Hello, Sb008, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! gidonb ( talk) 23:12, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Sb008, please see this link for our guidelines on flag usage. In the articles you've been editing, the use of cute flag icons is deemed disruptive--and, by the way, no one uses flags for provinces... Thank you, Drmies ( talk) 02:05, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, No wonder your remark didn't ring a bell. I didn't add any of those flags, they were there long before I made my first edit. I'm indeed Dutch and I can tell you this much.
Where provinces are concerned: In general we support the team from our birth town or nearest town with a team. Next we support teams of our province. The rest comes last. On a national level, the province a team is from, is kinda relevant. Although none of the teams officially represent a province they do in the mind of many people. It goes back on sentiments over the centuries. A small sidestep. It is not uncommon that people outside the Netherlands call the country Holland. However Holland is only a region or 2 provinces (long ago a united single province) in the Netherlands. In my province (Limburg) calling someone a Hollander or someone from Holland is considered a big insult. In some areas there are quite strong provincial sentiments. Calling the Netherlands, Holland is like calling the USA, California, Texas or pick any state you like. So it is in some way relevant to have a list of teams by province. If you have such a list it seems valid to me to add the province flag. I know I care more bout my province flag and anthem than about the national flag and anthem. Of course one could say it's all nonsense, but then distinction by country could be called nonsense as well.
As far as the country flags in front of the people are concerned, they indicate the nationality of the person. Plenty of people who like to know where a manager or coach is from. If you look at the well known club football (the real football) teams, you will see a country flag in front of the players. hen they play for a club, they don't represent a country. Yet we would like to know their origin. So why should we use flags in any case where national sport is concerned? I would say because it's informative and many people like to know.
That being said. I feel the flags are informative and therefore relevant, but I don't care much about the flags being there or not, I didn't add them to start with.
Just never call me a Hollander, lol
--
Sb008 (
talk) 04:57, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
The Running Man Barnstar | ||
This barnstar is bestowed upon you for your exceptional contributions to Dutch soccer! Specifically your invested work on the seasons of the Hoofdklasse drew my attention. Thank you for your efforts thus far! May many more quality edits follow!!! gidonb ( talk) 23:12, 12 August 2017 (UTC) |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | ||
Another one for updating Template:Eerste Klasse. Much appreciated! gidonb ( talk) 01:22, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
Hey there! I just re-launched the WikiProject Investment.
The site has been fully revamped and updated and I would like to invite you the project.
Feel free to check out the project and ping me if you have any questions.
Cheers!
WikiEditCrunch (
talk) 11:06, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
{{
User investment}}
Hello, Sb008. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on SV OSS '20 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a club, society, or group, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. - Mr X 🖋 13:34, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on VV GOES requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a club, society, or group, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. - Mr X 🖋 13:35, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Is there any evidence that reliable sources are denoting '+' to indicate 3 or more goals? If a player scores more than 3 goals then he has automatically scored a hat-trick. Is there any evidence though that reliable sources are tracking hat-tricks, as opposed to them being listed in match scores?
I note you added a source for the position by round topic but is it possible to choose an actual round or do you have to pick a date to find the round number? Eldumpo ( talk) 20:30, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Template:2017–18 Eredivisie table. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. BangJan1999 17:19, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
I restored it because I have heard nothing from the other editor. Enigma msg 21:17, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article HSV De Zuidvogels 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/HSV De Zuidvogels until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. » Shadowowl | talk 09:49, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on SV Dalfsen requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. CASSIOPEIA( talk) 10:29, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
Thought you may enjoy figuring this one out. The following coaches are said in different places (infoboxes, manager template) to have managed RBC:
Unless comanaging as equals (unlikely), some of this should be incorrect. gidonb ( talk) 02:19, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Sb008. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hey, it is common usage to list not more than two players. See international Handball, Basketball articles e.g. Kante4 ( talk) 19:13, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
You were reverted several times by several editors (@ Dellux mkd and Sportsfan 1234:), so stop adding them back. It's consistent throughout all tournaments (basketball aswell), i know you don't like it but as i said, three editors disagree. Kante4 ( talk) 15:32, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
@
Kante4:
It's not consistent within the page. Sometimes top scorers are mentioned and sometimes they're not. Consistent is they're either always mentioned or they're never mentioned. See the dictionary:
consistent.
Style is not consistent either, not within the page, and not between different pages. Just 1 example of each; 'align=left', 'align="left"' and 'style="text-align: left;"', and on the page WC Spain 2013 the module "sports_table" is not used.
None of the style changes I made changed the layout of the page. I removed deprecated tags. Guess you want to keep these tags till browsers no longer support them and the pages start to cause problems. I bet you don't even change the definitions used by your virus scanner neither. After all you prefer to keep things as they're and not to anticipate on new developments and progress.
I advise you to read about the
Five pillars, specifically pillar 3 and 5. You find enough reasons there why I don't need to discuss removal of deprecated tags first. Doesn't have to do anything with being my style or not.
The only thing which can be considered as "my thing" is all top scorers to be mentioned. But then, that's not style but a disagreement about which content data should be presented.
Up till now, you nor anybody else, provided a logical argument for why if there're are more than 2 top scorers not to mention their name. Best you could do, 2 other editors think/do the same. Let me ask you, if all editors decide to jump from a skyscraper, are you gonna jump without any thinking as well or are you going to decide, based on logical arguments, whether you will jump or not.
If we would keep doing things out of habit or just because more people do it, we would be still living in the stone age.
I wonder why the layout of the current WC is so different from the layout of the WC in 1938? Shouldn't you be busy reverting all these layout changes and shape all as in 1938?
