User talk:Govvy/Archive9

hi there I just wanted to ask why you removed my work on the English national football team I am a ferly new editor but I have checked all my sources and feel that it was a good edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:9616:2800:C595:1B6F:BF7D:3814 (talk) 11:37, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

It's policy not to have a gallery of shirts like that, please goto

WP:FOOTBALL and have a browse through the history, type in 'Gallery' in the search feature on the talk page and you will see all the arguments. Govvy (talk

) 12:07, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Was easy to see and fix, was vandalism. Kante4 (talk) 13:11, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

@Kante4: Cheers, I really didn't see what went wrote, I was trying to work out the code but couldn't for some reason. Govvy (talk) 13:14, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

At the bottom there was a player added but the closing }} were missed. Kante4 (talk) 13:17, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks - I've merged them into your sandbox. GiantSnowman 12:47, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the

We also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors on the day before and the day of this TFA. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:12, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Walter Görlitz again removed Spanish club at Marc-André ter Stegen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fcbjuvenil (talk • contribs) 23:37 (UTC)

I removed it as it looked like it had been copied from a club website having words such as 'we' and 'our', therefore it was a copvio. I do not have the knowledge to rewrite what was there, and did not know that an earlier better version had existed. All the best Red Jay (talk) 16:57, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Spurs football

Thank you for quality articles, such as your contributions to History of Tottenham Hotspur F.C., Danny Thomas (footballer, born 1961) and Tottenham Hotspur Stadium, for service from 2005, reverting vandalism and patrolling pages, adding article talk pages, for "if I see something wrong I will correct it", - keen Spurs fan, you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:20, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

I had already nominated it! Now trying to fix as some citation needed tags have been added. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 11:33, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Hey! Just a quick question about Nick Tsaroulla's move to Brentford B. Wouldn't the move have even less relevance to next season's page, given that it occurred this season? Just trying to get my head around how it will look on next season's page...

Cheers! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Supernaut09 (talk • contribs) 00:24, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

@Supernaut09: That note on the Spurs season page is normally if a player is snapped up in a short time period, it has been such a long time period, a whole season till he got signed by Brentford, how do we know he wasn't at a smaller club for a little bit in between that time. I guess you're correct in saying it's this season still, although he won't get any football till next season now! Govvy (talk) 07:29, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Good point about us not knowing if he was at a smaller club. I have scoured the internet and haven't found any evidence of this, though... Checked his social media outlets without luck, too. If you reckon we leave it until next season, I'll go with your advice, as I reckon you're a hell of a lot more experienced at this Wikipedia game than me, but I just can't see in my mind how it will fit onto next season's page. Do you advise that we just let this bit of news go entirely and not address it on the Spurs pages at all? Supernaut09 (talk) 12:15, 18 May 2019

@Supernaut09: I don't think it needs to be noted on the Spurs article, I have an article in my sandbox for him User:Govvy/Nick Tsaroulla if you're interested. Govvy (talk) 16:28, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

@Govvy: That looks brilliant! Thank you for creating that! Supernaut09 (talk) 08:32, 21 May 2019

The article List of celebrities who own wineries and vineyards has been nominated for deletion. You took part in previous discussions about the article at AfD; feel free to follow this discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of celebrities who own wineries and vineyards (3rd nomination). ɱ (talk) 16:55, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Barkeep49 -- Barkeep49 (talk

The article

I am contacting everyone who participated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of minor planets: 500001–501000 to tell you the same discussion is happening again at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meanings of minor planet names: 500001–501000. Dream Focus 12:33, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Have had a go at tweaking the text re Spurs departure. Hope you think it is okay and accommodates use of both sources now. RossRSmith (talk) 11:10, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

@RossRSmith: You got it completely wrong, Tottenham did include Llorente in their released players list to the premier league, hence that primary source. You should read how I had it before carefully, you made it worse and in-factual. The source you added doesn't really add anything and I feel inclined to revert again. I will give you a chance to un-do your edit. Govvy (talk) 15:32, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

My apologies. It does seem I mis-read that PL document. RossRSmith (talk) 09:13, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --Loginnigol (talk) 18:10, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Govvy, the discussion is closed. If you haven't already, though, you should heed my warning in the closure.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:34, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

