Prowler294

Welcome

Hello, Prowler294, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! —Darkwind (talk) 03:28, 29 April 2014 (UTC) Getting started Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia Finding your way around Table of contents Department directory Editing articles How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles How you can help Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

In a recent edit, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 03:25, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Please respect the work of other editors and do not change (correct) spelling at your preference. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 03:28, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Materialscientist (talk) 03:58, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Prowler294 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

The African Bird's eye chilli is a topic relating to a plant found in southern and eastern Africa, where the word "colour" is spelled correctly. As such I edited the topic to reflect this correct spellingProwler294 (talk) 04:04, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

If so, that's one example of such a change being appropriate, but the other eight weren't. I suggest you simply don't do that any more when your block expires. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 04:27, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Prowler294 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Correcting spelling mistakes does not constitute "disruptive editing" as per wikipedia's page on disruptive editing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disruptive_editing, as claimed by materialscientist Prowler294 (talk) 05:31, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

The key word being "mistakes". Please read and understand WP:ENGVAR while you are blocked, because a resumption of this behavior when it does will rapidly result in a reblock for a much longer period. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:15, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Proposed deletion of Hanyani Shimange

The article Hanyani Shimange has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has 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 seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Jinkinson talk to me 01:29, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Hanyani Shimange may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• (rugby union)|hooker]], but played one game for the [[Springboks]] at [Flanker (rugby union)|flank]]. During his career, Shimange played for the [[Natal Sharks]], [[Free State Cheetahs]] and [[Western Province (rugby team)|Western Province}} in the [[Currie Cup]] competition in South Africa and the [[Sharks (rugby union)|Sharks]], [[Lions

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:17, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

June 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Natal Sharks may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• union)|flank]] [[Wahl Bartmann]] and [[Number Eight (rugby union)|eighth man]] [[Andrew Aitken (rugby player|Andrew Aitken]]. McIntosh produced a masterstroke by naming regular lock [[Steve

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:39, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 2000 Currie Cup may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• | try1 = [[Ricardo Loubser]] (<br/> [[Rhys Botha]] <br/> [[Chad Alcock]] <br/> [[Wonga Joka]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:38, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

2004 Currie Cup Premier Division

Hi there, Thanks for your work on 2004 Currie Cup Premier Division. I have stuff that might help – have a look at User:TheMightyPeanut/sandbox#2004 Currie Cup. It still needs some work; player links must be checked, etc., but it might save you some time! Thanks, TheMightyPeanut (talk) 08:14, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2004 Currie Cup Premier Division, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Newlands (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) 08:55, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2004 Currie Cup Premier Division, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mark Lawrence and Trevor Hall (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) 08:53, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

2000 Currie Cup

Hi there, thanks again for all your work on this article, it's much appreciated! I split the 2000 into three separate articles, to have a format closer to the other seasons. I didn't add any new content, just copied and pasted stuff throughout the three articles... TheMightyPeanut (talk) 12:46, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Why do you think the split is unnecessary? If you look at the results of the preliminary rounds, there are several results that are not relevant to the Currie Cup competition, for example the Mighty Elephants v Falcons match in round 1. The result of that match was carried forward to the 2000 Bankfin Cup competition. So, if those results are deemed relevant to appear in the 2000 Currie Cup article, then they are equally as relevant to appear in the 2000 Bankfin Cup article? However, that would lead to a large unnecessary duplication of information, so splitting it out into its own article seems a much more logical step. TheMightyPeanut (talk) 07:09, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Splitting it into three separate articles makes it confusing. Plus from game 1 in the preliminary rounds all teams played for the Currie Cup. In round 1 neither the Elephants nor the Falcons played for the Banfin Cup but for the Currie Cup. To stay in line with the other seasons and to keep the information flowing logically, the preliminary rounds together with the Top 8 should form one article. All the other articles for the Currie Cup is one article from game one to the final. Now we have two. So please undo your unnecessary split. A separate article for the Bankfin Cup rounds is fine as is. Prowler294 (talk) 10:09, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

"In round 1 neither the Elephants nor the Falcons played for the Banfin Cup but for the Currie Cup". That's the issue, at the time of playing those matches, they didn't know whether the result would eventually count towards the Currie Cup or the Bankfin Cup. As it turned out, that was one of the results that were carried over into the Bankfin Cup competition. Having that result on the Currie Cup page but not on the Bankfin Cup page doesn't make sense. Having it on both is an unnecessary duplication of information. In 2006, the two highest-placed teams from the Vodacom Cup qualified for the Currie Cup Premier Division. Using your logic, it means that all results from the 2006 Vodacom Cup should then also be included in the 2006 Currie Cup article, since all those matches could possibly contribute towarda a team eventually winning the Currie Cup. I agree there are several existing Currie Cup articles that really should be split out too. TheMightyPeanut (talk) 10:28, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

If I want to read about the 2000 Currie Cup or any of the other for that matter, I do not want to fight my way between three separate articles. I want to read the story from start to finish. Like in the article about the 2005 Currie Cup. In 2000 all games formed part of the Currie Cup competition. It was only in 2006 that it split out into two separate distinct competitions.