When you finished doing that, you can go change the high jump pages of the Olympics in 1908, 1992 and 2012. At all these Olympics the were 3 jumpers who won the bronze. By mistake the names of all these jumpers are mentioned. Of course this should never have happened. So best you go change it into ""three jumpers 1.88m", "three jumpers 2.34m" and "three jumpers 2.29m". Don't forget to mention there're are 2 more editors who agree on the "not more than 2 names policy". Luckily there weren't any Olympics with 5 bronze medalists. Imagine the total disgrace if they all had been mentioned by name.
Unarmed habits, especially of the majority, are the biggest obstacle for progress.
Time you start presenting your arguments. I'm not interested in how many do as you do. I want to know for which reason you do as you do.
Discussing you do based on arguments, not on what others do as well.
It's not the quantity but the quality and validity of arguments which matters. -- Sb008 ( talk) 06:29, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
@ Dellux mkd: Your question implies you are an unique person. Apparently you argue with people because you think your wrong. But I admit, I indeed argue because I think I'm right. However, I also know that contrary to what I think, I could be wrong. To make me realize I'm wrong, you will have to present valid arguments. So far, neither you nor Kante has done so.
Why can't we be consistent? The perfect question. I know you aren't consistent!!! A small analogy; the people in a street can choose to wear footwear on both feet (list all top scorers), only on the left foot (list only top scorers of team listed as home team), only on the right foot (list only top scorers of team listed as away team), or no footwear at all (list no top scorers). These are accurate and valid choices. According to you, these people are consistent in their footwear because in another street (another WC or EC) people have the exact same choices. Basically according to you footwear is consistent for all people. In this example there are only 2 choices (yes or no footwear on a foot). Let's expand this a bit. In the evening I can choose to watch tv, make love with my wife, go visit friends, go for a walk, solve a crossword, and a few 100's more options. You have the same choices, as has anybody else. Guess we are all consistent in our evening activity since we got the same choices. Consistent and variation do not match. A single tournament contains variety in regard to the top scorers. Just because in every tournament you got the same variety, it doesn't mean your consistent. You're consistent in being inconsistent. Consistent is; either list the names of all top scorers or always use a string like "x players y". If you do the same for every tournament, you're consistently consistent.
To answer your question about what if there're 5 players with the same number of goals. What is the problem if there're 5? What are the odds there're 5? What are the odds the whole squad scores the same number of goals? Why, in e.g. football, they don't have a problem listing all goal scorers even if a team scores more than 10 times? To answer your question more concrete, I say, we list all 5 because I see no reason at all not to. The template can handle any amount of players and the visible layout of a match is not affected. To do it different for 2 or 5 players requires a valid argument like e.g. as of "x" players the problem "y" is caused.. From a wiki code perspective there is none. From a layout perspective there is none.
So maybe you can give me an armed reason why 5 is a problem. I'm curious to hear your first real argument.
Also I like to hear from you why if there're only 1 or 2 top scorers they get the privilege of being mentioned by name and if there're more than 2 they're denied this privilege?
And maybe you can tell why you replace informative data by less informative data.
All in all, You accuse me of thinking I'm always right. Well, aren't we all? You claim to be consistent. A false claim, at best you consistently inconsistent. You want people to accept common practice. If we would think what the majority thinks, we would still think the earth is flat and if we only do things as the majority does, we still would do things as in the stone age. Common practice has to be challenged at any time because otherwise there will never be progress. And worst of all you don't present a single argument why what you do is correct. -- Sb008 ( talk) 11:28, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
Sometimes we just need to put our vanity aside and to act more sensible. This discussion went far beyond and is complete nonsense. I think that you need to sign up some forum when you can discuss about history, philosophy, logic's, psychology, etc. Here we are talking about a simple handball article, about listing goalscorers and with your discussion and arguments you went far beyond. You present completely pointless arguments and facts unrelated to the topic. I have nothing against you and your opinion. As you express your own opinion and attitude, i express mine. I am reverting the edits because i think that i am right, not because you think differently. I am leaving this conversation here and i have no intention to go further. Of course you have the right to think differently. Dellux mkd ( talk) 18:22, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
But 3x 2 minutes is a red card. Not sure why it is not shown... Kante4 ( talk) 18:05, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
@ Kante4: It's indeed inconsistent, Seems DEN KSA is the only exception, so to make it consistent it's indeed better to add the red card for KSA. I don't read the web pages and reports on the official site, but use programs to scan them and generate the wiki data. Hence no red card for KSA. -- Sb008 ( talk) 19:59, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi, the article on Jonathan Okita lists him as being Belgian, not German! I've been looking for some sources and basically it seems he has double nationality, both Belgian and German. If you say he's primarily German, then please change the article and add references to prove that statement. Otherwise imho it's quite unclear and there's no reason to use one over the other, born in Germany yes, but also Belgian citizenship and played there since his youth... -- Pelotas talk| contribs 16:56, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
@ Pelotas: On the 2018–19 Eerste Divisie page, just like on the Eerste divisie 2018/19 page, he will remain German until proven otherwise. -- Sb008 ( talk) 18:40, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
@ Pelotas:
There's 1 common factor: German. So start respecting those references and stop bothering me until you can present solid proof. -- Sb008 ( talk) 18:55, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
Anyway thanks for the refs. -- Pelotas talk| contribs 19:23, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
@ Pelotas: No you should read better, NOS is mentioned as reference for the Assist table. Soccerway and Worldfootball are mentioned on the players page. As far as the N.E.C. page is concerned, I told you to contact them so they can clarify matters and/or change the web page if they consider it needed. Finally, I don't need to show a reference for a players nationality. Otherwise there have to be 20 references (doubles ignored) for the top scorer and assist table on the page. We done now? -- Sb008 ( talk) 19:34, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
Template:2017–18 Eredivisie results has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Zackmann ( Talk to me/ What I been doing) 20:40, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like you to assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Zackmann ( Talk to me/ What I been doing) 21:00, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