@Bbb23: Okay, didn't think I really did anything serious, but I thought the guy was trolling, I've seen a pattern like that before from two other users and his edit seemed a bit pointless in it's application. Govvy (talk) 19:59, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

The article

The article Matt Bomer you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Matt Bomer for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Barkeep49 -- Barkeep49 (talk) 18:41, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Govvy. You have new messages at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film#The_One_(2001_film).
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- 109.77.229.35 (talk) 22:33, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

More sockmaster than sock - but there was an older account (very low edit count) involved. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PE65000/Archive. I am waiting to see what EMG has to say - I hope this is a mistake.Icewhiz (talk) 14:16, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

@Icewhiz: Such a shame if it's right, I thought the guy was a good editor. Govvy (talk) 14:33, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

He is. He was TBANed a few months back from immigration for bludgeoning a bit too much - which may have been a trigger. Or perhaps a mistake. Want to see what he has to say.Icewhiz (talk) 14:36, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your support. COYS. Fullrabb (talk) 14:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC)Fullrabb

Hi Govvy! You created a thread called timestamp on watchlist at archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread . Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both talk ) 19:01, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

This has been an issue of some contention in the post, not least because there is no clear, settled view on it. It is applied incredibly inconsistently, some people have runner-up positions included, most do not. A general opinion that was floated the last time this flared up as an issue was that the highest achieved position should be included, but even this is applied inconsistently. Would suggest there is at least some attempt to get consensus on this again... Vaze50 (talk) 13:57, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

This is incredibly frustrating. The Champions League is the biggest club competition in the world and it is entirely logical that we note when a club has won silver medals as runner-ups. Are these same editors going through every Olympian entry and deleting mentions of silver medals?? Including this information is supported by Wikipedia precedent - see, e.g., the entry for Borussia Dortmund, which lists every single runner-up season not just in Europe but domestically, as well. If anything, we should prioritize adding significant information rather than concealing or censoring it, which is what a couple of these editors are insisting upon doing. Furthermore, it is entirely contradictory for Wikipedia to include entries for lucrative and international pre-season tournaments such as the International Champions Cup and the Audi Cup, and to list the winner for each year, but then for one Wikipedia editor to decide, "No, you can't list this information on the Tottenham Hotspur entry!!" More information and less stubborn censorship, please. Realgonerocket88 (talk) 19 August 2019 (UTC)

This is just being consistent with all the articles on major clubs, only major trophies won are given in the main articles (see for example Liverpool F.C., Manchester United F.C.) and minor trophies for Tottenham are given in List of Tottenham Hotspur F.C. records and statistics. Pre-season friendly tournaments are not major competitions. Hzh (talk) 00:12, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

@Vaze50: @Realgonerocket88: Club articles are treated differently to athlete biographies. The current consensus in the Association Football project for club articles is to list trophies won that are run by FIFA, UEFA or the association league of said country. A football club doesn't receive a runner up trophy! As for footballers, there is a slightly different consensus, the current model is to list medals won, that also includes runner up medals. However, for top footballers that have won a lot of trophies and there are only a handful, it's common practice to remove the runner-up medals to stop that section being saturated. As for question over Olympians, editors shouldn't be removing the silver and bronze medals, that's disruptive editing. Govvy (talk) 08:17, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation, but your explanation is incorrect and inconsistent with Wikipedia precedent. Firstly, the section is clearly for "Honors" not "Trophies," so your statement that "A football club doesn't receive a runner up trophy!" is irrelevant. (Similarly, we see, for example, that the entry for the Croatian national team lists both runner-up and third-place finishes in the World Cup, and neither came with trophies!) Furthermore, your statement regarding a current consensus is incorrect, as the entries for such runner ups as Atletico Madrid, Borussia Dortmund, Valenica, Monaco, Olympique de Marseille, FK Patrizan, Borussia Mönchengladbach, Malmö FF, Saint-Étienne, Hamburger SV, FCSB, etc., ALL list Runner-up finishes in the European Cup/Champions League. In fact, some of these entries also list Runner-up finishes in their domestic leagues or cups, as well! Clearly, it is neither consensus nor common practice to remove runners-up finishes from these lists. Finally, as Tottenham just had its first appearance in club history in the CL final, it is even more noteworthy that this be listed! The policy here should be to share significant information, not to indiscriminately or selectively censor it just because a few other clubs haven't listed their runner-up finishes yet. Thank you. User:Realgonerocket88 (talk) 19 August 2019 (UTC)

