User talk:Mr.Kennedy1/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Perry Prine

Hello again,

I'm coming to you about this as for the moment I have no idea where to bring these sort of things to so if you can lead me to the right direction that would be greatly appreciate. Despite being a long-standing member of WikiProject Ice Hockey I am still pretty green when it comes to discussing things with fellow project members.

Anyways I was browsing through the American darts players category when I discovered this! - Perry Prine.

Is he even notable, my opinion is that he's certainly not notable to be in a darts category but what do you think? Raphie (talk) 10:14, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I have copied this conversation and added it to the talk page. I haven't done a prod in a while now since my guide was deleted to due to hard drive corruption. He may even be a case of speedy deletion which I have never done in my four years here. I will look up some sort or guide for any future events like this, for now though if you know the tools of the trade, you got this one. Raphie (talk) 10:31, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

The article is now nominated for deletion. Raphie (talk) 11:02, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Darts

Hey, just wanted to say I'm in for the WikiProject Darts and I thank you for the invitation. Kind regards. Raphie (talk) 15:21, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Looks OK to me. Did you take it by the WikiProject Council's proposal page yet? Doesn't look like it; it would be a great place to get feedback. Daniel Case (talk) 04:10, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

US Open (darts)

Would you share a source for the 2010 edition of US Open (darts). You put Phil as the winner. I can't find any info on the pdc website. I thought there was no 2010 edition. -Koppapa (talk) 20:04, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Phil Taylor/GA1

Hi, I've explained a couple of points at Talk:Phil Taylor/GA1. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear before, it's easy to get into the habit of assuming people know exactly which guideline you're referring to! I've got a few things on the go at the moment, so I may not have time to look at the article straight away, but I will look it over again and see if there are any more suggestions to make. Let me know if you'd like me to explain/expand on anything else.--BelovedFreak 17:12, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Importance ratings

Hi, was just in the process of answering when you removed the question. Not sure if you're still curious, but the way I see it, individual editions of tournaments (even world championships) are all of low importance unless there is something out of the ordinary to push it above that.The world championships could possibly be assessed as mid importance, but not the lesser tournaments. Of course the parent articles will be assessed much higher.

What also that concerns me is whether individual editions of lower tournaments are sufficiently notable, with extensive independent reliably sourced coverage, to warrant articles at all. Regards, _wjemather^bigissue 08:57, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but if you put individual tournaments like the World Grand Prix and GSoD low importance then smaller individual tournaments like the European Championship wouldn't fit in the Darts importance scale at all. Mr.Kennedy1 ^talk 09:20, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

We cannot rate articles on that basis – we would need far more steps on the scale. Otherwise we could end up with this:

• Top – xxxx World Championship
• High – xxxx World Matchplay
• Mid – xxxx Grand Slam of Darts
• Low – xxxx European Championship

However the general article is of higher importance than a single instance of it, so we would have to rate the World Matchplay as top importance alongside the World Championships, which we wouldn't want either.

We just have to accept that the categories are broad. Therefore it is best to ignore relative importance to other articles. Most of our articles will be rated as low, with there being a wide spread of importance within that, and some will be very, very low. _wjemather^bigissue 09:50, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, clearly we can't settle this between ourselves, do you think we should bring it to the project talk page? Mr.Kennedy1 ^talk 10:08, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Can do. To explain further where I am coming from, I largely tend to see the importance ratings as an indication of priority rather than significance, based on what an average reader may want to find out about. That way it is much easier to assign ratings. _wjemather^bigissue 10:31, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Darts player sandbox/testcases

Hi, I have had an initial go at paring down the information in the infobox and combined that with standardising on the {{infobox}} base template for ease of editing. Note in order to avoid having to edit all the articles where it is transcluded, we need to keep the same variable names, although we can add new ones if required. Pleas take a look at the testcases and share your thoughts. Thanks, _wjemather^bigissue 10:34, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Question for Peer Review

