![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 15 | ← | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 |
Excuse me.i am lijianxing(李建兴)What is 42? why is 42 for universe answer. Adsafe ( talk) 17:00, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
I saw a tv《The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy》Chinese cant know that... I have to ask English men you.Excuse me very much
ok. and help add time zone in some match schedule(up and down) it is convenient to view There are only one time zone display, and the top and the bottom are far away.Really inconvenient to see.Always need move Webpage. Adsafe ( talk) 11:09, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
You are right the page should be moved.so I do that.if I wrong, please undo.
Adsafe (
talk)
15:27, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
if I right.please delete all about "help".and excuse me again,thank you for help,I am happy and thanks. Adsafe ( talk) 15:36, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
say to administrators:I am not to make trouble.I just contact Qed237.and Get Needed help,I don't want to break the rules of wiki.please give the wrongdoer a way out. Adsafe ( talk) 15:55, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
ok,I do not remove again. Adsafe ( talk) 03:36, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
thanks to God. Adsafe ( talk) 15:01, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
yes.not for very long and Jesus loves you and thank you Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi. Adsafe ( talk) 14:22, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
I just to be thankful,thanks to God.mayby “thanks God haha”is wrong mind,so I change,please forgive me,and Fortuna misunderstand my mind.say “...not for very long, perhaps...”so I delete,that is it. Adsafe ( talk) 15:44, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
That's the end of that, Qed. This will finlly archive if nothing else! Cheers, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 18:46, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Hey mate, thanks for the nomination of List of United S.C. seasons for deletion. I have nominated the article for speedy deletion as the creator and merged the right information with United. If you find any other article like this in the future though about an Indian team, just tell me on my talk page and I will merge and speedy delete instead of just having to go through AfD. Cheers. -- ArsenalFan700 ( talk) 14:22, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
If you notice, this user has a vast array of IPs (all starting with 79), and he never updates one single time, EVER. At least here, in Fredy Guarín, Martín Montoya and Jeison Murillo, which are the only Inter players I edit in.
Continue the good work, cheers -- 84.90.219.128 ( talk) 23:57, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi,
I'm sorry but the capacity of the stadium of Lyon is: 59,186. cf the official website of the french football league : http://www.ligue1.com/club/olympique-lyonnais — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oromis 33 ( talk • contribs) 23:21, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
But Carlisle United will be playing Everton at Goodison Park because it says so on the BBC Sport website — Preceding unsigned comment added by AMamun84 ( talk • contribs) 20:47, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you for fixing all those also wills! bonadea contributions talk 17:41, 24 January 2016 (UTC) |
Hello Qed237. The official proclamation of 2015–16 Superleague Greece, says clearly (article number 10) that 1. The teams will fill the two (2) latest posts immediately go to the second division; 2. The number one and two places of this year's second division promote for the 2016–17 Superleague Greece; 3. The 2016–17 Superleage Greece will take place including 16 teams. Thank you, 2A02:587:5410:D200:A454:EB12:C070:D003 ( talk) 21:57, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Arguments or sources for any Allsvenskan "title" (note: "title" not top finish) being given the years that the competition winner was determined by playoffs. As long as we have no such official ruling we should go by what is given by the rulings of the Swedish football association regarding the main title of the Allsvenskan competition.
We should still present the stats for finishing top of the league table. But we should be accurate in not describing it as a title. Since it was not for some years.-- Mvhtnb ( talk) 22:02, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
//SvFF 2015-- Mvhtnb ( talk) 22:14, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Done
Giant
Snowman
12:37, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm having a situation with User:Misiunea10 as he states that Stephan El Shaarawy's date of exit from Monaco should be written as 2015-2016 in the infobox. Even though he left the club in January 2016, he hadn't played since 2015. So shouldn't it just be written as 2015 in the infobox? I remember seeing an example of this with Alessandro Nesta and Miami FC since he signed as coach in 2015, but the infobox says 2016 since play doesn't start till then. (Then as soon as I reference him to Nesta, he takes it upon himself to change it on his page too without further discussion.) Who is correct here? He also is correcting a date in the national team infobox for the U19 team to 2010-2011 from 2010. He tells me Transfermarkt says it says this, even though Trasnfermarkt isn't technically a reliable source. The Italian article says just 2010 like how it was before as well. Thanks. Vaselineeeeeeee ( talk) 20:09, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Can you please tell me what was the reason you had for reverting all of the edits I just made to this page. Thanks. Ratchet8865 ( talk) 23:11, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
If you don't have the time or inclination to expand what should be a notable topic, then why not simply redirect them to the main article? Giant Snowman 14:50, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Template:2014–15 Premier League PFA Team of the Year has been
nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
GreenCricket
TALK
14:37, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Here is the source I used for the FA Cup replay matches [4]. They do seem to be subject to change so thanks for fixing that.
