User talk:PeeJay/Archive 24
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:PeeJay. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 20 | ← | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | → | Archive 30 |
2019 AFC Cup Final line-up image
Hi, if you had time could you please make the line-up image for the 2019 AFC Cup Final? Thanks. Nehme1499 (talk) 18:42, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
Short names
The element is asking for short names, not the initials of the team, and Utd is an abbreviation. Govvy (talk) 19:39, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
- "MUFC" is not only initials but also one of the common names used to refer to the team, at least historically. Thanks. – PeeJay 19:40, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
- MUFC is still not a name, it's the initials of Manchester United FC, United is a name, Utd isn't a name, these are not short names. Govvy (talk) 19:52, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
- I prefer to keep the conversation on one talk page cheers! Also, I might see what everyone else thinks on the project page, also, you said Utd isn't a short name, so why did you restore that part back then? Govvy (talk) 20:19, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
- MUFC is still not a name, it's the initials of Manchester United FC, United is a name, Utd isn't a name, these are not short names. Govvy (talk) 19:52, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:28, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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 |
Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!
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) 21:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:55, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
Re: Wolfsburg/Wolfsberg
Hi. Please look at Bundesliga pages or Bundesliga Austrian pages. You can find everywhere VfL Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger AC. I'm not disruptive.--80.183.57.38 (talk) 12:59, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- No, I'm sorry but I don't accept this. The name of the team including in a competition is always the same. Never mind that it's a championship or a UEFA competition. The main article name on this platform is VfL Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger AC. According to this, in each article in this encyclopedia, we must follow the correct full name. Never mind if UEFA calls it just Wolfsburg. It has been using VfL Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger AC since I joined editing on this platform. Even, I'm always following S.A. Julio's contributions fox example, who has followed this way, also in UEFA competitions pages.--80.183.57.38 (talk) 13:23, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- According to me, the only good reason is following S.A. Julio's contributions, the best user about football articles, who has always used to add VfL Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger AC in those kind of pages. No other reasons are necessary to explain. I'm just following an user who is more expert than me about what add or fix on this platform, including teams name. I'm doing just this. Other users, as Phanto1999 or Mediocre Legacy, both are agree with S.A. Julio about this problem, putting VfL Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger AC respictively. It's just necessary to have a look at edits history, such as here and here.--80.183.57.38 (talk) 13:55, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- Ok, this is your opinion, but I've already explained the problem on edit summary, putting WP:KARLSRUHER, as Phanto1999 did before me. Is WP:KARLSRUHER a good reason? If it isn't, I think we have to start another talk in a different article, with an opinion of other user who I mentioned before, finding a solution. But I don't think I will change my idea.--80.183.57.38 (talk) 14:16, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- I'm really sorry, but I won't change it, leaving VfL Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger AC. Is it a problem for you if I just follow an user who is more expert than me? Is it really important? User Chanheigeorge put VfL Wolfsburg, when the article was created in summer, so now I follow this full name. It's my true habit.--80.183.57.38 (talk) 14:31, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- I think you should start a new talk with S.A. Julio, Phanto1999, Chanheigeorge and Mediocre Legacy to resolve this problem and don't re-add once again Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger. At the moment, it's better that the page shows VfL Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger AC. There are a lot of pages on this platform which shows VfL Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger AC, instead Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger. Never mind if it is a UEFA competition. Thanks for this talk and enjoy your time on this encyclopedia.--80.183.57.38 (talk) 14:53, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry, right now I don't have time. But I also want to know an opinion of other users that I mentioned before. I'll come back this evening, focusing on Wednesday Matchday 6 CL group stage.