Hi, Mr. Kennedy. A question about Wikipedia:Peer review/Phil Taylor/archive1 - is dart in the UK a winter, summer or all-year sport? --Philcha (talk) 21:24, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

It is a all-year sport. Mr.Kennedy1 ^talk 07:36, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. --Philcha (talk) 17:53, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Please check this diff at Phil Taylor

Hi, I found this diff from an IP user. I've no idea what's right, I hope you can resolve. --Philcha (talk) 06:31, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

It was a proper edit, I must have put it in wrong when I was making the table, thanks for notifying me. Also, i'm going to try and get more work done on the article today. Mr.Kennedy1 ^talk 11:30, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Peer review

Hi, I've added some comments at the Phil Taylor peer review. Sorry it took me so long, but I'm glad that someone else has reviewed it in the mean time! I would also recommend asking someone from a relevant wikiproject, that knows about darts, to review it as they may be able to pick up some things that someone unfamiliar with darts wouldn't. Good luck with developing the article.--BelovedFreak 11:41, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

The Taylor timeline

Hi, been off of the computing world for a while.. but now im back. Yeah well I thought the timeline was a good idea well executed, and certainly better than the recent form timelines used on most pros articles. If you want to take it, edit it etc. by all means do so, and no worries about the credit or nothing like that. I only want to see the standard of articles improve. Ill check out the wikiproject too... see if anything that needs doing can be addressed.

The table is:

Tournament	1988	1989	1990	1991	1992	1993	1994	1995	1996	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	Total Wins
BDO World Championship	Absent		W	QF	W	2R	Not BDO Member																	2 / 4
PDC World Championship	Not Held						F	W	W	W	W	W	W	W	W	F	W	W	W	F	QF	W	W	13 / 17
Players Championship Finals	Not Held																					W	SF	1 / 2
Premier League	Not Held																	W	W	W	W	SF	W	5 / 6
UK Open	Not Held															W	QF	W	QF	QF	QF	W	W	4 / 8
World Matchplay	Not Held						2R	W	2R	W	QF	SF	W	W	W	W	W	QF	W	SF	W	W	W	11 / 17
European Championship	Not Held																				W	W	W	3 / 3
World Masters	2R	SF	W	F	1R	Not BDO Member																		1 / 5
Championship League	Not Held																				W	F		1 / 2
World Grand Prix	Not Held										W	W	W	1R	W	W	1R	W	W	1R	W	W		8 / 11
Grand Slam of Darts	Not Held																			W	W	W		3 / 3
Las Vegas Desert Classic	Not Held														W	SF	W	W	SF	1R	W	W	NH	5 / 8
Totals																								58 / 86

Slash99 (talk) 13:46, 24 August 2010 (UTC) ;)

Years in Darts

Re Darts: No, I am not a Darts player, so will not join the project. But I decided to replace and expand the categories by year for years in Darts eg Category:2010 in darts, and with the decade navbox. Have also sorted the years in Softball, which only had one year, 2007 in softball, ie not even 2010 the current one. Hugo999 (talk) 05:24, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Reply

Well, I am also new to huggle. I started using it today. But I'm a fast learner. ;) And here you can watch recent changes done by IPs, and there you can see vandalism more often than in the normal recent changes. I used that prior to learning huggle. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 ^(Contact) 14:53, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reverting it. You took 6 seconds to revert it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.77.216.108 (talk) 00:24, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Your welcome. Mr.Kennedy1 ^talk 00:26, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Darts bio stubs

Sure thing - happy to be of assistance. I don't know that much about darts, I'm afraid, so I'm of scant use otherwise, but I was happy to work on the stub tag. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 17:33, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Mireille Guiliano

What do you mean unconstructive?? I expanded on a paragraph. Be more specific. 108.116.232.167 (talk) 13:38, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Since I made more than one edit, your reversion just deletes everything. This, to me, is a lazy way to edit. A better (more constructive) method, would be to delete, or edit the parts you don't agree with. I added her hometown, as well as a comment on her book title. The comment wasn't abusive. She herself says she was a fat sack of potatoes, and wanted to get back in shape. So obviously French Women DO get fat. If you can see my thinking. 108.116.232.167 (talk) 14:01, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

I changed the edit to:

This story is the basis of her first book, French Women Don't Get Fat.[12][13] The book title is really a mind game, because French women actually do get fat, just like everyone in the world, but unlike millions of boring diet books, she mixes humor, French, and English, into an excellent story. The recipes not being the highlight, but more an afterthought, with most being interesting and a little high-brow. An alternative title might have been: Fat French Women Can Get Thin, as that is really what the book is about.

