Wikipedia

User talk:NapHit/Archive 7

< User talk:NapHit
Latest comment: 11 years ago by NapHit in topic Talkback

Pacific hurricanes FLC

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

I've addressed all your comments you gave here; would you mind taking another look to see if I fixed them "correctly"? HurricaneFan25 — 15:58, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Addressed :) HurricaneFan25 — 19:50, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Template:Infobox European football

Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Do you not think some sort of reference to 'titles' is necessary in this infobox? It might be neater if the word's put in bold above the list of titles, but the current layout is unsatisfactory. The logical conclusion to draw from this infobox is that the club have been in the Europa League twice; they haven't.  Omg †  osh  20:02, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree, I would put it above the list of titles, to make it clear what they refer to. Sorry for removing it, it made the infobox look a little clunky which was I removed it but you're right it needs including and above is a good compromise I think. Its still a work in progress after all. NapHit (talk) 20:11, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
There. It looks neater and clearer now; it does so on Parma's page in any case. You might consider replacing the hide/show element on Liverpool's, but it's no big gripe.  Omg †  osh  23:56, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
Great job, thanks, personally I like the collapsible list, think it works well considering the amount of trophies the club's won. NapHit (talk) 00:39, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Good Article barnstar for 1973 UEFA Cup Final

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
  The Good Article Barnstar
Well done for getting 1973 UEFA Cup Final, along with many other Liverpool related articles, up to Good Article quality. Adam4267 (talk) 19:58, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 December 2011

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

WPF1 Newsletter (December)

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This newsletter is being delivered to you because you signed up to this list. If you wish to stop receiving it, please remove your name.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Formula One at 19:40, 3 January 2012 (UTC).

The Signpost: 09 January 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of papal elections/archive1

Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion

Hi. Please let me know if my recent edits have addressed your concerns. Savidan 08:58, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Please advise re: the two rows I mentioned. Thanks. Savidan 21:21, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I finally got around to finishing the sorting. Please let me know if I did so correctly. Savidan 04:16, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

1984 European Cup Final

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thought you might want to look at what I just posted on the talk page.

Wannabe rockstar (talk) 06:09, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikitable markup

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

In light of this edit, I was wondering if you knew of a way to change the colour of the sort icons? I'm designing a template that does what the current Watford table does, but for the likes of Newcastle this could mean black sort icons on a black background, which is obviously not desirable. Regards, —WFC— 17:53, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your response; I suspected there wouldn't be a documented way of doing it. I was hoping to use each team's existing navbox colours, as I'm attempting to incorporate the squad template/navbox feature of {{Boca Juniors squad}}, the basic functionality of {{Football squad player2}}, and the customisation found at Watford F.C. and Seattle Sounders FC. If I'm successful enough for the colour of the sort keys to become the biggest issue, I'm sure a solution will be found. —WFC— 18:04, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Finding your articles

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Hi, Don't forget that if you create an article like Thomas Lowry (footballer), you ought to provide a link from Thomas Lowry. Sometimes it's a case of adding, or adding to, a hatnote at that article, sometimes it's a case of adding to a disambiguation page. But either way, you need to help readers to find your article if they've just searched for the name. I've fixed this one. Thanks. PamD 08:24, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

And while I think about it, as you're creating such a lot of similar stubs, perhaps you could help us out by adding {{Scotland-footy-bio-stub}} or {{England-footy-bio-stub}} as appropriate, as you go along, instead of plain {{stub}}? Thanks. PamD 09:05, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi. When you recently edited David Wilson (footballer born 1942), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nelson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:55, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Special character entry

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Per wiki's own rules the preferred way to enter special characters is to simply use the actual symbol... not to put it in brackets like {{dagger}}. There are examples under entering special characters that tell us this. We even have an example on this very item by using our own wiki text editor shown on the special character page. Goodness I'd hate to have to type "&ndash" every time when a good old single – character does the job with less html. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:34, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

List of India ODI cricketers

Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments1 person in discussion
 
Hello, NapHit. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of India ODI cricketers/archive1.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
 
Hello, NapHit. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of India ODI cricketers/archive1.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I am looking forward to your suggestions. You must be busy but whenever you have some time please take a look at the article.--Vyom25 (talk) 09:24, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Fixed the key section.--Vyom25 (talk) 13:21, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Have a look at Rewritten prose.--Vyom25 (talk) 14:20, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Do have a look at the list....--Vyom25 (talk) 13:47, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