--80.183.57.38 (talk) 15:07, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- I think you should start a new talk with S.A. Julio, Phanto1999, Chanheigeorge and Mediocre Legacy to resolve this problem and don't re-add once again Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger. At the moment, it's better that the page shows VfL Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger AC. There are a lot of pages on this platform which shows VfL Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger AC, instead Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger. Never mind if it is a UEFA competition. Thanks for this talk and enjoy your time on this encyclopedia.--80.183.57.38 (talk) 14:53, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- I'm really sorry, but I won't change it, leaving VfL Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger AC. Is it a problem for you if I just follow an user who is more expert than me? Is it really important? User Chanheigeorge put VfL Wolfsburg, when the article was created in summer, so now I follow this full name. It's my true habit.--80.183.57.38 (talk) 14:31, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- Ok, this is your opinion, but I've already explained the problem on edit summary, putting WP:KARLSRUHER, as Phanto1999 did before me. Is WP:KARLSRUHER a good reason? If it isn't, I think we have to start another talk in a different article, with an opinion of other user who I mentioned before, finding a solution. But I don't think I will change my idea.--80.183.57.38 (talk) 14:16, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- According to me, the only good reason is following S.A. Julio's contributions, the best user about football articles, who has always used to add VfL Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger AC in those kind of pages. No other reasons are necessary to explain. I'm just following an user who is more expert than me about what add or fix on this platform, including teams name. I'm doing just this. Other users, as Phanto1999 or Mediocre Legacy, both are agree with S.A. Julio about this problem, putting VfL Wolfsburg and Wolfsberger AC respictively. It's just necessary to have a look at edits history, such as here and here.--80.183.57.38 (talk) 13:55, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:21, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
Category:Rugby union coaches by country has been nominated for discussion
Category:Rugby union coaches by country, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 18:57, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Category:Rugby union coaches in England has been nominated for discussion
Category:Rugby union coaches in England, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 18:59, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:48, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
Liverpool vs Manchester Utd rivalry, and general trophy question
Morning and Merry Christmas etc. On the Man U Vs Liverpool question: It has obviously become a 'thing' for clickbait sources, tabloids, and the Daily Mail, to run with the whole "major" trophy malarky, but it does leave us struggling on the reliable sources to use for the current totals etc without creating WP:SYNTH. Almost all sources that are not the FA or the club themselves seem to eliminate the Charity Shield from the equation. I am all for removing the relative claim at the start of the article because it has always been problematic due to the inability of no single source to consistently update / maintain their data year on year, or use of qualifying statements like "major" when comparing between divisions / leagues / continental association. Thoughts? Koncorde (talk) 12:52, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
- I think there’s bound to be inconsistency in how the records are considered right now since Liverpool are in the ascendency and they’ve just “overtaken” United by a certain measure. I’m fine with that being the case as long as we can get a consistent definition of what constitutes a major honour. When you get people saying the Community Shield is a friendly trophy of the same calibre as the International Champions Cup or the Amsterdam Tournament, we’re going to have issues. And where does that leave us with regard to the European Super Cup or the Club World Cup? They’re all super cups of some description, so the idea that the Community Shield occupies some unique space between “major” trophies and “friendlies” is pretty ridiculous. – PeeJay 17:25, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's why we removed the major argument a few years back, it was utterly arbitrary. I'll think of a new way to look at it and perhaps rephrase a few of the equivalent articles to evade the issue. In the end it looks like Liverpool will be clearly ahead in the next year or so by all measures, so it would become moot. Then we will have to start worrying about most successful UK club! Koncorde (talk) 18:08, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
- My two cents would be to look at the situation properly at the end of the season. Liverpool look odds on to win the league title from here at the very least and they’re still in other cup competitions while Man United are in a cup semi final themselves and in the other cup competitions too, so there’s plenty of scope for the picture to change in either direction and we wouldn’t want to be editing the page constantly between now and May. We could have a definitive lead across the board by then.