@ Zackmann08: Apparently my apology wasn't clear enough. It was an apology for being wrong.. -- Sb008 ( talk) 21:25, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2019–20 Eerste Divisie, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ill ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 07:26, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
Personally I don't think you understand that what you are essentially something that isn't really needed on the wiki as they can be easily placed in the seasonal section of that team. This talk has already happened before over here and as Lee Vilenski said in that discussion, it's a WP:FANCRUFT issue that covers all sports. You could also put that info under WP:NOTSTATS as well because that is what it is. Stats. HawkAussie ( talk) 23:19, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
@ HawkAussie: I would define that as a very basic start which still needs a lot of work. Just looking at the infobox I would eventualy expect something like:
parameter | format/description | tier 1 | tier 2 | tier 3 |
---|---|---|---|---|
competition | link to general page descring the league, e.g. Eredivisie | mandatory | mandatory | mandatory |
image | league logo | mandatory | optional | optional |
season | 9999–99, e.g. 2019–20 | mandatory | mandatory | mandatory |
dates | d M Y – d M Y (startdate – enddate) | mandatory | mandatory | mandatory |
relegated | <br /> seperated list of links to teams which relegated | mandatory | mandatory | mandatory |
continentalcup1 | link to EU cup, e.g. Champions League | mandatory | no | no |
continentalcup1 qualifiers | <br /> seperated list of links to teams which qual for Cup above | mandatory | no | no |
biggest home win | team1 result team2 | mandatory | optional | no |
matches | 99, number of matches played | mandatory | mandatory | mandatory |
total goals | 99, number of goals scored | mandatory | mandatory | mandatory |
league topscorer | <br /> seperated list of links to players | mandatory | mandatory | mandatory |
prevseason | link to prev season | mandatory | mandatory | mandatory |
nextseason | lonk to next season | mandatory | mandatory | mandatory |
I just put something very quickly together. If it was for real I would do it different, most likely 2 tables. Someething like, first table: "parameter - description - format - example", second table: "parameter - tier 1 - tier 2 - ... - tier X". I used the values: "mandatory - optional - no". Maybe there should be more possible values. And the values I put in the quick table above are not by definition correct, they only meant as an example. Probably a motivation for each parameter about e.g. why it's mandatary for tier 1 and not to be used for tier 3 or a short summary of the pro's and con's in the discussion which resulted in why mandatory or optional or not to be used, or a link to the page where it has been discussed. Anyway, it should not only be about how it's supposed to be but also why it's supposed to be like that. Always better when people can read why it is as it is than just saying it's like this. Just been brainstorming, so don't read anything as a dictate. -- Sb008 ( talk) 03:13, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
Hello, I'm HawkAussie. I noticed that you recently removed content from 2019–20 Eredivisie without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. HawkAussie ( talk) 00:19, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
@ HawkAussie:
-- Sb008 ( talk) 10:53, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on 2019–20 Eredivisie. Thank you. HawkAussie ( talk) 05:34, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.
When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled " Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:
Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)
Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.
Edit summary content is visible in:
Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Cabayi ( talk) 13:27, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, mate : i reverted the wrong edit (was intending to revert the one from Jawszy but obviously got it wrong). Matilda Maniac ( talk) 20:44, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello,
Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.
I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!
From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.
If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.
Thank you!
-- User:Martin Urbanec ( talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi Sb008! You may enjoy the articles I created for SC Emma, Janus van der Gijp, Wim van der Gaag, and EBOH. All part of Dordrecht football history. The article Terneuzense Boys was prodded and deprodded. Improvements are always welcome. Best, gidonb ( talk) 18:11, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Looks not like 500 tbh. Do we have any (official) statement that the whole tournament was played without spectators? Would be good to add. Kante4 ( talk) 20:48, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
Hey, i would guess and use the logical ones (that are often used). If we want to be correct of what we know, we should just add the city, as everything else would be (yeah) gueses.... Kante4 ( talk) 18:15, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to 2008 European Women's Handball Championship qualification – Play-offs, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. -- John B123 ( talk) 19:17, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:2008 European Women's Handball Championship qualification requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 16:28, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
You have been reverted by three different editors now. Please take it up at the relative discussion at WT:FOOTY. REDMAN 2019 ( talk) 13:49, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello. What's happening with UEFA links attendance? Apparently, there seems to be a system error. ( example) I noticed you added Croatia v Austria and France v Denmark attendance. Did the link work properly as usual?-- Island92 ( talk) 10:32, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
|url=
https://match.uefa.com/v2/matches/2034412/
. It mentions "v2" instead of "v4". I corrected all v2's to v4's and the ref URL's are fine now. It is possible to add already now the ref URL's for all group matches as wikicode comment . I aleady did so for the match ITA v GER. In General the reference is <ref>{{cite web |url=https://match.uefa.com/v4/matches/<ID>/ |title=<name home team> vs. <name away team> |publisher=Union of European Football Associations |date=<match date> |access-date=<match date>}}</ref>. Just replace ID, name home team, name away team, and match date by the correct values. ID is the exact same value as in the report URL.When I started adding attendance for this edition of Nations League v2 in those links worked perfectly. This issue has been working since yesterday. It's the first time ever is happening. Personally, I think it will work again as previously. And please calm down. Island92 ( talk) 12:05, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi Sb008,
I noticed you make template brackets. I need help making a bracket for the 2022–23 NBL season page. I’m having issues making one since the bracket I want is complicated.
I have an example of two brackets which need to be merged.
Lastly, I need best-of-3 (3 legs) for the Semi Finals and best-of-5 (5 legs) for the Grand Final series. If you could help me or know someone for help, that would be greatly appreciated.
