User talk:Vaselineeeeeeee/Archive 13

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

→

Archive 18

Awards/Buffon's honours

@Messirulez: Wait, so is the Best Goalkeeper through UEFA Club Football Awards, awarded separate from the Best European Goalkeeper? from 1998-2009 it was just coincidence they were given to the same keepers? This is all very confusing ahah. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 18:45, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, it is...I've heard conflicting information about the Award... Messirulez (talk) 18:47, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

One question, I was wondering, shouldn't Gigi's individual honours be listed chronologically? I think that's how they were initially, and that's why I put the Best Goalkeeper Award at the bottom. What do you think? Best, Messirulez (talk) 19:34, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

@Messirulez: Looking at Cristiano Ronaldo there isn't really chrono order... maybe it's because it's hard with awards being for a whole season and some just one year, but I think it's easier to follow if we put related awards under eachother, it makes it easier on the eye. Buffon's order right now doesn't look completely chrono, but I don't mind either way. There's no rule really, but you're right, we usually order things alpha or chrono. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 19:49, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I do see your point; I was positive in the guidelines it stated that the award should be chronological, so that surprises me about Cristiano Ronaldo's individual honours being so disorganised...hmmm. Do you mind if I put the award back at the bottom? It's just that I had originally done them chronologically and I have OCD, lol... Messirulez (talk) 21:20, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

@Messirulez: hahah no problem, I think as Wikipedians, we all have a bit of OCD ;) Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 22:28, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Buffon's international appearances vs. those of other players

Hey! How are you doing? Napoli got dominated in the Champions League today against Mancester City away in the first half (and they missed a penalty), but in the second half they definitely improved and got one back, although the points situation in the group doesn't look too great for them at the moment, which is frustrating, as I always want Italian teams to do well in Europe for the UEFA Coefficiant points ranking, even though the system will change and we will have an extra team which will qualify for the Champions League next season, I believe. I had a question I wanted to ask you about, regarding the page for male players with more than 100 international appearances. I was confused about what the official number of Hossam Hassan's and Mohamed Al-Deayea's international appearances were. The international appearances page previously said that Hassan had made 178 appearances for Egypt between 1985 and 2006, but his actual wiki page says 169, so that was changed I think (which is why Buffon is now listed as the third-most capped player of all time with 173 appearances for Italy, whereas before he was listed as fourth, so thanks again for changing that!), and the list of all-time goal scorers page also says he made 169 appearances (and scored 69 goals). The two FIFA sources on his page confirm this (169 appearances; 69 goals) (and this is what is also listed in the Egyptian national team records page), but the RSSSF (178 appearances; 68 goals) source cited on his page appear to be giving conflicting information, and the stats table further down shows a different number altogether (176 appearances; 68 goals). As for Al-Deayea's International Appearances, according to this FIFA source, Mohamed Al-Deayea made 178 official international appearances (and this is what is also listed in the Saudia Arabia national team records page), but in the List of footballers with 100 or more caps wiki page he is listed as having 172 official international appearances for Saudi Arabia between 1993 and 2006 (the RSSSF source cited on his page also confirms this). Is there anyway to confirm what their actual number of official appearances is? I'm wondering if some of those didn't come in official matches (maybe some were with the olympic team or in unofficial friendlies), hence the confusion, but I wasn't sure if there was any way of verifying this, so I was wondering if you could offer any help or advice, as I was wondering if that might change his appearance ranking (hopefully he will make more than six more appearances for Italy between the playoffs and the World Cup, so he will overtake both of them and Claudio Suárez anyway, lol!). Thanks, take care, and fingers crossed for Juve's Champions League game tomorrow! Best regards, as always, Messirulez (talk) 02:41, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

