User talk:Luis7M

Hi there. Thanks for adding the career statistics table at Herbert Potts. Going forward, please use the standard table layout as outlined at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Players. It is the result of past discussions of the community of football editors at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football.

I've fixed the issues at Herbert Potts in this change. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 18:00, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

I read his article about the international goals and saw the notes explaining the 73 goals instead of 75, but I think the article with the most international goals should, for now, mention 75 for consistency reasons with the sources, including the general source.

In addition, that WP article has a secondary ranking (always had), which is why he is the first one mentioned from the players of the 12th position, which secondary ranking is that the player who achieved the number earlier (i.e. in fewer matches) is mentioned before in case of a tie.

Kind regards,

Lorry Gundersen (talk) 16:31, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In 1894 Taça D. Carlos I, there's a reference to Tovar 2011, but the full citation is never specified. Could you provide it? Thanks. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:14, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That was Clenixon's doing, not me. But thanks for the warning, I will remove it immediately since there are other references who cover that information. Thanks! Barr Theo (talk) 00:20, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! View history which is located right above the article --> Fix dead links. Kind regards, Lorry Gundersen (talk) 19:11, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly the bot doing these archives isn't working right now. A bug report has been made. I will wait for that to be fixed... Barr Theo (talk) 23:23, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is that the subject of your article is not the primary subject. Most likely, there is no primary subject. So once you create your article, a hatnote on both pages would suffice. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 09:51, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see... So I should ada said hatnote in Henry William Brown the ace and Henry W. Brown the footballer and that's it?

I want to stress the fact that EVERY link to Henry W. Brown is related to the footballer. There is not a single link to Henry W. Brown that is related to the ace. I made sure of that.

Thank you for trying to find a way.

PS: Do you know know how to archive sources/references? Barr Theo (talk) 14:14, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, its true. Barr Theo and Clenixon are in fact the same person... The reason that led me to use multiple accounts was purely aesthetic. Basically, my main account (Clenixon) was for the big edits (usually over 5,000 bytes) while this one was for the smaller ones. I have never used multiple accounts to deceive or mislead other editors, disrupt discussions, distort consensus, avoid sanctions, evade blocks, or otherwise violate community standards and policies. With this said, I have logged out multiple times to make edits as an IP address, and for that there is no excuse.

If my actions are deemed excusable and if you judge me whorthy of a second chance, I shall renounce all my claims on Clenixon (leave it blocked) and never again use IP addresses, and take upon Barr Theo as my only account. If necessary, I can also list in each page the existence of the other account with an explanation of their purpose.

On the other hand, if my actions are deemed too serious and vile, and if my accounts remain forever blocked, I will also understand.

Since this is the first time I am going through this, I am unware of the proceedings. So I am deeply scared about what might happen to my contributions. Everything I have done, I did it in good faith, I promise. I always searched and cited reliable sources in every article and I have always done it with my own words in order to respect copyright rules, sept for two or three occasional "fevers of laziness". My work surely does not deserve complete extermination and anihilation. That is what I fear the most...

What should my next move be? I hope you can guide me through this. Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 16:00, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi. I had noticed your block a few days back, but I'm only writing now. Honestly I'm not surprised. I don't think that your reasoning above is a legitimate reason to use two different accounts, especially considering that you didn't disclose it. However, I do believe that it's sad; apart from a few isolated copyvio issues, your contributions have been really good when it comes to Spanish football. Really, those were super interesting and well written in many cases—I patrolled quite a few of them, you know. I'm not sure what Bbb23 thinks for it, but I do think that you deserve a second chance, with a one-account restriction that is. If you wish, you can follow the instructions on the template and request an unblock with {{unblock|reason=}}. Oh and, the archive tool is back since a few days, the pages you mentioned in November on my talk have been archived. ~Styyx^Talk? 14:43, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Hello Styyx. Do you know how much time does it take for an unblock request to be reviewed? Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 22:30, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Varies a lot, usually within a few days, but it may take longer. ~Styyx^Talk? 11:18, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to echo the sentiment of the comments made by User:Styyx above; generally the edits have been constructive, well-intentioned and legitimate and the interactions have been courteous, nothing that would come close to incurring a ban in those respects. I really can't think of a reason for you to muck about with multiple accounts in that way, maybe you didn't realise how much that is frowned upon, but why do it anyway? I would like to reassure you that your contributions will not be erased - for one thing, you don't own them, they are now the property of Wikipedia. The disadvantage you will have, besides not being able to contribute more at present, is that if any of your additions get challenged and nominated for deletion in the coming months (which is possible, some of this is pretty niche stuff within the "amateur semi-organised gentlemen's era" of Spanish football - it's interesting to me and a few others, but not everyone will consider the teams and players independently notable even with all the time that people, mainly yourself, have taken on creating the articles), you won't be able to challenge it personally, nor make improvements which could prevent its deletion. And editors may take a harsher judgement on borderline stuff because it it came from a banned user (or an IP liked to them). But there will be no blanket 'banned user=all content deleted' operation. Hope to see you back some time if it still interests you. Crowsus (talk) 04:54, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser data shows no evidence of recent sockpuppetry or block evasion. --Yamla (talk) 15:32, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Louis Østrup. User:BeanieFan11, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Nice article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|BeanieFan11}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:26, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Barr Theo. I found two articles (Kent Carlsson and Johan Sjögren) you contributed to recently where you gave the wrong language code for the references. While the top-level domain for Swedish websites is .se, the code for the Swedish language is actually sv. The code se refers to the Northern Sámi language. I encourage you to excercise some more caution when it comes to language codes in the future (I personally just write out the full name of the language so stuff like this doesn't happen). Thanks. ArcticSeeress (talk) 04:55, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Don't do too much on Serena Williams as I have it in my sandbox for a complete re-write. I've already removed all the refs from the lead section as they are never supposed to have refs to begin with. Fyunck(click) (talk) 01:20, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