Play-in / Seeding qualifier | Play-in game | Semifinals | Grand Final | |||||||||||||||||||||
5 | S.E. Melbourne Phoenix | 99 | 1 | Sydney Kings | 95 | 82 | 79 | |||||||||||||||||
6 | Perth Wildcats | 106 | 3 | Cairns Taipans | 87 | 93 | 64 | |||||||||||||||||
3 | Cairns Taipans | 91 | 1 | Sydney Kings | 87 | 81 | 91 | 70 | 77 | |||||||||||||||
6 | Perth Wildcats | 78 | 2 | New Zealand Breakers | 95 | 74 | 68 | 80 | 69 | |||||||||||||||
3 | Cairns Taipans | 79 | 2 | New Zealand Breakers | 88 | 78 | 92 | |||||||||||||||||
4 | Tasmania JackJumpers | 87 | 4 | Tasmania JackJumpers | 68 | 89 | 77 | |||||||||||||||||
Semifinals | Grand Final | ||||||||||||||
1 | Melbourne United | 74 | 72 | 73 | |||||||||||
4 | Tasmania JackJumpers | 63 | 79 | 76 | |||||||||||
3 | Sydney Kings | 95 | 90 | 97 | X | X | |||||||||
4 | Tasmania JackJumpers | 78 | 86 | 88 | X | X | |||||||||
2 | Illawarra Hawks | 79 | 87 | X | |||||||||||
3 | Sydney Kings | 89 | 99 | X |
Alextigers ( talk) 21:38, 6 August 2022 (AEST)
Hi. I noticed you made some changes to Template:Bracket entry for Module:Bracket builder to try to add legs. The whole thing is a mess, and I've been working to replace it all. I've created a (similarly-named) module that is much easier to work with: Module:Build bracket that will eventually replace all of the old stuff. What bracket are you trying to add legs to? I can quickly swap it over to the new module if you would like. – Pbrks ( t • c) 02:25, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi Pbrks,
The bracket I need 5 legs for doesn't exist yet. Based on the request of Alextigers in the post before yours, I'm trying to create a bracket which requires a 5-leg match.
I'm not familiar with the NBL, but what I understand from it is:
Best of 5 games are not uncommon, also in tennis we know 5 set games. Hence the need for the 5-leg option.
he official bracket for the NBL play-offs (play in tournament) can be found here
To create this bracket I tried using {{ #invoke:Bracket builder|main}} (which uses {{ Bracket entry}}), After your post I did the same by using {{ #invoke:Build bracket|main}}. Below the results of both
This is not an actual bracket, but just example of what it could look like
Script error: No such module "Bracket builder".
Issues
All I manage to create is
Where I would like to have:
This would require creation of:
Similar, in case the brecket would be upside down, creation of:
|
Same example data as above. Bracket is not parameterized, so not suitable for template use.
Seeding qualifier | Play-in game | Semifinals | Final | |||||||||||||||||||||
5 | New Zealand | 102 | 1 | Adelaide | 74 | 72 | 73 | |||||||||||||||||
6 | Cairns | 99 | 3 | Melbourne | 63 | 79 | 76 | |||||||||||||||||
3 | Melbourne | 110 | 2 | Perth | 95 | 90 | 97 | X | X | |||||||||||||||
Play-in qualifier | 5 | New Zealand | 90 | 3 | Melbourne | 78 | 86 | 88 | X | X | ||||||||||||||
3 | Melbourne | 100 | 2 | Perth | 89 | 99 | X | |||||||||||||||||
4 | Sydney | 105 | 4 | Sydney | 79 | 83 | X | |||||||||||||||||
Improvements
Issues
Remarks I didn't study the module code in detail. Also I dont know the status, under contruction, beta or someting else, but:
Don't have much time right now, hence didnt look in depth at the code or made the necessary changes.
For now, only multiple headers in 1 coulumn (round) should be made possible.
-- Sb008 ( talk) 00:54, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
Template:4TeamBracket-PagePlayoff-Extended has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Pbrks ( t • c) 14:12, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Got it wrong here, sorry. Kante4 ( talk) 20:54, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Stop censoring information. The data is the same in the previous qualifications for 2022, 2020... We have to report the qualified team for the next Euro 2026. The 2024 qualification is part of the list of entries for the 2026 qualification. It's important to understand and to explain to everybody (that is the purpose of wikipedia) that Each Euro is linked to the previous or next, due to the qualification system put in place by EHF. So it's important to put that and to explain how teams qualify to current but also next Euro. In 2024 Euro Qualification, regarding the ranking, countries are qualified to 2024 Euro final tournament but some countries are also qualified to 2026 next Euro for different phases (relegation round, phase 2 or phase 1). We cannot ignore this, these are the EHF rules, and again in previous Euro qualification, you can find the same data. Frozizi ( talk) 10:52, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
The practice is to put * name player {{goal|}} under goals1 or goals2. Island92 ( talk) 18:57, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
goals1 =
*player1 ...
*player2 ...
goals1 = player1 ...<br />player2 ...
Do not separate list items with line breaks. S.A. Julio ( talk) 04:16, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to 2023 UEFA European Under-21 Championship, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 17:51, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
Can you tell me what is fully wrong with the section, because there is a lot of good information in the section. I read it and it didn't look subjective, it looked pretty neutral. ILoveSport2006 ( talk) 16:30, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to 2023 World Women's Handball Championship, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Pindrice ( talk) 18:31, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
Congrats for entering Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits/5001–10000! Keep up the good work! Timothytyy ( talk) 12:57, 29 December 2023 (UTC) |
Hi, I have reverted Your edit on the Top goalkeepers table. It is better to use the percentage with decimal number, as it shows correctly the percentage of saves made as it is the main date for the ranking. The table of Top goalkeepers on the other hand is ranked by "goals scored", and the percentage is just a side data. Tuvixer ( talk) 12:49, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Sb008, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! gidonb ( talk) 23:12, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Sb008, please see this link for our guidelines on flag usage. In the articles you've been editing, the use of cute flag icons is deemed disruptive--and, by the way, no one uses flags for provinces... Thank you, Drmies ( talk) 02:05, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, No wonder your remark didn't ring a bell. I didn't add any of those flags, they were there long before I made my first edit. I'm indeed Dutch and I can tell you this much.
