User talk:Coquidragon

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ╟─TreasuryTag►UK EYES ONLY─╢ 16:45, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion

Message left at talk page: I am trying to create a comprehensive listing of the National Greek umbrella organizations. This NAGC is a council created by regionals and locals orgs that do not meet the criteria for joining the National more established councils, such as NIC, NPC, NPHC, NALFO, etc... I created the NAGC article (after asking the admin who previously deleted) to eliminate the redlink from the main article. I think that the listing of the member orgs should not be in the body of the main article. So, what is the next step? --Coquidragon (talk) 16:57, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Discussion with Admin

What happened? I got the notification about the deletion. I put a hangon petition and added a response about its purpose and the page was deleted without anybody responding to my explanation. Can you at least userfy the page? It was not an orphan page, but part of a project about all the diferent

Just in case, I had already contacted the previous admin that had deleted the original page and he/she told me to go ahead and create the new page as long as I did not violate any copyrights. I was trying to eliminate the redlinks from the original page.--Coquidragon (talk) 00:17, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the page because your reasons for placing the hangon-template did not address the reasons why speedy deletion was proposed - i.e. that the article did not say why the group should be considered important or significant in any way (and from my own Google searches, I couldn't find any such indication as well). I have restored and moved the article, including talk page, to

notable, otherwise it will most likely be deleted again. Regards SoWhy 09:53, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks for restoring it. I also apreciate the feedback. I will do (or at least try to do) as you say.--Coquidragon (talk) 14:11, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fraternity Leadership Association

First Petition

Soumyasch talk page
I have created an article for

Can you userfy for me the old Fraternity Leadership Association? I would like to know what was in the original article so that I can improve on for notability and sourcing.--Coquidragon (talk) 15:19, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Second Petition

SoWhy talk page
I have a favor to ask, that is if you can and if you are willing. I don´t know how this would work. I would really apreciate if you could userfy to me the deleted Fraternity Leadership Association article so that I could improve on its notability and sourcing as well. I left a message at Soumyasch talk page, who was the admin who deleted the page, but there is a message there that says "I am no longer actively editing on Wikipedia, though out of sheer habit, still check my watchlist regularly and sporadically fix a mistake/vandalism or two." Thanks in advance either way.--Coquidragon (talk) 15:27, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem. You can find it at User:Coquidragon/Fraternity Leadership Association. Regards SoWhy 17:44, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much.--Coquidragon (talk) 20:02, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would like to help

I found your copy of the Fraternity Leadership Association page and would like to help if I can, but I'm not having much luck googling for it. Any ideas on how I can help?Naraht (talk) 13:11, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a copy of Baird's Manual? I am currently residing in Spain and have no access to it. If you do, you could see which campus FLA made it to and when did it dissolve? If not, I plan to work on it once I ge back.--Coquidragon (talk) 15:17, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Baird's Manual of American College fraternities hasn't been published since 1991. (It normally went 5-10 years between editions anyway, but it has probably stopped for good). Since the FLA dates from 2002, more or less, that wouldn't be useful. (I actually own a copy of the 1991 version)Naraht (talk) 15:27, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I realized that after posting the message. Still, the help is welcome as to the two questions on campuses and dates. Thanks for your feedback and for your offer to help.--Coquidragon (talk) 17:16, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Campuses? FLA was an organization of National Fraternities, the only question with campuses is which schools actually changed their rules to say "NIC or FLA" in some set of rules rather than NIC.Naraht (talk) 18:39, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand it, besides the original six members, it seems three other organizations (don´t know which ones) could have also joined as I have found websearches that put the number of FLA members at nine (it may be a mistake, but who knows). I have also read at the time that FLA made it to several campuses as local umbrella groups, and that´s besides the constitutions of many IFC´s being ammended to include "members of NIC and FLA". Now, I haven´t look at the info for quite some time, but I plan to do it once I get back.--Coquidragon (talk) 22:51, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FIBA information is wrong

I am coming to your rescue regarding the issue of who won the 1988 Tournament of the Americas Olympic Qualifier in Montevideo, Uruguay. The information at http://archive.fiba.com/pages/eng/fa/event/p/cid/COPSM/sid/3008/_/1988_American_Olympic_Qualifying_Tournament_for_Men/index.html is totally wrong. The information at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Tournament_of_the_Americas is indeed correct and I have the articles and videos to prove it. I have corrected the information contained in article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puerto_Rico_national_basketball_team to reflect this and have added a footnote to support my thesis. Misterfrisky (talk) 17:38, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am not going to make an issue of this and will not change it, even though I would believe FIBA's page over wikipedia data. If FIBA is wrong, let them correct it. I will assume good faith in your source, even though I have no way of double checking it.--Coquidragon (talk) 23:37, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that history should be backed up by proof, so I have "parked" an image of my reference at http://www.merdist.com/SJS060188.jpg You can download and keep for your files. Anytime you need help with our National Team History, please don't hesitate to leave a message. I have many videos and newspaper clippings that I am willing to share. Misterfrisky (talk) 13:57, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sigma Lambda Beta articles

