User talk:Stew jones

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A tag has been placed on Stewart Jones, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company or website, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable. If you can indicate why Stewart Jones is really notable, I advise you to edit the article promptly, and also put a note on Talk:Stewart Jones. An admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles. You might also want to read our general biography criteria. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that admins should wait a while for you to assert his/her/their notability, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and then immediately add such an assertion. It is also a very good idea to add citations from reliable sources to ensure that your article will be verifiable. -- Malpertuis 19:18, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] License tagging for Image:Will stannage.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Will stannage.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Paul hathaway.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Paul hathaway.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:08, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adding flags

I'm not sure about this new thing with flags in infoboxes. Although the flags just denote the birthplace, it does tend to stick out and appear as a claim of nationality. WP footballer articles already see a large amount of nationalism-related vandalism - nationalities being changed by partisans of one side or another - so I'm not sure about this. Bill Oaf 00:20, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lucas Neill

Just so you know, Lucas Neill hasn't completed his move to West Ham United yet. Please wait till it is confirmed he is. -- Mattythewhite 19:13, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Do you ever get tired of being wrong? Stew jones 21:09, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
I know this was a long time ago, but excuse me? Mattythewhite 15:17, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More on adding flags to infoboxes

Hi, I've reverted the edits you made to Mark Cooper as the flags by the clubs put's the box totally out of sync (on explorer anyway). Can I suggest that you don't add these flags? WikiGull 12:16, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Well does it really matter what you suggest your going to go ahead and remove them anyway so who gives a fuck what i think me old sausageStew jones 21:10, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Don't really think there was any need for that. Fair enough if you didn't know that it was screwing up the infoboxes, I thought I'd point it out and corrected them for you. No need to get all insulting about it. WikiGull 13:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. You may share your thoughts on the matter at this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page.


[edit] Etienne Barbara

I will not discuss if the article was fairly or not under deletion, I will assume that you have the right that it is notable article. However your action to remove it from deletion was considered vandalism. The note was writing Please improve the article if possible, but the article must not be blanked, and this notice must not be removed, until the discussion is closed. For more information, particularly on merging or moving the article during the discussion, read the guide to deletion. So you should have respect as rules and since you are not an administrator and 5 days deadline didn't pass, your action was considered vandalism and I have already said that to administrator. KRBN 13:49, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Do not remove AFD notices

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Etienne Barbara. The notices and comments are needed to establish community consensus about the status of an article, and removing them is considered vandalism. If you oppose the deletion of an article, you may comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. — ERcheck (talk) 11:21, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Reviewing the afd discussion, it is likely that this article will be kept. However, the discussion has not yet been officially closed. Please do not delete the afd notice until that time; also, do not add the deletion closed notice to the talk page until that time. As a matter of process, I restored that afd tag; and since I was approached by the nominator concerning the process, I'm recusing myself from speedy closing the nomination. — ERcheck (talk) 11:29, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#Regarding notability of Football (soccer) players

Hi, seeing you have been involved in previous Afd debates on the subject I invite you to contribute to this discussion to clarify certain issues about football player notability. I think clearer guidelines are needed to avoid repeated inappropriate nominations for deletion and time consuming discussions. Cheers! StephP 20:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] George Lawrence (footballer)

May be deleted. `'юзырь:mikka 05:45, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

What a joke, this player has played league football all his career and some clown has now deleted it off, what kind of rules has this been deleted under then? "May be deleted" seems a bit of a poor excuse to me personally, fancy giving me some information as to why this has been deleted then guys? Stew jones 17:07, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

If you click the redlink, you should be able to view the deletion log, which shows the admin who deleted the page and the deletion summary, in this case "A7"--which is explained at WP:CSD#A7. Hope that helps. NickelShoe (Talk) 00:52, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trevor Templeman

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Trevor Templeman, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. NickelShoe (Talk) 00:50, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deleted

The article in question was deleted by consensus and recreated by you, breaking WP:CSD#G4. The content of the article is not in question, but the policy involved is. ck lostsword•T•C 01:55, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:JamiePace.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:JamiePace.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 23:56, 7 August 2007 (UTC)


A tag has been placed on Anthony Robinson (footballer), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

non-notable, has never made the requisite appearances in the Football League under notability guidelines for football players