Volman92 ( talk) 19:14, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
Stop reverting things you have no right to revert. The comment about the greatness was settled in the talk page, and it merely describes the sources given. Your argument prior about not EVERYONE seeing him as the greatest doesnt hold water as the sources merely imply many do, which is true. Our job is not to say what we want to say but what the sources say and all the sources say he's the greatest. The second part was a factual quote from the Guardian which supports a point that was agreed on on wikiproject football weeks ago. Davefelmer ( talk) 22:28, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
First of all, the other editor made note about sticking EXACTLY to the sources when I referenced another piece of info so I countered that that wasnt what was currently being done with existing sources since they described AF as the greatest and we had it down as one of the greatest. He didnt reply. Secondly, this is not how consensus works. Editors can't "decide" that for this article, you won't use the information from the sources and say something different from what the sources say instead. the fact that three have done so is ridiculous and makes me wonder whether outside factors are at play. Thirdly, the part about the guardian and other media quoting him as the most successful manager is also factual, sourced and was agreed to be added on wikiproject football (on top of the fact it shouldnt need to be as its sourced by the flipping Guardian). Davefelmer ( talk) 04:04, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
You can't keep senselessly reverting or I'll report you. The sources say something not corroborated in the text which I've attempted to fix and the part about the guardian was agreed and is archived on wikiproject football and in any case its a quote from a very reliable paper in the guardian. There is absolutely 0 reason to keep changing, as I've gone through all the right channels and quoted only reliable news sources. You can't revert something because you don't like it. Others may have done the same but that doesnt make it any more right. All you are doing is edit warring now. Consensus cannot decide to not match the information of a source with the written text. Davefelmer ( talk) 21:29, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Bias my arse. I phrased it poorly and explained what I actually meant in the talk page. This has nothing to do with this article. And I'd say you are at risk yourself seeing as I have explained my point on the talk page to no response, reached consensus over another on wiki football and am doing what wikipedia is about; having the text reflect the sources which it does not do at present. Davefelmer ( talk) 23:21, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
But that's the thing - I don't want to report people. I'd rather either you either explain your stance or accept that all I'm trying to do is reflect source content in the actual text. Davefelmer ( talk) 07:15, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
But its not about your stand or anyone else's. Its about the sources, and they say he's the greatest. There's nothing wrong with saying some people view him as the greatest. I'm not saying EVERYONE does, but the info stated has to be what the sources say. This is an encyclopaedia based on sources, not our opinions. Davefelmer ( talk) 19:50, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Exactly. But thats not what I (by way of the sources) am saying. Nobody ever said to write he explicitly is the greatest of all time or is seen as that because of exactly that point, other sources exist claiming others are the greatest (although I am not sure about 'a lot'). The fact is that many do see SAF as the greatest, that is indisputable and is exactly what the sources show, which is what should be reflected as anything else is interjecting our own opinions into the article. Other managers who have been referred to as the greatest can and should (and maybe even do) have similar statements of fact stated if the sources are found and used as that is what we are; an encyclopaedia of sources. why should we not acknowledge that many see someone as the greatest in their profession if that is what people have said and the sources show this? Who are we to deny them that distinction? Davefelmer ( talk) 22:44, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
I need consensus to agree to use the information of the sources in the actual article? when I post on the discussion page, I don't get replies. Or there is a reply with an avoiding of the point, as you just did. So what would you recommend I do then if nobody answers directly to the question? Davefelmer ( talk) 05:13, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Done
Giant
Snowman
17:20, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
He has joined Cardiff City on loan, please don't change this back. Jimmy Skitz's Answer Machine 18:19, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello. Why the revert? Part ( talk) 23:09, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Not sure, not enough for DUCK yet. Giant Snowman 18:02, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi Qed, I've seen your message at my talk page, I just want to say that I created the article because it was on the requested articles list at the wikiproject football thingy. TheSoccerBoy ( talk) 23:03, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi Qed237
Thank you for pointing out the issues around the Bogdan edit. This isn't the first time that someone me from Wikipedia has pointed out to me edits they feel were inappropriate, and the reason this concerns me is that I'm 100% sure, 1000% sure if you will, that I didn't make this and several other of the edits ascribed to me. I've literally no idea who this guy is, or why anyone around me with access to computer would make such a change as there are literally no football fans in this family of four (me, my son, my ex-wife, her 6 year old son) can you help at all? Why have these edits been ascribed to me?
Thanks,
kieron — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.205.198.107 ( talk) 14:21, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello,
Is there a way to stop editor FkpCascais from editing the name of the country that was known as "Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina" into only "Bosnia and Herzegovina"? It is really annoying since he is erasing a very important historical fact. HankMoodyTZ ( talk) 19:09, 5 February 2016 (UTC) HankMoodyTZ ( talk) 19:09, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
No, I don't think so, wrong location - though it could well be the same IP from Libra Legends. Giant Snowman 18:08, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Good evening. You cancelled my correction, because it hasn't sourse. I can cite the source: http://www.iihf.com/home-of-hockey/championships/olympics/ . Section Final Olympic Qualification. It says that Group D will be in Minsk and Group E will be in Riga. City in Norway at the moment isn't defined This is the official website of the IIHF! I think this is the most reliable source. Although I may be wrong in this. Андрей Козлов 123 ( talk) 16:20, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Done - thanks for the heads-up!
Giant
Snowman
18:02, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Following an AFD that was recently closed as "keep", I have proposed that 2016 Masters Champions League be merged into Masters Champions League. I am sending you this notification as you participated in the AFD discussion. Discussion of the proposed merge is here. AtHomeIn神戸 ( talk) 01:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello from Bosnia.
I was wondering should I make a page for aforementioned player, since he recently went to Turkish Konyaspor and is now playing in a professional league? HankMoodyTZ ( talk) 23:48, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
Done, thanks.
Giant
Snowman
16:44, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
He's had two warnings already today...he probably won't see that one as he rarely edits after 8PM. Tomorrow we start again with another IP address. Eagleash ( talk) 20:31, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
@ Eagleash and Tvx1: today as 88.106.224.170 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS). Qed237 (talk) 14:27, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi umm i added the news about the petition because it is big news. It is on metro.co.uk, on mirror.co.uk and was mentioned by the BBC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Catabolicsuperstar ( talk • contribs) 05:24, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Qed237.