as they are never supposed to have refs to begin with Not exactly true. See MOS:LEADCITE. Robby.is.on (talk) 01:37, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We do our best to avoid them would be better. But we also have to make sure it is covered with sourcing in the main body. And there are also circumstances where it can't be avoided. If there is a source in the lead it's no biggie and might be needed... if there are five we didn't do a good job. Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you would be thinking to create an article for List of footballers who achieved headed goal records, instead of trying to include so many at the hat-tricks list. A listicle for headers would also open the scope of achievements you could include. Kingsif (talk) 01:07, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Alfonso Almasqué. Bastun, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hi Barr Theo, nice work on your new article. I would suggest adding it to appropriate Wikiprojects.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Bastun}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 13:02, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Julius Müller (footballer). BeanieFan11, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

An excellent article. Thank you for your contributions!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|BeanieFan11}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:25, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Charles Hereford has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The only substantial source is a (rather speculative) blog, not a reliable source.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fram (talk) 10:50, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, can you help me create a template with all editions of Campeonato Regional Centro, and after I will make a page whith every edition. Thank you!

Thank you for the reply and advices! I read your Wipedia news articles and that`s why I asked you to create the Campeonato Regional Centro. Thank you for helping! I have to wait for a few days before I create my first article. But by then you might help to add colors to Campeonato Regional Centro List of winners.

You can also help to create Iberia FC and Internacional FC to complete the teams from the competition.

Kind regards, Help.Football.History (talk) 21:00, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been creating articles massively, sometimes several in less than one minute. Is there an explanation for that? Please disclose if you are using a bot or another automated or semi-automated program to create these articles for you. Thanks. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 02:18, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please reply, are you using a bot or something to create these articles? The editing time (often several per minutes, and always at :59 or :00) seems a bit unnatural. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:17, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 1927–28 Spanish Football League, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 00:14, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. A page you recently created, 1927–28 Spanish Football League, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for new pages, so it has been moved to where you can continue to work on it. Please consider using the Article Wizard or the Articles for Creation procedure. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read "Your first article". You may also want to read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. Not ready for mainspace, entire sections not written in English, 20+ citation errors, 23 Template:Confirmado?? errors, 17 link=|20px errors, needs work. Isaidnoway (talk) 06:23, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 01:07, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please log in so we can confirm you made the above request. I don't see where someone said you were a "criminal"; Wikipedia is not a government with legal authority over you. You won't be unblocked just to accommodate your need to be particular with when you click Publish. 331dot (talk) 15:27, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll also note that it wasn't just the page creations and timing, which absolutely made it look automated. The lack of responsiveness is also a major factor that would need to change. Chaotic Enby asked you two weeks ago about the unnatural patterns of these edits. You chose to ignore the questions, and instead continue your "insane streak of creations", as you put it. That gave even more of an impression that this account was being run by a bot rather than a human. Creating lots of pages isn't necessarily a problem (though creating tons of articles that nobody is watching/maintaining can be a magnet for vandalism, especially articles about living people). I haven't evaluated these articles for issues and I'll accept on good faith that they're okay, but when a reasonable question about your editing is raised there's an expectation that you explain what you're doing. How are you choosing the articles and where is the content coming from? I can see they're alphabetical, and presumably translated from something but there's no indication of what this project is about. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 15:48, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I know that I should have answered, but I really didn't wanna break my streak nor use IP addresses due to my previous problems with multi-accounts.