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Ref (chew)(do) 23:07, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Seasons format

Please could you stop changing the correct format of football seasons to the incorrect format. The standard for English football articles is to include the endash (as per WP:DASH), and to link it to the article for that season (e.g. 2007–08). Cheers. --Jameboy 21:55, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summaries

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thank you. robwingfield «T•C» 20:58, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ludovic Quistin

Whoever deleted him before was wrong to do so, but hiding him won't help - the thing to do is be vigilant; if a speedy tag is added, contested it, if he is prodded, remove it, and if it goes to AfD, WP:FOOTY should see him survive. If he does get deleted, WP:DRV can get him back. ArtVandelay13 21:03, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok cheers if I do see anyone put a deletion tag on this I will let you know so we can contest it Stew jones 21:05, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Having looked into it, I see he was deleted a few months ago, before he was an international, and at that time he won't have passed WP:BIO. Now he does, so there should be no danger of him being deleted. ArtVandelay13 21:06, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Well in all honesty, we did make his profile before he was an international and fair enough it was deleted fairly quickly, but after he did get his call up and his first cap we made him again, but again he was deleted, but like you say we will need to see what happens and wait to see if anyone does fancy disagreeing again Stew jones 21:09, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Please stop adding flags back into the infobox for this article. It's bad practise to do so as the images distort the infobox for many users. See WP:FLAGCRUFT. If you check Template talk:Infobox Football biography#Flags you'll see that there is no consensus for the introduction of flags to this infobox, so discuss there first before continuing. robwingfield «T•C» 21:39, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Just a quick question, who are you? Me and my collague made this article, took time getting all the information etc and have done it the same as every other profile we have made and I believe that you have no place to come here giving me the 3rd degree on how to make these articles, many have flags included and the no free image picture, so leave the article to me and my collague Stew jones 17:02, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Please do not assume ownership of articles such as Ludovic Quistin. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you. robwingfield «T•C» 22:08, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Oi what right have you got to delete a perfectly good article??? this is a disgrace!!! Stew jones 23:15, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I've not deleted anything. I don't have that ability. robwingfield «T•C» 11:23, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
I've added this article to Deletion Review: Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_October_2#Ludovic_Quistin. You might want to add your thoughts. ArtVandelay13 15:44, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Again, please stop altering the formatting of this article away from the Manual of Style. If you disagree with the MoS, then discuss there, but unilaterally changing articles is not the way to go about it. robwingfield «T•C» 23:00, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry I will continue to undo your useless changes, I have looked at the Manual of Style, and then I have looked at many other articles of footballers profiles and I will continue to make them as this one has made. Stew jones 23:04, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cameron Belford

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Cameron Belford, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. robwingfield «T•C» 01:59, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Cameron Belford

An article that you have been involved in editing, Cameron Belford, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cameron Belford. Thank you. robwingfield «T•C» 23:10, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Ludovic Quistin. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. robwingfield «T•C» 18:00, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked for 6 hours

You have been blocked from editing for a short time in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule . Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

Stifle (talk) 21:14, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] George Lawrence (footballer)

You may care to note that I have re-created the article that you originally created and was for some obscure reason speedily deleted. At present the article is at User:Daemonic Kangaroo:George Lawrence (footballer) but I will re-name it when I have filled in his biography. Happy editing. --Daemonic Kangaroo 06:11, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Attitude

You need to work on your attitude, pal. Your smug, snide remarks will earn you no favours around here. - PeeJay 23:01, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Listen son I don't have any problem with my attitude, but I lose my cool when people turn up changing my work and deleting perfectly good articles that I have taken the time to put together Stew jones 11:26, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Please to not threaten Dancarney, or any user, about what articles they can and can not edit. Mattythewhite 13:09, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
I'll add them back if you want. My revert was mostly due to the removal of the 'as of..' and reference. Mattythewhite 13:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I am not threatening anyone but why when I do something does everyone turn up and start taking things off that I have done, I really can't understand it Stew jones 13:11, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Well in all honesty I don't see what problem they pose, thats why it winds me up Stew jones 13:14, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Quick question totally off the subject, there is an article on Bury goalkeeper Cameron Belford who to date hasn't played a league game, but plays for a league team, they also have another player called Ben Leonard who is in exactly the same situation, but his article was deleted, how can we get it to be reinstated? Stew jones 13:17, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Really, Belford should be deleted as he hasn't played a game in a professional league, going by WP:BIO. Mattythewhite 13:24, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah but the talk went on for ages and then it was decided that the article should remain, which if this is the case so should Ben Leonard. Stew jones 13:48, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Manual of Style