LFC players FLC

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Hi, sorry for not responding to your amendments yet. I'd like to give the list a more detailed look over before making more comments/voting, and hopefully I shouldn't get this done any later than Tuesday. Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 17:43, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Have now left a few more comments, only 1 hour and 26 minutes late... Mattythewhite (talk) 01:29, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Albert Shears (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Newcastle
Frank Mitchell (footballer born 1890) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Elgin
John Charlton (footballer) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Leadgate
Steve Parr (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Preston
Tom Scott (footballer) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Newcastle
William Cunningham (footballer) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Radcliffe

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

1985 European Cup Final

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I just wanted to let you know that I will be reviewing the article shortly. InTheAM 13:08, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi, NapHit, I've done the copy-edit you requested at GOCE; I'm sorry it's taken so long to complete this. Wishing you well with the GA nomination. Cheers, 03:22, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of George Whitworth (footballer born 1927)

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

The article George Whitworth (footballer born 1927) has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. -- MST☆R (Chat Me!) 11:18, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 January 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 30 January 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Re: Thanks

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Any time. It's the first FLC I've reviewed in quite a while so I guess I went a little comment-happy! Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 00:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (January)

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This newsletter is being delivered to you because you signed up to this list. If you wish to stop receiving it, please remove your name.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Formula One at 20:48, 6 February 2012 (UTC).

The Signpost: 06 February 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Disambiguation link notification

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi. When you recently edited History of Liverpool F.C. (1892–1959), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spion Kop (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:54, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Liverpool FAC

Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Just to let you know I'll do a last minute check on the tables and statistics after getting some sleep before making my decision. Won't be doing any source or image checks. As it stands, it looks complete and would be happy to support it. – Lemonade51 (talk) 00:31, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Right have made my final comments on the FAC. Just one last thing, Ref 51 has a different headline to the one in the Wikipedia article. – Lemonade51 (talk) 12:22, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments and your thorough review, much appreciated. NapHit (talk) 12:36, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 February 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello

Latest comment: 12 years ago37 comments3 people in discussion

Regarding "Right now if a reader wants to see all the singles that were in a certain album they have to scroll up and down the page looking for them, whereas if it was sortable it would be much easier", this is not a list of singles or albums. If you want to know what singles were released from the album, or the albums track-listing, click on the albums wiki-link, that's what it is for. This is a list for the songs. Not all links in the tables are just singles, a lot are songs as well. Aaron • You Da One 18:57, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Point is that if a reader wants to see all tracks on an album when they're looking at this list, they should be able to do it. You, for no good reason, are preventing them from doing that. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:05, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
@NapHit, Gah, forget all this. There seems to be no way to compromise, there's not a chance right now that they'll consider even trying it out. As you know, we have lists that are WAY larger than this one which are a single sortable table. I suppose they either don't know how to code it up or they haven't looked closely at our recent promotions. I'm moving on and letting someone else deal with it, suggest you do too. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:19, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Have a look. Now all of the pictures don't match up to where the song is, and it is impossible to go straight to a certain letter section. No compromise? You're right about that. You wouldn't compromise either. Your table works for your lists, however, here it does not work, but I've done it anyway. Aaron • You Da One 19:22, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for changing the table it is much more useful for the reader, but I must say that to be quite frank that your attitude stinks. You are putting this list up to be scrutinised by the community, it doesn't matter what the list is about, its about whether the list meets the criteria. The simple fact is that it didn't because it lacked functionality. The whole point of FLC, is to get feedback from the community, to rail against experienced reviewers (and one of the FL Directors) because they are suggesting you IMPROVE the list is ridiculous. Its not impossible to go straight to a certain letter, you can anchor it, look at the papal tombs list, which TRM mentioned earlier. I suggest you be more cooperative in the future, you have to understand we are trying to help you, if you can't recognise that then you need to look at yourself. NapHit (talk) 22:24, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm really confused by the TOC you want me to do. Aaron • You Da One 16:41, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