- Yeah, that's why we removed the major argument a few years back, it was utterly arbitrary. I'll think of a new way to look at it and perhaps rephrase a few of the equivalent articles to evade the issue. In the end it looks like Liverpool will be clearly ahead in the next year or so by all measures, so it would become moot. Then we will have to start worrying about most successful UK club! Koncorde (talk) 18:08, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
- In terms of the “major” trophy issue, I think we’re all in agreement that it can’t be used as the tabloid sources messing around with it are unreliable, the consistency is all over the place where I don’t think one of them matches up with another (I’ve seen 43-42, 47-45, 47-46, 44-43, 42-42, 43-44 United etc) and the information peddled seemingly goes against official sources from governing bodies such as describing the European Super Cup as ‘major’ when several sources show UEFA specifically seperate it from that definition. In terms of editing the existing phrasing, perhaps we could be a little more clear in terms of what the data represents. We don’t want people thinking the article looks at a specific permutation of trophies itself if that is the confusion for some so perhaps something like “United lead Liverpool in terms of all official trophies 66-63” or “all competitive trophies” or some combination of the two would work. I personally think the wording is clear and fine as it is but maybe that could be a helpful edit because we have had a lot of IP disruption on the page lately. On that note, maybe semi-protect the article? Davefelmer (talk) 00:06, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
19-20
I wrote a post on the talk page of 19-20 Champions League article. Ae245 (talk) 08:45, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
For older comments, please see:
- Archive 1 (16.12.2005 ~ 18.5.2007)
- Archive 2 (27.5.2007 ~ 5.4.2008)
- Archive 3 (7.4.2008 ~ 13.12.2008)
- Archive 4 (14.12.2008 ~ 2.10.2009)
- Archive 5 (3.10.2009 ~ 18.8.2010)
- Archive 6 (19.8.2010 ~ 13.11.2011)
- Archive 7 (20.11.2011 ~ 13.11.2012)
- Archive 8 (15.11.2012 ~ 2.7.2013)
- Archive 9 (5.7.2013 ~ 17.10.2013)
- Archive 10 (20.10.2013 ~ 20.02.2014)
- Archive 11 (21.02.2014 ~ 14.06.2014)
- Archive 12 (15.06.2014 ~ 25.09.2014)
- Archive 13 (26.09.2014 ~ 29.01.2015)
- Recent Archive (03.02.2015 ~ present)
I am not going to waste my time publicly edit warring with you. I will simply remind you of WP:RS, which requires sources that actually say what will go in an article. You found a source that says someone thought something was the case. That doesn't mean it IS the case. On the basis of that source, you can write that "Person x believes that.....", but you cannot write what you have written with absolute certainty in Wikipedia's voice. It's also time for you to learn how to discuss things a little more politely, following the philosophy of WP:AGF. There are often many ways of looking at matters. Writing as if it's your way or the highway is not productive here. HiLo48 (talk) 21:30, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:14, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
Ashley Young Transfer to Inter Milan
Ashley Young transfer has happened. It is already cited by Guardian's article. Here is more proof — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arthurwilson5943 (talk • contribs) 11:34, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah it hasn’t happened @Arthurwilson5943 when you see a photograph of Ashley young in an inter Milan shirt that has been posted by inter Milan then he will have signed. RossButsy (talk) 11:59, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:31, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
Football kits
Hi I noticed you reverted my edit on 1894–95 Football League saying it was not "appropriate" for Wikipedia. I do not see how it is inappropriate for Wikipedia. it is informative, and provides more information on that season. I do not see how that is not appropriate. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 17:18, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
FIFA CLUB WORLD CUP
Sorry but why do you keep vandalizing the page? 1- from 2001 to 2004 it was not played. 2- The new Club world cup born in 2005, not in 2006 3- With your vandalism you not only change your (wrong) phrase but also the modification of Roberto Carlos which is irrefutable, you should read the article well in addition to informing you about the history of this competition that you obviously do not know. regards. --Football Missionary (talk) 22:46, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
commas exist and we speak of the first edition in the phrase, not the others, the phrase is correct. the first edition was parallel with Intercontinental Cup, not the others because the second edition took place in 2005, if football is not your subject, don't continue with these useless edit ways.--Football Missionary (talk) 01:11, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 1
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2019 South Africa Sevens, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Terry Kennedy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 15:34, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
Why are you being a pain in the arse?