Where provinces are concerned: In general we support the team from our birth town or nearest town with a team. Next we support teams of our province. The rest comes last. On a national level, the province a team is from, is kinda relevant. Although none of the teams officially represent a province they do in the mind of many people. It goes back on sentiments over the centuries. A small sidestep. It is not uncommon that people outside the Netherlands call the country Holland. However Holland is only a region or 2 provinces (long ago a united single province) in the Netherlands. In my province (Limburg) calling someone a Hollander or someone from Holland is considered a big insult. In some areas there are quite strong provincial sentiments. Calling the Netherlands, Holland is like calling the USA, California, Texas or pick any state you like. So it is in some way relevant to have a list of teams by province. If you have such a list it seems valid to me to add the province flag. I know I care more bout my province flag and anthem than about the national flag and anthem. Of course one could say it's all nonsense, but then distinction by country could be called nonsense as well.
As far as the country flags in front of the people are concerned, they indicate the nationality of the person. Plenty of people who like to know where a manager or coach is from. If you look at the well known club football (the real football) teams, you will see a country flag in front of the players. hen they play for a club, they don't represent a country. Yet we would like to know their origin. So why should we use flags in any case where national sport is concerned? I would say because it's informative and many people like to know.
That being said. I feel the flags are informative and therefore relevant, but I don't care much about the flags being there or not, I didn't add them to start with.
Just never call me a Hollander, lol
--
Sb008 (
talk) 04:57, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
The Running Man Barnstar | ||
This barnstar is bestowed upon you for your exceptional contributions to Dutch soccer! Specifically your invested work on the seasons of the Hoofdklasse drew my attention. Thank you for your efforts thus far! May many more quality edits follow!!! gidonb ( talk) 23:12, 12 August 2017 (UTC) |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | ||
Another one for updating Template:Eerste Klasse. Much appreciated! gidonb ( talk) 01:22, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
Hey there! I just re-launched the WikiProject Investment.
The site has been fully revamped and updated and I would like to invite you the project.
Feel free to check out the project and ping me if you have any questions.
Cheers!
WikiEditCrunch (
talk) 11:06, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
{{
User investment}}
Hello, Sb008. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on SV OSS '20 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a club, society, or group, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. - Mr X 🖋 13:34, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on VV GOES requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a club, society, or group, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. - Mr X 🖋 13:35, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Is there any evidence that reliable sources are denoting '+' to indicate 3 or more goals? If a player scores more than 3 goals then he has automatically scored a hat-trick. Is there any evidence though that reliable sources are tracking hat-tricks, as opposed to them being listed in match scores?
I note you added a source for the position by round topic but is it possible to choose an actual round or do you have to pick a date to find the round number? Eldumpo ( talk) 20:30, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Template:2017–18 Eredivisie table. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. BangJan1999 17:19, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
I restored it because I have heard nothing from the other editor. Enigma msg 21:17, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article HSV De Zuidvogels 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/HSV De Zuidvogels until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. » Shadowowl | talk 09:49, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on SV Dalfsen requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. CASSIOPEIA( talk) 10:29, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
Thought you may enjoy figuring this one out. The following coaches are said in different places (infoboxes, manager template) to have managed RBC:
Unless comanaging as equals (unlikely), some of this should be incorrect. gidonb ( talk) 02:19, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Sb008. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hey, it is common usage to list not more than two players. See international Handball, Basketball articles e.g. Kante4 ( talk) 19:13, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
You were reverted several times by several editors (@ Dellux mkd and Sportsfan 1234:), so stop adding them back. It's consistent throughout all tournaments (basketball aswell), i know you don't like it but as i said, three editors disagree. Kante4 ( talk) 15:32, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
@
Kante4:
It's not consistent within the page. Sometimes top scorers are mentioned and sometimes they're not. Consistent is they're either always mentioned or they're never mentioned. See the dictionary:
consistent.
Style is not consistent either, not within the page, and not between different pages. Just 1 example of each; 'align=left', 'align="left"' and 'style="text-align: left;"', and on the page WC Spain 2013 the module "sports_table" is not used.
None of the style changes I made changed the layout of the page. I removed deprecated tags. Guess you want to keep these tags till browsers no longer support them and the pages start to cause problems. I bet you don't even change the definitions used by your virus scanner neither. After all you prefer to keep things as they're and not to anticipate on new developments and progress.
I advise you to read about the
Five pillars, specifically pillar 3 and 5. You find enough reasons there why I don't need to discuss removal of deprecated tags first. Doesn't have to do anything with being my style or not.
The only thing which can be considered as "my thing" is all top scorers to be mentioned. But then, that's not style but a disagreement about which content data should be presented.
Up till now, you nor anybody else, provided a logical argument for why if there're are more than 2 top scorers not to mention their name. Best you could do, 2 other editors think/do the same. Let me ask you, if all editors decide to jump from a skyscraper, are you gonna jump without any thinking as well or are you going to decide, based on logical arguments, whether you will jump or not.
If we would keep doing things out of habit or just because more people do it, we would be still living in the stone age.
I wonder why the layout of the current WC is so different from the layout of the WC in 1938? Shouldn't you be busy reverting all these layout changes and shape all as in 1938?