I've done an example just look at the diffs and copy it. NapHit (talk) 17:19, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
I just spent ages doing the entire article and you edit conflicted me! I knew that would happen! Aaron • You Da One 17:20, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
Just a note your recent edit removed scope cols which are needed, and I'm fairly sure you don't need the valign=top coding bit, as the anchor I put in worked without it, so you're not going to like me for this, but I'd revert your edit and just add the anchors if I were you. NapHit (talk) 17:24, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
I've done exactly as you told me. I used the Tomb list as an example, and it works absolutely fine. Aaron • You Da One 17:25, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
You need to add the colscopes back every column heading should have scope=col per MOS:DTT. The valign=top adds nothing, if you reverted your edit all you've got to do is add the anchors, not that much work. NapHit (talk) 17:29, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
What?? Aaron • You Da One 17:30, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
Look at the diffs for the edit you made after mine, apart from adding the anchors there was no need to remove the colscopes/add the valign=top bits. So what I'm asking is that you add the colscopes back and remove the superfluous coding you added. Understand? NapHit (talk) 17:51, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes I have done it now. Aaron • You Da One 17:42, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok good, still a few more comments that need addressing. NapHit (talk) 17:48, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I have done everything now. Aaron • You Da One 22:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
No you haven't. Sorting still moves three songs starting with A to the top, either move them to the top, or force them to sort correctly. I don't see the addition of colours either to indicate singles, or the removal of coding which makes the columns unnecessarily bigger. Please don't title your edit summary "I have done everything now." when that is clearly not the case. NapHit (talk) 22:37, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Well I didn't know that, and I don't know how to correct it. And what colours? I changed the scopes to what you told me. Aaron • You Da One 22:42, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes you did the col scopes, i didn't mention that above at all, I was referring to the coding which regulates the width of the columns, it needs removing as it adds nothing. If the cells move to the top when sorting then the easiest solution would be to move them to the top wouldn't it? Failing that you can use the sort template to force them to sort according to their current position in the table. Read what I put at the FLC regarding the colours, I won't be able to strike my oppose until all these issues are done unfortunately. It's no good saying I didn't know that, its your responsibility to ensure everything has been done, especially when your edit summary is so matter of fact about it. I can't keep spoon-feeding you all the information, you have to find things out for yourself, looking at other articles and seeing how they implement these features is the best option. NapHit (talk) 23:06, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Yeah I don't know what you mean by removing whatever it is that you want removed. And no, I didn't know that it did whatever to the first three songs. I'm not adding colours. There would need to be about 5/6 different colours for different types of releases, there is no need for it at all. I changed the tables, even though I didn't want to, and you are now saying something else (which is completely preferential) should be there, so even though I did what you originally asked and was your original basis for opposing, you are still opposing. Reviewers are there to give comments about how it could be improved; just because you a reviewing, it does not mean that everything you say must be changed or else. Not everything a reviewer says is necessarily right or correct. A lot of the time, it is purely preferential. There has to be compromise on both sides, but you will not do that. Aaron • You Da One 23:25, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
"I don't know what you mean by removing whatever it is that you want removed" your attitude really is atrocious, I've explained it perfectly clearly to you. I'm not sure if you mean to come across in a negative way or not, but you could have asked for explanation like a lot of other nominators I've worked with have. If you're unsure how to do something you ask how to do it, yet you dismiss the notion of change outright, unbelievable! I don't want 5/6 different colours just one indicating what songs were singles, is that so unreasonable? Yes I will still oppose because currently the list does not meet the criteria, if it did I would happily strike it. As I want to draw a close to this farce, I'll edit the article to show you examples about what what I'm asking above, hopefully then you'll understand. NapHit (talk) 23:35, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
I said I didn't know how to correct it! And I still don't understand what the difference is?. Surely having colours will then remove the grey background of the Song name boxes? Not that I even know how to do colours. Aaron • You Da One 23:43, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
It was superfluous, and not needed, thank you for doing it. The sorting still needs fixing. Regarding the colours yes it will, but that is not a problem, as long as !scope=row is there its fine. If you don't know how to implement colours look at lists that do, there are plenty, a few of the lists I have promoted utilise colours have a look at how its done there and use trial and error as I've said before. NapHit (talk) 23:48, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
What do you mean by the sorting still needs fixing? Aaron • You Da One 23:50, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
This is trying my patience now. When you click the sort button in the song title column, it shouldn't move on the first sort, yet some of the songs that begin with A come to the top, this needs fixing. Look at the unrealised table, the same column there does not sort when the button is clicked in the same column. My example edit showed you what you have to do. I'm going to bed now so you won't get a response if you ask any more questions that have already been answered. NapHit (talk) 23:54, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Okay, well I just went through and did this. And you say to ask if I don't understand something, then you say that I am trying your patience when I do ask. If I don't ask, you say to ask. If you was in my shoes then perhaps you would understand my frustration. I still don't understand what you want me to change so that it doesn't sort on the first. Aaron • You Da One 00:07, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
I said ask but you're asking questions that have already been answered, above is an example. I told you to add the colours as long as !scope=row is there yet you removed it when you inserted the colours. That is why I'm losing patience, if you had co-operated and understood what I was asking this would have been sorted ages ago. I'm not explaining the sort issue again, I've explained it above clearly. NapHit (talk) 11:34, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Well you clearly haven't. And you told me to look at one of your own examples to see the colours, so I did and applied to the list of songs, now you are saying it is wrong, again. Aaron • You Da One 11:51, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I can't be bothered arguing anymore, I've done an example regarding the colours. You need to add !scope=row back to all the song titles cells for some reason you removed these. The sorting issue is explained clearly above, TRM also explains it on the FLC page. Out of interest which list did you look at because none of them are wrong and they all include t he symbols needed which you did not include. NapHit (talk) 11:56, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

