![]() | This page 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. |
Hi you removed my contribs on the population of Liverpool City Region...I compared the Liverpool page with the nearby cities of Manchester and Leeds. Manchester has 3 sets of population figures in its intro paragraph, Leeds has 5!! Now you've removed the Liverpool City region population figures that leaves Liverpool with only 2. Firstly how is that fair? And secondly, don't you think this downplays the actual importance of Liverpool's urban area in comparison to these other similiar sized cities? How do you intend on amending the Leeds and Manchester pages? Richie wright1980 ( talk) 16:14, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
I was just wondering whether or not places such as sale and saddleworth from The historic county boundaries of cheshire and yorkshire are in the county palatine or not,or are these in the county palatines of yorkshire and cheshire.or does the county palatine of lancashire cover all of greater manchester. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.8.126.226 ( talk) 19:31, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Could you please lists The Districts that fall under the County Palatine of Lancashire if youd be so kind.If even you agree about Greater Manchester being in the palatine of Lancashire,this should be mentioned on greater manchester district pages,instead of just saying Historically a part of Lancashire all the time,as this makes it sound as if the places have got nothing to do with Lancashire at all,which if they are part of the county palatine of Lancashire clearly they do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.8.126.226 ( talk) 20:18, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Send me an email: my personal email address is pcnw35083@blueyonder.co.uk I attempt to post other people's personal information on Wikipedia, so why not send me an email at my personal email account?. Shannon bohle ( talk) 14:50, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
for your kind comments.-- Blue Tie 20:09, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up. I read this guys other stuff and he is really wacked out! I imagibe he is beyond all reason. In anycase, thanks for trying to keep things fair and up to standard. 98percenthuman 18:05, 13 August 2006 (UTC)98percenthuman
You didnt remove the Bounty reference from the Anglophobia section, i did, please remove this from the history. 68.71.35.93 07:37, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
No problem, I'll trust your superior knowledge of the subject, though if its used as a general reference it should probably go in the References section rather than being a plain ol' external link. Oldelpaso 09:17, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
please cease and desist from tampering with my talk page
Hi mate,
The book sources I have used are the following:
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)There a couple of useful websites too:
Happy history hunting!
-- Spyrides 22:58, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello mate
Sounds cool. I've got a lot on at work so I've been unable to do much wiki-ing lately. However, I've just been bought a new book about Thames Ironworks which is absolutely awesome. If you get a chance to get hold of a copy, do so.
It has all of the London League and friendly appearance data that is still in existence, and offers some well researched history.
Take care
-- Spyrides 20:43, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Uh, excuse me, but how about getting your facts straight before you edit-summary attack? The citation that I was talking about was the Carter-Steinberg New York Times article that had been anchored in the lead as CartSteinTimes and was deleted without the deleter noticing that it was tagged later on - leaving a missing citation. The editor who did it apologized - it was not a big deal - so what exactly is your problem? As for my accidental caps - congratulations on your biting sarcasm. Must do your mother proud. Tvoz | talk 21:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
The 'leave it' comment has to do with areas of this article that I have added/edited.
A considerable amount of the statistics in this article were added by me, and the Trivia section in which the image appears was added by me.
200px is too small, 300px appears just right. If you want to size your pictures at 200px that's OK by me. But leave the ones I have added alone.
Mat macwilliam 10:35, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Please read the section I have added in the discussion. Importantly please read the virus warning.
Mat macwilliam 12:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Again all your references are non-West Ham related. Citing non-West Ham fans or clubs that use the term in a derogatory way. I have sent a question on the matter to the club historian, and will await the outcome of his reply.
One of the pages casued a virus to be downloaded to my computer. I have the latest version of two browsers Firefox, and IE, I have pop-up blockers and two anti-virus softwares installed.
Marcus A.T MacWilliam, MSc, CEng (IEEE), CEng(SEI), MBCS (CITP), BSc (Hons), BA. (I have forgotten more about computers and software than you will ever know).