@Messirulez: Yeah I read Napoli didn't have a great first half and may have been a little unlucky, but I'm the same way, I want to see all Italian teams do well in Europe, I can't stand when others can't put rivalries aside when it comes to teams of your nation playing in Europe. Italy got Sweden, arguably the most difficult of the draws, but they can do it, they just need to come to play period. Yeah, you know, I saw your messages on the footballers appearances talk page and the players talk page's, and didn't really know what to make of it because of the sourcing differences and hoped others would reply...sadly virtually none. For the sake of consistency, the same reference should be used in all the pages. I know RSSSF is considered to be a reliable source, however in this case FIFA should definitely trump that. So I think Hassan's apps are correct now, and I will change Al-Deayea's to the FIFA 178, meaning Buffon will go back to fourth place. I'm going to change them now; let me know if you have any other concerns with this. If someone else sees this and has objection they can take it to talk. And yes, hopefully Buffon can pass them both, and take first place as well! Regards, Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 03:03, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! Yeah, the draw for the Playoffs will be tough, as Sweden are playing well. Hopefully we can do it, but Italy haven't been playing well under Ventura, and we struggled against the Swedes at the Euros. Hopefully the more difficult draw will mean that we take it more seriously and hopefully the more experienced players like Buffon can rally the players and show their true leadership qualities. We have good individual players, we just need to play as well as we can, but that rarely ever seems to happen.

Best regards, Messirulez (talk) 03:41, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Pedro Neto

Hi there Mr. V, come va?

thanks for stalking the page, indeed! In the light of that new source, OF COURSE it's a loan! I just don't know what to make of the other source that speaks of 26 million euros, to be honest :(

I'll look at it at length when I get home from work, kind regards and many thanks for "butting in"... --Quite A Character (talk) 12:11, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

@Quite A Character: Maybe that's the price they've agreed on to pay at the time the loan expires, it is an obligation to buy, so it also makes more sense in that regard. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 15:09, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Bad Blood image

Hey. I finally did the logo for Bad Blood. — Wyliepedia 20:24, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

@CAWylie: That looks sick, thanks a bunch! Are they going to play this show in the States? It would suck if they didn't considering they played Making of the Mob here in Canada, and if you're a fan of Making of the Mob, this should be up that alley. Regards, Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 20:29, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! I haven't heard if they are showing it in the States. There are a few crime-show networks here, so surely one would pick it up, even if in syndication. And the star quality alone would make anyone want to see it. — Wyliepedia 20:32, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Yeah exactly, I was excited when I saw the actors for this, it should be good! Especially because it's about an iconic real life crime family. It's about time Canada's gotten a show like this. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 20:35, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

What about Wiseguy? Haha. "Only the toes knows." — Wyliepedia 21:15, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Doesn't look to be Canadian, though, I still need to watch that one. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 23:35, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

@CAWylie: Hey, for the life of me I can't figure out why the short summary isn't appearing on Bad Blood, can you take a look? Thanks. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 15:11, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

 Fixed. The table was transcluded, which, for TV articles, is normally meant for episode list pages and only lists ep numbers, titles, writer/director, dates, production codes (if known), and viewership. Summaries only appear on original table, i.e. list and/or season pages, if they exist. I also removed sublisting formatting, normally only used in such articles. Let me know if you need further assistance; just ask at my talk page. — Wyliepedia 21:47, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Hat tricks table Serie A 2017-2018

Hi, I haven't deleted the hat tricks table, it is still there.RafaelS1979 (talk) 23:16, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

@RafaelS1979: Because I just put it back. Look at your edit, you -860 bytes. Maybe by accident? Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 23:18, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Protection for 2017–18 Juventus F.C. season

I don't know what else to do at this point; there's this IP address user who continually insists on changing Juan Cuadrado's position from midfielder to forward even though that's incorrect. This has been going for weeks now. Italia2006 (talk) 01:06, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

@Italia2006: Yeah I've noticed that, that's totally wrong. I'll see if it can be protected. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 01:47, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

@Italia2006: It was protected for a week, so hopefully they won't start it again afterwards. You can also request pages for protection at WP:RFPP. (By the way thanks for updating the 2016-17 Chievo page). Regards, Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 17:15, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