You know fine well they are most commonly referred to as AC Milan. Type in “Zlatan rejoins”. AC is the first option on Google. The BBC: Zlatan Ibrahimovic rejoins AC Milan at 38, ACMilan.com: ZLATAN IBRAHIMOVIC REJOINS AC MILAN. Sky Sports: Zlatan Ibrahimovic to AC Milan: Does Swedish striker still have ability to revive Serie A club?. Won’t labour the point. Rhys Mayall (talk) 22:20, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; 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 edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. 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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elcorteingles1 (talk • contribs) 20:42, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:14, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
Naming conventions
Hi, it looks like you've moved several American football player pages to disambiguate them to "John Doe (American football, born 2020)" instead of their position. Per Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(sportspeople)#Gridiron_football, the first disambiguation should be by position (point #2) but if multiple players play the same position they should be disambiguated by birth year (point #4). Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:19, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
- There also shouldn't be disambiguation if the other person doesn't have an article. For example Jeff Williams (American football) shouldn't have been moved to Jeff Williams (American football, born 1955) until the other article is created (if it ever is).-- Yankees10 00:23, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
- I’m in the process of creating those articles. It’s only been a couple of days, give me a chance! Blimey! – PeeJay 00:25, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 8
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- Fields (surname) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Mark Fields
- Mark (given name) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Mark Fields
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:21, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Juventus old badge.png
Thank you for uploading File:Juventus old badge.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:11, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
Naming aviation accident victims in articles
Has been discussed multiple times in the last six months.
- Here- https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Northwest_Airlines_Flight_255#Should_Cecelia_Cichan_be_mentioned_by_name?
- Here- https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:1943_Gibraltar_B-24_crash#Question
- And how about a little over a month ago- https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Galaxy_Airlines_Flight_203
Please read....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:24, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi there just dropping a note to explain Mat Protheroe page and why nationality has been added. He is quoted in a reputable source, cited on the page, as saying his nationality is Welsh. Therefore I think it no longer falls into the ambiguous category where nationality should be avoided in the first sentence. Skeene88 (talk) 15:56, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of UEFA Celebration Match
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article UEFA Celebration Match you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski (talk) 21:01, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of UEFA Celebration Match
The article UEFA Celebration Match you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:UEFA Celebration Match for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski (talk) 17:21, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
Women's T20 World Cup
Hi. Please see this discussion, and offer some policy-based rationale to counter it, instead of edit-warring about it. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 11:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:45, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
Greenwood
Hi mate, greenwood is at least 6 ft 1. Though I’d just ask why u edited it back to 5 ft 11. Thanks, Jonathen Jonathan7252 (talk) 19:32, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 12
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pakistani cricket team in England in 2006, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mohammad Yousuf (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:58, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
 | |
| Six years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:36, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 19
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1989 New Zealand rugby union tour of Canada and the British Isles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Kirwan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:01, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:07, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
"cleanup"
Hi, just curious as to why you made so many changes to the citation templates in this (and other such) edit. They appear to have no practical use at all other than to make it virtually impossible to track the other changes you have made which do make material differences to the article. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:51, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
Reverting
Sir, you have reverted all of my work on Zlatan Ibrahimović. I added a lot of good sources. Why did you do this?? In my view, that statistic is important. Please tell me why it isn't. Also, you have reverted other things too; not just the statistic. And, I think you have violated Wikipedia's guidelines by saying "who cares about this shity statistic". So, please, be careful with your language! Jam ai qe ju shikoni (talk) 21:26, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Ok, fine, it is not encyclopedic. I won't argue about that. Can I add it somewhere else in the article though (not in the lead)? Also, yes, it is oversourcing. I agree. However, I would argue that some of those souces need to be kept. What is the max. nr of sources you would allow? Jam ai qe ju shikoni (talk) 21:52, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 26
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited New Zealand national team nomenclature based on the "All Blacks", you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Black Sticks (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:45, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:26, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Bithplace of Park JiSung
Back in April, you just couldn't resist changing the birthplace back to Seoul could you. Fuck me are you such a stupid and ignorant racist you just can't stomach the fact that the Koreans actually know where their own captain is born!!!!!