Mat macwilliam 13:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
The statements were removed in the Adrian L. Peterson article because they are uncited. If you would like to add content, please add a source, otherwise it will be deleted per WP:BLP. Thanks. RyguyMN 22:45, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Hey, Koncorde. You partially reverted my edit to the James D. Watson article. I understand your reasoning, but you can't leave it in the state it's in. It uses unencyclopedic phrasing ("you should not..."), improperly begins a quote mid-sentence, and the whole thing is non-sequitur (one idea does not follow from another). Please see what you can do. Thanks. Robert K S ( talk) 04:31, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Parts of the article are posted here for editing. [2] -- Jagz ( talk) 21:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Thankyou for backing me up on the West Ham Infobox header disagreement! Why it should take someone else to intervene before the constant reverting stops is beyond me. One thing though - in your edit summary you put "Sarumio is kind of right, but not in the place where he makes the edit. Have changed this based on other Premier League formats"
- How is your edit anything different to mine - also I was just trying to change it to the same format as all the other premiership clubs' infoboxes too! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarumio ( talk • contribs) 13:48, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Your comment about the German uniform hit the nail on the head. I was about to add my own comment (and still might) when I read your entry. You pretty much shut down that argument. I just want to add one more point, though: the color bars on the collars of some of the soldiers in the background. Although the picture is fuzzy, you can clearly make out that they do not extend to the ends of the collar, unlike the uniform's Russian counterpart. I also am fairly certain—although my knowledge on military uniforms is not exhaustive—that these color bars were unique to the uniforms of the Wehrmacht. - Gravinos ( "Politics" is the stench that rises from human conflict.) 06:23, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
I thought you may want to take a look at the Roman salute article. I've made some alot of edits to it, including extensive citations.-- Work permit ( talk) 02:26, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Good grief. Our mutual acquaintance has been at this for a while, then? -- Ibn ( talk) 18:56, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback re Talk:St Helens, Merseyside#Confusion. The webpage I cited just happened to be the first authoritative one on Google. I note the warnings recently given for reverted edits to the article; hopefully the constructive responses to the talk page assertions will reduce the chances of escalation. Hopefully! — Richardguk ( talk) 03:09, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:StHelensBus.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 09:52, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
I read what you've been saying on Leigh talkpages and so I read a bit about St Helens, same sort of history, and also what the IP thinks! I'll do a bit more if you like, I find it theraputic sometimes!!-- J3Mrs ( talk) 13:54, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your message.
Re the 'factors', I think the sources bring the two arguments toegether, but I'll have to check and get back to you.
Re 'killing them as they ran', I think this is as clear as description of what happened as possible. Would it be better in your view to say, 'pursued and killed'? The retreating Royalists were pursued into the town and killed without quarter. There's no delicate way to say it!
Regards,
Jdorney ( talk) 12:48, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Koncorde/Archives/2020 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I appear to have acquired a blocked IP address (TOR) via my Virgin Media supplied internet connection. I would like to request an exception be applied, if possible, for my account. I believe the blocked IP range to originate at 92.235.0.1 (unfortunately I am unable to edit from my home address to even update this request with the relevant specific IP that I have, I think it is 92.235.239.x or similar). Any help would be much appreciated. Koncorde (talk) 10:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Accept reason:
I've granted you IP block exemption — Tivedshambo ( t/ c) 10:48, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Please cease unnecessarily disambiguating page titles where the titles themselves are ambiguous. Jeni ( talk) 17:54, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
I have no idea why, but this edit doesn't show up when I look at the actual page. Is that just me?
On that subject, I suggested to KittyBrewster that her statement was a bit rash. -- Thepm ( talk) 11:01, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello Koncorde,
I am commissioned to write a book about civil engineering structures for railway modellers. I would like to include the above illustration. I understand you have placed the image in the public domain. However, I feel it only courteous to seek your permission to use it.
I am a retired civil and bridge engineer now living in Spain.
Best wishes.
Brynduke2006 (
talk)
14:42, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
I thought I was saying dormitory town as opposed to suburb. A dormitory town is of necessity a commuter town. I'm also puzzled by 'Northwood' ward. The only Northwood I know is one of the original three divisions of Kirkby. As to the percentages travelling, these should be related to the percentage of the population that is of working age, and/or actually working. If that 10% is 10% of each ward, and one considers the high percentage of retired people in the Southport and Formby area, that is high. It's unclear how that figure has been obtained, and exactly what it refers to. I'll read it again tomorrow (or later if I have to take off to Leeds or Sheffield (or even Liverpool...)). Peridon ( talk) 21:36, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Suburbs and Domitory towns, hey Koncorde someone on Litherlands page is trying to widen the boundaries again, i would like some help in changing this, i have had a heated debate over wether litherland is liverpool, (its not) haha, would appreciate your help thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scouserrr ( talk • contribs) 11:04, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Hey again friend, just edited Formby but I think there will be some resistance as usual, once again people trying to enlarge Liverpools borders again, just a hits up, thanks for all your help! Really appreciate it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scouserrr ( talk • contribs) 19:55, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
Your argument doesn't make sense in you comments you list of what is in Liverpool Urban Area, you list Prescot which contains Whiston.-- Kitchen Knife ( talk) 17:40, 6 November 2011 (UTC).
