User talk:VanishedUser sdu8asdasd/Archive 11
 | This is an archive of past discussions. 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 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | → | Archive 15 |
I have remove the, Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Lead Actor in a Drama Series because I've asked The Rambling Man to help me, but I don't need his help anymore. Therefore, can I please remove it? — SoapFan12 Talk 
10:20, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
- SoapFan12: I'm not sure what you're asking me to do? :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 10:22, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
- You reverted my edit on The Rambling Man to-do-list (diff). I've asked him to help me with that article, but I don't need his help anymore, so I am asking you, can I please remove it from it from his to-do list, since he does not need to help me anymore. — SoapFan12 Talk
11:42, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
- You should contact him directly - he may still wish to contribute, even if you don't require his help. :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 11:45, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
- I was wondering you have time this weekend or week to only help me with the lead of Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Drama Series (correct grammar and add more info- broadcast info). It would mean the world to me if you would be willing! — SoapFan12 Talk 12:01, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, I'm not a Featured Article standard writer, so I'll pass on that :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 13:07, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
- I was wondering you have time this weekend or week to only help me with the lead of Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Drama Series (correct grammar and add more info- broadcast info). It would mean the world to me if you would be willing! — SoapFan12 Talk
- You reverted my edit on The Rambling Man to-do-list (diff). I've asked him to help me with that article, but I don't need his help anymore, so I am asking you, can I please remove it from it from his to-do list, since he does not need to help me anymore. — SoapFan12 Talk
Ah, so our paths cross again. :) Say, consider leaving references raw until the AfC is approved. Others may disagree, but I always think that refs don't go dead so quickly, and newcomers find filled-in references cause a lot of clutter when trying to put together a draft. Just a thought. Very best wishes, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:40, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
- I'm a confirmed talk-page stalker xD Seeing an AfC notice appear on an admin's talk surprised me, so I investigated further. I never use AfC myself, so I don't know the standard procedures there xD Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 14:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
- Well, Anna, I guess this is the problem when people misspell names, and don't leave redlinks in articles... this is why, when I go to add one wikilink, I go through and do everything else as well! Sometimes there are a lot of articles that existed but were unlinked... Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 15:01, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) ::That's okay. We're all stalkers. It was tagged for deletion. I googled it to be sure. It got lots of hits. I saved it and resubmitted it as a single sentence with a few extra refs. It was declined. I was just moving it to the mainspace myself and it bumped into a redirect of the same name. Turns out the article exists under the different spelling Kritika Kamra. The jokes on me. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:05, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.
IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.
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.
Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:
- Views/Day
- Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
- Quality
- Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.
The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:
- Content
- Is more content needed?
- Headings
- Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
- Images
- Is the number of illustrative images about right?
- Links
- Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
- Sources
- For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?
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. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:37, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
Kenny Davenport
Thanks for clarifying! GiantSnowman 08:17, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
- Not a problem, GiantSnowman :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 08:32, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi there LUKE, AL "here",
i apologize for (apparently) reverting you in this player's article, but i sincerely don't understand why we must: make a second infobox out of intro ("he made 28 appearances for Atlético Madrid B"), refer to RESERVE TEAMS in the intro especially when the given player has not even appeared that much for the B-side. I see you have re-reverted, don't worry i have to respect your work, it stays that way. I was going to work on Arouna Koné, Gerard Deulofeu and Lucas Alcaraz (i edit almost exclusively on Spanish/Portuguese-related football), but now i won't, since i'd meet the same wikifate.
On a related note, quite laughable what Roberto Martínez (and 99,99999999% of the managers) is doing, taking his buddies (former Wigan players) to his next club, as we all know that went well last season at Wigan - who's next? Jordi Gómez i presume, or Albert Crusat who can barely walk... I don't know how club presidents worldwide allow this, and in the current light of English football (30% or so of national players in the Premier League, the national team being constantly ousted in the early stages of the major tournaments), even MORE. The state of Portuguese football is pretty much the same, just look at the rosters of S.L. Benfica and F.C. Porto and you'll see what i mean.