Page User:Qed237/sandbox4 is very good. Thank you. I found mistake about "Paris Saint-Germain". You wrote "TBD since Norwegian clubs are still playing in 2015–16 European competitions". GAV80 ( talk) 13:15, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Hey Qed, its me again, I wanted to ask you two questions: first one is, would I be allowed to create a list of CLUB goals scored by Lionel Messi? or Cristiano Ronaldo or any other famous footballer? I'm looking forward to create an article like this in the future, just wanted to know if it would be approved by the wikipedia football community. The second question is, can you please search for my name in the wikipedia football project member list? I've checked like 5 times already and I can't find my name, was I kicked out or haven't I looked well? I don't know, but can you please do me the favor and prove to me that my name is in that member list, Thank you. I await your answers at my talk page TheSoccerBoy ( talk) 03:19, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi Qed I wanted to talk to you about the changes of Bournemouth and West Ham stadiums. Bournemouth's stadium is originally called Dean Court, but as from now due to sponsorship purposes it's called the Vitality Stadium and that's its name from now. For West Ham it is referred on Sky Sports it's referred to as Upton Park, never Boleyn Ground and for that reason its present name is Upton Park. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omerjoker ( talk • contribs) 16:17, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi, just wanted to thank you for your help, thanks for finding my name on the list, I think I would do good with a better eyesight, Lol. But anyways Thank you once again Qed, for your good help :) TheSoccerBoy ( talk) 00:33, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I changed it because Yaya joined year after Kolo. I admit that I was a little lazy do rewrite it properly, but still thought that it is better to delete erroneous part. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.14.232.7 ( talk) 11:59, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
With the 2015 FIFA corruption case, transparency is needed. It's the 21st century and people have the right to know where they can watch football matches.-- Abiete900 ( talk) 10:47, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
Why have you reverted my edits to player heights? The addition of "precision=0" to the height template removes the rather odd looking 1⁄2 inch. This is a rather spurious level of accuracy. Please explain your logic, or was it simply a knee jerk to an edit n=by an unregistered user? 2.96.236.37 ( talk) 08:58, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
My sincere apologies - I withdraw my stupid comment. I'll explain further later today. Best wishes. 2.96.236.37 ( talk) 09:27, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
I was a bit cross earlier because you reverted all my edits back to the incorrect ones by User:Neiliog93 and then reverted those edits of his on other articles which I had not changed, such as Rio Ferdinand. To be consistent, surely you should have also reverted his initial edits, such as that on Ivan Rakitić. Before his edit, the code was {{convert|1.84|m|ftin|0|abbr=on}} which gave the output 1.84 m (6 ft 0 in). His edit was to change this to {{height|m=1.84}} which gives the output 1.84 m (6 ft 1⁄2 in). I altered this to {{height|m=1.84|precision=0}} to give the output 1.84 m (6 ft 0 in) (i.e the same as the original) but you reverted me (and not User:Neiliog93) to show the current {{height|m=1.84}} giving 1.84 m (6 ft 1⁄2 in). Apart from the 1⁄2 inch being disproportionate with the rest of the text, as I said above this is a rather spurious level of accuracy. You say that the use of the half-inch is standard for the conversion template – are you sure? The template documentation suggests the use of the precision parameter. The documentation for the Convert template implies that the default precision is to the nearest inch.
Ignoring Wikipedia conventions and templates for a moment, I am not aware of any website or database in the UK which includes the half inch in height measurements. On a personal note, my height at a recent medical was recorded as 1.79 metres or 5 ft 10 in; I would never refer to my height in imperial as 5 ft 10 1⁄2 in.
Incidentally, you also reverted my edit on Stuart Green which had nothing to do with his height. UserSrednuas Lenoroc has changed many articles to replace "sent on loan" with "on loan" which completely alters the meaning. I have reverted you and hope you will accept this. Best wishes 2.96.236.37 ( talk) 12:15, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Do you know where I can start discussions on the WikiProject Football page?
-- PerelmanMorales ( talk) 10:04, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. May I ask you why you are so much against my and others proposal of making a distinction between official titles (those recognized or organized by The FA, UEFA or FIFA) and unofficial trophies? I think that you know what I am referring to here.-- PerelmanMorales ( talk) 21:51, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Again, I have to apologize for jumping the gun (not waiting until game is over before updating stuff). You are following the guidelines, I am not, but we BOTH want to help and improve I am sure.
Don't worry, when MARCA has the reference for his Getafe debut available i'll add it. Cheers -- 84.90.219.128 ( talk) 22:52, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Hooo boy. Aren't you going to be glad you asked me to explain this when you see my response. The answer is not exactly straight-forward, but it is mathematically definite.
First off, I will start by saying I disagree with your interpretation of WP:OR, and this is a sticking point I have had with users of this website for many a year. WP:OR was implemented to prevent people from going to an article such as this PL season article and adding what looks like reasoned arguments but made up of massive leaps of logic or misuse of source data, such as saying "the twenty-five yellow cards Newcastle United received all came in the first sixty minutes of a game, showing that their tactics revolved around deliberate foul play intended to injure their opponents". Pure mathematics, on the other hand, is empirical - it is either correct or not correct and simple numbers are not interpretable. Therefore, the calculation of a club's mathematical safety cannot be Original Research as a club is either safe or not safe, it is not arguably safe. What I research about mathematical safety is the exact same conclusion you would have to reach if you used the same method, and it would be the same 100 times out of 100.
As a second point, I don't think the source is a decent point of reference. It's talking about probability, which is a far more subjective methodology, especially as they haven't determined what system they are using to determine which team will win. You can also see that their rating for whether teams are safe or not gives different answers based on whether you use the weighted method or 50/50. I think you'll find that their "No" rating comes from when the numbers become sufficiently close to zero to become not worth reporting, rather than a genuine zero rating.
To answer your actual point, however: being a mathematician by both training and by trade, I decided to investigate a more rigorous definition. I found a predictor chart which has the current status of the league and has the ability to calculate the league table based on entering hypothetical results to the remaining league games (namely this one). I then came up with the following scenario, which I won't go into the methodology of because I don't want to write a response so long you won't read it. If you want the full explanation, I can provide it if necessary.