I noticed this morning, thanks for that. Italia2006 (talk) 02:33, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Issue with the sent off for a second yellow code

Dude I just noticed something is wrong with the sent off for two yellows thing. Look at the Roma or Torino season articles and you'll see what I mean. What is up with that? Italia2006 (talk) 23:30, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

UPDATE: I checked Template:Sent off and it had appeared oddly since someone's edit five hours ago, so I just reverted his edit and everything appears normally again, so w/e. Italia2006 (talk) 23:37, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Ok sounds good. Keep an eye on the template I guess in case they change it back. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 00:36, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Canadian TV ratings

Hello. You asked on my talkpage about Canadian TV ratings. The only site I know of that's "official" (and therefore WP acceptable) is Numeris. However, they only list the top 30 and run about two weeks after the fact. You can ask around at some of the TV projects here for better info. — Wyliepedia 00:09, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Reverts on Mount Vesuvius

Hi, I noticed you reverted two edits on Mount Vesuvius in this edit. Could you indicate what you think is wrong with the edits so that we can maybe find a compromise? 92.64.31.85 (talk) 15:08, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for your message. I noticed there was a little bit of POV and no material was sourced. For example the sentence "It is uncertain on what time scale - if ever - Mount Vesuvius will have another eruption." may not be appropriate. Looking at the edits again, they seem to be decent, so if you'd like to revert with more of a neutral tone and provide a source, that would be the best. Regards, Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 15:53, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

I'll see if I can source things better. WRT the POV issue, what POV do you feel the phrasing is pushing? 92.64.31.85 (talk) 15:59, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Province of Frosinone

Hi! I have noticed you reverted my edits on Province of Frosinone. Actually it's a very popular "term", but it's a non-scientific term (According to the Enciclopedia Italiana "the region has no physical unit, nor does it have its own individuality" ("la regione non ha unità fisica, anzi non ha neppure una propria individualità")... it is a derogatory term (18th century, quite rare at the time) and it was imposed by fascists (1927) for propagandistic reasons (to eradicate local identities and historic culture, in particular for the areas of Sora and Cassino that were not part of the ancient Delegazione apostolica di Frosinone and Papal States) when they created the Province of Frosinone and then it has been used for tourists...

• • Then:
  • here: it would be in Campania;
  • here: it would be Lazio, Southern Abruzzo and Molise;
  • here: it would be in the Province of Latina;
  • here: it would be the Roman periphery (have you watched that movie? 1 and 2);
  • here: it would be in the Province of Frosinone...

(the largest (invented) European region...) only confusion... you won't find a single scientific map or a single historic toponym... (but you will find Monte San Giovanni Campano, because of Campagna)

• • the well-established scientific (geographic and historic) names are:
    • Valle Latina: Province of Frosinone and South of Rome:
      • Giuseppe Ponzi, Osservazioni geologiche fatte lungo la Valle Latina, Roma, 1849
      • Sabrina Pietrobono, La Media Valle Latina: castelli e viabilità in una zona di frontiera, Società degli Archeologi Medievisti Italiani, 2006
      • Sabrina Pietrobono, I monasteri della Media Valle Latina (Frosinone): aspetti topografici e scelte insediative, in Letizia Ermini Pani, Committenza, scelte insediative e organizzazione patrimoniale nel Medioevo, Atti del Convegno di studio, Tergu 15-17 settembre 2006, Centro Italiano di Studi sull'Alto Medioevo, Spoleto, 2007, p. 472 (footnote 4);
      • Antonello Angelucci, La serie miocenica nella media Valle Latina (Frosinone), in "Geologica Romana", V, 1966
      • S. Pracchia, L. Petrassi, F. Cifarelli (a cura di), Elementi minori di un paesaggio archeologico: una lettura dell'Alta Valle Latina, Roma, 1998
      • See also: Latium and Via Latina
    • Campagna: Northern Province of Frosinone:
      • See maps [1]; [2]; [3]; [4].
    • Marittima: Northern Province of Latina
    • Marsica: These 37 comuni in Abruzzo
    • Molise: Provinces of Campobasso and Isernia
    • Terra di Lavoro: Northern Campania, Southern Province of Frosinone (Sora, Cassino), Southern Province of Latina and the area of Venafro
      • High Terra di Lavoro: Southern Province of Frosinone (Sora, Cassino), Southern Province of Latina and the area of Venafro
        • see maps [5]; [6]; [7]; or this picture.