For footballers nationalities within squads, I suggest you read the policy MOS:FLAG. "Flags should only indicate the sportsperson's national squad/team or representative nationality." I'd also like to draw your attention to WP:3RR. Regards, -- Jimbo [online] 21:02, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Ok I fully accept your explaination regarding Trevor Brooking and the Number 10 shirt. I suppose my bias took over, and just because I and maybe some others belive he "owns" the number 10 shirt it is not always so. I also admit the first time round I didnt really see the bulid up statement of, in the 2003 book....! or that 500 fans were quizzed!. I orginally thought it was a single persons view and opinion. I admit it was a bad change on my part, and I am 100% in agreement with your undone revision. Keep up the good work...! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.128.31 ( talk) 19:23, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for
your contributions to
Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to
S-Bahn does not have an
edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! No big deal, but if you'd have left an edit summary, I could've probably saved quite a bit of time reviewing your edit
. Thanks for your hard work!
Jackson Peebles (
talk)
18:40, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
I noticed your too have had issues with edits from this user, which was the reason our paths crossed recently as I was replacing the wording on the Scouse page that the user had changed. Do you know how you go about blocking or warning someone for their edits? Babydoll9799 ( talk) 15:17, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
First of all, Bellerin did not play in the Premier League. He never did in his life. Akpom had a few minutes as a sub when Giroud got injured, that still does not qualify him for the list. The way the template works is like how the squad list on the Arsenal page works... the players must be listed by Arsenal themselves in the first-team section of arsenal.com ( Here is that list by the way). On the page it can be clearly seen that Akpom and Bellerin are not on the list and thus should not be on wikipedias as well. End of story. As for Myron Fernandes, he is listed as a first-team player for Dempo S.C. which can be clearly seen here. Again, end of story. If you have any more questions then please don't be afraid to ask. If you disagree with me still then feel free to take it up with the folks at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football. Cheers. -- ArsenalFan700 ( talk) 03:49, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Hey,
it is not totally impossible to add a column "Watch now!" for the spreadsheet. It would not only separate the click whoring but made it to an option. The link I am using is directly to the videos where you can CHOOSE which video to watch.
Nosepea68 ( talk) 02:05, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Anjem Choudary, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Serialjoepsycho ( talk) 05:53, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Please apprise yourself of WP:EW and the strictures thereof, and note that you have made three reverts on the Monckton BLP within a period of two hours, on an article which falls under the ArbCom General Sanctions rules, as far as I can tell. Collect ( talk) 17:30, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
I note you have reverted my changes to the lead paragraph of this article.
The problem I have with this article is that, in the opening paragraph, it only mentions the term "Rapid Transit". Rapid Transit is a North American term. It is not necessarily understood outside North America. The more common terms are Metro and Underground. These terms need mentioning in the opening sentence. They were in an earlier version of this article, but have somehow disappeared.
In the "terminology" paragraph it currently says "Metro is the most common term for underground rapid transit systems used by non-native English speakers" I contend that "metro" is the most common term for English language speakers, at least outside Noth America. Also many systems (prime case London) are known as "Underground".
As proof, read the article. There are more systems described as "xxx metro" than as "xxx Rapid Transit", and there is the linked article List of metro systems. You may claim "Original version" rights to call this article "Rapid Transit", which is a foreign term to many English speakers, but at least acknowledge the other common terms in the lead. TiffaF ( talk) 21:58, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
If Peter Lloyd doesn't have a ref (admittedly not an rs) should he be removed from the list? — George8211 / T 19:43, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Haydock, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blackbrook. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:56, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.ForbiddenRocky ( talk) 15:20, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
The Gamergate controversy page is under a WP:1RR restriction, imposed here, which your last revert there violated ( here, here.) You should probably self-revert your second one! -- Aquillion ( talk) 21:57, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi Koncorde, you thanked me in the past 24 hours for a simple clarification I included on the Anjem Choudary page, and I'm curious as to why. While it is always nice to be appreciated for one's effort, I'm inclined to think you were commenting favourably on my objectivity in the matter. Just curious but, given my edit was barely worth a blink, can you tell me why so innocuous an edit garnered your approval? With thanx Mark Dask 17:00, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Davefelmer ( talk) 16:00, 27 September 2015 (UTC)please explain why you think a semi-profesional club should have a place in an article detailing the most successful PRO teams in Europe? Why not just populate the list with local teams then?!
