleaning them up. Thank you. Umarghdunno (talk) 01:41, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

November 2016

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.  Someguy1221 (talk) 03:52, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Block?

@Vanjagenije: @J man708: What is happening here? I'm suddenly blocked and the first I know of this investigation is the moment I'm blocked? Do you not bother informing users who are under investigation and give them a chance to respond? --SuperJew (talk) 16:07, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

@SuperJew: No, the policy does not mandate notifying accused users about SPIs. Do you have any other issue with this block except the one concerning procedure? Vanjagenije (talk) 16:48, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

@Vanjagenije: I don't understand how that's not a policy, especially as the page says "Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims." But how do accused parties even know they're accused?

The whole thing is not a professional problem, but rather a personal vendetta of Jman708 against me. He keeps on gaming the system, even after being warned about it when we were both blocked, and this is just another example of his continued crusade.

Regarding the issue itself, the examples brought are stating that me and the IP edited the pages similarly, but seriously, how different can you edit stats? It's not like a piece of prose where different people have different styles. A change from "pos=x" to "pos=y" will be the same whomever changes it. Furthermore the IP made positive contributions, so I don't see what the issue is. --SuperJew (talk) 17:05, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

The issue is WP:block evasion. There is no such thing as "positive block evasion". Vanjagenije (talk) 18:32, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

@Vanjagenije: You didn't respond to how accused parties are meant to comment if they don't know about it, or how your blocking is supporting Jman gaming the system. --SuperJew (talk) 23:59, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

@Someguy1221: as the admin who correctly called Jman out on his gaming the system, I would like to bring this to your attention and request your input about said gaming of the system. Thanks, --SuperJew (talk) 00:03, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Why don't the block rules apply to you and you alone? What's the point of being blocked if you just log out and edit anyway? While blocked you decided to ping me with the message "Great job J man708, that was very productive!", which was totally needless. Also, how am I continuing to game the system? You seemingly avoided the ban and were caught out by it, so I put in an investigation. - J man708 (talk) 01:04, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

@J man708: It's amazing how your continued vendetta against me misses the bigger picture. Your complaint about me "edit-warring" brought around that the 2 most active, contributing editors of a page were blocked. You're missing the spirit of contributing and building up the encyclopedia. If I was abusive to editors, or destructive to pages then I'd understand your continued need to have me blocked, but all you're doing is trying to bite off one of the main hands that are helping you along. --SuperJew (talk) 07:06, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Oh look! another IP edited 2016-17 W-League, you should prob get an investigation going in case it's me again. --SuperJew (talk) 07:07, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Since I was pinged, I'll just say, it's not gaming the system to point out that someone is evading a block. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:52, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

@Someguy1221: I meant for you to elaborate on how Jman was gaming the system. --SuperJew (talk) 10:56, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

So, let me get this straight. You've mentioned that I've been gaming the system without much proven evidence, but you're still making edits to Wikipedia (on a second IP address) while banned and that's just not an issue because it's in good faith?

This whole "crusade" began because I'd simply had enough of it being SuperJewpedia, wherein it feels like every major revision of anything about Australian football requires your seal of approval and if it doesn't, it needs to be reverted by you, while requiring them to submit a talk page application to change what's in the article, wherein a fortnight's worth of filibustering occurs until they've just had enough of your inability to relent?... - J man708 (talk) 12:06, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Firstly, I didn't mention your system gaming, that was Someguy1221 when he blocked you. Secondly, so now any edit by an IP on your pages is automatically my fault? Thirdly, at least you've finally admitted to being on a crusade to ban me, good to know, I'll let admins know once I'm unblocked. --SuperJew (talk) 12:27, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

To answer your points, 1) - You didn't initially use the words "gaming the system", but have since 2 or 3 times. 2) - Any edit from an Israeli IP address seems a little suss, especially seeing that this page is almost exclusively edited by Australian accounts or Australian IP addresses. 3) - I was quoting you on the "crusade" (see the quotation marks?). SJ, what I'm trying to do is to get you to acknowledge that perhaps you should take a backseat for a period and to think a little about the points that have been made in the past to the whole "SuperJewpedia" and see if (given the position other editors such as myself are in), that the lengths that you've gone through to see articles edited to how you wish to see them are waaaaay too extreme and effort consuming for us to continue having to work with you in your current state? Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the gnome work that you go through on here, but it seems to come at a cost of having you see it as being yours and that frankly isn't good enough for me anymore. - J man708 (talk) 12:38, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Oh right, I forgot that I'm the only Australian-Israeli.. but that's allright, you continue grouping people together.. we Jews are used to that.

Sure, I wouldn't mind taking a backseat (especially now with uni load turning up), but as I mentioned in the past if I do, then almost nothing will get updated (and this is also from experience when I was travelling). It's so ridiculous your claims that I "own" the articles, but they are only so influenced by me because I'm the only one who edits them. When people actually bring up serious issues as a discussion and not and edit-war as you do, I do converse and reach a conclusion, as has happened this season with the goalscorers order.

it's also funny that you accuse me of not bringing evidence for claiming your gaming the system (even though I multiple times linked the diff of the admin who said it and also pinged him to elaborate) but yet you continue your crusade throwing out your claims of ownership and SuperJewpedia without an iota of evidence. --SuperJew (talk) 13:02, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

"Oh right, I forgot that I'm the only Australian-Israeli.. but that's allright, you continue grouping people together.. we Jews are used to that."

And the second you said that, you've lost all credibility to me. Goodbye. - J man708 (talk) 13:11, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

@J man708: I apologise, that comment was inappropriate. The rest of my comments are still relevant. --SuperJew (talk) 18:45, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Jaime Maclaren

Hey, Page protection on this page will expire on 1 Jan 2017. I think this needs to be extended. Disruptive editing has not ceased. Thanks. Simione001 (talk) 09:19, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

@Simione001: I opened a new page protection request about it. Feel free to add anything additional relevant. Have you been personally attacked regarding this any more? --SuperJew (talk) 09:35, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

No, no more personal attacks thank goodness. Simione001 (talk) 21:16, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Looks like the request was rejected. That's frustrating to say the least. Simione001 (talk) 21:20, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Hey mate, the page protection has expired and it looks like the disruptive editor is at it again. This person is also again leaving nasty messages on my user talk page User talk:Simione001. I think we need have a go at protecting this page again because i'm at my wits end. Been grappling with this issue for years. Simione001 (talk) 10:44, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

PS, i have applied for page protection. Simione001 (talk) 11:02, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Request looks good to me. Hope it'll help. --SuperJew (talk) 11:53, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

AFL Women's Sqaud Templates

In the Collingwood AFL Women's squad templates you said that linking to player bios was the consensus. Can I ask where this discussion took place? I can't see anything on the existing women's football discussion in WikiProject Australian rules football - Tigerman2612 (talk) 23:02, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

@Tigerman2612: I was talking in general for squad templates all over Wikipedia. Football and soccer too. That way you can see the full name by hovering over the name with the mouse. --SuperJew (talk) 23:18, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

@SuperJew: Oh I see. I created the first few but had them edited back by some other members. It was my understanding that notbaility is contentious at least for now so having a bunch of dead links was ill-advised. I'd prefer to see your version with the link in tact and notbaility establish with a single game played but not sure where the discussion will land on that. --Tigerman2612 (talk) 23:25, 22 December 2016 (UTC)