User talk:Grant.Alpaugh
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Please feel free to leave me a message here and I will respond to it ASAP. Have a good one.
-- Grant.Alpaugh 17:09, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Canadian Articles
In regards to your comment about me feeling ownership over the Canadian Championship you are both correct and incorrect. You are correct in the sense that I feel ownership over it, but you have the reason wrong. I feel ownership due to it being a Canadian competition. You say that I should respect the consensus of the community. Well, the 23 voters who cast a vote of 13 to 10 in favor of WLT does not represent the wiki community, and without representing a proper sampling of the community it is irrelevant. Now, I understand that MLS/ULS articles should be presented the same way that the companies themselves present the stats. But the Canadian Championship is not under the jurisdiction of the MLS or USL and is also the only all Canadian Club competition that is sanctioned by the Canadian Soccer Association. If I understand the logic that led to the WLT 'consensus' for MLS I think I am correct in saying that the reason is because "that's what MLS does". Well, if you look at the CSA website (which is the Association that is overseeing the Canadian Championship) in this link http://www.canadasoccer.com/tourney/FIFA_Clubs/national.asp?sub=6 you will see that they are presenting the data in the W-D-L (or W-T-L format if you prefer). Therefore according to the logic that has the wiki articles for MLS using W-L-T then the Canadian Championship should be using W-D-L. Also, from this we should be able to infer the way that the CSA presents stats, and therefore should be able to see that all articles that involve Canadian soccer that do not fall under the umbrella of MLS or USL should use the W-D-L format. NeilCanada (talk) 01:47, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] USA soccer page
You don't feel that some people might care about who scored against the US in their international matches. I think if you look at the pages for Mexico and Brazil, to name a few, they have this information listed. It may not be of interest to those looking only at the US side, but as information of interest to soccer watchers who are looking for scores, etc of recent games. Jonasturn (talk) 12:20, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Dialog
You know, I think in something you right. For fans not much interesting how much capacity in arenas/stadiums, and I think so.
I think we have not a dialog because my English very bad and minimized, and I think sometimes I have aggression here from this problem. I want tell you something about my adds, but right I can't. And I should like to that people here not only got information, but also to him pleasantly was look pages.
This table not bad, but maybe add more to information, such as team coaches or seasonal points, team colors.
Peace
US - Jimmy Slade (talk) 16:00, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
- Russian language, I'm from Moscow US - Jimmy Slade (talk) 16:52, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Premier League 2008-09
Your edit to this article just now was probably a bad idea. Neither Manchester City nor Blackburn's managerial changes should be listed in that article because all managerial changes relating to those teams took place before 1 July 2008. – PeeJay 21:03, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- Who's yelling? Apologies if it sounded like I was having a go at you, but surely you saw the article's edit history? Myself and Falastur were just making efforts to correct the article, and then your edit made it seem like established editors were condoning the inclusion of the info. Anyway, I apologise again. As long as the info gets removed, I'll be happy =) – PeeJay 21:20, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- PeeJay's about right, though (from your comment in my talk page) I understand your innocence. And I do agree that you are right that Scolari's stuff should be in the article - if you check the edit history, I was leaving that bit in :) And I support your rewording, though I'd note to you that the 07-08 article has a very similar idea to you but with different wording (see the buying of Steve Bruce's rights) so maybe you'd want to follow that edit for conformity?
- And trust me, if there's any sudden flashpoint between you two - we weren't trying to get at you. Your edit was just mistimed, it came in the middle of an...incident...we were dealing with (albeit not very well, I guess) and it seems us trying to point out the problem to you was misinterpreted. We promise there's no hard feelings, just a misunderstanding. Falastur2 (talk) 21:24, 11 June 2008 (UTC)