There are other semi pro teams that have won a lot that could be on the list. Why aren't they then? Why is linfield the only one? Davefelmer ( talk) 21:47, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Getting into a group stage or even a knock-out stage of a tournament isnt an honour. And neither is restore it reverting vandalism. Murry1975 ( talk) 21:47, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Your "source" for the trophies is one of the most unreliable I've seen. It isn't a club, a media or governing body's document. Unless you can provide one, the information can't stand. And what do you mean the club's site is "incomplete"? What a ridiculous notion. Every club lists their full honours on their website, your refusal to accept that any club, media or governing body's list is "complete" is ridiculous and is solely done to get your point of view across. When there is no credible mainstream source to define something, you use the closest thing to that, which here is the club website. Otherwise you don't say it at all.
On top of everything, the competitions were unofficial. This is reflected by them not being listed on any club websites and even CSKA Sofia's wiki page where this is noted. With no physical trophy count to prove your claims, they must be deleted and restored to the most reliable piece of evidence that lists the trophy haul. Which is the club website. Davefelmer ( talk) 21:45, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
"Non-official winners" need a separate page and add to the Defunct competitions of Football in Bulgaria. What do you think ?-- Alexiulian25 ( talk) 19:52, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Cup of the Soviet Army (1946–1982) - Official tournament.
In 1981 they also created "Bulgarian Cup" - to be the country name in the name of the cup, for 2 unofficial editions. Practically 2 editions of Cup were played, Cup of the Soviet Army 1981 and 1982 - Official and "Bulgarian Cup" with not all division teams.
In 1983 they swap the names Cup of the Soviet Army became unofficial and Bulgarian Cup Official, this time Cup of the Soviet Army (1983–1990) with lots of low division teams and the big 2 : Levski and CSKA Sofia.
In 1983 Cup of the Soviet Army changed the name in "Bulgarian Cup" - Official tournament, and Cup of the Soviet Army (1983–1990) become unofficial till the end of the communist era, in 1990.
The RSSSF has the neutral information, and we should follow it, instead of Levski Sofia official page. Did you understand now ? Can you write there this in correct English ? Thanks.-- Alexiulian25 ( talk) 09:06, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Of course on their website (PFC Sofia - Levski Sofia) they will admite that they won 26, because they can write anything in their advantage, but it is obvious that those competition was unofficial. Check the Cup Winners Cup qualification teams from 1981-82 for the next season, and you will see is not Levski Sofia involved. Bulgarian Cup (1981–1982) with the 1981 winner CSKA Sofia and 1982 winner Levski Sofia are not official. The real winner are 1981- Botev Plovdiv and 1982- Lokomotiv Sofia --- teams who qualified for Cup Winners Cup.-- Alexiulian25 ( talk) 00:57, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Can you help me with this template Template:Bulgarian Football Cup seasons by adding the rest of the official seasons of the history, I do not know exactly how to do it. Thanks!-- Alexiulian25 ( talk) 12:14, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Can you improve also Balkans Cup seasons, there are not many games in one edition, just QF, SF and Final. Thanks.-- Alexiulian25 ( talk) 19:44, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
16:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hey, I noticed you used a source on the Blackburn page that I couldnt verify by clicking on it. Is that allowed or do you need an actual verifiable citation (so I know in future)? I wanted to request a better source but figured to ask first... Davefelmer ( talk) 16:30, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
Hey, check your sandbox. I sorted all the references; thanks for showing me how to do them! Did you now want to look at some of the wording of the edit? Davefelmer ( talk) 03:56, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Updated the sandbox mate. Davefelmer ( talk) 20:26, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Hey mate,
Sorry i havent gotten back to the sandbox recently but I've been quite busy with school exams and stuff. Could you send me a link to that article so we can finish the job on it because I can't find it on your talk page. Thanks Davefelmer ( talk) 23:05, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Made some more changes on the sandbox as per your most recent edits. Think we should definitely move it to the actual page; really liking our work and how it looks and reads. Davefelmer ( talk) 22:31, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
You've done a great job making the lead more relevant. Perhaps the second paragraph could be merged with the one after, as it's only two sentences. Lemonade51 ( talk) 17:57, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
I have looked at the source you mentioned more closely and it does list the sofia championship wins. However, it still doesnt list two of the soviet army cup wins, which the RSSF and club website sources dont show either. so those two must go and they must be recognised as 4 time winners of that cup and not 6, unless sourcing to prove it can be found. also, in any case the sofia championship is a regional trophy so to mention they've won 70 trophies is pretty misleading as that is not what anyone has said. The club do not confirm that total so what should be done is if a number is absolutely a must in the intro, it should be the number of total national titles (60 after removing the 2 unsourced cups). Davefelmer ( talk) 10:17, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:BritishPlateGlass.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.