Thanks for your attention! :) Þiudamers (talk) 10:32, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

@Þiudamers: Thank you for your message. Ciociaria deserves a mention as it was the name was adopted by a fascist movement of Frosinone as an ethnic denomination for the province of Frosinone, when it was created in 1927. Also, in the Middle Ages, the region was referred to as Campagna. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 14:39, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Re Maldini

Thanks again for looking into that! That's some good information to have... I can look into adding some sources to the international section! I'll probably have some more time on the weekend to do that. Best regards, Messirulez (talk) 20:47, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

TV ratings

Unfortunately not. Numeris releases the weekly Top 30 publicly, but you have to be a subscriber to see everything else and I'm not sure where else it would be posted besides getting lucky and finding the information in the news. None of the other places I would check for that kind of thing (Digital Forum, Channel Canada and/or Bill Brioux's blog) seem to have recent ratings at all. Bearcat (talk) 16:45, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

I'd give the second (larger) figure. In this day and age, with timeshifting and PVRing and VOD channels and all of that, television networks rely on the "Live+7" numbers much more than they do the number of people who sat down to watch the original broadcast itself. Bearcat (talk) 14:24, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Re: Giovinco Free kicks for TFC

Hi! Yes, from that article I wasn't sure if 13 was including the free kick goal in the playoffs, as it wasn't very clear, as it mentioned that it was his 7th of the season (and he had scored 6 in the regular season, plus the one in the playoffs), but I found some other sources which suggest that he has scored 13 in the regular season: this one states that he has scored 14 since joining TFC (so I'm guessing the 14th is the one in the playoffs), and this one from August said he had scored his 12th MLS free kick, and I think after that he was injured, and then came back and scored the equaliser on the last matchday, which must have been his 13th in the regular season. Thoughts? Best, Messirulez (talk) 20:13, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

@Messirulez: Yeah, those sources, being from MLS looks better than the CBC one. Looks like it is 13 regular season, 14 total. I'll fix that. I also added a "Goals from free kick" section to Major League Soccer records and statistics if you ever find more to add to the list. Regards, Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 22:18, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Hullaballoo Wolfowitz

Greetings. As the title goes, I'm trying to report him for his idiotic deletions of pictures with fair-use rationals. I'm telling you about this because I read a discussion on his Talk involving you and some deletions on other Italian topics, so maybe you could be interested in this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Hullaballoo_Wolfowitz_deletion_spree --Conte di Cavour (talk) 01:12, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

@Conte di Cavour: It was closed before I could say anything, but I don’t think you were WP:CANVASSING because it states appropriate notification includes notifying editors who have taken part in similar discussions, which I have. But I guess your message could’ve been more “neutral”. Anyway, it is a bit annoying that some good images are being removed, which is why it prompted me to leave him a message you saw a while back, but I stopped before we got into an argument because there is no point in going on with users like that. Sometimes you just need to WP:Drop the stick. User:DonCalo had some discussion with him about the removal of these images I was talking about also. See Salvatore Riina history. Looks like the images stayed in the end, but it looks like Hullaballoo is “in the right”. Regards, Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 14:49, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

I suppose you are right all along, there is really no point, but I become infuriated by users that just delete stuff. Cheers. --Conte di Cavour (talk) 15:00, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I know what you mean, I’m more for inclusionism as well, especially when there are fair use rationales that seem reasonable. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 15:07, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Pictures