Here is the full list of results I selected to engineer Spurs' relegation:
Fixture list | ||
---|---|---|
Home team | Score | Away team |
Newcastle United | 10-0 | Manchester City |
Liverpool | 10-0 | Everton |
West Ham | 10-0 | Spurs |
Stoke | 0-10 | Newcastle United |
Arsenal | 0-10 | Swansea |
Liverpool | 10-0 | Manchester City |
United | 0-10 | Watford |
Spurs | 0-10 | Arsenal |
Chelsea | 0-10 | Stoke |
Everton | 10-0 | West Ham |
Manchester City | 10-0 | Villa |
Newcastle United | 10-0 | Bournemouth |
Soton | 0-10 | Sunderland |
Swansea | 10-0 | Norwich |
Watford | 10-0 | Leicester |
Palace | 10-0 | Liverpool |
West Brom | 10-0 | United |
United | 0-10 | Palace |
Norwich | 0-10 | Manchester City |
Bournemouth | 0-10 | Swansea |
Stoke | 10-0 | Soton |
Arsenal | 0-10 | West Brom |
Liverpool | 10-0 | Chelsea |
Villa | 10-0 | Spurs |
Leicester | 0-10 | Newcastle |
Sunderland | 10-0 | Everton |
West Ham | 0-10 | Watford |
Everton | 10-0 | Arsenal |
Palace | 10-0 | Leicester |
Watford | 0-10 | Stoke |
West Brom | 10-0 | Norwich |
Chelsea | 10-0 | West Ham |
Swansea | 10-0 | Villa |
Newcastle | 0-10 | Sunderland |
Soton | 10-0 | Liverpool |
Manchester City | 10-0 | United |
Spurs | 0-10 | Bournemouth |
Villa | 0-10 | Chelsea |
Arsenal | 0-10 | Watford |
Bournemouth | 10-0 | Manchester City |
Stoke | 0-10 | Swansea |
Sunderland | 10-0 | West Brom |
West Ham | 0-10 | Palace |
Norwich | 0-10 | Newcastle |
Liverpool | 10-0 | Spurs |
Leicester | 0-10 | Soton |
United | 0-10 | Everton |
West Ham | 10-0 | Arsenal |
Palace | 10-0 | Norwich |
Soton | 0-10 | Newcastle |
Swansea | 10-0 | Chelsea |
Villa | 0-10 | Bournemouth |
Watford | 0-10 | Everton |
Manchester City | 0-10 | West Brom |
Sunderland | 10-0 | Leicester |
Liverpool | 0-10 | Stoke |
Spurs | 0-10 | United |
Norwich | 0-10 | Sunderland |
Bournemouth | 10-0 | Liverpool |
Everton | 0-10 | Soton |
United | 10-0 | Villa |
Newcastle | 10-0 | Swansea |
West Brom | 0-10 | Watford |
Chelsea | 10-0 | Manchester City |
Leicester | 0-10 | West Ham |
Arsenal | 0-10 | Palace |
Stoke | 10-0 | Spurs |
Bournemouth | 10-0 | Chelsea |
Villa | 0-10 | Soton |
Palace | 10-0 | Everton |
Liverpool | 0-10 | Newcastle |
Norwich | 0-10 | Watford |
Manchester City | 0-10 | Stoke |
Sunderland | 10-0 | Arsenal |
Leicester | 0-10 | Swansea |
West Ham | 10-0 | United |
Spurs | 0-10 | West Brom |
Swansea | 10-0 | Liverpool |
Everton | 0-10 | Bournemouth |
Newcastle | 10-0 | Palace |
Stoke | 0-10 | Sunderland |
Watford | 10-0 | Villa |
West Brom | 10-0 | West Ham |
Arsenal | 0-10 | Norwich |
United | 10-0 | Leicester |
Soton | 10-0 | Manchester City |
Chelsea | 10-0 | Spurs |
West Ham | 0-10 | Swansea |
Villa | 0-10 | Newcastle |
Palace | 10-0 | Stoke |
Leicester | 0-10 | Everton |
Liverpool | 10-0 | Watford |
Manchester City | 10-0 | Arsenal |
Norwich | 0-10 | United |
Sunderland | 10-0 | Chelsea |
Spurs | 0-10 | Soton |
Bournemouth | 10-0 | West Brom |
Arsenal | 0-10 | Villa |
Chelsea | 10-0 | Leicester |
Everton | 10-0 | Norwich |
United | 0-10 | Bournemouth |
Newcastle | 10-0 | Spurs |
Soton | 0-10 | Palace |
Stoke | 10-0 | West Ham |
Swansea | 10-0 | Manchester City |
Watford | 0-10 | Sunderland |
West Brom | 0-10 | Liverpool |
The end result is thus: Image
It should go without saying that if Spurs win today, they become mathematically safe too, as it would be impossible for all the various teams above them to gain a further three points each in order to stay above them. It's very hard to say if a draw would be enough - it might even partially depend on other results tonight - but I'd suggest it is probably also enough.
Either way, on their current points total, Spurs are not safe, and the likes of United are a million miles from. Falastur2 Talk 20:14, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Joe Riley (footballer). Since you had some involvement with the Joe Riley (footballer) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Joseph2302 ( talk) 22:07, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
We meet again, again i spend time on editing current sports things, and again u delete them, are u stubborn to change? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arni777 ( talk • contribs) 13:39, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
i didnt know there is an option like this, never the less, its better that the old temples will be erased rather than the new ones, because they are up to date with all the matches and all the teams, while the old ones has nothing. will you do it or shall i? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arni777 ( talk • contribs) 14:44, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
i you feel offended from the personal attacks, maybe you should, its not the first time i spend hours to make a good thing to the community and u using your "powers" and just terminate everything so you can be in charge.. euroleague 2014, uefa champion league 2015 etc ring a bell? Arni777 ( talk) 15:17, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
excuse me, but except you, no one was on your side, and as i recall it, in past times it wasn't only me that changed things, but others as well and guess what, u were against them as well. Arni777 ( talk) 16:01, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi Qed237. Is it OK to write SR Croatia, Yugoslavia to people born in Croatia from 1945 to 1992? Since SR Croatia was part of Yugoslavia till 1992.I think it gives people a bit more clarity as to the peoples background and in light of the fact that the country no longer exists. Sorry I dont know how to get the tildes onto the computer screen also. Can you tell me how to get them to appear on the sign off. Thanks. OK I think i just worked it out Stevesmith215 ( talk) 00:24, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
I feel like the article gets cluttered with constant links to teams. Looking at previous seasons (and other leagues), links to the playoff teams are included in the playoff bracket but aren't used excessively elsewhere. However, links to the stadiums are useful information, in my opinion, and those links are fine. Ho-ju-96 ( talk) 12:30, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 15 | ← | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 |
Excuse me.i am lijianxing(李建兴)What is 42? why is 42 for universe answer. Adsafe ( talk) 17:00, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
I saw a tv《The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy》Chinese cant know that... I have to ask English men you.Excuse me very much
ok. and help add time zone in some match schedule(up and down) it is convenient to view There are only one time zone display, and the top and the bottom are far away.Really inconvenient to see.Always need move Webpage. Adsafe ( talk) 11:09, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
You are right the page should be moved.so I do that.if I wrong, please undo.