If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{ non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 09:43, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Rhoark's been working on a draft re-write. It might be more productive to focus on that which looks like it'll replace the current article eventually. James J. Lambden ( talk) 18:39, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
Empathise with your comments on that article's Talk page. Suggest that there are a number of editors in the In that case, fuck it. I'll come back in another year or so.
category. -
Ryk72
'c.s.n.s.'
20:38, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
It sounds like you may like the general idea but take issue with some specifics of the draft. While in the process of writing from scratch, there was really no way I could do it except by sticking to my own vision, but now we're in a phase where I can be more hands-off. It would be an ideal time for you to jump in. Rhoark ( talk) 15:06, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
If you continue your edits to the Liverpool intro I will have no choice but to report you for vandalism. Your edits are not making any justifiable contribution to the article and you are not only reverting my edits but reverting the edits of others on a regular and persistent basis which is now vandalism. The current version is logical in that it builds up from the city to the county to the city region and ends with the Liverpool/Birkenhead metro area. This is a logical transition from the smallest area to the largest area and it is quite clear that Liverpool and its surrounding areas are included in that. I have no idea what your agenda is here but I believe you are politically driven to undermine the city, its status and its population at any given opportunity. Please desist or you will be reported. Richie wright1980 ( talk) 22:06, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Koncorde. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
We can't allow edits to slip by disguised as a typo. I have no problem with 'probably' being removed. It just needs an explanation. JMcC ( talk) 12:16, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
It seems as though you have an issue with my style of editing. While I am not an experienced editor, I have made a strong effort to follow and abide by the conventions and rules of wikipedia. Perhaps I am missing something, it is certainly possible. As far as SRS is concerned, I might suggest that you visit the subreddit when you have some time, and you will see for yourself the toxicity I was talking about. I understand that the subreddit itself can't be used as a reliable source, however it might give you a different perspective if you actually saw the level of hate and venom occurring there. Regarding the Rolling Stone article, I don't take something like sexual assault lightly, and I don't feel it is something that should be joked about, minimized or misquoted. That is why I have always tried to support my edits with direct quotes from reliable sources. There are enough vandals and troublemakers on wikipedia, I am not one of them, and I don't believe you are either. I am a little confused as to why you are specifically reverting my edits, when I have made so few. It's entirely your perogative of course, but we are actually on the same team in that we are both working to improve this project. 23.242.67.118 ( talk) 03:41, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
You need to read the sources. The claims are false and have been widely debunked as meritless. Policy and common sense requires that we describe false, defamatory claims about living people as what they are: false. As the cited article from
The New York Times states, None of it was true. While Mr. Alefantis has some prominent Democratic friends in Washington and was a supporter of Mrs. Clinton, he has never met her, does not sell or abuse children, and is not being investigated by law enforcement for any of these claims.
(
[3]) Reliable sources are unanimous in describing the claims this way. If you revert again, I will request administrative intervention. You're a longtime editor and should know better.
NorthBySouthBaranof (
talk)
10:49, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello Konkorde,
I tried to add to the infobox of Prescot: Historic County - Lancashire, the same as can be seen on the Liverpool page, but despite copying the same format it doesn't seem to work! Please may I ask you to tell me how to add to the infobox part of the page?
Also, I am a great supporter of the historic counties of the UK so I am interested to know why in your info box it states you were born in St Helens Lancashire (in 1980, after the 1974 botch up) yet on the main page it states St Helens Merseyside? Would you not consider stating Lancashire throughout the page?