Hi, I uploaded a few pictures in the articles I created: Gaetano Costa, Ninni Cassarà and Giuseppe Montana. I declared them as my property because I didn't see any other option, but now I'm afraid I've broken some rule. Is it good what I did? And if not, how is the correct way to insert pics that are anyway on public demain? In the Italian wikipedia there is another technic system and I've not much experience in the english one Charlie Foxtrot66 (talk) 21:55, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

@Charlie Foxtrot66: You know, this has never been my wheelhouse, with uploading pictures and how and when to, or when not to use a certain picture. I'm pinging Usernamekiran who will probably have better knowledge in this. Thanks. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 22:18, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping, Vaselineeeeeeee. How are you?
@Charlie Foxtrot66: Unfortunately, its 5:15am here, and i was about to sleep. I have some basic knowledge of copyrights (and copyleft/GNU GPL/FreeBSD), yes. A reverse search of Cassarà's photo gives some results. All of them are in italian though, so I cant be sure about the rights, for now. I will do it tomorrow, first thing related to enwiki. Also, Charlie, dont worry. There is always a way, we just need to find it. —usernamekiran(talk) 23:50, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

PS: Can you provide links to the articles on Italian wikipedia? Maybe we can find something there. —usernamekiran(talk)

I transferred two images from Italian wikipedia to commons, they were in public domain. The third image seems to be a cropped image of an image in public domain. So I just provided a link on the talkpage of that image at commons, the link leads to an image file on Italian wikipedia where information about license is provided. I also replied to Charlie on my talkpage (pinged him there). Regards, —usernamekiran(talk) 20:32, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

@Usernamekiran: Thanks for your help! Regards, Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 20:40, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Re: Moreno

Yes, I just saw that now; thanks for letting me know! Yes, it's frustrating, as it's not that much more detail that I'm adding (and it's impartial as you said), and I didn't say that any of the decisions were wrong, I just said that they were all contentious, as the BBC article even said that the match was controversial and that the penalty was debateable. I don't see the issue; we both expanded on the Grosso penalty incident in an objective manner, neither calling it an outright dive, nor saying that he didn't exaggerate the contact a bit. I might expand the paragraph on the match; thanks for that link! Fingers crossed for tomorrow! Best regards, Messirulez (talk) 01:35, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

BRD “doping”

Please agree at FOOTY.

Thank you.

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:59, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

I've always agreed with that. That's what I first said at the Juventus talk page. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 21:10, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

That's good to hear. :) Please post at FOOTY saying that. That would be a big help to the situation. Cheers. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:18, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

In principle there is no consensus where that paragraph should be reading Talk:Juventus F.C. and WP:FOOTY and Wikipedia does not prohibit anyone from adding POV template where the neutrality and impartiality of content does not exist according to Wikipedia guidelines. As I wrote to Anna, I remind you that this kind of ads serve to improve that article according to these guidelines, it should not be interpreted as a final sentence. At Peejay's insistence, personally I think it should be in the article dedicated to detailing the club's history as in its corresponding version in Italian (that section must cover the most important points and this case has not had a single concrete repercussion for Juventus beyond the mediatic clamor and POV of lovers/haters that does not guarantee the encyclopedic value). Also, the article about the club is over 100 Kb. (exactly 150,015 bytes) for including that. Insisting to include that paragraph in the page about 1996 CL final or about that edition is arbitrary because the whole process was not focused on a specific competition, but about a Juventus doctor's conduct from 1994 to 1998, including all pre-seasons. The neutrality of an article also implies precision in certain terms and as I wrote in Talk:Juventus F.C., this was never officially a "doping" case and both UEFA and Ajax (which never filed a legal action), were fully aware of it. I also consider it excessive to include that claims also inside biographical articles such as Del Piero and Conte if none of club's players were charged in almost 1 decade of trials, but they have only been cited by the accusing side's doctor to "prove" the hypothetical epo use, and therefore, cited in court by the Turin procurator as eyewitnesses. One thing is to discuss a case, another is supporting tendentious editing based in opinions of any interest user. Wikipedia should not be filled with different versions of the same case when the relevant article for adding just the facts is only one.--Dantetheperuvian (talk) 22:37, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