Back to item #1: sorry for any inconvenience again, keep up the good work --AL (talk) 15:15, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
- No problem, AL, although I'd have done the same edit even if it hadn't been me that re-wrote the lead in the first place. :) For the majority of setups, I would agree with you; however, with the Spanish (and indeed, many German clubs), their reserve sides play in relatively high divisions, and are very different to the reserve sides in the UK (or Portugal, as far as I am aware), which play in dedicated reserve leagues, or against really, really small local clubs. In this case, Aletico Madrid B were playing in the third tier of Spanish football, so it's definitely worth noting his appearances for them in the lead.
- As to your related note, it's not surprising that managers re-sign players that they'd managed previously; they know the specific strengths and weaknesses of those players, and how they fit in within a team. If you see a gap in your team, and you already know a good, young player who will fit (Joel being an example here) - then you're likely to take the easy option. That, and the player is more likely to join you if they already know how you work, and if they like you. :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 15:25, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Re:Mass reversion of my Wikilinks
Per previous WP:MOTOR consensus all drivers below FIA European Formula 3 Championship level didn't enough notable for their own articles and drivers who already have article shouldn't contain table results for the series that below FIA European Formula 3 Championship level. For example, you said that In 2-3 years time, a large amount of the drivers WILL be notable enough for articles. But look at this. Half of the drivers in twelve years time didn't became notable. Cybervoron (talk) 16:36, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
- The Euro F3 Open is essentially the same as the FIA European Formula 3 level. I read the latest thread, it didn't establish any consensus whatsoever - opinions were completely mixed, and at different levels of their stance. Besides, there's STILL no problem with including redlinks - they're much more informative than no link at all... Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 16:40, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
- It's really distracting, so it's a problem. You should read Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking#Red Links. Cybervoron (talk) 16:52, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
- Nothing there changes my viewpoint that these redlinks were beneficial, especially given how annoying it is, as a content creator, to have to do all of this linking to stop your articles being orphans - because people didn't link properly in the first place. The very guideline you point to (guideline, not policy) states "If you remain convinced there is overlinking of red links, consider turning some of them blue." This would've been FAR more productive than just reverting wholesale; if redlinks annoy you, make the articles on the notable drivers. Especially with the Euro F3 Open; which is essentially the same level as the European F3 Championship, and the consensus you allude to doesn't exist anyway. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 17:10, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
- Most of this links will never become blue because the drivers are not notable, so I reverted your edit. It will be productive to leave redlinks for the articles that really likely to be created. Does it has any sense to have link for Sebastian von Gartzen, Florian Le Roux, Johannes Moor, etc? Also, F3 Open isn't the same level as the European F3, F3 Open cars are obviously slower, most of the F3 Open drivers doesn't graduate to the professional series. Cybervoron (talk) 09:22, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Uh... the Class A drivers in the European F3 Open use exactly the same cars as the ones in the European F3 Championship. So they are not "obviously slower". And it is STILL a continental level F3 series, and is still a professional series. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 09:28, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Not exactly. They use the same F312 chassis but have the different engines that less powerful than that used European F3 Championship. Cars from the both championships are presented in 2013 British Formula Three season and as you could see in the different classes. Cybervoron (talk) 09:36, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Well, fair enough, but "obviously" is still an invalid term to use. Given how many current British F3 drivers have articles, my European F3 Open edit looks more and more valid by the minute... Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 09:41, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, but it is only valid for the main class of F3 Open, not Copa Class. Cybervoron (talk) 09:55, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
ANI notification
Hi, Lukeno. Hijiri88 here. Long time no see! I'm editing under a proxy username in order to keep JoshuSasori off my back for at least the next few days. Anyway, just thought I should mention that I brought your name up in my ANI posting. Cheers! Coldman the Barbarian (talk) 12:00, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
See also:
- Wikipedia:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
- Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
- Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:26, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
- Fantastic, thanks :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 21:33, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
DYK for Sarah Moore (racing driver)
 | On 3 August 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sarah Moore (racing driver), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Sarah Moore was the first female racing driver to win a mixed-gender, national-level series in the UK? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sarah Moore (racing driver). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project (nominate) 16:04, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
Sarah Moore