Adsafe (
talk)
15:27, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
if I right.please delete all about "help".and excuse me again,thank you for help,I am happy and thanks. Adsafe ( talk) 15:36, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
say to administrators:I am not to make trouble.I just contact Qed237.and Get Needed help,I don't want to break the rules of wiki.please give the wrongdoer a way out. Adsafe ( talk) 15:55, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
ok,I do not remove again. Adsafe ( talk) 03:36, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
thanks to God. Adsafe ( talk) 15:01, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
yes.not for very long and Jesus loves you and thank you Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi. Adsafe ( talk) 14:22, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
I just to be thankful,thanks to God.mayby “thanks God haha”is wrong mind,so I change,please forgive me,and Fortuna misunderstand my mind.say “...not for very long, perhaps...”so I delete,that is it. Adsafe ( talk) 15:44, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
That's the end of that, Qed. This will finlly archive if nothing else! Cheers, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 18:46, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Hey mate, thanks for the nomination of List of United S.C. seasons for deletion. I have nominated the article for speedy deletion as the creator and merged the right information with United. If you find any other article like this in the future though about an Indian team, just tell me on my talk page and I will merge and speedy delete instead of just having to go through AfD. Cheers. -- ArsenalFan700 ( talk) 14:22, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
If you notice, this user has a vast array of IPs (all starting with 79), and he never updates one single time, EVER. At least here, in Fredy Guarín, Martín Montoya and Jeison Murillo, which are the only Inter players I edit in.
Continue the good work, cheers -- 84.90.219.128 ( talk) 23:57, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi,
I'm sorry but the capacity of the stadium of Lyon is: 59,186. cf the official website of the french football league : http://www.ligue1.com/club/olympique-lyonnais — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oromis 33 ( talk • contribs) 23:21, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
But Carlisle United will be playing Everton at Goodison Park because it says so on the BBC Sport website — Preceding unsigned comment added by AMamun84 ( talk • contribs) 20:47, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you for fixing all those also wills! bonadea contributions talk 17:41, 24 January 2016 (UTC) |
Hello Qed237. The official proclamation of 2015–16 Superleague Greece, says clearly (article number 10) that 1. The teams will fill the two (2) latest posts immediately go to the second division; 2. The number one and two places of this year's second division promote for the 2016–17 Superleague Greece; 3. The 2016–17 Superleage Greece will take place including 16 teams. Thank you, 2A02:587:5410:D200:A454:EB12:C070:D003 ( talk) 21:57, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Arguments or sources for any Allsvenskan "title" (note: "title" not top finish) being given the years that the competition winner was determined by playoffs. As long as we have no such official ruling we should go by what is given by the rulings of the Swedish football association regarding the main title of the Allsvenskan competition.
We should still present the stats for finishing top of the league table. But we should be accurate in not describing it as a title. Since it was not for some years.-- Mvhtnb ( talk) 22:02, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
//SvFF 2015-- Mvhtnb ( talk) 22:14, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Done
Giant
Snowman
12:37, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm having a situation with User:Misiunea10 as he states that Stephan El Shaarawy's date of exit from Monaco should be written as 2015-2016 in the infobox. Even though he left the club in January 2016, he hadn't played since 2015. So shouldn't it just be written as 2015 in the infobox? I remember seeing an example of this with Alessandro Nesta and Miami FC since he signed as coach in 2015, but the infobox says 2016 since play doesn't start till then. (Then as soon as I reference him to Nesta, he takes it upon himself to change it on his page too without further discussion.) Who is correct here? He also is correcting a date in the national team infobox for the U19 team to 2010-2011 from 2010. He tells me Transfermarkt says it says this, even though Trasnfermarkt isn't technically a reliable source. The Italian article says just 2010 like how it was before as well. Thanks. Vaselineeeeeeee ( talk) 20:09, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Can you please tell me what was the reason you had for reverting all of the edits I just made to this page. Thanks. Ratchet8865 ( talk) 23:11, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
If you don't have the time or inclination to expand what should be a notable topic, then why not simply redirect them to the main article? Giant Snowman 14:50, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Template:2014–15 Premier League PFA Team of the Year has been
nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
GreenCricket
TALK
14:37, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Here is the source I used for the FA Cup replay matches [4]. They do seem to be subject to change so thanks for fixing that.