@Dantetheperuvian: I agree with you. It's just if that guy keeps reverting, we're going to need to find some common ground. However, a maintenance template definitely would not be appropriate in a "good article status" article such as Juventus'. And yes, they definitely don't belong in player articles as no one was charged, that is why I removed it from Conte's. The other editor needs to wait for the BRD cycle as Anna said because his additions are in question. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 22:46, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

To maintain that status, the article needs a lot of work (for example, rewriting the historical section - and even its dedicated article - translating it from the articles in it.wiki and updating the financial section), that does not have to do with adding a notice.--Dantetheperuvian (talk) 22:51, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

@Dantetheperuvian: No, it doesn't need a lot of work, a lot of work has already gone into it, that's why it was promoted not too long ago. If you see something wrong with the article, probably the doping parts, remove them boldly and see if they get challenged. The article doesn't need a POV template. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 22:56, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

About this Why should it be maintained in the Del Piero article? I insist, no club's player were formally accused, they were only cited as witnesses and that from the legal point of view amounts to nothing. If someone wants to "argue" about that, that would be added in the article to agree.--Dantetheperuvian (talk) 23:00, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

So remove the doping info boldly. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 23:02, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Do you mean the entire paragraph as in the article of content or just that phrase?--Dantetheperuvian (talk) 23:05, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

"Following his serious injury, Del Piero underwent a muscle strengthening regime in order to adapt to the increasingly more physical and athletic demands of twenty-first century football, which allowed him to compensate for the loss of some of his pace and agility.[68] Due to his dramatic weight gain and physical development during this period, as well as the club's success during the mid to late 90s,[69] Del Piero, along with several other Juventus players and staff members, was claimed of being involved in illegal performance-enhancing drug abuse;[69] after a lengthy investigation, the club's staff members incriminated were eventually cleared of all doping allegations in 2005.[70][71]" Any of this probably. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 23:10, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

All the text?--Dantetheperuvian (talk) 23:12, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

What you think the POV is. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 23:21, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Sorry for "stalking", but Vaselineeeeeeee, I saw your comment on my user page and I looked through the disussion over the Juventus doping allegations between 1995–1998 and responded; I was going to message you about it, but I saw that someone else had already messaged you about this, so I hope you don't mind if I butt in! Personally, I think it could possibly be mentioned in either the Juventus or the History of Juventus pages, but obviously in a very neutral manner, with balanced language and only by stating all of the facts surrounding the case/investigation, and stipulating that Agricola was later acquitted after initially being found guilty; it did attract much attention in the media at the time, until the acquittal, so I do understand why some might think it might be worth mentioning, especially as it went to trial. Although I don't think it is noteworthy enough to be mentioned in most Juventus players' articles or in the Champions League articles of that period, I had put it in Del Piero's article because I had mentioned in the style of play section that he had gained muscle mass in order to adapt to the increasingly physical demands of the game, and that he had to adapt to his playing style, therefore I mentioned that it was because of his significant weight gain that he was singled out amongst other Juventus players amidst the doping accusations, although I thought it was done in a neutral manner at the time, as it mentioned that the club, its staff and all of its players were acquitted of all charges. Hope this is of some use! Best regards, Messirulez (talk) 00:18, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