Kind regards, Andrew Donaldson. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DonaldsonAC ( talk • contribs) 21:12, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
@Koncorde, your recent redraft of the lead section is entirely persuasive; I concede the argument, (guess I should have read it before opining). Mark Dask 00:17, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello there, from Portugal,
thanks for your input in this article, I have made some more adjustments in the storyline (i.e. trying to avoid repetition of words in same line ("appointed", etc); one of your corrections left the storyline in the following display: "but reached the semi final of the 2013–14 Taça de Portugal of the Taça de Portugal", surely I can correct that; please let's try to avoid paragraphs of only one line), surely we can reach a compromise. A doubt: regarding your note "Also please watch your 'tone' on edit summaries" in your penultimate summary, do you mean my previous summaries BEFORE your cleanup or my last one? Because the latter was as unassuming as can be, the others were not I admit it, but you can surely agree with me the user's actions were very similar to those of a downright vandal. If not, that's OK too.
Attentively -- 193.137.135.2 ( talk) 10:15, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello Concorde. I am hoping that you can lend some assistance. Me and user Giant Snowman need assistance in resolving an edit dispute concerning the kit section that was in the Nigerian national football team article. He removed it citing WP:NOTGALLERY. I disagree with his interpretation and I have shared my reasons on the talk page at WikiProject Football. We request the input of members of this project in order to resolve this issue. Your assistance would be appreciated if you have the time. Thanks! unak 1978 16:23, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
I found a source that gives Anita's birth date: famousfamilybirthdaysbiofacts.com/Personality/Blogger_Anita-Sarkeesian_Birthday-Bio-Fact-Age/ August 15, 1983
I've added the 'new' IP to the list at SPI, textually S/he appears to confirm they are one of the prev. editors. I also asked for semi-protection on 'PC', since I am not prepared to waste time on them. Pincrete ( talk) 00:02, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Screengrab everything. Artw ( talk) 18:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
I wanted a better understanding of progressive politics so I put some questions/suggestions at Talk:Social justice warrior and Talk:Progressivism.
If you could review my input/comments, it would be appreciated. The reason I ask is that you were active on the talk page of the Social justice warrior article. Knox490 ( talk) 15:36, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Why are you so eager to revert my edits? My edits were perfectly legitimate. Ikrewrwe ( talk) 11:53, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on
edit warring. Thank you.
202.159.191.219 (
talk)
16:37, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
You and the other party are both warned per the result of a complaint at the edit warring noticeboard. If either of you reverts the article again before you get a consensus in your favor on the talk page you may be blocked. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 19:32, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello Koncorde, I wanted to ask you whether you know how to archive sources. I would like to do that with the ones in the List of Turkish football champions article, since they are important and can't be replaced if they should be deleted or get lost for some reason. Thanks in advance. Regards, Akocsg ( talk) 11:01, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
Yes I know, but still I would prefer theEnglish name, since the Turkish name really isn't a "trademark" or special. Akocsg ( talk) 14:25, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
Please stop reverting, take this to WP:ANI or some other disputed sources if you have an issue. -- American Canadian Expat In London 10404 ( talk) 12:54, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello, Koncorde.
I've seen you editing recently and you seem knowledgeable about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. |
Hello, Koncorde. 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)
The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.
The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:
If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.
Please be aware this survey will close Friday, Dec. 8 at 23:00 UTC.
Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:14, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello Koncorde. I would like to know your opinion on the following matter: Talk:Chancellor Cup, conerning the requested move. And if you have time would you perhaps review this one: Wikipedia:Peer review/List of Turkish football champions/archive1?. Thank you in advance. Regards, Akocsg ( talk) 12:33, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Koncorde, I'm having a trouble finding a source for the bit on the West Ham United F.C. page that mentions the OCS colours ("The predecessors of Thames Ironworks, Old Castle Swifts FC, played in pale blue shirts, white shorts and claret socks as early as 1892"). Looking through the revision history, it was originally added by an IP in 2011. I can't find anything in my books or in contemporary sources to support this. The colours were added with the infobox on the main OCS page in 2007 by @ Spyrides but he's not sure now where this came from (and I can't see any mention in the references added at the same time). The History of West Ham United F.C. page states that "The Castle Swifts colours were re-used on several occasions by the Thames Ironworks team as an alternative to their traditional Oxford Blue kit.", apparently referencing Iron in the Blood. However, I can't see this mentioned in the book at all (as an aside, I notice the page numbers are wrong for many of the IITB refs on the History page. They appear to be using the page numbers for the sample chapter, rather than the book itself). I did mention this to John and he thought it was OK but hasn't found a source for it. The only reliable source I've found actually contradicts this and suggests the OCS kit was similar to the early 'Oxford blue' TIW kit. [4] Everything else I've found seems to be basing their info on WP.