When you finished doing that, you can go change the high jump pages of the Olympics in 1908, 1992 and 2012. At all these Olympics the were 3 jumpers who won the bronze. By mistake the names of all these jumpers are mentioned. Of course this should never have happened. So best you go change it into ""three jumpers 1.88m", "three jumpers 2.34m" and "three jumpers 2.29m". Don't forget to mention there're are 2 more editors who agree on the "not more than 2 names policy". Luckily there weren't any Olympics with 5 bronze medalists. Imagine the total disgrace if they all had been mentioned by name.
Unarmed habits, especially of the majority, are the biggest obstacle for progress.
Time you start presenting your arguments. I'm not interested in how many do as you do. I want to know for which reason you do as you do.
Discussing you do based on arguments, not on what others do as well.
It's not the quantity but the quality and validity of arguments which matters. -- Sb008 ( talk) 06:29, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
@ Dellux mkd: Your question implies you are an unique person. Apparently you argue with people because you think your wrong. But I admit, I indeed argue because I think I'm right. However, I also know that contrary to what I think, I could be wrong. To make me realize I'm wrong, you will have to present valid arguments. So far, neither you nor Kante has done so.
Why can't we be consistent? The perfect question. I know you aren't consistent!!! A small analogy; the people in a street can choose to wear footwear on both feet (list all top scorers), only on the left foot (list only top scorers of team listed as home team), only on the right foot (list only top scorers of team listed as away team), or no footwear at all (list no top scorers). These are accurate and valid choices. According to you, these people are consistent in their footwear because in another street (another WC or EC) people have the exact same choices. Basically according to you footwear is consistent for all people. In this example there are only 2 choices (yes or no footwear on a foot). Let's expand this a bit. In the evening I can choose to watch tv, make love with my wife, go visit friends, go for a walk, solve a crossword, and a few 100's more options. You have the same choices, as has anybody else. Guess we are all consistent in our evening activity since we got the same choices. Consistent and variation do not match. A single tournament contains variety in regard to the top scorers. Just because in every tournament you got the same variety, it doesn't mean your consistent. You're consistent in being inconsistent. Consistent is; either list the names of all top scorers or always use a string like "x players y". If you do the same for every tournament, you're consistently consistent.
To answer your question about what if there're 5 players with the same number of goals. What is the problem if there're 5? What are the odds there're 5? What are the odds the whole squad scores the same number of goals? Why, in e.g. football, they don't have a problem listing all goal scorers even if a team scores more than 10 times? To answer your question more concrete, I say, we list all 5 because I see no reason at all not to. The template can handle any amount of players and the visible layout of a match is not affected. To do it different for 2 or 5 players requires a valid argument like e.g. as of "x" players the problem "y" is caused.. From a wiki code perspective there is none. From a layout perspective there is none.
So maybe you can give me an armed reason why 5 is a problem. I'm curious to hear your first real argument.
Also I like to hear from you why if there're only 1 or 2 top scorers they get the privilege of being mentioned by name and if there're more than 2 they're denied this privilege?
And maybe you can tell why you replace informative data by less informative data.
All in all, You accuse me of thinking I'm always right. Well, aren't we all? You claim to be consistent. A false claim, at best you consistently inconsistent. You want people to accept common practice. If we would think what the majority thinks, we would still think the earth is flat and if we only do things as the majority does, we still would do things as in the stone age. Common practice has to be challenged at any time because otherwise there will never be progress. And worst of all you don't present a single argument why what you do is correct. -- Sb008 ( talk) 11:28, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
Sometimes we just need to put our vanity aside and to act more sensible. This discussion went far beyond and is complete nonsense. I think that you need to sign up some forum when you can discuss about history, philosophy, logic's, psychology, etc. Here we are talking about a simple handball article, about listing goalscorers and with your discussion and arguments you went far beyond. You present completely pointless arguments and facts unrelated to the topic. I have nothing against you and your opinion. As you express your own opinion and attitude, i express mine. I am reverting the edits because i think that i am right, not because you think differently. I am leaving this conversation here and i have no intention to go further. Of course you have the right to think differently. Dellux mkd ( talk) 18:22, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
But 3x 2 minutes is a red card. Not sure why it is not shown... Kante4 ( talk) 18:05, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
@ Kante4: It's indeed inconsistent, Seems DEN KSA is the only exception, so to make it consistent it's indeed better to add the red card for KSA. I don't read the web pages and reports on the official site, but use programs to scan them and generate the wiki data. Hence no red card for KSA. -- Sb008 ( talk) 19:59, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi, the article on Jonathan Okita lists him as being Belgian, not German! I've been looking for some sources and basically it seems he has double nationality, both Belgian and German. If you say he's primarily German, then please change the article and add references to prove that statement. Otherwise imho it's quite unclear and there's no reason to use one over the other, born in Germany yes, but also Belgian citizenship and played there since his youth... -- Pelotas talk| contribs 16:56, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
@ Pelotas: On the 2018–19 Eerste Divisie page, just like on the Eerste divisie 2018/19 page, he will remain German until proven otherwise. -- Sb008 ( talk) 18:40, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
@ Pelotas:
There's 1 common factor: German. So start respecting those references and stop bothering me until you can present solid proof. -- Sb008 ( talk) 18:55, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
Anyway thanks for the refs. -- Pelotas talk| contribs 19:23, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
@ Pelotas: No you should read better, NOS is mentioned as reference for the Assist table. Soccerway and Worldfootball are mentioned on the players page. As far as the N.E.C. page is concerned, I told you to contact them so they can clarify matters and/or change the web page if they consider it needed. Finally, I don't need to show a reference for a players nationality. Otherwise there have to be 20 references (doubles ignored) for the top scorer and assist table on the page. We done now? -- Sb008 ( talk) 19:34, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
Template:2017–18 Eredivisie results has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Zackmann ( Talk to me/ What I been doing) 20:40, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like you to assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Zackmann ( Talk to me/ What I been doing) 21:00, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