This one. Aaron • You Da One 11:58, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
That was a bad one to pick as the rowscopes were in a separate cell from the colour, but never mind. I've done an example edit that shows you what you need to do, as above please add the !scope=row back as well, still can't figure why you removed those. NapHit (talk) 12:01, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
OMG! I can't believe this, I'm being mucked about so much with this list. And thanks, I wouldn't have know to do that unless you'd done an edit. And I removed them because you "bad to pick" list, which is an FA nonetheless, didn't have them. Aaron • You Da One 12:07, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
You're not being mucked about at all. If anything you're mucking me around, especially last night with your edit summary saying everything is done now when it clearly wasn't. My list did have !scope=row just not on the same line as the colours, so don't blame me for that when that is you fault for not reading/looking carefully, which has been the problem throughout this farce. The problem is you're not willing to do anything, you moaned about changing the list when that needed to be done, any little piece of work that needs doing you start moaning. The bottom line is the list did not meet the criteria when you nommed and it still doesn't meet the criteria now. If you stopped moaning, engaged with the reviewers instead of treating them with contempt the comments would have been addressed. I've just seen your edit, did you even look at the FLC page or the example edit I did? I added a symbol because that is needed for readers who are colour blind, yet again for some unknown reason you deleted. What is the point in me showing you what to do if you don't follow it You also don't need to indicate songs that were not singles with colours, its already explicit when you've indicated what songs are singles. NapHit (talk) 12:26, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
You are mucking me around. First you opposed on one basis, and after not wanting to do it, I changed the table format. The you said you wanted colours and would still oppose, to which I eventually agreed to do, then you say to look at your FL articles, so I did, then the one I use for an example you say wasn't a good one to use. I am engaging with reviewers, but the majority are so self richeous and believe the nominator should do everything they tell them, and then don't explain things properly and make things difficult, and then moan when I asked a question or counter something. I've dealt with enough nominations and reviewers to know that this is true 95% of the time. Yes I did see your edit, but I don't see why when there are this many singles, that they all need a dagger or a asterisk. And about the non singles, it was suggested on the talk page to indicate non singles by either you or Rambling, so I thought I would do it. See, I am engaging with reviewers, but you are saying that this shouldn't be here now. Can't you see how I am spending so much time editing editing and changing this article and you keep saying "No, do this" or "No, do that" or "No, this is wrong". Aaron • You Da One 12:35, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry but I'm not mucking you around, yes my oppose was on the table but the list still doesn't meet the criteria. You're not engaging with reviewers, every change that has been suggested, you have moaned about doing, when it will improve the list for readers. If you think most of the reviewers you've dealt with are self-righteous its probably because you're a massive pain to deal with. I've been reviewing lists for a number of years now, but this is the most drawn out and ridiculous one yet, it seems like you fail to understand basic concepts such as sorting and adding colours. You should know most of this and you certainly hold know the criteria before nominating a list that is basic. Remember it wasn't just me who asked for the table to be changed there were other reviewers as well, who again have a lot of experience at FLC. Adding colours for non-singles has not ben suggested anywhere, so again I'm not sure where you're getting this info. The daggers are needed per WP:ACCESS as colour blind readers will not be able to distinguish what songs are singles without a symbol. I've done it anyway otherwise we'd spend another day going back and forth like this. NapHit (talk) 12:49, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Well, you have. I've proved my point about it. Other people disagreed with you about having one table and having colours, so it's not just me. There is no point continuing to converse if you are still going to oppose despite addressing your two largest concerns. If you decide to review a couple of upcoming lists by other nominators I know, you will have to go through all of this again. Aaron • You Da One 12:55, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
You haven't proved any point at all. The other people who disagreed with me over the table were people who are unfamiliar with the FLC process. Funnily enough the person you agreed with me is one of the FLC directors who should know what is a featured list and what isn't so I don't know what point you've proven at all. Look for the umpteenth time, I've made it perfectly clear if you address ALL my concerns I'll strike my oppose, there are still a number of things at the FLC that are not fixed, yet you just keep moaning and arguing. I won't have to go through all this again believe me because in four or five years this IS the first time I've gone through it and its primarily your fault, as you can't understand basic concepts, or take on constructive criticism, so you will problems like this again not me. NapHit (talk) 13:02, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 February 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