But my main point was that you can't just hit the undo button, as it deletes my other additions. One doesn't know what you are complaining about if you just delete everything and then say it isn't constructive. 108.116.232.167 (talk) 14:11, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

I will explain the problem's I see in your additions (I will start with the other additions instead of your new paragraph):

• You should add references to all additions you make that are likely to be challenged (it is most important for biographys).
• "having been a POW" this is trivia and should be removed.

Ok, now the paragraph:

• You suggested another title, this should be removed
• You shouldn't say the book title is "really a mind game" without a reference.

There are clearly alot more problems but im just pointing out some I see, so now can you see where you are wrong (please read Wikipedia:How to edit a page). Mr.Kennedy1 ^talk 14:49, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

If you've never been to France, you can't know that French women really do get fat. It's a title that is designed to reinforce a French high-brow stereotype, and it sold millions of books to people who secretly desire her French Riviera lifestyle, supposedly through dieting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.116.232.167 (talk) 15:50, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Cookie!

Látches has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. {{subst:if||| {{{message}}} ||subst=subst:}} To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Látches ^{Lets talk!} 17:31, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

The guestbook

Thank you for signing my guestbook; I appreciate that. I like how you signed it as well. Happy editing. Backtable _{Speak to me}^{concerning my deeds.} 00:07, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Your welcome. Mr.Kennedy1 ^talk 10:18, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

ACC

I, Mr.Kennedy1 confirm I requested an account for ACC. Mr.Kennedy1 ^talk 17:43, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for applying to access the account creation tool. I have approved your request. You may now access the tool here. Before you do so, please read the tool's guide to familiarise yourself with the process. You may also want to join #wikipedia-en-accounts on irc and the mailing list. Keep in mind that the ACC tool is a powerful programme, and misuse may result in your access being suspended by a tool administrator. Right now our new WelcomerBot is awaiting the approval for regular use. You can opt in to having the bot welcome those new accounts you create via your preferences on the ACC tool. Please note that as the bot is awaiting final approval no welcomes are being done right now.

As EdoDodo said, being a member of the project and the user right are two different things. As the right includes some things that are otherwise admin-only Account Creator rights are given out on a combination of need and trust. Most requests can be done without the rights. Don't hesitate to get in touch with me if you have any questions. Thank you for participating in the account creation process. delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 00:56, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to the team :). We have an IRC channel on Freenode at #wikipedia-en-accounts ^connect by the way, you'd be very welcome to join. A bot on it keeps us updated on new requests, and it's also a great place to get advice from if you are unsure about a request. - EdoDodo ^talk 02:44, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

RE: Userpage Design

Hi Mr Kennedy,

Sure I can certainly try to help! Your user page doesn't seem to look to bad at the moment - but how can I help? :)

Thanks,

The Helpful One 09:59, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey there Mr. Kennedy. THO asked me for help with your userpage, and I think I've gotten it fixed up how you want; I stuck the majority of your userpage into an invisible table so that it'll line up alongside itself nicely. If this isn't what you were after, let me know and I'll see what I can do. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 10:43, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mr Kennedy - I created the tables with borders for you - and then Hersfold helped me finish it off as you can see above. I hope this helps! The Helpful One 10:44, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

You're certainly welcome! If you have any other questions - don't hesitate to ask! :) The Helpful One 13:32, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Uploading photos

Hi, the best way of uploading photos is to go to Commons:Upload and follow the instructions there. Uploaded photos must be public domain or creative commons with attribution, see the upload page for links to detailed explanations of what these terms mean. Once uploaded on Commons, images can be shown in Wikipedia and any of the sister projects in the normal way (see Wikipedia:Picture tutorial).