Volman92 ( talk) 19:14, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
Stop reverting things you have no right to revert. The comment about the greatness was settled in the talk page, and it merely describes the sources given. Your argument prior about not EVERYONE seeing him as the greatest doesnt hold water as the sources merely imply many do, which is true. Our job is not to say what we want to say but what the sources say and all the sources say he's the greatest. The second part was a factual quote from the Guardian which supports a point that was agreed on on wikiproject football weeks ago. Davefelmer ( talk) 22:28, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
First of all, the other editor made note about sticking EXACTLY to the sources when I referenced another piece of info so I countered that that wasnt what was currently being done with existing sources since they described AF as the greatest and we had it down as one of the greatest. He didnt reply. Secondly, this is not how consensus works. Editors can't "decide" that for this article, you won't use the information from the sources and say something different from what the sources say instead. the fact that three have done so is ridiculous and makes me wonder whether outside factors are at play. Thirdly, the part about the guardian and other media quoting him as the most successful manager is also factual, sourced and was agreed to be added on wikiproject football (on top of the fact it shouldnt need to be as its sourced by the flipping Guardian). Davefelmer ( talk) 04:04, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
You can't keep senselessly reverting or I'll report you. The sources say something not corroborated in the text which I've attempted to fix and the part about the guardian was agreed and is archived on wikiproject football and in any case its a quote from a very reliable paper in the guardian. There is absolutely 0 reason to keep changing, as I've gone through all the right channels and quoted only reliable news sources. You can't revert something because you don't like it. Others may have done the same but that doesnt make it any more right. All you are doing is edit warring now. Consensus cannot decide to not match the information of a source with the written text. Davefelmer ( talk) 21:29, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Bias my arse. I phrased it poorly and explained what I actually meant in the talk page. This has nothing to do with this article. And I'd say you are at risk yourself seeing as I have explained my point on the talk page to no response, reached consensus over another on wiki football and am doing what wikipedia is about; having the text reflect the sources which it does not do at present. Davefelmer ( talk) 23:21, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
But that's the thing - I don't want to report people. I'd rather either you either explain your stance or accept that all I'm trying to do is reflect source content in the actual text. Davefelmer ( talk) 07:15, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
But its not about your stand or anyone else's. Its about the sources, and they say he's the greatest. There's nothing wrong with saying some people view him as the greatest. I'm not saying EVERYONE does, but the info stated has to be what the sources say. This is an encyclopaedia based on sources, not our opinions. Davefelmer ( talk) 19:50, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Exactly. But thats not what I (by way of the sources) am saying. Nobody ever said to write he explicitly is the greatest of all time or is seen as that because of exactly that point, other sources exist claiming others are the greatest (although I am not sure about 'a lot'). The fact is that many do see SAF as the greatest, that is indisputable and is exactly what the sources show, which is what should be reflected as anything else is interjecting our own opinions into the article. Other managers who have been referred to as the greatest can and should (and maybe even do) have similar statements of fact stated if the sources are found and used as that is what we are; an encyclopaedia of sources. why should we not acknowledge that many see someone as the greatest in their profession if that is what people have said and the sources show this? Who are we to deny them that distinction? Davefelmer ( talk) 22:44, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
I need consensus to agree to use the information of the sources in the actual article? when I post on the discussion page, I don't get replies. Or there is a reply with an avoiding of the point, as you just did. So what would you recommend I do then if nobody answers directly to the question? Davefelmer ( talk) 05:13, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Done
Giant
Snowman
17:20, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
He has joined Cardiff City on loan, please don't change this back. Jimmy Skitz's Answer Machine 18:19, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello. Why the revert? Part ( talk) 23:09, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Not sure, not enough for DUCK yet. Giant Snowman 18:02, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi Qed, I've seen your message at my talk page, I just want to say that I created the article because it was on the requested articles list at the wikiproject football thingy. TheSoccerBoy ( talk) 23:03, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi Qed237
Thank you for pointing out the issues around the Bogdan edit. This isn't the first time that someone me from Wikipedia has pointed out to me edits they feel were inappropriate, and the reason this concerns me is that I'm 100% sure, 1000% sure if you will, that I didn't make this and several other of the edits ascribed to me. I've literally no idea who this guy is, or why anyone around me with access to computer would make such a change as there are literally no football fans in this family of four (me, my son, my ex-wife, her 6 year old son) can you help at all? Why have these edits been ascribed to me?
Thanks,
kieron — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.205.198.107 ( talk) 14:21, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello,
Is there a way to stop editor FkpCascais from editing the name of the country that was known as "Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina" into only "Bosnia and Herzegovina"? It is really annoying since he is erasing a very important historical fact. HankMoodyTZ ( talk) 19:09, 5 February 2016 (UTC) HankMoodyTZ ( talk) 19:09, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
No, I don't think so, wrong location - though it could well be the same IP from Libra Legends. Giant Snowman 18:08, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Good evening. You cancelled my correction, because it hasn't sourse. I can cite the source: http://www.iihf.com/home-of-hockey/championships/olympics/ . Section Final Olympic Qualification. It says that Group D will be in Minsk and Group E will be in Riga. City in Norway at the moment isn't defined This is the official website of the IIHF! I think this is the most reliable source. Although I may be wrong in this. Андрей Козлов 123 ( talk) 16:20, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Done - thanks for the heads-up!
Giant
Snowman
18:02, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Following an AFD that was recently closed as "keep", I have proposed that 2016 Masters Champions League be merged into Masters Champions League. I am sending you this notification as you participated in the AFD discussion. Discussion of the proposed merge is here. AtHomeIn神戸 ( talk) 01:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello from Bosnia.
I was wondering should I make a page for aforementioned player, since he recently went to Turkish Konyaspor and is now playing in a professional league? HankMoodyTZ ( talk) 23:48, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
Done, thanks.
Giant
Snowman
16:44, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
He's had two warnings already today...he probably won't see that one as he rarely edits after 8PM. Tomorrow we start again with another IP address. Eagleash ( talk) 20:31, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
@ Eagleash and Tvx1: today as 88.106.224.170 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS). Qed237 (talk) 14:27, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi umm i added the news about the petition because it is big news. It is on metro.co.uk, on mirror.co.uk and was mentioned by the BBC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Catabolicsuperstar ( talk • contribs) 05:24, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Qed237.
