User talk:Courcelles/Archive 68

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 65 Archive 66 Archive 67 Archive 68 Archive 69 Archive 70 → Archive 75

The Signpost: 28 March 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:40, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Greenlocking TFAs

Hey Courcelles, I believe the practice has always been to not put the greenlock on TFAs even though they are move-protected. I'm guessing this is because it doesn't look good when a bunch of people are looking at a page, but that's just me. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:27, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

db-g6

ACK, thanks :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:29, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Courcelles 11:34, 30 March 2011 (UTC

Suso

I see that you have deleted the jesus fernandez page. He is a football player who plays for liverpool. My question is, why does the page keep getting deleted and why have admins locked the creation of the page. how do i request an admin to actually create this page. I am kinda tired of it being deleted. not that i am personally trying to make the page i am just a fan of liverpool and this player. I want the page to be created and it is hard to happen if the pages keep getting deleted and locked by admins.--HelpMeRhonda213 (talk) 02:32, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

The moment he plays a game for Liverpool, he's notable, under WP:ATHLETE, and the page will be unlocked. Merely being on their reserve squaed does not confer notability upon an individual. Courcelles 02:51, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Thats the thing he has. Suso has not only played on the Reserve team he has scored a number of goals. There are plenty of players on the reserve team who have not play a senior game in the ACTUAL premier league. These players play in the Reserve league. For instance, Raheem Sterling has a content page. He has never played a "Game" for liverpool senior team but has played for the reserve team. Suso has the EXACT same notoriety as players such as Raheem Sterling or Tom Ince who have content pages who have never played a Senior game for any team let alone just liverpool. If what you are saying stands true these players should not have pages because they are equally "not noteable" Do you see what i am saying?--Rhonda (talk) 03:41, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Thomas Ince has played six games for a League One team, which is enough for notability. [1] Looks like Sterling should be sent directly to WP:AFD, there's nothing there that meets the notability bar at this time, same as Fernandez. Playing in a reserve league never grants notability, and the fact that you've found another article that fails notability requirements isn't going to help restoring another such article. Courcelles 03:48, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
I understand what you are saying. But why have a page dedicated to reserve teams if their players are not considered "notable"? How is it then notable to have a content page dedicated to players who are not notable. Almost every club reserves page have these players who have never played a senior game. It just seems silly to even have reserve team content pages if the players and such are considered un-notable.--Rhonda (talk) 03:54, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Also if a player has U18, U19, U20, U21, caps in international matches are those considered notable or does a player have to play for the Senior national team to be considered notable?--Rhonda (talk) 03:56, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
To your first one, an analogy, if I may. The Oort cloud is notable. There's scientific, and even popular, literature about it in any halfway decent library. The billions of pieces that make up the cloud? Not so much, though there are of course rare exceptions, like 90377 Sedna. Literally one-in-a-billion. So Liverpool reserves aren't that numerous! But the principle holds- a broad and large topic like Liverpool's reserve academy can be notable without everyone who has been there being notable. The few that are don't receive their notability through the academy, however. Some like Ince have played a qualifying game elsewhere. Some have gotten one appearance on the main team, which is enough. Some have played on a senior-level national team, which is sufficient- such players are our Sednas in the huge Oort cloud of people who want to make a living playing football. I'll reproduce WP:NFOOTY below, as it fully explains the problem: (Note that "Senior level" is exactly that, U-anything teams are not enough, except for the extremely special case of Football at the Summer Olympics.


Association football (soccer) figures are presumed notable if they meet the following:

  1. Players, managers and referees who have represented their country in any officially sanctioned senior international competition (including the Olympics) are notable as they have achieved the status of participating at the highest level of football. The notability of these is accepted as they would have received significant coverage as outlined above in the general notability criteria.
  2. Players who have appeared, and managers who have managed, in a fully-professional league (as detailed here), will generally be regarded as notable.
Note: A player who signs for a domestic team but has not played in any games is not deemed to have participated in a competition, and is therefore not generally regarded as being notable. Youth players are not notable unless they satisfy one of the statements above, or if they can be shown to meet the wider requirements of WP:GNG.