I've proposed a color change on the Template, please respond on the template talk page. (And if you can think on *anyone* else who might have an opinion, please invite, I *promise* not to complain about

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

1. editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see

Really? I deleted your edits because they were unreferenced. You can cite internet pages, but I have read the minutes for all NALFO meetings, and there is nothing in there to support your claims on NAK, ODPhi, SLB or SLG. By the way, citing the first caution message on NPOV, you are the one writing on a competitor; I was actually surprised to see you actually commented in a HATE blog what your are trying to put in Wikipedia:http://greekstand.com/blog/2010/10/the-infamous-hate-blog/comment-page-1/#comments. The 21st and 22nd comments are yours I believe. I don't know what you expected people to hear as it is a recording of a SLB podcast, but it does show intention. Nevertheless, Wikipedia is no HATE blog and unless you can cite documents where it is stated the reason for the orgs leaving NALFO, you should refrain from doing so.--Coquidragon (talk) 12:07, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar awarded

		The Half Barnstar
		For working together on the National Association of Latino Fraternal Organizationsarticle with User:Greektruthmovement (Naraht (talk) 21:15, 22 February 2011 (UTC))[reply]

File:SLB-map.jpg

File:SLB-map.jpg The file needs rationales for both pages it's attached to. We hope (talk) 17:42, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have created a new image "File:SLB-map.gif" and have supplied rationale for it. Please delete "SLB-map.jpg". Thanks in advanced.--Coquidragon (talk) 19:07, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:SLB-map.gif

Thank you for uploading

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Armbrust ^{WrestleMania XXVII} _{Undertaker 19–0} 18:42, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected.--Coquidragon (talk) 19:06, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Augustine quote dispute

Hi Coquidragon. Would you care to drop by

We had an agreement on the NALFO page please do not break it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greektruthmovement (talk • contribs) 15:39, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I made the change based on the new discussion and the new reference. The proposal was in the discussion page for over a week before I made the change. I have changed it back, but I would like for you to comment on the last part of the discussion with respect to the second reference. Thanks in advanced.--Coquidragon (talk) 16:36, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Categories:Former USL Professional Division teams

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. ~~EBE123~~ ^talk_Contribs 14:24, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for alumni at Sigma Lambda Beta

Just a friendly reminder. --Muhandes (talk) 18:35, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I've been traveling. I'll add it back whenever I have sources. Thanks for your patience.--Coquidragon (talk) 01:49, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic religious order

I have a quick question for you. I see that on the page

Thanks for writing. If you read the article, it talks about Religious Orders, as classified in the

Priests of the Sacred Heart are called an order in their webpage. Hope this helps.--Coquidragon (talk) 01:43, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Is there a reason you removed this category from Catholic Church? The only criteria for inclusion in the category is that the organization actively opposes same-sex marriage. It doesn't have to be their sole or primary function (the Mormon Church and Alliance Defense Fund, for example, are also there); the Catholic Church has given a great deal of money (probably more than most other organizations in the category) and made a great deal of effort towards banning same-sex marriage. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:48, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I clearly stated my reason in the summary page, as well, as in a the discussion page of the category. I even asked about my taking it out, with no response from anyone for more than 2 months. If you think my reason is not valid, let´s discuss it at the discussion page for the category or for the Catholic Church. Thanks.--Coquidragon (talk) 00:57, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have either of them on my watchlist; please see also

Wikipedia:Silence means nothing. However, this aside I'm not sure why you're citing the 2 months it's been gone as evidence that people agree with you; before you removed it, it had been there for four months. If you wish to change the criteria for inclusion in the category, surely it is incumbent upon you to achieve consensus, since the current inclusion criterion is active opposition to same-sex marriage and only that. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:16, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Cl%C3%A1sico

Look for Palmarés (honours) and see the references and notes used.

Also see FIFA's official page concerning FC Barcelona and see that they have included the Inter-Cities Fairs Cup and regard it as official. The official page of FC Barcelona also includes it.

Thank you and happy easter.

--Suitcivil133 (talk) 00:28, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When the Wikipedia from other languages are cited, they are usually the same article, not other random articles. The Spanish wikipedia for the said article had nothing alike and there was no article in the Catalan wikipedia. Besides, I'm culé and I agree with you. Still, most article involving European records in English Wikipedia have no mention of Fairs Cup in the official trophies. So editors do have a point. I added it back for it being a mayor competition often cited by FIFA, but if consensus is seek based on other well sourced English articles, I would have to give reason to those opposed to Fairs being counted as European record.--Coquidragon (talk) 02:00, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not always. I have seen that they often differ. The Incer-Cities Fairs Cup is an official trophy since it is recognized by FIFA. It is also recognized by UEFA as the predecessor of the current UEFA Europa League. Also FIFA include the Fairs Cup in Barca's trophy haul and FCB also have it included as an official trophy on their homepage.