I am sorry to be so rude but I see you added an opinion piece from the London Times' as that some how justifies that Europeans know better than the Korea's Yonhap News agency, Korean Times and equivalent FT.
You are one thick fuck. For the final time I will explain and try and get it into your racist little imperialist head (see you were you born on the right side of Orchard Road). He was not born in Seoul he was born in Goheung county. As the Korean sources plainly show. He might have even had his birth certificate registered in Seoul too but he was not born there. Many in S.Korea including my own wife is registered as Seoul even though they were born elsewhere. OK. It's the culture to be associated with the capital. Nearly everywhere else is seen as bumpkin.
But no, you had to change it again based on whiteman's sources, like they don't copy the lie that you keep holding on to huh?? Fucking faggot, just want your own way?? I wonder how many other times people will copy you lies thus keeping the lies going in an ever growing circle. Maybe you might understand how important it is to get things right when your IQ gets to three figures
죽은 사람의 항문에서 똥을 먹는다....!!
Person in Korea [apologies for not knowing your name]. Thank you for providing the correct birthplace, and for your explanation of the Korean registration system.
However, Wikpedia works best if we all keep the discussion civil. PeeJay2K3 has provided many valuable additions to Wikipedia over the years. He is clearly not remotely thick. There is absolutely no evidence of racism, which is an extremely serious accusation. It's generally best to just assume good faith.
But thanks again for explaining this to those of us who were ignorant of Korean ways.
Best wishes
Pete Ridges (talk) 11:10, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Please note
Regarding this post. Please read the thread higher up his talk page where Bbb23 states that he is leaving wikipedia. You will need to file a WP:SPI from now on. Sorry about that. MarnetteD|Talk 23:59, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
Season naxboxes
Hi. I've reverted your removal of these navboxes on several articles. It seems perfectly natural/sensible for them to be there. Also, as they are on vast numbers of club page (the majority of a random sample I checked), it would probably be better to initiate a centralised discussion first before proceeding with such changes. Regards. wjematherplease leave a message... 09:31, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
- I have proposed merger of Category:Years in European association football navigational boxes by season. Please see WP:CFDS. – Fayenatic London 19:52, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
The file File:Stade francais badge.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
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.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:34, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
File:Manchester United vs Ipswich Town (4 March 1995) programme.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Manchester United vs Ipswich Town (4 March 1995) programme.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 21:46, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
_programme.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_programme.jpg){kind=link}
File:Manchester United v Arsenal programme (21 September 2003).jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Manchester United v Arsenal programme (21 September 2003).jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 21:53, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Honours
Hi there, from Portugal,
please read this (https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User_talk:Mattythewhite#Honours). Suffice it to say i did not ask your opinion before said message because it's evident, so i went for "the bigger picture" instead (like a patient asking for a second opinion). 13 years here, and i see no consensus still on this matter, perhaps there never will.
My question is thus the following: if i find sources (i happen to agree with Matty, for me runner-up stuff is an honour - not in leagues, of course!) to cover for those finals will you still remove it or leave it be? If it's the first option then i won't bother to search, article stays in its present shape and i can live with that no worries :)
Attentively, happy editing --Quite A Character (talk) 23:49, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
Losing Seasons
Not winning seasons because it complicates things. There are draw seasons (equal number of W and L) and if there is more than 0 draws it is a winning season in terms of points (maybe). So a draw season is also positive. So to keep it simple and straightforward I chose losing seasons. Setenzatsu.2 (talk) 18:03, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
You also deleted town column. WHy? Setenzatsu.2 (talk) 18:05, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Manchester United vs Ipswich Town (4 March 1995) programme.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Manchester United vs Ipswich Town (4 March 1995) programme.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:24, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
Re: Supercups & Messi Discussion
Hi. Here is the archived discussion regarding whether the supercup should be removed from Messi's titles. There were also some discussions on Messi's talk page, and I've included the links here and here.