@Messirulez: No problem at all! As you probably saw at the Juve talk page, or maybe it was at the project page, I thought they raised valid points by mentioning a controversy did exist. But as you said on the talk page, it wasn’t done in a impartial manner, which is something I said needed to be addressed if added. Also It’s not that I didn’t think the part on Del Piero’s page I quoted above should be included, eh. It’s so we don’t need a POV template, but even then I thought it was always a fine addition since it was an impartial addition, as you can see from my edit summary when I removed the POV tag. If Dante wants to challenge it boldly, he can...but yeah on Conte’s not needed. I don’t really mind if it’s at the final CL page, because it’s kind of like the 2002 World Cup controversy eh? So not stated at the 1995-96 CL page, but at the final page like the WC knockout stage page. Again though as long as it’s done impartially. Regards, Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 01:11, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Trillium Cup ref

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Trillium_Cup&diff=811672929&oldid=809250497 uses https://frtr.gov/matrix2/section3/sec3_int.html as the ref, but it's "Section 3 Treatment Perspectives". Hmm. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:42, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: LOL, I must've copied the wrong link, this is right. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 14:21, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewing

Hello, Vaselineeeeeeee. I've seen you editing recently and you seem knowledgeable about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 09:45, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer granted

Hello Vaselineeeeeeee. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

• URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
• Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
• Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
• Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Alex Shih (talk) 17:05, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

Goodnight. I point out that this user has similar editions, mostly here and here to Wim Kostrowicki (same conspiracy theory, same sources, same deformation of the case to support his theory). It would be prudent a global CU request a revision to avoid future problems having edited also in this wiki.--Dantetheperuvian (talk) 03:58, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

@Anna Frodesiak: This seems very likely. Would you be able to look into this please? Thanks. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 04:05, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure how. The edits are in French. The pattern by this editor here at enwp doesn't seem like him, but I could be wrong. If there is evidence, then a CU could be requested. But what evidence is there? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 04:56, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

@Anna Frodesiak: Well, it’s almost the exact same edits, using the same sourced and same language just in French. @Dantetheperuvian: if you can understand French and can put a formal request through, that could be a start. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 04:59, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

My French is so-so. If yours is good enough, please do reopen the sock investigation. If it turns out to be him, we can request a global lock.

Convenience link: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/C.Gesualdo

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:03, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Re: Football Records in Italy

Yes, there is conflicting information on some of these things, I guess because records from the past weren't kept as easily or recorded accurately, which makes it quite frustrating at times...Hopefully we can find some reliable sources to resolve these issues! And yes, fingers crossed for TFC and Juve's Champions League draw! Best regards, Messirulez (talk) 18:47, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Nani - Reply

Hi there fellow wiki-user,

regarding your request, it seems that the infobox is wrong and the storyline is in the right. Born in Cape Verde and raised in Amadora, Lisbon, per these reliable sources (please see here http://espn.uol.com.br/noticia/606967_ele-foi-abandonado-pelos-pais-ao-lado-de-14-irmaos-hoje-brilha-na-eurocopa or here https://www.publico.pt/2016/09/29/desporto/noticia/gelson-martins-da-praia-a-amadora-e-do-sporting-a-seleccao-1745630).

Hopefully i was of help, take care from Portugal --Quite A Character (talk) 19:42, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

@Quite A Character: Thanks for that! I've fixed Nani's page, and also on Portuguese wiki, as Lisbon was stated as well. Regards, Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 20:09, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Quite confusing stuff, indeed. If this is an interview where the man himself says he was born in Portugal (i admit i, being Portuguese, never heard him state X or Y) then i guess it should have some relevance, not quite sure if you agree with me there. A suggestion, if you think it is not enough: maybe e-mail the Portuguese Football Federation for a definitive answer?

