Jump to content

User talk:SinisterUnion

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

[edit]

Hello, SinisterUnion, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking 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 help you get started. Happy editing! GiantSnowman 20:40, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GiantSnowman 20:40, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate it @GiantSnowman, thank you very much for the welcome.
I'm focused on improve Wikipedia articles, content, etc., especially about football.

Help request about 2025 FIFA Club World Cup

[edit]

Actually, while browsing through some Wikipedia articles with the aim of helping to improve them, I came across an article (2025 FIFA Club World Cup) that is not in accordance with FIFA. There was already a debate about the issue on the article's talk page, but new facts have emerged in recent months that have practically ended the debate, as I have argued extensively there (Talk:2025 FIFA Club World Cup#c-SinisterUnion-20240829180800-Danoniinho-20240319115200), but without any response. In addition, I tried to discuss the issue on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football, but without success, as only 1 person spoke out. I would like to know what procedure I should adopt, since an important article is clearly in disagreement with the highest football authority. I saw there was an edit war before in relation to the topic, so I don't want to just go there and edit to correct it, but also such important article cannot stay wrong. SinisterUnion (talk) 21:38, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the thing about trying to gain consensus. Sometimes you have to make the change you are proposing before other editors actually speak out about their opposing views. If that's what it takes to get a discussion going, that's still normal Wikipedia behavior. If there's opposition, you and the opposer(s) need to discuss. Sometimes it takes a while. But if nobody opposes your changes, you are done, right? — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 01:07, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right, thank you very much @Jmcgnh. SinisterUnion (talk) 15:38, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Other help request about 2025 FIFA Club World Cup

[edit]

I'm an old Wikipedia user, but never created an account before. In July I decided create an account and more recently I decided to engage myself trying help Wikipedia getting better, help update and improve articles, mainly on sports topics.

Unfortunately, in this attempt to make improvements to sports articles, I came across a situation where an important article, 2025 FIFA Club World Cup is outdated (not to say wrong) and in total disagreement with the highest football authority, FIFA, as well as with important non-primary sources.[1] However, only a couple of users engaged in the debate and we can see that the arguments, unfortunately, are in the sense of avoiding work, such as "...wait for a while. I'll bet that FIFA says something different when the 2024 Copa Libertadores is completed...", doing futurology exercises to avoid making a change (which yes, will require work) that is necessary to adapt/update the article to make it correct.

I don't want to take up too much time from anyone reading this, asking you to read all discussion there, but this reply here explains almost everything: [2]

So, basically we already have the football governing body saying 2025 will be the 1st edition of a new tournament and very important non-primary sources, but a couple of users who are not open to making changes to adapt the article to reality (laziness from what I see in the comments), avoiding the aforementioned correction to be made and this important article keeps incorrect and out of date.

My question is, how to procede in this situation: edit and correct the article according to the international governing body of association football and a lot of important non-primary sources, or wait consensus of 2 people that are preventing the article from being accurately updated and corrected?

Thank you very much for your time, appreciate it. SinisterUnion (talk) 17:58, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. Your use of the help templates is verging on inappropriate in that they are not to be used to ask for help about content. Consensus is a definite standard for Wikipedia and it sometimes takes a while for a consensus to emerge.
On this topic, you seem to be wanting to give extra weight to what 'official' sources say; that's contrary to how Wikipedia generally looks to put independent reporting up front. If you can't find secondary coverage, it could mean that - in a certain sense - the fact is not truly 'noteworthy' and can just as well be left out of the article.
As I said before, as long has you are not engaged in an edit war, you can be bold and make the changes that you think need to be made. There is no requirement to wait forever. But slow-motion edit wars can also be a problem, so make sure you keep the discussion going and perhaps make smaller incremental changes rather than big ones if other editors have expressed disagreement. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 21:55, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, but I gave the weight FIFA deserves as football governing body, also I gave many important secondary coverage examples, from important media, to prove the fact is truly "noteworthy" as everybody can see there.
But thank you very much, that's what I'm going to do so, appreciate it. SinisterUnion (talk) 03:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Posting the same message here. SinisterUnion you need simply to wait. There were other two users in the past convinced about the same thing, insisting on editing the article because it needed to be like that. See history page. As a result, they were blocked from editing. You appear to back up the same evidence because of those sources. Please wait and see for the time being. You edited again the article, soon reverted because wait is needed now, despite those sources. Island92 (talk) 11:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AFD

[edit]

Hello, SinisterUnion,

A recent AFD discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1940–41 Primera Fuerza season, closed with a Redirect closure but you ignored that decision and tried to recreate the article. This is disruptive editing and now you have been warned. If you do this again, you will likely be blocked. Please honor the closure of an AFD discussion and do not edit in violation of the decision.

As it happens though, several editors have come to my User talk page and challenged the closure so I have reverted the decision and the article is back, at least for one more week. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 03:18, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Liz,
I didn't tried to recreate the article, I recreated the article. This is not disturbing at all and your warning was ignored, since the article has come back into existence. So I come to the conclusion that your text is a threat and an attempt to silence a new user, but one who is tough and has arrived to revolutionize.
Let's clarify, I did not participate in any discussion and was not aware of the situation. Second, even if I had been aware, I would have edited it anyway, since I made improvements and added references. So, if an article is deleted, no one can create it again? Come on, especially since I added new information and new sources to it. SinisterUnion (talk) 04:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd leave this message to any misguided editor who ignored the outcome of an AFD closure. Recreating the article when the AFD was closed as a Redirect was disruptive editing and if you do this again (or any editor did this), a block would be the result. That's not a threat, it's an explanation. Looking at your User talk page, I can see that I'm not the only editor who has suggested that your editing style, ignoring Wikipedia policies, could lead to a block. You have received other warnings. Liz Read! Talk! 04:54, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whoever goes to the battlefield trying to revolutionize, making improvements and fighting to make Wikipedia better, will always end up receiving warnings.
As I said, I didn't just recreated the article, I made improvements and added references. So, this situation doesn't apply, nor the warning. Misguided admins that just restores without take a look if improvements were made should receive warning. Let's focus on improve Wikipedia and not waste time trying to demonstrate power. SinisterUnion (talk) 12:11, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You blame someone else for not seeing if there any edits? But at same time, you reverted the redirect, someone not seeing the pointer to the AFD in both the header of the restored article which you deleted before posting. And also not in the edit summary next to where you pressed undo? Assuming good faith, I'd think you just didn't know what it meant or something. But at the same time, you also need to assume good faith. Just move on ... Nfitz (talk) 16:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, let's move forward, make this thing bigger and better every day. I've already forgiven Liz and everything is fine. Keep going, my friend. SinisterUnion (talk) 17:28, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SinisterUnion&oldid=1246224065"