User talk:Bobbyfletch85

formations

There really is no need to add these to pages. As formations aren't concrete they don't mean anything. Exceptions are "greatest ever" teams that are officially voted for. SenorKristobbal 22:12, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. If you're going to a match or want to update you're computer game, football fans will find it useful, even only as rough guide. Bobbyfletch85 22:16, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encyclopedia not a games forum. It is factual information not "rough guide" SenorKristobbal 22:20, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look, it seems like only you have a problem with it. It remains on the articles Real Madrid, Barcelona and A.C Milan by different users and it looks good. Obviously the team sheet is never certain, what with injuries and such but it's useful to know team lineups and educates people better about the teams players. I think it should stay and looking at other club articles - so do many others. Bobbyfletch85 22:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SteveO has done a similair revert to me and it has been up less than 10 minutes. Note the only featured articles Arsenal F.C., Everton F.C., IFK Göteborg and Manchester City F.C. don't have one for their current squad. SenorKristobbal 22:28, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also object to it. Such additions are pure speculation, possibly original research and, imo, do not belong in an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball or a news service. SteveO 22:33, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree with this view although I do understand that teams could be fickle. But look at the Barcelona F.C and A.C Milan articles. I think the formations help to provide a better picture of the team. Okay, so perhaps Chelsea isn't the best example since due to so many players, the strongest team is more difficult to determine. I still think it is a benefit to the articles. It does not need updating regularly and it is not based totally on opinion. The A.C Milan formation played virtually every game, undoubtedly the A.C Milan first team. Why is not a benefit to have this on the article?? Bobbyfletch85 22:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the A.C. Milan ones and requested the Barcelona one is removed (its protected article). Also see here for people opposed to them. SenorKristobbal 22:52, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At Talk:Football (soccer) positions someone comments on how they are a benefit. I think people who are against it are so for personal reasons; such as they are fans and don't want to see someone else pick their beloved side. I see nothing wrong in having the formation screens and I think they're a useful and interesting addition to the articles. Bobbyfletch85 23:06, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chelsea players

No problem mate. I think the "former" bit was added partially to stop the whole current squad being added, but it's probably better that way. They are on the daughter article List of Chelsea F.C. players, though. Cheers. SteveO 14:14, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Bob_Fletcher.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bob_Fletcher.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. NMajdan•talk 05:43, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Meg Ryan

I noticed your comments on the Meg Ryan page regarding the Parkinson Interview. It seems as if a lot of people share your view. You may want to read the "Removal of Parkinson Section" discussion at the bottom of the page. From what I can understand, the British media ran "unflattering clips" from the interview taken out of context. I suspect that is the reason for the widespread misconception that Ryan was rude. It looks like a "truce" has been made with that other editor. Of Course, defamatory statements continue to be added to the Parkinson page. Anyway, thanks for sharing your perspective. Cleo123 19:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. It gave me a chuckle! If you're looking to break into the American market step one is to find an AGENT! All television work here is through agent submission or personal connections. The Dramatists' Guild of America publishes a great Resource Directory every year that includes a list of all of the legitimate agencies, writing competitions and other valuable information. You can also get a list of legit agents through the Writers Guild of America. In terms of pitching a screenplay I suggest the book "Selling A Screenplay: The Screenwriter's Guide to Hollywood" by Syd Field. It provides all kinds of information that will help you get a handle on the US market. The very best advice I can give to you, however, is don't spend too much time on Wikipedia! It's addictive! LOL! Best Regards, Cleo123 06:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gareth Bale

Please refrain using the talk page as a soapbox, and from making personal attacks. Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views. Oldelpaso 19:54, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Hopefull the user will accept my resolve for the argument, which I've offered. After which I'll delete the whole discussion. If he doesn't accept, I will not respond. Bobbyfletch85 06:37, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Robert Fletcher

An article that you have been involved in editing, Robert Fletcher, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Fletcher. Thank you.

--Old Moonraker (talk) 07:07, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think only administrators can restore lost page content. Sorry it was deleted, but it failed to satisfy notability guidelines. Anyho, Chelski beat Everton tonight, so it's not all bad news. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 22:47, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think User:Hut 8.5 deleted your page. Try them. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 00:00, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've sent you an email with the content of the article. Hut 8.5 17:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

July 2008

Do not make unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Kaká. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. Beemer69 ^chitchat 03:53, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Bobby Man.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bobby Man.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. rootology (C)(T) 21:45, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Bobby Man2.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:01, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Bobbyfletch85. 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)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Bobbyfletch85. 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)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Bobbyfletch85

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:Bobbyfletch85 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 13:17, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Bobby Man2.jpg

The file File:Bobby Man2.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused personal photo. Out of scope.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 13:17, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because... this is a notable person, TV/Film producer and writer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.148.102.108 (talk) 13:28, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]