@ Zackmann08: Apparently my apology wasn't clear enough. It was an apology for being wrong.. -- Sb008 ( talk) 21:25, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2019–20 Eerste Divisie, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ill ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 07:26, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
Personally I don't think you understand that what you are essentially something that isn't really needed on the wiki as they can be easily placed in the seasonal section of that team. This talk has already happened before over here and as Lee Vilenski said in that discussion, it's a WP:FANCRUFT issue that covers all sports. You could also put that info under WP:NOTSTATS as well because that is what it is. Stats. HawkAussie ( talk) 23:19, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
@ HawkAussie: I would define that as a very basic start which still needs a lot of work. Just looking at the infobox I would eventualy expect something like:
parameter | format/description | tier 1 | tier 2 | tier 3 |
---|---|---|---|---|
competition | link to general page descring the league, e.g. Eredivisie | mandatory | mandatory | mandatory |
image | league logo | mandatory | optional | optional |
season | 9999–99, e.g. 2019–20 | mandatory | mandatory | mandatory |
dates | d M Y – d M Y (startdate – enddate) | mandatory | mandatory | mandatory |
relegated | <br /> seperated list of links to teams which relegated | mandatory | mandatory | mandatory |
continentalcup1 | link to EU cup, e.g. Champions League | mandatory | no | no |
continentalcup1 qualifiers | <br /> seperated list of links to teams which qual for Cup above | mandatory | no | no |
biggest home win | team1 result team2 | mandatory | optional | no |
matches | 99, number of matches played | mandatory | mandatory | mandatory |
total goals | 99, number of goals scored | mandatory | mandatory | mandatory |
league topscorer | <br /> seperated list of links to players | mandatory | mandatory | mandatory |
prevseason | link to prev season | mandatory | mandatory | mandatory |
nextseason | lonk to next season | mandatory | mandatory | mandatory |
I just put something very quickly together. If it was for real I would do it different, most likely 2 tables. Someething like, first table: "parameter - description - format - example", second table: "parameter - tier 1 - tier 2 - ... - tier X". I used the values: "mandatory - optional - no". Maybe there should be more possible values. And the values I put in the quick table above are not by definition correct, they only meant as an example. Probably a motivation for each parameter about e.g. why it's mandatary for tier 1 and not to be used for tier 3 or a short summary of the pro's and con's in the discussion which resulted in why mandatory or optional or not to be used, or a link to the page where it has been discussed. Anyway, it should not only be about how it's supposed to be but also why it's supposed to be like that. Always better when people can read why it is as it is than just saying it's like this. Just been brainstorming, so don't read anything as a dictate. -- Sb008 ( talk) 03:13, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
Hello, I'm HawkAussie. I noticed that you recently removed content from 2019–20 Eredivisie without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. HawkAussie ( talk) 00:19, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
@ HawkAussie:
-- Sb008 ( talk) 10:53, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on 2019–20 Eredivisie. Thank you. HawkAussie ( talk) 05:34, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.
When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled " Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:
Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)
Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.
Edit summary content is visible in:
Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Cabayi ( talk) 13:27, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, mate : i reverted the wrong edit (was intending to revert the one from Jawszy but obviously got it wrong). Matilda Maniac ( talk) 20:44, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello,
Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.
I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!
From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.
If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.
Thank you!
-- User:Martin Urbanec ( talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi Sb008! You may enjoy the articles I created for SC Emma, Janus van der Gijp, Wim van der Gaag, and EBOH. All part of Dordrecht football history. The article Terneuzense Boys was prodded and deprodded. Improvements are always welcome. Best, gidonb ( talk) 18:11, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Looks not like 500 tbh. Do we have any (official) statement that the whole tournament was played without spectators? Would be good to add. Kante4 ( talk) 20:48, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
Hey, i would guess and use the logical ones (that are often used). If we want to be correct of what we know, we should just add the city, as everything else would be (yeah) gueses.... Kante4 ( talk) 18:15, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to 2008 European Women's Handball Championship qualification – Play-offs, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. -- John B123 ( talk) 19:17, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:2008 European Women's Handball Championship qualification requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 16:28, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
You have been reverted by three different editors now. Please take it up at the relative discussion at WT:FOOTY. REDMAN 2019 ( talk) 13:49, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello. What's happening with UEFA links attendance? Apparently, there seems to be a system error. ( example) I noticed you added Croatia v Austria and France v Denmark attendance. Did the link work properly as usual?-- Island92 ( talk) 10:32, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
|url=
https://match.uefa.com/v2/matches/2034412/
. It mentions "v2" instead of "v4". I corrected all v2's to v4's and the ref URL's are fine now. It is possible to add already now the ref URL's for all group matches as wikicode comment . I aleady did so for the match ITA v GER. In General the reference is <ref>{{cite web |url=https://match.uefa.com/v4/matches/<ID>/ |title=<name home team> vs. <name away team> |publisher=Union of European Football Associations |date=<match date> |access-date=<match date>}}</ref>. Just replace ID, name home team, name away team, and match date by the correct values. ID is the exact same value as in the report URL.When I started adding attendance for this edition of Nations League v2 in those links worked perfectly. This issue has been working since yesterday. It's the first time ever is happening. Personally, I think it will work again as previously. And please calm down. Island92 ( talk) 12:05, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi Sb008,
I noticed you make template brackets. I need help making a bracket for the 2022–23 NBL season page. I’m having issues making one since the bracket I want is complicated.
I have an example of two brackets which need to be merged.
Lastly, I need best-of-3 (3 legs) for the Semi Finals and best-of-5 (5 legs) for the Grand Final series. If you could help me or know someone for help, that would be greatly appreciated.