I don't know if this suffices, or if we need to open up another discussion, but several users voted in support of retaining the title, and none voted against it, and then the discussion was eventually archived, so it was my understanding that this meant that the 2005 Supercopa de España title should be left in Lionel Messi's honours, even though it is unusual seeing as he wasn't even called up. If this isn't enough, then I'm happy to open up another discussion or remove the honour. Best, Messirulez (talk) 14:30, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
- I didn't stop participating in the discussion; I'm just working at the moment and I've only been editing during my work breaks. I said I was willing to re-open the discussion. And my username should have nothing to do with me supposedly being biased here, especially when if you look at my profile page, I only used the name at the time because I had no idea what else to use, and in hindsight I probably would've used something else that would make me come across as less of a young fanboy had I known that I would be on here so frequently. I have shown in my edits that I am objective and that I care about things being impartial and accurately sourced on football articles, and you should know this from my edits and contributions, so I don't really like the fact that you are implying that my username makes me somewhat biased. I really don't care about removing the honour from Messi's page or not, especially when he's won the title plenty of times, and I haven't objected to users removing the honours from other players' pages. I just thought that seeing as a few people voted in support of keeping the honour, and no-one voted against it, and that the discussion was later archived that it sufficed. I opened the discussion in the first place and was trying to come to a solution here, because I understood your argument about shirt numbers, but there was nothing concrete in a reliable source that specified that with Barcelona the permanent first time members only receive a shirt number between 1 and 25. I had notified people on Messi's talk page about the discussion and had made a post asking us to vote, and if no-one who was against keeping the honour voted it's not my fault, as I made sure to check up on the discussion. It's probably best to re-open a discussion, and I'm sure that if we explain the situation and do that then more people will ensure to vote against keeping the honour, and if that's the case, then I'm fine with removing it, but I'm not wrong when I said that there has been a discussion, which is now archived, and that more people voted to keep it. So I was going by that and reverting any edits that removed the honour. I wasn't merely inventing this! Regards, Messirulez (talk) 16:55, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
- Also, I'm sorry if things got a bit heated earlier and if I'm acting overly stern or coming across as being rude as that wasn't my intention... Unfortunately I know that exchanges online can sometimes be less civil given how impersonal they are, and seeing as there isn't an ideal way of interpreting intended inflections in users' comments; moreover, I think I'm just a bit anxious about everything that is going on at the moment with Covid–19, especially in my home–country, and I've certainly been a bit crabby as of late from all the social distancing, even though I fully know that it's essential for everyone to practise it right now given the current severity of the health crisis! I hope you are doing well and staying safe! Best regards, Messirulez (talk) 17:47, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you, and the same to you as well! And yes, starting a new discussion is completely fine with me, and yes, I also hope that we can come to a conclusion. And if the outcome is indeed that the 2005 Supercup should be removed from Messi's page, then I will ensure to revert anyone who adds it back! I'm happy to start it, but if you would like I can post a draft on your page so that you are ok with what I am posting. Best, Messirulez (talk) 16:05, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
- Hi again, I was just checking, what is the protocol now to close the discussion and establish a consensus on what method should be followed with Supercups in the future, seeing as the overwhelming majority have voted to remove said honour from Messi's page, and I would like to avoid a similar situation as the last one. I added a comment, but no-one has responded since the vote. Thanks! Best, Messirulez (talk) 14:19, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks! Best, Messirulez (talk) 15:48, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:57, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
Full-back v fullback
Hi, there's a category discussion going on at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 May 3#Category:Association football fullbacks. It would be nice if you gave your opinion to why we should use the hyphenated version over "fullback". Also, on a related note, there are also discussions for "wing-half v winghalf" and "central defender v centre-back". Thanks, Nehme1499 (talk) 16:08, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
Hat trick articles
Rather than just removing the PROD tags, it would be grand if you could actually fix the articles and demonstrate notability and worth as well... GiantSnowman 15:11, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
New message from Iggy the Swan
Message added 16:52, 11 May 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I've identified you as the source of this svg file and might have been your typing of all these names. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 16:52, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
We do indeed use the website parameter a lot of the time, but only when it's needed. An appropriate instance would be when using Soccerway, with Soccerway as the website and Perform Group as the publisher. Whereas, the ones you've altered are simply the official websites of the publishers themselves. And as far as I can see, neither site refer to themselves as using the website titles you've used; they're just the urls with correct capitalisation. Mattythewhite (talk) 15:32, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:58, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
Battle of the Buffet
Hi.