Courcelles 04:11, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your time and patience. I understand and I am sorry if I have wasted any of your time. Your analogy was also very interesting and informative.--Rhonda (talk) 04:19, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Not wasting my time at all. If I can't explain my deletions, I should never have pressed the button. Courcelles 04:33, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Easter, etc.

Seems like holiday article protections have their own "holiday schedule" within wikipedia. :( ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:35, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, and that's why they don't get protected year round, the vandals only really care about, say, Easter, during Great Lent and Eastertide. I thought about protecting it out to Pentecost, but figured the week of the Ascension should be enough, until 2012.... though feel free to come ask me after the Easter Octave/Divine Mercy Sunday is over, maybe we can try it again then. Courcelles 02:54, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
You could almost automate the process. Review the history to see when vandalism normally starts and stops its annual clustering, and add a few days at each end. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:01, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Ack! Automation! Adminbots! Someone might do it, but not me- I'm no programmer. Considering BAG approved an adminbot to do a barely-necessary update to a single page, anything is possible, but it's not like protecting the major holidays is that much work on the admins in a year, and if ClueBot and the abuse filter get better, it might not even be necessary someday. Courcelles 03:06, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Good point. A more useful exercise might be to figure out which articles get targeted by vandals periodically and apply "pending changes" to them. Assuming that ever gets fully approved. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:09, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion Policy

Noticed you deleted "Matt Gutman" as a national network journalist. He appears on World News - and therefore is seen all over the world including here in the UK. Since I expect wikipedia to have information about international career journalists, I came here to find out more about his work... to find that the page is deleted.

I realise that wikipedia policy is not your fault, but this kind of deletion policy (which could be compared with "he's not interesting to me") is one of the most frustrating aspects of wikipedia. The information that was on that page appears to be permanently lost - with not even the history available. Do you know if that's correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.28.43.36 (talk) 00:51, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Restored as a contested WP:PROD, though someone may pursue a more permanent method of deletion such as WP:AFD. Courcelles 05:47, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Should we really be freely restoring unsourced BLPs? Gigs (talk) 18:01, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
There's absolutely nothing controversial there. In fact, it is about as plain as a BLP can get. I don't really think he's notable, either, so an AFD might be the quickest solution. Courcelles 19:53, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

RE: SPS

Do not get me wrong but this "newbie" get one's own way. S/He used the "the source is in this article" excuse (even when it was not in Slim's son article) to edit war, violate BLPs and V after many messages and for what, for get a page protected. If being apparently new in Wikipedia is enough to violate three rules and not being blocked from editing, let me crate many account for now to do the same in article space. Tbhotch* ۩ ۞ 05:15, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
And what could you have done to alleviate the situation? Some personal words? Fixing, instead of reverting, the edit? Revert, revert, warn, request block is not a good way to handle newcomers who are acting in good faith and run into our brick walls. Courcelles 05:43, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Carlos Slim

HI, C.Fred, myself and a couple of others have spent a lot of time fighting minor vandalism on the Carlos Slim article, usually in short bursts. I also psent a lot of time a month or so ago trying to clean out a fair amount of rubbish & develop the content a bit. The issues arise when his name hits the news, which causes a flurry of activity, almost always to the detriment of the article, eg: changing the figure of his wealth to something even more ridiculous than it already (correctly) is.