Page User:Qed237/sandbox4 is very good. Thank you. I found mistake about "Paris Saint-Germain". You wrote "TBD since Norwegian clubs are still playing in 2015–16 European competitions". GAV80 ( talk) 13:15, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Hey Qed, its me again, I wanted to ask you two questions: first one is, would I be allowed to create a list of CLUB goals scored by Lionel Messi? or Cristiano Ronaldo or any other famous footballer? I'm looking forward to create an article like this in the future, just wanted to know if it would be approved by the wikipedia football community. The second question is, can you please search for my name in the wikipedia football project member list? I've checked like 5 times already and I can't find my name, was I kicked out or haven't I looked well? I don't know, but can you please do me the favor and prove to me that my name is in that member list, Thank you. I await your answers at my talk page TheSoccerBoy ( talk) 03:19, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi Qed I wanted to talk to you about the changes of Bournemouth and West Ham stadiums. Bournemouth's stadium is originally called Dean Court, but as from now due to sponsorship purposes it's called the Vitality Stadium and that's its name from now. For West Ham it is referred on Sky Sports it's referred to as Upton Park, never Boleyn Ground and for that reason its present name is Upton Park. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omerjoker ( talk • contribs) 16:17, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi, just wanted to thank you for your help, thanks for finding my name on the list, I think I would do good with a better eyesight, Lol. But anyways Thank you once again Qed, for your good help :) TheSoccerBoy ( talk) 00:33, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I changed it because Yaya joined year after Kolo. I admit that I was a little lazy do rewrite it properly, but still thought that it is better to delete erroneous part. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.14.232.7 ( talk) 11:59, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
With the 2015 FIFA corruption case, transparency is needed. It's the 21st century and people have the right to know where they can watch football matches.-- Abiete900 ( talk) 10:47, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
Why have you reverted my edits to player heights? The addition of "precision=0" to the height template removes the rather odd looking 1⁄2 inch. This is a rather spurious level of accuracy. Please explain your logic, or was it simply a knee jerk to an edit n=by an unregistered user? 2.96.236.37 ( talk) 08:58, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
My sincere apologies - I withdraw my stupid comment. I'll explain further later today. Best wishes. 2.96.236.37 ( talk) 09:27, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
I was a bit cross earlier because you reverted all my edits back to the incorrect ones by User:Neiliog93 and then reverted those edits of his on other articles which I had not changed, such as Rio Ferdinand. To be consistent, surely you should have also reverted his initial edits, such as that on Ivan Rakitić. Before his edit, the code was {{convert|1.84|m|ftin|0|abbr=on}} which gave the output 1.84 m (6 ft 0 in). His edit was to change this to {{height|m=1.84}} which gives the output 1.84 m (6 ft 1⁄2 in). I altered this to {{height|m=1.84|precision=0}} to give the output 1.84 m (6 ft 0 in) (i.e the same as the original) but you reverted me (and not User:Neiliog93) to show the current {{height|m=1.84}} giving 1.84 m (6 ft 1⁄2 in). Apart from the 1⁄2 inch being disproportionate with the rest of the text, as I said above this is a rather spurious level of accuracy. You say that the use of the half-inch is standard for the conversion template – are you sure? The template documentation suggests the use of the precision parameter. The documentation for the Convert template implies that the default precision is to the nearest inch.
Ignoring Wikipedia conventions and templates for a moment, I am not aware of any website or database in the UK which includes the half inch in height measurements. On a personal note, my height at a recent medical was recorded as 1.79 metres or 5 ft 10 in; I would never refer to my height in imperial as 5 ft 10 1⁄2 in.
Incidentally, you also reverted my edit on Stuart Green which had nothing to do with his height. UserSrednuas Lenoroc has changed many articles to replace "sent on loan" with "on loan" which completely alters the meaning. I have reverted you and hope you will accept this. Best wishes 2.96.236.37 ( talk) 12:15, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Do you know where I can start discussions on the WikiProject Football page?
-- PerelmanMorales ( talk) 10:04, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. May I ask you why you are so much against my and others proposal of making a distinction between official titles (those recognized or organized by The FA, UEFA or FIFA) and unofficial trophies? I think that you know what I am referring to here.-- PerelmanMorales ( talk) 21:51, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Again, I have to apologize for jumping the gun (not waiting until game is over before updating stuff). You are following the guidelines, I am not, but we BOTH want to help and improve I am sure.
Don't worry, when MARCA has the reference for his Getafe debut available i'll add it. Cheers -- 84.90.219.128 ( talk) 22:52, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Hooo boy. Aren't you going to be glad you asked me to explain this when you see my response. The answer is not exactly straight-forward, but it is mathematically definite.
First off, I will start by saying I disagree with your interpretation of WP:OR, and this is a sticking point I have had with users of this website for many a year. WP:OR was implemented to prevent people from going to an article such as this PL season article and adding what looks like reasoned arguments but made up of massive leaps of logic or misuse of source data, such as saying "the twenty-five yellow cards Newcastle United received all came in the first sixty minutes of a game, showing that their tactics revolved around deliberate foul play intended to injure their opponents". Pure mathematics, on the other hand, is empirical - it is either correct or not correct and simple numbers are not interpretable. Therefore, the calculation of a club's mathematical safety cannot be Original Research as a club is either safe or not safe, it is not arguably safe. What I research about mathematical safety is the exact same conclusion you would have to reach if you used the same method, and it would be the same 100 times out of 100.
As a second point, I don't think the source is a decent point of reference. It's talking about probability, which is a far more subjective methodology, especially as they haven't determined what system they are using to determine which team will win. You can also see that their rating for whether teams are safe or not gives different answers based on whether you use the weighted method or 50/50. I think you'll find that their "No" rating comes from when the numbers become sufficiently close to zero to become not worth reporting, rather than a genuine zero rating.
To answer your actual point, however: being a mathematician by both training and by trade, I decided to investigate a more rigorous definition. I found a predictor chart which has the current status of the league and has the ability to calculate the league table based on entering hypothetical results to the remaining league games (namely this one). I then came up with the following scenario, which I won't go into the methodology of because I don't want to write a response so long you won't read it. If you want the full explanation, I can provide it if necessary.
