User talk:S.Azzopardi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Hi S.Azzopardi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for joining the coolest online encyclopedia I know of. I hope you stick around. You'll probably find it easiest to start with a tutorial of how the wikipedia works, and you can test stuff for yourself in the sandbox. Check out the simplified ruleset. When you're contributing, you'll probably find the manual of style to be helpful, and you'll also want to remember a couple important guidelines.

  1. Write from a neutral point of view
  2. Be bold in editing pages
  3. Use wikiquette.

Those are probably the most important ones, and you can take a look at some others at the policies and guidelines page. You might also be interested in how to write a great article and possibly adding some images to your articles.

Be sure to get involved in the community – you can contact me on my talk page if you have any questions, and you can check out the village pump, where lots of wikipedians hang out and discuss things. If you're looking for something to do, check out the community portal. And whenever you ask a question or post something on a talk page, be sure to sign your name by typing 4 tildes like ~~~~. Always sign the talk page, never the articles.

Again, welcome! It's great to have you. Happy editing! Iswatch20 (talk) 05:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Football (word)

The fact that you call the reverting of your edits vandalism is telling of your mindset. Two other editors along with myself have already reverted your edits to the lead. The opening paragraphs I reverted to weren't even written by me and already make it clear that 42/45 FIFA countries use "football" instead of "soccer". I'll let other editors revert your biased edits, because you seem like an uncompromising individual. LonelyMarble (talk) 22:03, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Please not that three editors have reverted your recent edits to Football (word) I suggest that you discuss you proposed changes before placing warnings on a users talk page. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 12:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Also please read Wikipedia:Three-revert rule if you revert the page more than three times in 24 hours expect to be blocked. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 12:45, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

As per PBS and Lonely Marble. I suggest we use the talk page. There are reasons why we are reverting your edits. It might be an idea if we discussed exactly.GordyB (talk) 12:47, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

If you continue to do this then you will get banned. It's up to you. That four editors have now reverted you should tell you something. In addition, don't try the WP:Blanking thing as it is definitely inappropriate in this situation. Discuss proposed changes on the article talk page or you will likely be banned.GordyB (talk) 12:51, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Very well. I will tell you why I don't like your edits. It's clear agenda pushing e.g. you are using the population of India (5% of whom speak English at a fluent level) as a weapon to imply that soccer=football is the correct or natural interpreation of the word football.
The article's contents are the results of compromise and negotiation between people from very different perspectives. If you don't discuss such proposed changes then you start of edit wars.GordyB (talk) 12:58, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I would strongly suggest that you don't simply reinsert your text. I have been editing Wikipedia for over four years and Phillip Baird Shearer even longer. What you have to bear in mind is that because something is verifiable does not mean it should be included. Much of your text broke other Wikipedia principles such as NPOV.

If you wait a couple of days and then insert your text a section at a time then likelyhood is that most of your text will be accepted.GordyB (talk) 14:29, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

After four years of editing, I don't need to be told what the Wiki protocols are. I know what is and is not accepted practice.
The article is not US-centric as very few Americans have had much input on it. Most of the editors are either English or Australian. I'd rather there wasn't a reference to how many people speak American English but that was Grant's doing and he's an Aussie.
If you want to raise a particular point then I suggest you do so on the talk page. If you simply deleted the reference, it wpould be reverted and you'd be edit warring again.GordyB (talk) 14:45, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Football (word)#Asia and Africa:
There is a difference between the use of football as a word where English is a minority language and the most popular footballing sport in the region. Unlike where English is the common language and the popularity of a code of football and usage can be assumed to go together, this can not be done were English is a minority language as other factors such as to foreign media comes into play.
To give those who consider the Asia and Africa sections important a chance to come up with citations on the use of the word football (and not on the games played), in the countries and regions listed in the sections, I suggest that we leave it two weeks, before deleting text with citations requested. If on deletion of those sentences the resulting stubs do not provide any meaningful information then the whole section or sections should be removed
--Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 08:59, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Warning

Your comment in the history of Football (word) ("remove clear case of WP:BLANKing. User intetionally blanked tons of sources info with no rationale. According to WP:3RR I am able to revert such destruction of work.") is not a justification for a clear violation of the WP:3RR. You have now reverted parts or all of the page many more than three times. If you revert all or in part again I will block you account. However if anyone else reports you for your WP:3R violations to date, your account will almost certainly be blocked by another admin.

I suggest strongly that you engage with other editors on the article's talk page and try to reach an agreement with other editors before you edit the article again. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 13:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Editorial comments like this one "I go away a month and see American troll LonelyMarble acted like a troll and removed all my work?? not happening"[1] are a breach of Wikipedia:Civility. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 09:03, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Flag of Gozo

I noticed you had created the image at Image:Flag of Gozo.png and I was wondering what your source of this flag is? Myself and other vexillologists could not find any reference to any flag for the island, much less any reference to that flag appearing (outside of Wikipedia). Is this a design you created yourself that exists nowhere else? I also noticed it is linked to pages about the Gozo football team, is it perhaps more related to the team than the island? Please enlighten us to more details about the flag, when it was created, who created the flag, the symbolism, who uses it (since the island has no government of its own to legislate the flag as the official flag of the island). Thank you. --Canuckguy (talk) 16:47, 28 March 2008 (UTC)