@Realgonerocket88: A little thing, are you signing your posts correctly, you use four twiddles to sign ~~~~ Secondly, a national team isn't a club, I don't have those other teams on my watchlist. There is a difference to achievements and honours. Getting to a cup final is an achievement not an honour. Receiving a trophy is an honour. Govvy (talk) 14:36, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

@Govvy: I'm afraid you did not address my points, and saying "a cup final is an achievement not an honour" is not just an arbitrary value judgment but, as I have clearly demonstrated, contradictory with more than a DOZEN similar entries association football clubs. Fact: The heading is "Honours," not "Trophies." Are you seriously arguing that winning a silver medal in the world's biggest competition is not an honor? If so, then (1) you will have to explain to UEFA that it is not worth it for them to award silver medals, and (2) you are contradicting MANY other entries, as I have documented for you above. Furthermore, the point about the national team holds true; a Wikipedia editor cannot reasonably claim that a silver medal in the world's biggest club competition is not an "honor" when Wikipedia considers a third place medal in the World Cup - the national team equivalent of the Champions League! - to be a worthy honor. Furthermore, editors cannot claim "trophies only" but then simultaneously delete the trophies won in the ICC and Audi Cups these past two years. So not only are these deletions contradictory to the precedent established by a slew of other entries, the editors are also contradicting each other! Again, these deletions speak toward selective censorship and against consistency and transparency of information. Let's be consistent please. … By the way, I might be confused about the signature format? Actually I copied the identical signature format of the post above me and simply changed the user names as appropriate. I don't see where the four twiddles will go? Realgonerocket88 (talk) 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Goto

WP:FOOTBALL then, they will pretty much repeat what I've already said. But from what I read, you haven't really understood anything I've said, so I not going to say anything else. Govvy (talk

) 17:49, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

) 21:37, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Govvy! You created a thread called How do I check my account security? at archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread . Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both talk ) 19:01, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Sorry

I thought I was being helpful and when I realised I made a mistake I tried to correct it. H.B Desiato (talk) 17:45, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

please keep the discussion to the relevant article. Govvy (talk) 17:46, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi. A few days ago I answered your message on my talk page, and I also added comment on the Honours subject at the

@RossRSmith: Not my fault if others don't reply to you, but for Tottenham all the honours are on List of Tottenham Hotspur F.C. records and statistics, a club wins an honour, players receive an honour for being a runner up, the club does not receive an honour for runner-up. Leagues and Cups have differences for runner-up. I can't put it any more straight forward than that. Govvy (talk) 22:19, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

You can always do what I do (with my assistance with the delete-y bits) - move to mainspace and delete to restore the history in case he becomes notable in the future. GiantSnowman 18:27, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: Okay, looks like you move protected it ages ago. Govvy (talk) 18:57, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

 Done GiantSnowman 19:12, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

FYI: Draft:Troy Parrott#International Career Bogger (talk) 09:19, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

@Bogger: I have a skimmed draft in my own user space of User:Govvy/Troy Parrott, however you haven't explained what you want from me! Govvy (talk) 09:55, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

The position in the examples aren't changing it from noun to verb, it's the context of the rest of the sentence that switches it from a named thing (noun) being recognised as the "host" (noun) to the named thing (noun) being recognised as performing the act of hosting the event as the "hosts" (verb). Per the examples in the football talk page I gave, they are interchangeable in a lot of situations depending on the intent, but there are also situations where first person vs third person become set in rock. Koncorde (talk) 08:40, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

It's not a case of not listening, it's a case of what is being said not being presented in a way that is very clear. The "S" is to do with the third-person singular use of singular or plural nouns of which countries are an example. This BBC World Service article covers it in a basic fashion, as does this which also includes lots of people arguing about it in specific cases, with some examples Pop Quiz #4 and #5 are particularly relevant. Koncorde (talk) 13:46, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Just saying, guys, in all that tidying-up to remove my unwanted and unnecessary inputs, the substantive warning was lost. So for the record, from the History previously, I think this was it, below. Saying No More. Do whatever you like, Govvy. I am out of here. Pings Parthian Shot. >

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three 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.