List of UEFA Super Cup winners

Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
– "What rules?"

Well, obviously the rules that you have not read yet. Check here to see the correct way the club competitions must be styled: WP:WikiProject Football/Competitions, especially the first table. As you will see, what was lying there in the mentioned article (i.e. not hyperlinking all club names, using separate table cells for flags, unnecessarily colour coding extra time scores and penalties, colouring the aggregate score row etc.) was wrong and I had corrected it. What you have done, I mean reverting a complete edit, is not a good way of seeing and showing good will. Why? Because you should be careful reverting an entire edit when you only have a problem with part of it. It is good to be bold while editing, but your way of interaction leads to unwanted edit wars, which I am definitely not into.

I must give credit where credit is due though. Obviously you have a point in removing the marks for colour blind readers. I suppose what you had to do was, just correcting the marks, and not reverting the article back to the crippled and cluttered old version. I have not made another edit. And I ask you to please go back to the mentioned article, and correct what you have mutilated. Have a nice day! — Ekin(talk·@) 13:51, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Um, that "style guide" is not "correct" and is not how a competition article "must be styled". In fact, that page is a complete mess and way out of line with WP:MOS, which of course this list needs to comply with since it's featured. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:55, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
I'll refer you to the discussion underway here Ekin. Regarding the quote, maybe I could have worded it slight better, but as someone who has got a lot of these lists to Featured standard I'm sure you can understand my position when an editor tells me they don't follow the rules. Anyway, hopefully this will result in the tables becoming more improved so it won't be a bad thing. NapHit (talk) 20:07, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Okay then, let's see what the outcome of that discussion will be. I hope a comprehensive club/international football WP:MOS blooms out of this. All the best! — Ekin(talk·@) 22:22, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

List of India Twenty20 International cricketers

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks for being a part of the review process and help the article to attaining FL status. —Vensatry (Ping me) 18:35, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Re:

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Thanks. Aaron • You Da One 22:54, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

No problem, got there eventually. Sorry if I came across as demanding, but when I first reviewed it the list wasn't up to the criteria. Anyway, well done you've done a lot of hard work over the past few days and the list looks great now. NapHit (talk) 22:59, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 February 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/CZW Iron Man Championship/archive1

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

All concerns at the above FLC have been resolved.--WillC 14:18, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (February)

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This newsletter is being delivered to you because you signed up to this list. If you wish to stop receiving it, please remove your name.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Formula One at 15:21, 5 March 2012 (UTC).

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please see my last comment in FLC record by opponent

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Please see my last comment in FLC record by opponent
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 00:22, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

I have added the Football Alliance to the league statistics page, so will be greatful if you would now support or if you wish to oppose it.
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 07:23, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Liverpool F.C.

Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

This is a note to let the main editors of Liverpool F.C. know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on March 15, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 15, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Liverpool Football Club is an English Premier League football club based in Liverpool. It has played at its home ground, Anfield, since its founding in 1892. The club has won eighteen League titles, the second most in English football, as well as seven FA Cups and a record eight League Cups. It has also won more European titles than any other English club, with five European Cups, three UEFA Cups and three Super Cups. The most successful period in Liverpool's history was the 1970s and 1980s, when the club won numerous honours both domestically and in Europe. The club's supporters have been involved in two major tragedies: the first was the Heysel Stadium disaster in 1985, in which charging Liverpool fans caused a wall to collapse, killing 39 Juventus supporters. In the 1989 Hillsborough disaster, 96 Liverpool supporters died in a crush against perimeter fencing. Liverpool have long-standing rivalries with city neighbours Everton and with Manchester United. The team has played in an all-red home strip since 1964, and its anthem is "You'll Never Walk Alone". (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Brilliant news and congratulations and thanks to NapHit for all the hard work he has put into the article. Jprw (talk) 17:17, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Jprw, much appreciated, hopefully we can get Liverpool F.C. in European football on the main page eventually. NapHit (talk) 22:18, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 March 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Disambiguation link notification for March 18