Additional points to note:

1. Logging in - you have to have an account on Commons, this may have already been created under the same name and password as your Wikipedia account, see Special:MergeAccount.
2. Copyright - if the copyright of the photo is owned by someone else and there is no existing free license to reference (for example on their website), then you need to follow the Commons:OTRS process and confidentially supply an email from the copyright holder. If you think your photo is public domain but want to check the rules that apply then see WP:RFCA.
3. Emailing - see Wikipedia:Contact us/Photo submission. You should note that there may be a long backlog and your email may take days or weeks before getting processed. If you seem technically able, you may get a polite request to do it yourself as this is a low priority for the OTRS volunteers.
4. EXIF - image data may be automatically added by the camera or by your photo processing applications. This will be visible after upload so make sure you are happy that the make of camera, when/where it was taken etc. will be consistent with your upload information.
5. Verification - the photo can be checked using TinEye after upload, so if it appears on websites which claim 'All right reserved' or similar then it may get marked for deletion.

A simple standard guide is at Help:Files. Thanks, Fæ (talk) 22:01, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

ani

I undid you edit to ANI. I think you were trying to add a link to an archived discussion, but you ended up pasting in the whole archive instead. I don't know what link you were trying to add, so you might want to try again. Cheers —DoRD (talk) 14:54, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Oh, i'm very sorry, I was just trying to provide a link to the main page, I must have done something badly wrong. Thanks. Mr.Kennedy1 ^{talk guestbook} 15:13, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Eduardo Peralta-Tello

The article Eduardo Peralta-Tello has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:04, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Phil Taylor

Hi, you're welcome, and I'm glad you found the suggestions useful. As far as GA goes, I'm not sure that it's 100% ready, but it certainly shouldn't be "quick failed". You've put a lot of work into it, and it has improved quite a bit since the last nomination, so well done! The only way you're going to know is to nominate t and see what happens. Chances are it'll languish at WP:GAN for a few weeks (it's quite backlogged) which will give you a bit more time. When I reviewed it at GAN, the issues were great enough that I didn't feel able to put the article on hold. Hopefully, this time round, if there are still issues, your reviewer will put the article on hold to allow you to work on it. I've had a glance through and these are a few things that caught my eye:

• Sources - make sure that all your sources are completely reliable. Don't assume they are because no one has challenged them yet. For example, what's introducingmonday? They don't seem to have an "about us" section yet, and it's not clear who owns/writes the website or if they're reliable in any way. Similarly, The Oche, and MindtheZap. I've not checked them all.
• The lead still looks a bit scanty. WP:LEAD is one part of the manual of style that is checked at GA.
• There are still some very short paragraphs which break up the flow of the prose. In particular, in "Rivalries" and "Nine-dart finishes". Try to either expand or combine these. Just one example: "They have now met over 45 times, with Taylor having the majority of victories, making their overall head to head very one sided to Taylor." - I see no need for this to be a separate paragraph. It could easily be combined with the previous sentence, and possible more.
• This is not covered by the GA criteria, but something you might want to consider in tidying up (and may also be commented on by a more scrupulous GA reviewer): you may want to clean up the citations a bit to make them more consistent. For example, you have "Dartsdatabase" and "dartsdatabase.co.uk" - these should be the same. Also, websites should not be in italics, only works like newspapers, magazines, books etc. (For example, BBC should not be in italics). Also, make sure that the correct fields are filled in in the templates. BBC is a publisher, not an author. Figuring out the citations templates can be tricky, so if you're struggling with it, don't worry about his bullet point.

Anyway, I'd say go for it and see what happens. Sort the sources though, reliable sources are a big deal at GA and above. Good luck! --BelovedFreak 20:47, 17 September 2010 (UTC)