> Goodbye.124.171.192.102 (talk) 12:00, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

I see no edit warring from yourself so I am clueless as to what this IP address is up to. Iggy (Swan) 14:08, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

@Iggy the Swan: I have no idea who the IP is, it was trolling Kevin McE, most likely a sock IP for someone. Govvy (talk) 18:54, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

I have deleted the background to this from my talk page: dig through the history of my talk page if you wish.

I received a 3RR warning (technically deserved, but I would defend what I had done) from , posted by Cassianto, but not signed. I replied that I thought that failing to sign that was rather uncivil (maybe not my finest Wiki-moment, but), and this IP (obviously an experienced Wiki-er, and therefore engaged here in sockpuppetry) weighed in, falsely, that it was a bot. Wondering why this IP with only one previous post would be aware of my talk page, I pointed out his/her error and the cowardice implicit in using an IP, which resulted in a quite incomprehensible reply, including denial that IP is Cassianto. I deleted the entire thread. Govvy (not sure what brought the activity on my talk page to your attention either) appeared with kind words, and the IP then returned with the repost of the 3RR and this surreal farewell message. I deleted it from my talk page, and an hour later it appeared here, with a slightly adapted text so that it was addressed to Govvy. Weird, certainly not the behavious of somebody with only one post to their history. Kevin McE (talk) 20:14, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

 Done - and FYI @Bogger and Hildreth gazzard:, please stop messing around with page moves/locations etc. If you need a hand just let somebody like me know. GiantSnowman 09:02, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

@Archieman123: - please also stop messing around with this article. GiantSnowman 09:20, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Govvy... no, I hadn't see your comment on WT:WikiProject Biography but glad someone else noticed it was a questionable addition. 🙂 —Joeyconnick (talk) 18:39, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

@Joeyconnick: No probs, you know, I am surprised how big a scope the biography project is that more editors don't bother even monitoring it!! heh. Govvy (talk) 18:58, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:18, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

 Fixed Govvy (talk) 09:41, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

"MUFC" is not only initials but also one of the common names used to refer to the team, at least historically. Thanks. –

A name is any recognisable identifier for a specific entity. "Utd." is not a name for Manchester United because it is not used in that fashion. Ever. –

Jay

19:59, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

I didn't restore that bit. The line says "Man United/Utd", which implies that they can be either "Man United" or "Man Utd". If that's not clear enough, we can change it to "Man United/Man Utd". –

Jay

20:20, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

	Have a Kit Kat
	Hope your fingers get better after I saw the WT:WPF page. Also one administrator has discovered that on this section that you'd started, the one who had has found out the linked user had already used an account before and it got blocked. Iggy (Swan) (What I've been doing to maintain Wikipedia) 21:59, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

@Iggy the Swan: Cheers, I always suspected he was socking but was never quite sure. Govvy (talk) 09:55, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello. I made sure the numbers were correct and dates updated before clicking submit. I am watching the game and would update if any more goals are scored. At the end of the game it's going to be the same edits that are made to these articles. So why can't they be done half an hour earlier? Ae245 (talk) 13:29, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

@

WP:LIVESCORES thanks. Govvy (talk

) 13:57, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Noted. Ae245 (talk) 14:04, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I was going to self-revert anyway actually, as the refs didn't look right there. The figures need a source though, so where should it be placed? Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 23:13, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

@Amakuru: Sorry about that, but that's why we avoid adding ref's in info boxes, that should be with the statistics lower down on the page. Govvy (talk) 23:17, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, there is a career statistics section, but it's also uncited at the moment. Shame, but there we go. Thanks, anyway.  — Amakuru (talk) 23:20, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

@Amakuru: For Spurs apps you can cite {{cite book |first=Phil |last=Soar |title=Tottenham Hotspur The Official Illustrated History 1882–1995 |year=1995 |page=285 |publisher=Hamlyn |isbn=0-600-58706-1}} Not sure about the other clubs, I did place one citation in the reflist pane, probably needs to be moved out. I am going to go watch Match of the Day now. Peace. Govvy (talk) 23:35, 21 December 2019 (UTC)