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi. When you recently edited Patrick Gordon (footballer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Renton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:39, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

List of Copa Libertadores winners

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I noticed you made changes to the winners tables in the Copa Libertadores winners. In the past there was an edit war (another discussion) over this topic and the general consensus was the table format that was in place before you made edits where there were Home and Away columns and not Winner and Runner-up columns. I am not aware of any new discussion that encouraged the table that you have adapted and there are a number of users that may revert your edits. --MicroX (talk) 23:56, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 26 March 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please be more careful in creating articles

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

I caught several errors in articles you have recently created. Benjamin Dabbs had the wrong birth year, birthplace and death year. Alf Hobson had the wrong death date and birthplace. Many more you had 1955 as the death year, but no death date was ever mentioned in the article. Please be more careful. Bgwhite (talk) 01:44, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

I just went over the last 14 created articles. Not one had correct information. Bgwhite (talk) 02:00, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of John Carlin (footballer)

Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
 

A tag has been placed on John Carlin (footballer), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Reference and article is about one person, when the title of the article is about another. The person in the reference already has an article

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Bgwhite (talk) 07:05, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

The reference link in the article was to another footballer - I have corrected it, and declined the speedy nomination. JohnCD (talk) 12:21, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, silly mistake by me. NapHit (talk) 16:41, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Ray Minshull

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have done some works in your newly created article Ray Minshull. Please expand the article. Let me know if you think I can help! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 21:12, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Smile!

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
A smile for you
You’ve just received a random act of kindness! 66.87.2.142 (talk) 15:18, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 April 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

WPF1 Newsletter (March)

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This newsletter is being delivered to you because you signed up to this list. If you wish to stop receiving it, please remove your name.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Formula One at 11:49, 3 April 2012 (UTC).

Disambiguation link notification for April 4

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Danny McRorie (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Airdrie F.C.
Fred Rogers (footballer) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Tom Morrison

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:44, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 April 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Parma F.C. GA review

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks for your review. I wanted to clear up a couple of follow-up questions, if that's okay.

  • The old "Parma have/has" issue surprises me because of how odd the latter sounds to most British ears. "Parma has" from a Brit's point of view would perhaps more often be taken to refer to the city. It's not a problem though: it's easy to correct. See point 4 here for why it is written as it is though, particularly the penultimate sentence in the context of an experienced contributor with several GAs and FAs under his belt.
  • I can understand that blog sections of Football Italia might not be suitable sources, but why would this not be, for example? I imagine the answer might come out in your response to that question, but why is Sportsbook24 not considered reliable?
  • What does the following mean? "Ref links should not have capitals in them, even if the website has them, we don't include them."

The other criticisms you've made revolve around more obvious problems, although I'm surprised at the high standard held for a GA! mgSH 22:11, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 16

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

2012 Football League Cup Final (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Crystal Palace, Patrick McCarthy, Daniel Ward, Craig Conway and Don Cowie

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:39, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 April 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Disambiguation link notification for April 23

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi. When you recently edited 2012 Football League Cup Final, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mark Hudson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:11, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 April 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

List of municipalities in Florida

 
Hello, NapHit. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of municipalities in Florida/archive2.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Disambiguation link notification for April 30

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi. When you recently edited 2012 Football League Cup Final, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Glen Johnson, Mark Hudson and Ben Turner (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:01, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 April 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is ready

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

  • Account activation codes have been emailed.
  • To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
  • The 1-year, free period begins once you enter the code.
  • If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
  • A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
  • HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
  • Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
  • When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 04:45, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

List of Friends episodes

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello NapHit. You recently supported this for FL, since then the list has been significantly changed to "transclude" the main content from sub-pages. There's an ongoing discussion both at the FLC and the talk page of the list itself. I felt you should know that the list you previously supported no longer reflects the current version. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:28, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (April)

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This newsletter is being delivered to you because you signed up to this list. If you wish to stop receiving it, please remove your name.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Formula One at 19:31, 7 May 2012 (UTC).