You might have noticed that I recently corrected a long-standing error in the 'Aston Villa kit story'. Whether it's true or not is highly debatable anyway, but the story came from Brian Belton's Miscellany book. Unfortunately, the wording is a bt ambiguous, so where it says "My grandfather, Jim Belton, told me that Charlie Dove, a local man who played for Old Castle Swifts, Thames Ironworks and West Ham, got the kits 'cheap' from his father William", this was taken to mean Dove's father, rather than Jim Belton's. This can be confirmed as Brian also mentions William in his War Hammers book (I'm also quite sure I've read in one book that Dove's father's name was George).
As a result of this issue, we can easily confirm that anything that mentions "William Dove" has based their info on (previously incorrect) information from WP so would need to be disregarded as a source. I'm not sure about that WH ref, but if we can't find anything else, I guess we'd have to run with that.. Nzd (talk) 17:21, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
The Teamwork Barnstar |
I enjoyed working with you to improve Daniela Vega. Thanks! :) HickoryOughtShirt?4 ( talk) 01:03, 30 March 2018 (UTC) |
Hi there again Koncorde, from Portugal,
player has announced retirement, yes. Ligue 1 has still one match to be played before the season is wrapped up and he is 100% retired. Other than that i performed minor adjustments overall, you'll see that after my reversion i tried to reach a compromise with the IP regarding the intro.
Attentively -- Quite A Character ( talk) 20:32, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Yes, my mistake, which I was just about to correct. I misread the anon edit as including Birkenhead in the Liverpool built up area. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 11:33, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
Hello I have looked at various articles related to the dead gamergate controvercy, such at Anita Sarkeesian and Tropes Vs. Women i nvideo game articles. What are your thoughts on claims that people make that the same users are showing ownership of the article due to them same users acting as a police force, including yourself, PeterTheFourth, DonQuixote (like that name BTW), and Cúchullain. I have over the various IP address I have edited form defended your guys's positions, and would like you guys to do something to address any future claims of wiki ownership of articles such as Anita Sarkeesian, Gamergate controversy, Tropes vs. Women in Video Games and this awesome Dutch game developer I'm sorry, I just love Zoe's games. Anyway, I have looked at the talk pages and it does appear that you guys are the only ones who call all the shots, is there a sollution you guys cam come up with to bring new parties and some outsider admins into the fray, this way we can prove me right that you guys do not claim ownership of the articles? thanks. 23.151.192.180 ( talk) 14:08, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
I say the various IP address I have edited from because I have lived in 8 different countries
and others. My job means I do have to move once in a while. I can't find all the IP addresses I would use otherwise I'd link you to where I have defended you guys before. thanks/ 23.151.192.180 ( talk) 14:10, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
A final note I will make is that a defence I have given, though I will continue to cautian you guys on, is that you guys do not own these articles, rather, this is a case of stewardship. My advice for you guys is to tone down on the stewardship. While stewardship is in my view a good thing, there are extents to which you guys have to say, does it look more like ownership or policing? If you guys could please help me out here that would be great, given that while I disagree with many positions of the subjects such as Sarkeesian (despite me liking Zoe's games), I do however strongly support your guys's positions of reliable sources. I turn t oyou because you are the first one I thought of. thanks. 23.151.192.180 ( talk) 14:21, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Koncorde. 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)
Hello,
I considered starting a new section on the PC talk page, but I figured I'd ask you to elaborate first. What do you mean: There is first the term, then there is the pejorative use. On its own, it is not pejorative any more than "Health & Safety"? How can it not be pejorative?
Cheers, Pokerplayer513 ( talk) 22:57, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
Hes changed it back to São Paulo FC — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.234.122.90 ( talk) 01:11, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
This guy is performing Block evasion. It is locked in multiple accounts. See: /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/109.154.129.183 / /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/109.151.92.251 / /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/109.144.222.45
Therefore, it is being reverted by administrators. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fcbjuvenil ( talk • contribs) 10:48, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
I've left them a message. Giant Snowman 12:33, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
The template ( Wikipedia:WikiProject_Football/Players) in question is obviously written for a current player. It is not ambiguous. In your edit summary you wrote 'template states "played for", not "plays for"'. However it clearly states "Tim Template (born 1 January 1985) is a Templatonian[1] professional footballer who plays as a striker for Template City of the Templatonia Premier League."