Regarding your question, well... most of my articles ("my project") are about individuals who are somehow involved with the Spanish football at the turn of the century (1890–1930), such as players (Manuel del Castillo), presidents (Manuel de la Sota), patrons (Manuel Rodríguez Arzuaga), and even stadium architects (Manuel María Smith). Then I organize them through alphabetics or names, make up a schedule, and follow through it no matter what. I always try to use as many references as I can find and look up for their pages in foreign wikis as a blueprint.

My current schedule ends on 1 April and I am looking forward for a particularly grand finale in March with a couple of José Marías (Abalo and Tallada for example), some of which are already created and ready to go.

Now that I have been forced to end my "insane streak of creations", I hope that you could at least allow me to finish up the month of March in style and unblock me before 23:58. It would mean a lot to me. Keeping up with this schedule required a lot of determintion, perseverance and sacrifices, and I do not want to miss it when I am THIS close to complete it (“Man Plans, and God Laughs”). Thank you for your consideration.

You guys are probably wondering why I put myself through such stress, but this is just how I work. All you need to worry about is the quality of my pages and I can assure that they are sourced, neutral, and very complete.

Sorry again for using an IP address. Kind regards.Barr Theo (talk) 16:59, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can respect that people have patterns they like to stick to, everybody gets a sense of satisfaction editing Wikipedia in their own way. I don't really have a problem with it, now that we've had an explanation. Before I agree to unblocking, I just have one more question: where is the text for these articles coming from? Are you writing original text, pulling it from the sources, or translating it from other language Wikipedias? The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 18:04, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All of it. I pull a line from here, other from there, put my own touch to it, mixed it all together and boom... We have a paragraph (like a nice cook); and then I repeat the same recipe until I'm done. So no, I am not copywriting if that's your worry.

Once again, thank you for your consideration. Truly! And yes, I am very satisfied and proud of what I have done in March thus far.

Coincinde or not, this miserdustanding forced me to make two "non-creation" edits, so I guess that's a pair. I will publish six José Marías at :59s of today, and you are welcome to review them if you want.

Kind regards (waiting for 18:59). Barr Theo (talk) 18:59, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(passing-by user) If you are including translated content from other Wikis, then you are required to identify where you translated it from: WP:TFOLWP.

– 2804:F14:8093:5F01:91C5:7125:1875:DAC1 (talk) 22:23, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When you created this article – Draft:1927–28 Spanish Football League – I moved it to draft because portions of it were not written in English and it was riddled with citation errors. It appears though it was basically copied from es.wikipedia.org, and is this article – es:Liga Española de Foot-ball – according to the translation app I use. You changed the title, and is almost word for word copied from that es article, is that correct? Are any of your other articles copied from es.wikipedia.org? If so, you must give attribution to where you copied it from, per the IP comment above. Thanks. Isaidnoway (talk) 04:56, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I might also like to ask whether, when I unblocked you the last time, you understood your unblock conditions, in particular this one: Specifically, you may not operate any account except for this one, and may not intentionally edit while logged out. (emphasis added) That doesn't mean "don't intentionally edit while logged out unless it breaks some pattern", it means don't do it at all. It appears above that you violated that condition while posting an unblock request. Do you understand that, going forward, you cannot do that, period? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 10:01, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, I understood my unblock conditions, that's why I said and I quote "this occasion is an exception that I do not want to repeat" and "Sorry again for using an IP address".

  I was desperate because I really didn't wanna break my "insane streak of creations" which dates back to 29 February. Now that I am cool-headed I understant that it was stupid.

  Kind regards (waiting for 11:59). Barr Theo (talk) 11:59, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is. 1927–28 Spanish Football League was a particular super long article, so if I had built that page like I usually do them – original writing, understading the product, attention to mistakes – it would have taken me over 10+ hours. Unfortunately, I was running out of time ("23:59"), and I decided to just copy-translante-past (but still reading the material) and then I made the stupidity of literally copying without event translanting. I am glad you moved it to draft instead of deleting it right away. I was intending to fix it after my streak ended.

