User talk:Sarumio

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Help:Minor edit

Please familiarise yourself with what actually constitutes a minor edit. Changing the foundation date of a football club by a decade is most definitely not a minor edit, particularly when you know it is likely to be controversial. And please...


Hi there. When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:
Edit summary text box

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field - please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:09, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Please switch off the preference which is currently marking all of your edits as minor. It is clear that they are not. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:02, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User page

I would advise you add something to your user page, even if it "Hello". As a red link to your user page makes you look very inexperienced. Thanks, Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk | Contribs 19:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. If Sarumio doesn't want a userpage he doesn't have to have one. It certainly doesn't make him look inexperienced, look at User:Wknight94 (51,546 edits) and User:JzG (45,211 edits). The Rambling Man (talk) 19:18, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A.F.C. Wimbledon

Hi Sarumio, I see you removed the full stops from the A.F.C. in the infobox. Are you going to move the article as well so the full name is correct in the title as well as the infobox? Right now they disagree with each other. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:28, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes I was thinking about that actually - I suppose its probably best. (Ps are you stalking me or something?) Sarumio (talk) 14:31, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
No, I've got the Wimbledon page on my watchlist - along with around 4000 other pages! The Rambling Man (talk) 14:32, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Ah ok, good! Sarumio (talk) 14:38, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Did I miss..

The closure and decision on whether the FC should be removed or not? You've made another lot of edits without consensus. Why can't you just wait? The Rambling Man (talk) 09:14, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry these edits were just reverting what Richard Rundle had done without consensus of his own - before the poll - which I'd assumed had been voted against making the header the same as the article title which is what he had been doing before the discussion took place! Option A (same as article title) and option D (discussing every name on individual talk pages) werent voted for so i'm genuinely confused as to what in Option C can make what i've done (which was just reverting in this case) wrong? Sarumio (talk) 12:13, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Really the point is not to continue to edit this way, whether you're reverting other editors or not, until the discussion has been closed by an uninvolved administrator. Then we will progress from there with how to handle the infoboxes based on what decision has been reached. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:29, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
And incidentally, should option C be chosen, we then have to create our set of rules, and only then should you start rolling out the edits. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:32, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi. As one who voted (for Option C, as it happens), I have to agree strongly with Rambling. Option C is not called "Sarumio's Been Proved Right, So He Can Get Cracking On Edits". It's a guide for clarification on what is going to be acceptable in F.C. edits and what is not. To prejudice the outcome by carrying out a continuation editing campaign is folly. As he says, please wait. Thanks. Ref (chew)(do) 14:51, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
But Sarumio. That isn't even true. Check out this diff which you have edited but Richard Rundle has not. I actually agree with you on the poll, but you're not going about this the right way. And lying doesn't make you any friends either. Peanut4 (talk) 15:02, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I haven't edited Fisher Athletic F.C. either! - fchd (talk) 12:13, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Tsk, tsk, young man. - Dudesleeper / Talk 18:40, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
And you accuse someone else of "stalking" you above? Oh, and where do you get your information that all clubs with A.F.C. (or indeed F.C.) actually have as part of their official names the words spelled out in full, or is it just Original Research? A.F.C. Wimbledon won't be the only ones. (and to pre-empt your next question, I don't use full stops in any club names on my website because research to which ones use them and which ones don't, and those which swap from one to the other over the years on typograhical whims would take time I could better spend on other things) - fchd (talk) 09:27, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

You've reached a new level of sadness now. I suggest you quit before you lose what dignity you have left, if any. - Dudesleeper / Talk 21:52, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't write nasty comments on your user page - can you please stop! Sarumio (talk) 07:36, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Sarumio, would you care to explain why you decided to go ahead and make that mass of edits, and the one last night? And saying "I was reverting x, y, z" is insufficient I'm afraid... The Rambling Man (talk) 11:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
We should probably leave Sarumio to dig his own hole. I think we've wasted enough time on him thus far. I'm removing this talk page from my watchlist for a start. - Dudesleeper / Talk 12:17, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
So in one breath Dudesleeper has a go at me with quite vicious snipes, and in the next breath, turns around and adds FC to the Motherwell article (without anyone saying anything) and you wonder why I feel aggrieved sometimes. Sarumio (talk) 13:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

This is all getting unnecessarily unpleasant. I didn't !vote in the discussion because I don't have a strong view on the subject and am happy to follow whatever consensus is adopted. I accept entirely that while the discussion was ongoing the offending part of the infobox should not have been changed, whether by Sarumio, Dudesleeper, Richard Rundle, or anyone else.

However, I do think it's relevant that the changes Sarumio made on many of the very recent edits (I haven't checked them all) were returning the infobox to its pre-discussion state, either where the infobox had been added to the article relatively recently by Sarumio himself, or where an infobox of long standing (for instance, Lincoln United F.C., Fisher Athletic F.C. and Fleetwood Town F.C.) had never contained F.C. until it was recently added by another editor. In my opinion, Sarumio shouldn't have pre-empted the closure of the discussion, but as it turns out I don't think his recent edits have gone against the spirit of the closing admin's remarks.