If you wanted to read about the 2000 Currie Cup, you wouldn't have to read three articles even if they were split out; you'll have to read two. However, the way things are at the moment, if you wanted to read about the 2000 Bankfin Cup, you would have to read two articles. How is that consistent? TheMightyPeanut (talk) 11:47, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

So following your logic, we should have seperate articles for every season divided into round-robin, a seperate one for the semi finals and a further separate one for the final? Do you know that the Top 8 was called the Currie Cup quater final round by the SA newspapers? Because in essence it was. You can not seperate the preliminary rounds from the top 8. The preliminary rounds were not a CC qualification. It were the rounds to determine who make it through to the finals series. All 14 teams qualified for the 2000 Currie Cup. Some just failed to make it past the preliminary rounds. To disconnect the two is illogical, and frankly, stupid. So stop your interference. It is unwelcome. Prowler294 (talk) 11:44, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

No, you completely misinterpreted my logic. The preliminary round had an impact on the teams playing in two separate competitions - the Currie Cup and the Bankfin Cup. The preliminary round was of equal importance to both competitions – it determined which teams qualified and it contributed towards the logs for both competitions. Why put those details in one of the articles if it pertains to two articles? Calling the Top 8 "Quarter Finals" is obviously just plain incorrect, since there was a round-robin phase at the start of it.

You keep on missing one point, again illustrated by your comments above. You said "The preliminary rounds were not a CC qualification. It were the rounds to determine who make it through to the finals series." — Yes, but those rounds determined who made it through to two separate competitions, not just to one competition. So does that mean your willingness to disconnect the preliminary rounds from the Bankfin Cup is "illogical, and frankly, stupid?" TheMightyPeanut (talk) 12:26, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't want to disconnect the Bankfin Cup from the Currie Cup. It was all part of one competition. In 2000 the Bankfin Cup was not a separate competition as today. But seeing that you are hell-bent on splitting the article I said I can live with the Bankfin Cup being a separate article. I still believe both the Preliminary rounds as well as the Top 8 and the Bankfin Cup makes one article. This is the only Currie Cup season that has been messed up into three separate disjointed articles. But, you know what, you do as you please. I have the time and the resources to update all the Currie Cup seasons since 1982. But seeing that you keep on interfering with your stupid ideas, I'll leave it to you to update those seasons. Good luck. Prowler294 (talk) 22:08, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Wow. Just wow. That's the Wikipedia equivalent of saying "I don't like the game, I'm taking my ball and going home". Seriously. I'm not hell-bent on splitting the article. You said several times you can live with the Bankfin Cup being a separate article – I have pointed out several times how that would lead to either a duplication of information or information pertaining to both articles only being included on one, which seems wrong. I'm not against the idea of merging everything into one article, although my personal preference is to split them out. It's also not "stupid ideas" (but thanks for the insult!). There is definitely merit in splitting them out ... as there is in merging them. It's much of a muchness really. Initially, I split them out, you merged it back and we opened a discussion (perfect as per WP:BRD). However, then in your edits about 24 hours ago, you made changes without any kind of consensus being reached ... and created yet another new page for some unknown reason. So, yes, take your ball and leave if you want, or we can do the mature thing and take this discussion to a wider audience to get more input into this. Your call... TheMightyPeanut (talk) 01:56, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2000 Currie Cup qualification, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mark Lawrence (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) 09:04, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:2000 Currie Cup Section X Log

Template:2000 Currie Cup Section X Log has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 04:39, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:2000 Currie Cup Section Y Log

Template:2000 Currie Cup Section Y Log has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 04:39, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:2000 Currie Cup Top 8 log

Template:2000 Currie Cup Top 8 log has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 14:28, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:2004 Currie Cup Premier Division Log

Template:2004 Currie Cup Premier Division Log has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 16:34, 6 April 2023 (UTC)