And no, none of my other articles are copied from es.wikipedia.org because none of my other articles were as "super long" as 1927–28 Spanish Football League, so I had the time to make them accordingly. Furthermore, some of my pages do not even have a article in es.wikipedia.org, such as Manuel Rodríguez Arzuaga (28 March), Manuel Ansoleaga (27 March), Luis Saura del Pan (26 March), and Luis Belaunde (25 March), Et cetera, and in fact, these four do not have a page in any other language.

I would love to "give attribution", but I do not even know how to do that. Perhaps you can help me.

Kind regards (waiting for 11:59). Barr Theo (talk) 11:59, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please read WP:TFOLWP. In your next edit to the draft, write this in the edit summary - Content in this article is translated from the existing Spanish Wikipedia article at [[:es:Liga Española de Foot-ball]]; see its history for attribution. Thanks. Isaidnoway (talk) 16:18, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help. I will do that when I get unblocked.

Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 21:59, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.

Just doing my daily check up.

Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 21:59, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, well with your "daily check up", I'm going to say that I oppose unblocking you at all. You repeatedly violated your unblock conditions and evaded the block altogether (and if it weren't wheel warring, if you were unblocked, I'd just reblock you for that. Unblock conditions are a last chance to adhere to, not a nicety). So, I think for you, it's the standard offer at this point. Wait six months with no evasion or editing under any account or anonymously, come back then, and see if we'll give you another chance then. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 00:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an administrator, but I've witnessed a lot of unusual situations with blocked editors and the steps editors need to take to get their privileges back. You have to understand that at this point, you're asking an admin to take a leap of faith and trust you, but on multiple occasions, you've put your personal need to fulfill your oddly regimented self-imposed posting rules over the actual rules. Even within the conversation in which people are discussing how to get your block lifted, you are enforcing this :59 rule and prioritizing it over a collegial discussion. If you really want to be unblocked, I would urge you to voluntarily agree, as a condition of being unblocked (and remaining unblocked), that you will not time your posts in accordance with any regimental pattern. Admins typically look for every reason to turn blocked editors back into contributing ones, but you have to give them a *reason* to do so. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 03:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I happened to notice the above, and wondered if anyone had introduced you to Template:Translated page. The short version is that in addition to what they told you about the edit summary, any article that contains translated text needs to have on its talk page at a minimum {{translated|es|}} -- assuming the translation is from Spanish -- or somebody else who is unamused will come and talk to you about *that*. Just a word to the wise. I am not, mind you, any kind of wikipolice, just a sympathetic fellow editor offering friendly advice.

Since you like projects, I also wondered, and this part is completely optional, whether your projects need to be about football. I know of a bunch of badly written articles that probably should be rewritten from scratch by someone who can easily read Spanish sources. If you just like football, that is a fine and admirable thing to work on; I am however not able to make topic suggestions in that area. Mine batch varies but is mainly business, history or economics. Mostly Central America, maybe some Hapsburg or Bourbon Spain. Oh, and the Philippines! Totally your call.

You don't need to answer me unless you are looking for something to do ;) I don't want to clutter up your time slot if you are sticking to your pattern. But I do strongly recommend using the translated template. It's for copyright compliance so they really consider it pretty important ;) Elinruby (talk) 16:19, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, they don't need to be about football. They need, however, to be about stuff that I find interesting and that does not bore me.

My next "insane streak of creations" will only take place in May, so I will have a lot of time to do other things in April.

Just send me all you got prior to 1950 and I will most likely do it. And thank you for the template advice, I will use it.

Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 18:44, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

prior to 1950? Is 1643 ok? And do I understand correctly that Spanish sources are not a problem for you? I can cope with them but it's work. Any other language abilities? It will take a little compiling since the list I use isn't sorted by topic date. But maybe @Mathglot: will help. If you are serious about this I can start on this in a few days. Some may be existing articles that perhaps should be rewritten. Any preference among the topics I mentioned? Elinruby (talk) 04:47, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh hey zi just noticed your Babel box. Portuguese might actually be better for me, unless you are out to practice your Spanish Elinruby (talk) 19:46, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I have been looking at stuff that needs to be done (not necessarily by you) and would like to increase the usefulness of my suggestions to you. Am I right in thinking that you want to create articles, not edit bad ones?

Right now I have a batch that center on late 19th and early 20th century Central America, mostly politicians and oligarchs. If that is not of interest I can try for something more cultural or historical. I saw the part about before 1950, but how far back is still of interest? Precolonial history for example? I also have a few about Marimba composers.