The PP you put in place a few hours ago is understandable but it has left the article full of invalid WP:RS queries because the source in dispute is ok per WP:SELFPUB. The general issue regarding his ethnicity and where to put it in the article had already been discussed on the talk page, hence C.Fred's revert a few hours before your intervention. Please can you revert the article to that point in order to remove the non-consensual changes presently showing. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 08:16, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

We don't favour one version over another after an edit war. However, Tbhotch's edit of 03:19 UTC was a massive violation of WP:POINT to add all those tags, so I'll revert that one and that one only. Filling the article with tags was not a good move. If things calm down and there's a consensus forming, we can always lift the protection early. Courcelles 08:42, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
I understand. Thanks very much for reverting the bit that you have. I self-tagged the section that relies on the SPS some weeks ago and do have the intention of returning in an attempt to find third party sources - the problem with the third party stuff is that much of it comes from press releases & so is still SPS by default. We'll work it out eventually, although the chances of things calming down for more than, say, a month are - ahem - slim. I'll revive the search for consensus, yet again. Thanks again. - Sitush (talk) 09:20, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

....for protecting my Archives. Have a good weekend. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 23:54, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

The Acacias

08:17, 18 September 2010 Courcelles (Talk | contribs) deleted "The Acacias" ‎ (Expired PROD, concern was: Non-notable home.)
Can you put a copy of the deleted article at User:Pdfpdf/The Acacias please? Thanks in advance. Pdfpdf (talk) 13:58, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Done. Courcelles 19:57, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Pdfpdf (talk) 06:35, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks a lot for removing that information. Did you get my oversight email or just stumble upon it? Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:56, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

I was in OTRS for something else, and figured that ticket shouldn't wait around. Courcelles 02:22, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Phatboi96

Though the report is technically stale, Phatboi96 is repeatedly adding a claim that the musician Al Cisneros is a drug dealer. 'Dank' and 'nugs' are forms of cannabis, according to the Urban Dictionary. Out of a couple of dozen edits by Phatboi96 it was hard to find any that were not vandalism. Please consider if an indefinite block might be the right outcome. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 05:00, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I've blocked him now. Risker (talk) 06:05, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Good, good. Thanks for the "education" into 2011-slang. May I never need it again ;) Courcelles 06:22, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 April 2011

Sources on Vera Caslavska.

Courcelles,if these sources are ok woth you i will repost the information soon.

She scored 2 perfect scores of 10 in event finals at the 1967 European Championships ( Source :Gymnastics,edited by Peter Tatlow,1979,p.143,ISBN 0 7111 0004 7).

Between 1964-68 Caslavska won 19 individual gold medals in the major championships ( World,European,Olympics)compared with 7 for all Soviet gymnasts during this time. (Source : Illustrated History of Gymnastics,John Goodbody,1982,pages 122-125,ISBN 0 09 143350 9).

She won the 1968 Olympic All-Around title with the highest received score up to that time ( Source : Complete Book of Gymnastics,David Hunn,1978,p.30,ISBN 0706356721).

Her win by 1.4 points remains the largest winning margin in Olympic,World,World Cup or European All-Around Championships for women. ( Sources : International Gymnast magazines,British Gymnast magazines,Illustrated History of Gymnastics,Olympics.org).

Olympics : Gorokhovskaya 0.84 Latynina 0.3 Latynina 0.335 Caslavska 0.566 Caslavska 1.4 Turischeva 0.15 Comaneci 0.6 Davydova 0.075 Retton 0.05 Shushunova 0.025 Gutsu 0.012 Podkopayeva 0.18 Amanar 0.051 Patterson 0.176 Liukin 0.6

World Cup Turischeva 0.6 Filatova 0.5 Filatova 0.3 Zakharova 0.15 Zakharova 0.1 Yurchenko/Bicherova 0.1 Shushunova 0.125 Lysenko 0.013

World Championships Rudiko 0.570 Latynina 1.132 Latynina 0.298 Caslavska 0.201 Turischeva 0.6 Turischeva 0.8 Mukhina 0.15 Kim 0.275 Bicherova 0.325 Yurchenko 0.35 Omelianchik/Shushunova 0.338. Dobre 0.163 Boginskaya 0.038 Zmeskal 0.112 Miller 0.007 Miller 0.038 Podkopayeva 0.118 Khorkina 0.049 Olaru 0.069 Khorkina 0.312 Khorkina 0.188 Memmel 0.001 Ferrari 0.275 Johnson 1.25 Sloan 0.05 Mustafina 1.034.