Please do not use styles that are unusual in articles, as you did to Ludovic Quistin. There is a Manual of Style that should be followed. Thank you. robwingfield «T•C» 21:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Breath a sigh of Relief

You'll be glad to hear Mattythewhite has finally finished ripping up your hard work, and has now moved on to ripping up my hard work and trying to delete my articles on the Hinckley United page. Honestly, I swear some of the people that appoint themselves Wikiheroes have never been out of a Premiership ground. It's like talking to a Little Britain character and every reply is Wiki says No! Can you believe he's even trying to rip up the Matt Gadsby section of the article? I know it's not really your problem, but I thought I'd just rant to someone who knows what it feels like to be patronised by the Wikielect and their decisions over what is and isn't allowed on a website created and designed to provide never ending resource of information. Apparently it does have an end, it is ended by the word notability... Rant over DJhinckley (talk) 19:58, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I totally agree with you, I have noticed how much hard work you have spent updating the Hinckley United page, it really pisses me off too, I swear some of these people really have nothing better to do. Stew jones (talk) 20:41, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
And I don't do hard work here two? Four GA's, one FA and four FL's, and you have the nerve to say I don't "have anything better to do"? Good grief. Thank god I don't do all of this work for you people. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:45, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Put it like this, you do the same as everyone else you add valuable information but I really can't understand the concept of you prowling wikipedia and looking for work to delete off, if anything I would believe that the more information the better, surely. Stew jones (talk) 20:52, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

It's a bit of a bitch, isn't it, articles being deleted and stuff. Quite a depressing side of Wikipedia really. There needs to be a cut-off point somewhere with footballers, and it's horrible really where it is and the reasoning behind it. Mattythewhite (talk) 21:02, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Well I really think that players who score important goals in FA Cup ties that knock out or draw with League teams deserve a mention Neil Cartwright, Kyle Storer who scored the winning goal for Tamworth against Bournemouth and scored in a live 3rd round FA Cup tie against Norwich City which was live on BBC 1 and Matt Tubbs at Salisbury City scored in both ties against Nottingham Forest and that was also seen live across the country on BBC, but then they say these players ain't notable? Stew jones (talk) 21:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Firstly, you shouldn't really think of people as "they". We're all in this together, as a whole project, even though at times everyone gets that feeling they're on their own. Anyway, you should probably have a look at this, where new criteria is being proposed. Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 21:50, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AFD

I have reverted your comment to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maltese Third Division. As the text clearly states, please do not add comment once the discussion has been archived. Also, try to be civil please. Any problems, just ask. Thanks. Woodym555 (talk) 00:33, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:MqabbaFC.gif

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:MqabbaFC.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 19:35, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Can you explain what you mean with this as I don't understand what I have to do Stew jones (talk) 19:38, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I've added the bits the unthinking robot wants. You don't really expect them to explain to you what they want? They'll just delete it until you guess the right format! ;) Anyway, what I've added is what they're after. DJhinckley (talk) 00:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] February 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, you may not know that Wikipedia has a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Using different styles throughout the encyclopedia, as you did to Nick Wright (footballer born 1987), makes it harder to read. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. robwingfield «T•C» 07:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Cameron Belford

I have nominated Cameron Belford, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cameron Belford (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. robwingfield «T•C» 17:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Malta.png

Thank you for uploading Image:Malta.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 15:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits on Image:Said, Brian.jpg

I've reverted your edits on this picture, since removing the whole tag (as explained on the tag itself) is not the correct way to deal with it, but merely an action which is against our policy. If you think the picture can be accepted as fair use please explain us why. Keep in mind non-free pictures of living people fail the first non-free content criteria (as a free equivalent can be reasonably found). Thank you. --Angelo (talk) 21:21, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Bolehall swifts.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bolehall swifts.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --21:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)