I see that you have included the Copa Latina in the new table but is this trophy not unofficial? I see no tables where it is included? And this Amarru sockpuppet who wants to include regional etc. trophies - they are all unofficial. Even RM's own homepage recognize this just as the "Real Madrid records and statistics" thread here on the English Wikipedia.

But I must say you did a good job making the table and changes.

But this Amurru must be stopped. I just got a death warning from him (possibly) under a new IP (this time not hidden)

The IP address 71.139.163.192 wrote the following on my talk page without any reason:

"You a bitch

I hope you die you worthless pathetic fucking cunt."

How do I report such incidents?--Suitcivil133 (talk) 11:32, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First, you should report the incident at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, and I agree. It seems the anonymous user is indeed Amarru.

As for Latin Cup, I noticed that the FIFA pages for several Central European teams included the Mitropa Cup (which was their equivalent to the Latin Cupa). As such, and since it was an European competion organized by 4 FIFA federations, I thought it could be included. As for Fairs, again, I know all that and think it should be included (I did include it, didn't I?). I just think a case could be argue both ways, which will make consensus hard to reach.--Coquidragon (talk) 15:19, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.

Yes you are right. The new user deleting your edits and including regional titles and writing uncorrect numbers of domestic titles for RM seems to be this Amarru as well.

Yes you might be right about that one. So we could as well include it. If I am not mistaken the Latin Cup was also the predecessor of the European Cup and organized by the football federations of France, Italy, Spain and Portugal.--Suitcivil133 (talk) 15:47, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also I was wondering if you could merge the total count of UEFA and FIFA titles into one in the table that display the number of trophies won by Spanish clubs. And also edit the references (just include the Copa Latina in the count)

Because without the Copa Latina it's 78-74 and now when its included it is 80-76 so it's the same difference.

I also guess that the El Clásico thread should be corrected to include the Latin Cup otherwise people will contradict the two pages.

I am still not sure if we should include the Copa Latina also because the Spanish and Catalan Wikipedia versions has not done so. Also the Wikipedia pages about RM and FCB in English do not include the Copa Latina. What do you say about this matter?

--Suitcivil133 (talk) 15:56, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Include in your table Pequeña Copa del Mundo, Copa Iberoamericana and  Copa Presidente  — Precedingunsigned comment added by Amarru (talk • contribs) 18:18, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply] 

Hey kid, you need to wise up. You are vandalizing.

First, learn how wikipedia works. Messages are signed. Messages are written at the end, not in between someone else's message. You don't make changes to a wikipedia article before seeking consensus in the Discussion Page. You respond the messages left at your talk page. You don't insult other users. You back any change you make with sources. If you think something in the article is wrong, you add a tag, you don't delete, etc., etc., etc.

Second, you don't come here to my page and demand nothing. You make a request: "Please," "Can you," "Would you," etc. When you learn some manners and learn how wikipedia works, then I can work with you, but not till then.--Coquidragon (talk) 18:27, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure the LNF is in recess? According to some of the teams' sites, they are playing games in 2012. Fraigcomar schedule

]

May 2012

Your recent editing history at

reverts

on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's

Hi. When you recently edited Liga Nacional de Fútbol de Puerto Rico, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Luis Ortiz (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:00, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stop putting information that you cant prove. I have already falsified the 1990/91 pasillo- barcelona did receive it but received it much earlier from another club as they were already 10 pts ahead before the last 3 4 games. unless you prove pasillo was given by madrid then FOR LA LIGA( pasillos for other cups are not mentioned, if they are to be mentioned, then madrid, valencia etc have received numbers of pasillos, it is unwise to put that here), i will not be able to put that false information you have been putting. i seriously question your knowledge of la liga history. how much do you even know about club football eh? :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.71.197.17 (talk) 04:32, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ignoring your personal attacks (which by itself is reason enough to block your IP), you have removed properly sourced material. If you continue, you'll be blocked from Wikipedia. For your peace of mind, in case you cannot read Spanish, I have added a second source in English, which states that in 1991 Real Madrid did the pasillo for Barcelona. Where is your source that says otherwise? Wikipedia is about sourcing, not about your opinions.--Coquidragon (talk) 18:34, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stop giving me first second idiotic warnings. about your reference! you are faslifying yourself. the source you gave says madrid got the pasillo in 1991 and not barcelona. do you understand spanish? try translating it. it clearly says madrid got twice until 2008 when they got it the third time. its emminent you will be blocked for lying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.71.197.17 (talk) 20:38, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed two records there which has matches from 1914 in which some and/or most include unofficial friendly matches. None of the other tables and their records have unofficial matches counted in the record streaks. Just letting you know.49.244.56.136 (talk) 04:34, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please protect the page for now? Some barca fanatics are creating absolute havoc there putting 100000+ goals and other false records... ridiculous vandalism.49.244.41.154 (talk) 06:42, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]