Please could any further discussion on this matter be conducted above the personal level, and might we better devote our energies to establishing the general standard per Option C. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 12:39, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I've already asked Mick MacNee to initiate the discussion for determining the "common rules". Until this is resolved it is important that nobody makes further mass edits. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:42, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Motherwell F.C.

Hello Sarumio, thanks for your note. Firstly, I don't have Motherwell F.C. on my watchlist so I am unaware of any changes being made to it. Secondly, by all means ask Dudesleeper what he's doing making changes. I'm not in charge here, you have as much authority as I do to ask him what he's doing. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:01, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

The last thing I want is to talk to Dudesleeper. He's made his feelings quite clear about me above and I've no intention of getting into an argument with him because i'll just be atatcked as usual. So i shall just revert it! Sarumio (talk) 13:19, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Well that's your call. I'd suggest leaving all these FC's well alone until the community have determined a "rule" for the infobox. You wouldn't do yourself any favours getting into an edit war with Dudesleeper, regardless of whether he should have made that edit or not. Take the moral high ground on this and ignore it. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
I see what you're saying and i shall leave this one, but with all due respect its not the moral high ground i was after (though as stated I'll take it this once) - i was after equal treatment. On top of this Motherwell edit, the Fleetwood Town edit etc, Dudesleeper systematically added FC to all 20 premiership infoboxes - yet strangely no one said anything, even when raised by me, it was quickly brushed over by the majority and forgotten about and he certainly doesnt get 5 or 6 people berrating him for it on his talk page. But then when i revert a load of edits to infoboxes (by both Dudesleeper and Richard Rundle adding FC to infobox headers where they had NEVER appeared before), i'm attacked. Neither (none) of us were right to make these edits in truth but only one of us is attacked, slagged off and told to explain his actions. SORT THIS OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sarumio (talk) 13:41, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Yes, well personal attacks in any form are to be discouraged always. I imagine that most people hadn't noticed Dudesleeper's edit, it depends on whether you have that page on your watchlist. I noticed your edits since I have several of them on my own watchlist, which is why I asked you, quite calmly, why you'd done it. I'd also appreciate it if you didn't resort to SHOUTING at me, it won't help. Hopefully Mick and the community can come to an agreement on the rule and you'll then be able to continue editing, in accordance with the new-found consensus, at your leisure. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Edit - you use the word in its singular form (as if you're just referring to the Motherwell edit) - its funny because i couldve sworn i just mentioned 21 other infoboxes being changed! Do you have no Premiership clubs on your watchlist!? Sarumio (talk) 13:57, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Also there is no fundamental concrete rule that words in capitals means shouting - it can also be to just stress a point, not necessarily shouting - if you want to take it as shouting and get all shirty thats your choice. Sarumio (talk) 13:57, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I thought you were complaining about the Motherwell edit. And no, I don't tend to have the bigger clubs on my watchlist, I stick with Championship (and below) teams as it happens. And while you may think there's no "fundamental concrete rule" about shouting in caps, it conveys an aggressive and pushy approach. Which is unnecessary. And far from being shirty, I thought I'd try to discuss this with you calmly to help your cause. But I can see that's a waste of both of our times as well. I'll leave you to it. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Yorkshire Amateur A.F.C.

Can you source the fact that the A.F.C. in Yorkshire Amateur A.F.C. actually stands for Association Football Club? I went through their website and the programmes I own and can find no such proof, therefore I removed it from the article, yet you reverted the infobox, but not the lead sentence of the article. - fchd (talk) 05:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mexborough

If you're going to move an article from one name to another, please a) move it to the right place - the club are now known as "Mexborough Athletic" not "Mexborough Town Athletic", and b) please fix the redirects. I now wish to move it to the correct name, and have dozens of redirects to fiddle about with first to prevent the creation of double-redirects. In consequence, I don't have time to do this now. - fchd (talk) 06:42, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Then the name of the club in the article and Infobox should have said Mexborough Athletic, It said Mexborough Town! Sarumio (talk) 14:49, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Season articles

Thanks for your work updating the club infoboxes just now. However, I should point out to you that in line with the other, higher-level leagues, I made some season articles for the directly sub-Conference leagues this season. You can find them at:

I've also done Football Conference 2007-08 if you edit those articles.

Rather than linking to the 2007-08 in English football page it's now possible to link directly to them for more accuracy, as you will see if you look at the infobox of a Premier League or Football League team. If you don't quite understand what I'm referring to, just check my last edit in the Hitchin Town F.C. article. Of course, I'm not trying to make you make these changes for me, I'll get round to it eventually either way, but if you still have some clubs to do (you seemed to be going through them methodically enough) then I just thought I should let you know for the ones still to do, and if you feel any compulsion to change the ones you've done so far then be my guest (if you can't be bothered, I'll get round to it eventually, as I say).

Just thought I'd let you know. Falastur2 (talk) 16:53, 27 May 2008 (UTC)