Do you have an actual reason for reverting my sourced edit, other than "who cares"?
Thanks.--98selitb (talk) 13:31, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
Depay
Why did you remove the depay thing Paul Vaurie (talk) 03:44, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
Content dispute / edit war
Hey PeeJay2K3,
thank you very much for joining the discussion and enforcing WP:ONUS. However, please consider the approach described at WP:DISCFAIL instead of repeatedly reverting. Your edits might be justifiable by the BLP exception at WP:3RRNO, but if this is your motivation, please clearly say so in your edit summaries. Else, please avoid edit warring; I see this has been an issue many times in the past.
Thanks and best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:46, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
- Additional note: This is probably obvious, but if TheRealGutripper, after all these warnings, continues to re-insert the challenged material, please notify me immediately and consider creating a report at WP:ANEW as well. If a different user than TheRealGutripper does, I recommend starting a discussion on the talk page and inviting the others to it – that is, unless an obvious sockpuppet appears, which can be reported at WP:SPI or on my talk page instead. As long as you don't revert, you're in the comfortable position of not having to be blocked for preventative reasons, while reporting someone who clearly has to be. If you create a noticeboard report, ideally, explicitly say that you won't revert anymore, and would like an administrator to deal with this instead. Especially because WP:BLP is relevant here, I'm pretty sure that the situation will eventually be resolved in your favor. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:19, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:39, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
Hey, is there any reason you haven't nominated 1999 FA Cup Final for GA or even FA? I was just reading through it and thought that it would fly through GA and only a few tweaks would be needed to become featured. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 16:22, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- I'll take a closer look! I would think FAC would be the place to go, no point in hanging around at GAN now the drive is over, could be waiting a month for a reviewer to pick it up, and it's clearly beyond the criteria. I'll do some tinkering and maybe leave some suggestions perhaps. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 16:27, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, we did two months, April and May, and think we basically halved the backlog. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 16:38, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- Go ahead and nominate it, there's usually a few days of lag on new noms anyway and that should give me time to make a few adjustments and make some suggestions. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 16:52, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- That's the joy of FAC, more than one reviewer, so there'll be multiple opinions. As I said though, we can easily address basic issues in the few days it normally takes to drag one FAC reviewer from their slumber! The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 18:16, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- I'd honestly be surprised if anyone even notices, but we can work on Kosack's unresolved comments before anyone has a chance to even think that's a real-world problem. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 18:34, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- That's the joy of FAC, more than one reviewer, so there'll be multiple opinions. As I said though, we can easily address basic issues in the few days it normally takes to drag one FAC reviewer from their slumber! The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 18:16, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- Go ahead and nominate it, there's usually a few days of lag on new noms anyway and that should give me time to make a few adjustments and make some suggestions. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 16:52, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, we did two months, April and May, and think we basically halved the backlog. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 16:38, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
Why?
Why remove the ref? 194.28.124.55 (talk) 03:30, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- I've reverted your change, as you didn't reply to my question.
- However, I accept you have more knowledge here than me, so if the edit isn't acceptable, feel free to revert, but PLEASE can you explain here why you did so.
- Thank you, 194.28.124.55 (talk) 01:27, 6 June 2020 (UTC)