Play-in / Seeding qualifier | Play-in game | Semifinals | Grand Final | |||||||||||||||||||||
5 | S.E. Melbourne Phoenix | 99 | 1 | Sydney Kings | 95 | 82 | 79 | |||||||||||||||||
6 | Perth Wildcats | 106 | 3 | Cairns Taipans | 87 | 93 | 64 | |||||||||||||||||
3 | Cairns Taipans | 91 | 1 | Sydney Kings | 87 | 81 | 91 | 70 | 77 | |||||||||||||||
6 | Perth Wildcats | 78 | 2 | New Zealand Breakers | 95 | 74 | 68 | 80 | 69 | |||||||||||||||
3 | Cairns Taipans | 79 | 2 | New Zealand Breakers | 88 | 78 | 92 | |||||||||||||||||
4 | Tasmania JackJumpers | 87 | 4 | Tasmania JackJumpers | 68 | 89 | 77 | |||||||||||||||||
Semifinals | Grand Final | ||||||||||||||
1 | Melbourne United | 74 | 72 | 73 | |||||||||||
4 | Tasmania JackJumpers | 63 | 79 | 76 | |||||||||||
3 | Sydney Kings | 95 | 90 | 97 | X | X | |||||||||
4 | Tasmania JackJumpers | 78 | 86 | 88 | X | X | |||||||||
2 | Illawarra Hawks | 79 | 87 | X | |||||||||||
3 | Sydney Kings | 89 | 99 | X |
Alextigers ( talk) 21:38, 6 August 2022 (AEST)
Hi. I noticed you made some changes to Template:Bracket entry for Module:Bracket builder to try to add legs. The whole thing is a mess, and I've been working to replace it all. I've created a (similarly-named) module that is much easier to work with: Module:Build bracket that will eventually replace all of the old stuff. What bracket are you trying to add legs to? I can quickly swap it over to the new module if you would like. – Pbrks ( t • c) 02:25, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi Pbrks,
The bracket I need 5 legs for doesn't exist yet. Based on the request of Alextigers in the post before yours, I'm trying to create a bracket which requires a 5-leg match.
I'm not familiar with the NBL, but what I understand from it is:
Best of 5 games are not uncommon, also in tennis we know 5 set games. Hence the need for the 5-leg option.
he official bracket for the NBL play-offs (play in tournament) can be found here
To create this bracket I tried using {{ #invoke:Bracket builder|main}} (which uses {{ Bracket entry}}), After your post I did the same by using {{ #invoke:Build bracket|main}}. Below the results of both
This is not an actual bracket, but just example of what it could look like
Script error: No such module "Bracket builder".
Issues
All I manage to create is
Where I would like to have:
This would require creation of:
Similar, in case the brecket would be upside down, creation of:
|
Same example data as above. Bracket is not parameterized, so not suitable for template use.
Seeding qualifier | Play-in game | Semifinals | Final | |||||||||||||||||||||
5 | New Zealand | 102 | 1 | Adelaide | 74 | 72 | 73 | |||||||||||||||||
6 | Cairns | 99 | 3 | Melbourne | 63 | 79 | 76 | |||||||||||||||||
3 | Melbourne | 110 | 2 | Perth | 95 | 90 | 97 | X | X | |||||||||||||||
Play-in qualifier | 5 | New Zealand | 90 | 3 | Melbourne | 78 | 86 | 88 | X | X | ||||||||||||||
3 | Melbourne | 100 | 2 | Perth | 89 | 99 | X | |||||||||||||||||
4 | Sydney | 105 | 4 | Sydney | 79 | 83 | X | |||||||||||||||||
Improvements
Issues
Remarks I didn't study the module code in detail. Also I dont know the status, under contruction, beta or someting else, but:
Don't have much time right now, hence didnt look in depth at the code or made the necessary changes.
For now, only multiple headers in 1 coulumn (round) should be made possible.
-- Sb008 ( talk) 00:54, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
Template:4TeamBracket-PagePlayoff-Extended has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Pbrks ( t • c) 14:12, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Got it wrong here, sorry. Kante4 ( talk) 20:54, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Stop censoring information. The data is the same in the previous qualifications for 2022, 2020... We have to report the qualified team for the next Euro 2026. The 2024 qualification is part of the list of entries for the 2026 qualification. It's important to understand and to explain to everybody (that is the purpose of wikipedia) that Each Euro is linked to the previous or next, due to the qualification system put in place by EHF. So it's important to put that and to explain how teams qualify to current but also next Euro. In 2024 Euro Qualification, regarding the ranking, countries are qualified to 2024 Euro final tournament but some countries are also qualified to 2026 next Euro for different phases (relegation round, phase 2 or phase 1). We cannot ignore this, these are the EHF rules, and again in previous Euro qualification, you can find the same data. Frozizi ( talk) 10:52, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
The practice is to put * name player {{goal|}} under goals1 or goals2. Island92 ( talk) 18:57, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
goals1 =
*player1 ...
*player2 ...
goals1 = player1 ...<br />player2 ...
Do not separate list items with line breaks. S.A. Julio ( talk) 04:16, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to 2023 UEFA European Under-21 Championship, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 17:51, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
Can you tell me what is fully wrong with the section, because there is a lot of good information in the section. I read it and it didn't look subjective, it looked pretty neutral. ILoveSport2006 ( talk) 16:30, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to 2023 World Women's Handball Championship, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Pindrice ( talk) 18:31, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
Congrats for entering Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits/5001–10000! Keep up the good work! Timothytyy ( talk) 12:57, 29 December 2023 (UTC) |
Hi, I have reverted Your edit on the Top goalkeepers table. It is better to use the percentage with decimal number, as it shows correctly the percentage of saves made as it is the main date for the ranking. The table of Top goalkeepers on the other hand is ranked by "goals scored", and the percentage is just a side data. Tuvixer ( talk) 12:49, 25 January 2024 (UTC)