Hopefully i was of help, merry holidays back! --Quite A Character (talk) 16:52, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

• Further (hopefully) helping out: have a look at his PFF official profile (please see here http://www.fpf.pt/pt/Jogadores/Nani), they also list him as being born in Amadora. --Quite A Character (talk) 09:28, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

@Quite A Character: Thanks. I think I'm going to change it based off of these probably more official sources to Amadora, to as many wikis as possible. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 14:27, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

MLS Cup articles for GA

Speaking of TFC and the win (congratulations, the Sounders got shut down effectively), would you like to lend me a hand and get MLS Cup 2017 to GA standards? I have already polished MLS Cup 2016 and I think it would be able to easily get promoted to GA once it reaches the top of the review backlog. SounderBruce 22:59, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

@SounderBruce: Thanks. Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. The articles are not too long, and User:Jaguar has been really helpful and reasonable with accepting GA requests in the past from me to avoid that awful backlog. I will be able to help mid next week. Regards, Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 00:19, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

I will be writing up a detailed summary (collated from a few minute-by-minute reports) over the next day or two. After that, we can work on shoring up some of the weaker sections, namely the Venue and Broadcasting, before sending it off to GAN. SounderBruce 04:17, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

@SounderBruce: Do you think there’s a thing else we have to do to the articles for GA? I think they should be good to enter a review, and I could ask Jaguar if he’d be able to take them on once nominated. I know it’s Christmas time so maybe it can wait till after New Year’s. Enjoy the holidays. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 02:02, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Your additions look good. I would try to find a reference that specifically compares the BMO Field capacity at the 2016 final to the 2017 final, as well as identifying the main commentary teams for TSN and UniMas. SounderBruce 02:05, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

@SounderBruce: I added ESPN, TSN and UniMas commentary. I couldn't find an overall MLS source for the table in the 2016 article, so I think just prose is fine. Also, yes, I was looking for a good amount of time for a source that specifically related the 2016 attendance and 2017 attendance with mention of the difference due to the Grey Cup and NHL extra seating, but was unsuccessful. However, I don't think that is a serious issue. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 04:07, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

@SounderBruce: MLS Cup 2017 promoted! Thanks for your help with the article, we've made some good efforts. If you'd like to get the 2016 article to GA, again, just ask Jaguar, he's excellent! Regards, Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 19:49, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Vaselineeeeeeee, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
• Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!

Outreach and Invitations:

• If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: {{subst:NPR invite}}. Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.

New Year New Page Review Drive

• A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
• Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

General project update:

• ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
• The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Question for you

I have been very active on Wikipedia, as you know, but have never published an article from scratch.

I just wrote one but it remains as a Draft; I don't know how to actually Publish it.

 Draft:Fred Jacob (journalist)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Can you provide any advice? Thanks, Peter K Burian (talk) 16:03, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

@Peter K Burian: Hi Peter. I’ve moved it to the article namespace by pressing “more” beside edit history and the move selecting article namespace. I would also recommend adding sources using the proper citation style at WP:CITEWEB. You can also take a look at citing other mediums there. Regards, Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 18:41, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, my friend. I will keep your suggestion in mind for future. All the best, Peter K Burian (talk) 18:49, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

No problem! Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 23:22, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

List of Italian Mafia crime families

04:53, 22 December 2017 (diff | hist) . . (-23)‎ . . List of Italian Mafia crime families‎ (Undid revision 816563228 by 141.131.2.3 (talk) wait)

Wait for what? -- MC 2605:6000:EC16:C000:CD26:1A0F:4253:427A (talk) 05:40, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Wait until the merge discussion ends. Houston crime family shows "Galveston Island mob" is also a name that is used for this family as well, maybe this article can be moved to that name, or we can create a redirect page for "Galveston Island mob" to Houston crime family. But that's if the article doesn't get merged into Sam Maceo. Looking at Sam Maceo's article, from a quick look, I don't think I saw any links to the Houston crime family. That should probably be fixed unless the page gets merged. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 13:51, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, but this doesn't really answer my question. Whether the linked article is going to get moved has nothing to do with what should be in the text of the List of Italian Mafia crime families article. That other discussion can continue regardless. -- MC 2605:6000:EC16:C000:CD26:1A0F:4253:427A (talk) 02:43, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of MLS Cup 2017

The article MLS Cup 2017 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:MLS Cup 2017 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 19:41, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

→

Archive 18