European Championships Latynina 0.667 Kot 0.66 Latynina 0.3 Bilic 0.101 Caslavska 0.701 Caslavska 0.432 Janz 0.55 Lazakovich/Turischeva 0.55 Turischeva 0.45 Comaneci 0.35 Comaneci 0.35 Comaneci 0.6 Gnauck 0.3 Bicherova 0.05 Shushunova 0.175 Silivas 0.3 Boginskaya 0.013 Boginskaya 0.237 Gutsu 0.077 Gogean 0.169 Podkopayeva 0.099 Khorkina 0.232 Khorkina 0.125 Khorkina 0.05 Kozich 0.05 Debauve 0.024 Ferrari 1.175 Semenova 0.05 Olymfacts (talk) 15:54, 5 April 2011 (UTC) olymfacts.

Those three books are rather old, but there's nothing there that would change with later performances, and they look reliable. Thanks for looking for good sources! Courcelles 08:47, 6 April 2011 (UTC)


WP:ANI#Proposed restrictions

Hi Courcelles. You have closed several ban requests at WP:AN. Would you close a proposed restrictions section at ANI? See WP:ANI#Proposed restrictions and the request at WP:ANI#Requesting closure. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:51, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

If it's not closed when I get online this afternoon, I'll dig into it. Courcelles 08:45, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. I've added a timestamp to the thread so it won't be prematurely archived. Cunard (talk) 22:41, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

A gentle reminder that you've forgotten to close the thread. If you don't have time to do so, I'll try to find another admin to close it. Cunard (talk) 07:26, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll have a look, right now. Courcelles 13:20, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, Cunard, you'll have to find someone else- after an hour's reading, I decided to comment instead of close. Courcelles 14:50, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Ah I didn't realise Cunard had made this request; I'd made a similar request of EdJohnston earlier today. :S Still, I appreciated the comment you made there and mumbled why I usually don't mention blocks explicitly [2]. Ncmvocalist (talk) 18:01, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
No worries, Courcelles. I've asked ErrantX (talk · contribs) to close it. Cunard (talk) 23:25, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

It seems that I've "un-retired" for now.  :) Thanks for your help on the Wendy Starland article re. that new edit review feature; it seems that semi-protection wasn't quite enough to stop the very strange edits to the article. I went ahead and reverted the last change which sliced more than 5K off the article and I left polite word with the user who did so. I figured that if I was going to help out with that article, I'd better do so as an active contributor once more. Thanks again and take care. Regards, --PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:03, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

replied on your talk page, I have no intention of reverting your reversion, but you have engaged in wheel warring. Courcelles 03:20, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for alerting me to that fact. I didn't reactivate my e-mail so I had no way to contact you offsite. To make a long story short, the subject is concerned because of some legal action she's engaged in and asked she asked me to restore the full protection. I did so with no malice or warring intended and I really had no intention of returning to active duty other than as a favor to her. I'd considered a limited return anyway less the vandal-slaying that drove me nuts to begin with, but at a later date. I'll set it right and I hope this settles the matter. I have no intention of overstepping my bounds. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:52, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

  • OK, all set. The user who alerted me to your concern also reminded me of the folks at WP:OTRS. They are far better equipped to handle the situation and it'll keep me from unintentionally wheel warring or other naughty bits. My immediate plans for the article are to get rid of the outdated links and continue to clean it up as my schedule allows in the hopes that it won't have so much content removed. Thanks for the slap on the wrist. Really. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 04:17, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Perfect. Please set the protection at any level you see fit. You'd be doing her and I a favor and no, you didn't come on too strong based on my unfortunate use of the word "vandalism." Many, many thanks for your diligence and no offense taken.

PMDrive1061 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.


To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Courcelles/Archive_68&oldid=1171650520"