The Signpost: 07 May 2012

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Imran Khan

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please have your comments on this. ZiaUllahKhan Khadar Khani 16:40, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

The Keetleys

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I noticed that you created both Joe Keetley and Joseph Keetley but, other than a one-year difference in their YOB, their pages are exactly the same and you link to the same profile as a reference. I'm guessing that they are the same person, but I thought I'd double check with you in case I'm missing something. Canadian Paul 18:10, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Yep, I've created two duplicate entries by mistake, there was only one joe kettles that played for liverpool. Thanks for spotting that. NapHit (talk) 21:51, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Cheers. I've redirected Joseph. Canadian Paul 04:18, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 May 2012

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

List of European Cup and UEFA Champions League winners

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
  The Original Barnstar
I was looking up the history of the UCL final yesterday. I was happy to see the Champions League winners list was in good condition and was already featured. Nice job! Just what I was looking for. As the main contributor, you deserve a barnstar. Strafpeloton2 (talk) 23:57, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 May 2012

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

List of Slovenian football champions

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello. I see you have made couple of comments in the List of Slovenian football champions, which is a Featured list candidate. It seems I forgot to include three Slovenian teams that played in the Yugoslav First League. Considering that you are already making comments on what needs to be fixed, I was thinking that its probably better if I ask you here on how to rephrase/add the new information in the lead (that is, if its good enough).

I was thinking something about: Before that, top Slovenian teams competed in Yugoslavia with only Ilirija, ASK Primorje and after a forced merger of the two teams, SK Ljubljana ever reaching the country's highest division, Yugoslav First League. Olimpija Ljubljana, Maribor and Nafta were the only Slovenian teams who participated in the top division since World War II and until the breakup of Yugoslavia in 1991.

If that is good enough and worthy of a FL;) I will just add it in the article. If its not, then let me know how it needs to be fixed. Thank you, Ratipok (talk) 23:55, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Ye looks good to me, left a further comments at the flc. NapHit (talk) 17:42, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of municipalities in Rio Grande do Norte/archive1

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi NapHit, if you could look at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of municipalities in Rio Grande do Norte/archive1 that would be appreciated. Thanks, Albacore (talk) 20:31, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

No problem, I've left a few comments for you to chew over. NapHit (talk) 22:58, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 May 2012

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of English Twenty20 cricket champions/archive1

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

As you participated in Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of official County Championship winners/archive1, I thought you might be interested in commenting on this similar list for English Twenty20 winners! Any comments would be greatly appreciated, thanks! Harrias talk 13:36, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (May)

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This newsletter is being delivered to you because you signed up to this list. If you wish to stop receiving it, please remove your name.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Formula One at 02:03, 5 June 2012 (UTC).

The Signpost: 04 June 2012

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

List of international cricket centuries by Mohammad Yousuf

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello, Any chance you could take a look at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of international cricket centuries by Mohammad Yousuf/archive3. ZiaKhan 22:11, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 June 2012

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

List of Pakistan Twenty20 International cricketers

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Hello, NapHit. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Peer review/List of Pakistan Twenty20 International cricketers/archive1.
Message added ZiaKhan 23:48, 17 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Latest comment: 11 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion
 
Hello, NapHit. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Kapil Dev/archive2.
Message added 07:43, 19 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—Vensatry (Ping me) 07:43, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, why did you reduce the table width while adding colours. Was there a problem with sorting? —Vensatry (Ping me) 12:19, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
It was an attempt to get the all the cells aligned properly, at the moment you have some aligning left and others centrally, the coding in the table is a real mess, so I can't identify what is causing the cells with colour to align to the left. NapHit (talk) 12:42, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Also why didn't you apply color for the entire row (talking about double-dagger). —Vensatry (Ping me) 13:38, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
I said at the flc it only needs to be down for the cell with the symbol in. NapHit (talk) 14:01, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I've added colours now to the table. Does it look good or should I remove it. —Vensatry (Ping me) 12:35, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
Ye that's fine, good stuff. NapHit (talk) 22:18, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 June 2012

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

List of international cricket centuries by Mohammad Yousuf

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Hello, NapHit. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of international cricket centuries by Mohammad Yousuf/archive3.
Message added ZiaKhan 23:14, 20 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:NapHit/Archive_7&oldid=1090549016"