Here is the full list of results I selected to engineer Spurs' relegation:
Fixture list | ||
---|---|---|
Home team | Score | Away team |
Newcastle United | 10-0 | Manchester City |
Liverpool | 10-0 | Everton |
West Ham | 10-0 | Spurs |
Stoke | 0-10 | Newcastle United |
Arsenal | 0-10 | Swansea |
Liverpool | 10-0 | Manchester City |
United | 0-10 | Watford |
Spurs | 0-10 | Arsenal |
Chelsea | 0-10 | Stoke |
Everton | 10-0 | West Ham |
Manchester City | 10-0 | Villa |
Newcastle United | 10-0 | Bournemouth |
Soton | 0-10 | Sunderland |
Swansea | 10-0 | Norwich |
Watford | 10-0 | Leicester |
Palace | 10-0 | Liverpool |
West Brom | 10-0 | United |
United | 0-10 | Palace |
Norwich | 0-10 | Manchester City |
Bournemouth | 0-10 | Swansea |
Stoke | 10-0 | Soton |
Arsenal | 0-10 | West Brom |
Liverpool | 10-0 | Chelsea |
Villa | 10-0 | Spurs |
Leicester | 0-10 | Newcastle |
Sunderland | 10-0 | Everton |
West Ham | 0-10 | Watford |
Everton | 10-0 | Arsenal |
Palace | 10-0 | Leicester |
Watford | 0-10 | Stoke |
West Brom | 10-0 | Norwich |
Chelsea | 10-0 | West Ham |
Swansea | 10-0 | Villa |
Newcastle | 0-10 | Sunderland |
Soton | 10-0 | Liverpool |
Manchester City | 10-0 | United |
Spurs | 0-10 | Bournemouth |
Villa | 0-10 | Chelsea |
Arsenal | 0-10 | Watford |
Bournemouth | 10-0 | Manchester City |
Stoke | 0-10 | Swansea |
Sunderland | 10-0 | West Brom |
West Ham | 0-10 | Palace |
Norwich | 0-10 | Newcastle |
Liverpool | 10-0 | Spurs |
Leicester | 0-10 | Soton |
United | 0-10 | Everton |
West Ham | 10-0 | Arsenal |
Palace | 10-0 | Norwich |
Soton | 0-10 | Newcastle |
Swansea | 10-0 | Chelsea |
Villa | 0-10 | Bournemouth |
Watford | 0-10 | Everton |
Manchester City | 0-10 | West Brom |
Sunderland | 10-0 | Leicester |
Liverpool | 0-10 | Stoke |
Spurs | 0-10 | United |
Norwich | 0-10 | Sunderland |
Bournemouth | 10-0 | Liverpool |
Everton | 0-10 | Soton |
United | 10-0 | Villa |
Newcastle | 10-0 | Swansea |
West Brom | 0-10 | Watford |
Chelsea | 10-0 | Manchester City |
Leicester | 0-10 | West Ham |
Arsenal | 0-10 | Palace |
Stoke | 10-0 | Spurs |
Bournemouth | 10-0 | Chelsea |
Villa | 0-10 | Soton |
Palace | 10-0 | Everton |
Liverpool | 0-10 | Newcastle |
Norwich | 0-10 | Watford |
Manchester City | 0-10 | Stoke |
Sunderland | 10-0 | Arsenal |
Leicester | 0-10 | Swansea |
West Ham | 10-0 | United |
Spurs | 0-10 | West Brom |
Swansea | 10-0 | Liverpool |
Everton | 0-10 | Bournemouth |
Newcastle | 10-0 | Palace |
Stoke | 0-10 | Sunderland |
Watford | 10-0 | Villa |
West Brom | 10-0 | West Ham |
Arsenal | 0-10 | Norwich |
United | 10-0 | Leicester |
Soton | 10-0 | Manchester City |
Chelsea | 10-0 | Spurs |
West Ham | 0-10 | Swansea |
Villa | 0-10 | Newcastle |
Palace | 10-0 | Stoke |
Leicester | 0-10 | Everton |
Liverpool | 10-0 | Watford |
Manchester City | 10-0 | Arsenal |
Norwich | 0-10 | United |
Sunderland | 10-0 | Chelsea |
Spurs | 0-10 | Soton |
Bournemouth | 10-0 | West Brom |
Arsenal | 0-10 | Villa |
Chelsea | 10-0 | Leicester |
Everton | 10-0 | Norwich |
United | 0-10 | Bournemouth |
Newcastle | 10-0 | Spurs |
Soton | 0-10 | Palace |
Stoke | 10-0 | West Ham |
Swansea | 10-0 | Manchester City |
Watford | 0-10 | Sunderland |
West Brom | 0-10 | Liverpool |
The end result is thus: Image
It should go without saying that if Spurs win today, they become mathematically safe too, as it would be impossible for all the various teams above them to gain a further three points each in order to stay above them. It's very hard to say if a draw would be enough - it might even partially depend on other results tonight - but I'd suggest it is probably also enough.
Either way, on their current points total, Spurs are not safe, and the likes of United are a million miles from. Falastur2 Talk 20:14, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Joe Riley (footballer). Since you had some involvement with the Joe Riley (footballer) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Joseph2302 ( talk) 22:07, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
We meet again, again i spend time on editing current sports things, and again u delete them, are u stubborn to change? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arni777 ( talk • contribs) 13:39, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
i didnt know there is an option like this, never the less, its better that the old temples will be erased rather than the new ones, because they are up to date with all the matches and all the teams, while the old ones has nothing. will you do it or shall i? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arni777 ( talk • contribs) 14:44, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
i you feel offended from the personal attacks, maybe you should, its not the first time i spend hours to make a good thing to the community and u using your "powers" and just terminate everything so you can be in charge.. euroleague 2014, uefa champion league 2015 etc ring a bell? Arni777 ( talk) 15:17, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
excuse me, but except you, no one was on your side, and as i recall it, in past times it wasn't only me that changed things, but others as well and guess what, u were against them as well. Arni777 ( talk) 16:01, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi Qed237. Is it OK to write SR Croatia, Yugoslavia to people born in Croatia from 1945 to 1992? Since SR Croatia was part of Yugoslavia till 1992.I think it gives people a bit more clarity as to the peoples background and in light of the fact that the country no longer exists. Sorry I dont know how to get the tildes onto the computer screen also. Can you tell me how to get them to appear on the sign off. Thanks. OK I think i just worked it out Stevesmith215 ( talk) 00:24, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
I feel like the article gets cluttered with constant links to teams. Looking at previous seasons (and other leagues), links to the playoff teams are included in the playoff bracket but aren't used excessively elsewhere. However, links to the stadiums are useful information, in my opinion, and those links are fine. Ho-ju-96 ( talk) 12:30, 9 March 2016 (UTC)