I have no idea why you have said that this relates to a retired player or quoted it inaccurately in your edit summary. You seem to be intelligent so is this a case of dishonesty? Or is there another reason? -- hippo43 ( talk) 05:18, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi mate,
On the United-Liverpool rivalry page, I re-established the prior wording but removed the 'major' trophy line that we agree is entirely subjective. I reverted simply because although we can agree that 'major' is subjective (and I do believe that not using the term is a general project policy), what is not disputable and corroborated by multiple reliable sources listed in the article is that United have more trophies when counting all official honours. From an encyclopedic standpoint, the only way to really define success is by counting all such official titles without arbitrary weightings like 'major' and 'not major', and with the likes of the BBC and SKY Sports (the most authoritative sports news sources in Britain) amongst others highlighting this count, there is really no need to create more awkward phrasing that goes against the info of several already very reliable sources depicting a full account of teams' silverware fit for encyclopedic content. I certainly dont think we should act hastily just because of a few IP-edits that took exception. If need be, the page can be IP-blocked for a period of a week or two just so that any attempts to insert arbitrarily defined trophy counts not corroborated by reliable sources can subside, but in the general absence of an encyclopedic alternative backed by reliable sources, there is no reason to change the general wording, as both clubs get their fair share of credit towards being more successful than the other. Davefelmer ( talk) 16:52, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi there. I'm in the process of drafting a topic ban (and possible indef block) against SNAAAAKE!! for the admin noticeboard. I'll post you a message when it goes live. If you've got any examples of diffs showing blatant disruptive comments or anything else he's done that you think should be mentioned, please point that out to me. I'll be posting the proposal tomorrow sometime. Cheers. Damien Linnane ( talk) 14:59, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
I'm glad you pointed out his "boys will be boys" shit on that talk page. It influenced my decision regarding his ANI. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 19:16, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
AFD != CFD. ☺ Uncle G ( talk) 13:56, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
It's completely insane, this constant circular reasoning reasoning. E Eng 11:21, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
Before a name you use the word as a noun, so you have no need to apply the "s". Adding an "s" changes the noun to a verb. The verb should follow a name, not before it. [6]. Govvy ( talk) 07:17, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
Your recent contributions at Sunderland A.F.C. appear to show that you are engaged in edit warring; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not override another editor's contributions. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being
blocked from editing—especially if you violate the
three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three
reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Sent to all involved
Leaky caldron (
talk)
21:46, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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) 07:28, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Got to say upon going over our chat and the information available, I came round to your way of thinking in regards to making a page for the clubs in the world with the most trophies. Not enough sources for the data, a few variables that had to be considered and all in all it ventured too far into original research territory. Cheers for the discussion! Davefelmer ( talk) 06:51, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
Thanks The unrelated kinsman ( talk) 16:58, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
Please cease making unnecessary edits to the intro for Liverpool. It is clear that you have a POV issue in relation to local authority boundaries. It is an established fact that cities are not wholly synonymous with local authorities. Until you can demonstrate that this is the case, please cease editing the intro. Correctus2kX ( talk) 22:33, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Okay that’s good to know, I was under the impression there was, somewhere, something that constituted what was a major honour, thanks for the heads up. From viewing past discussions, I agree we should just go with ‘overall trophies won’ - excluding pre season friendly competitions of course.
Can we get the FLSC added to the opening section (outlining honours won) and to the Honours section, under Domestic and Cup? Can I do this or is it down to you guys? Solid Snack90 ( talk) 14:59, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello,
Here you claimed the following: "This "because Facebook threats blocking every paper which prints Voldemort's name, and no paper can afford such a block, as usual I am not allowed to link to source" meanwhile is probably one of the finest works of fiction I have ever read."
The internet seems to be full of this "fiction": WaPo Mashable The Verge CNBC. And there is a ton of others.
Meanwhile, Breitbart's Allum Bokhari noted in an article I must not link to: "Numerous conservative media outlets, including Breitbart News, were prevented from posting stories naming [Lord Voldemort] as the alleged whistleblower on Facebook. The stories are still available on the websites of those news sites, of course. But in a world where 52 percent of Americans get their news directly from Facebook, that’s becoming less and less acceptable"
And Breitbart's Joel Pollak wrote: "Second, the tech companies punished news outlets that dared to publish the name of the so-called “whistleblower.” Though tech giants like Facebook enjoy immunity from libel lawsuits under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, they behaved as if publishing the “whistleblower’s” name would expose them to serious legal risk. Any media outlet that wanted to share its content online — in other words, any media company that wanted to stay in business — had to suppress the name of the so-called “whistleblower” in impeachment coverage."
So, yeah ... just read. Wefa ( talk) 19:01, 20 January 2020 (UTC)