It was an odd photo I know (considering it was I that took it after all!); because it was when the BTCC hit the streets of Edinburgh in August 2009, around a week prior to the Knockhill round of that year's championship. The photos that I took was just before the runs up Johnston Terrace, beneath Edinburgh Castle. So yeah, hence the oddity of the photo! As you might see from some of the other ones in this set; examples being Louise Goodman in static face, and John George trying to hump a car. They're all on Commons, if I remember rightly. Craig(talk) 20:34, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'd seen that you'd taken it, Craig; it must've been odd for someone that age to end up being such a centre of attention! Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 20:39, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
- Fifteen she must've been back then. I think the next youngest on the day out of the drivers would've been Andrew Jordan at a then 20. Shame she didn't have all the money in place for a step up the ranks; akin to the facts for most drivers nowadays, e.g. Scott Malvern, Oliver Turvey (prior to him moving into GTs) and many others. Craig(talk) 20:45, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, there are so many who lack the finances. I've never even had the finances to get into karting in anything other than the British Schools Karting Championship; where I found myself to be quicker than anyone other than the regular racing drivers. A shame, because I'd love to do some touring car racing. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 20:49, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
Adam McGurk
Hello. FYI, Skyblueshaun is a very enthusiastic editor, whose enthusiasm for making an edit as soon as he can sometimes gets the better of him. He has a habit of making unsourced edits to BLPs (and elsewhere), for which he's been blocked in the past, and which he's working hard on to cure. Sometimes he forgets, and if he forgets on something on my watchlist, sometimes I source it myself, and sometimes I remind him, and sometimes I take the easy way out and undo it, which with the current notification system will remind him without the need for me to do it manually. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:48, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- Struway2, I undid your edit as it was the fastest way to reinstate the information (and you'd know about it quicker). I can fully understand why you don't go looking for sources - I only occasionally do myself, and usually leave the burden on the adding editor. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 11:50, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- Personally, if I'm undoing a valid edit to reinstate a previous version, I either remove the automatic edit summary or edit that previous version via the history. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 12:00, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- Noted for future reference. I'll try to remember to do that, or add in "good faith" next time :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 12:01, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- Personally, if I'm undoing a valid edit to reinstate a previous version, I either remove the automatic edit summary or edit that previous version via the history. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 12:00, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.
IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.
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.
Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:
- Views/Day
- Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
- Quality
- Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.
The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:
- Content
- Is more content needed?
- Headings
- Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
- Images
- Is the number of illustrative images about right?
- Links
- Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
- Sources
- For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?
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. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:26, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
SPI
Did I file this wrong? I'm a little out of practice... Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 11:33, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi Luke, I have rewritten this article which you nominated for deletion. Would you like to take another look? Thanks. Black Kite (talk) 12:00, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
- I already replied to you in the AfD, but you've not established any notability whatsoever. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 12:01, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
Adnan Zahirović
Please can you convert to the standard table type as has been determined by FOOTY consensus? Regards, GiantSnowman 12:29, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
- Sure, no problem. There are so many different ones in widespread use that I'm never sure which to use! Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 12:45, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Hello, isn't the correct stats table to use this one WP:WikiProject_Football/Players#Career_statistics.. which is basically the same as the one that GiantSnowman gave but this one includes the name of the league too. JMHamo (talk) 21:52, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
- That's the one I've generally preferred, myself... but see what I mean? There are at least three very common types... xD Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 07:18, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.
IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.
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.
Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:
- Views/Day
- Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
- Quality
- Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.
The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:
- Content
- Is more content needed?
- Headings
- Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
- Images
- Is the number of illustrative images about right?
- Links
- Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
- Sources
- For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?
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. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:50, 12 August 2013 (UTC)