Also, I am concentrating on Spanish but Portuguese needs help even more. If now is not the right time to talk, you can reach me through the email link on my user page. And if this doesn't happen or doesn't happen until June, really, no pressure. Elinruby (talk) 01:13, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Andrés Calero. Another editor, Ingratis, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for this article

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Ingratis}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Ingratis (talk) 09:58, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Albert Almasqué. Another editor, Broc, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Please do not use sources with user-generated content. Family Search is considered unreliable per WP:RSP.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Broc}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Broc (talk) 08:23, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on José María Castellanos. Another editor, Broc, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice page!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Broc}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Broc (talk) 06:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on José María Mateos. Another editor, SafariScribe, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Kudos!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SafariScribe}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 20:12, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		Thanks for all your articles about historic Spanish footballers! It's amazing how prolific you have been in just two years. Also, your page of contribs has the most unique timestamp column I've ever seen. Your edits are appreciated (regardless of what time you made them)! Crunchydillpickle🥒 (talk) 21:46, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whoah, thank you.

I can't believe that I received my first-ever star right at the end of my "insane streak of creations of May". What a journey! It seems a fitting way to end it.

Two years? Call it one, because I spent the first-half of 2023 blocked and the second-half of 2023 obsessed with tennis.

The timestamp column is the true reason behind my productiveness and consistency. Rain or shine, I must have a page ready to go at 23:59. No time to procastinate.s

By the way, what am I suppose to do with this star? There is a specific place to put it or something? I have no idea...

Once again, thank you for the recognition. Barr Theo (talk) 12:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What you do with it is up to you. You can just let archive with the rest of the talk page, or some people put them on their user page. Your callElinruby (talk) 08:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I left a message for this at the time, but the way you created the René Ressejac-Duparc article, by copying over content from a previously-deleted article to a new name - and then adding the more recent claims to notability as an addendum rather than integrating the biographical details - is something that just shouldn't have happened. Copy-and-paste moves shouldn't happen in general. Recreating a deleted article out of process shouldn't happen in general either. While in this case I'm confident it was just haste that led to the article being published this way, combining the two is a huge red flag and generally a trademark of trying to disguise problem editing. And then the poor content structure, which I've edited since, and is a writing matter rather than an issue with article creation.

Still, I notice that you seem to have re/created articles in this way before - based on the message here #Josep Soler i Sardà - so please don't do it again, for real now. Kingsif (talk) 01:11, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know if you realized, but I am the same guy who created Club Femení i d'Esports de Barcelona, Enriqueta Sèculi, Edelmira Calvetó, Lolita Ortiz, and Maria Antònia Mínguez. So, if I have any trademark, it surely ain't problem editing.

.

And yes, I'm aware that I'm not the greatest writer ever, but that is why there are people like you to improve my hundreds creations and initiatives, which was exactly what you did on Spanish Girl's Club, for instance. I am looking forward to make many more similar collaborations with you.

.

Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 07:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Theo, I don't think you even understood what I was telling you is a problem, which is another problem. I told you that an article on the subject had previously been created, and deleted at AfD. You then re-created it 1. without holding a discussion, 2. at a new location without linking back (which appears like deliberately discrete recreation of a deleted page), and 3. without linking back to the original in any way (see WP:Copying within Wikipedia for why you should have done that, here and elsewhere FTR). All in all, it was a very bad way to go about it, that suggests you do not have a good handle on how creating articles should go.

By the way, listing your half-finished, possibly-not-notable article creations does not support your case at all. While I was glad that you pinged me when you created Spanish Girl's Club, it was so that I could clean it up, not because you made it. You should not be expecting me and others to make your "initiatives" acceptable for inclusion on Wikipedia. That's not "collaboration". Kingsif (talk) 01:38, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for you work on creating biographies! However, it would be really helpful if you applied more specific categories than Spanish sportspeople. Mason (talk) 04:30, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kingsif (talk) 01:38, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you translated text from fr:Coupe Manier 1900 to another page. While you are welcome to translate Wikipedia content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing requires that you provide attribution to the contributor(s) of the original article. When translating from a foreign-language Wikipedia article, this is supplied at a minimum in an edit summary on the page where you add translated content, identifying it as a translation and linking it to the source page. Sample wording for this is given here. If you forgot, or were not aware of this requirement, attribution must be given retroactively, for example:

NOTE: Content in the edit of 01:25, January 25, 2023 was translated from the existing French Wikipedia article at [[:fr:Exact name of French article]]; see its history for attribution.

Retroactive attribution may be added using a dummy edit; see Repairing insufficient attribution. It is good practice, especially if translation is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{translated page}} template on the talk page of the destination article. If you have added translated content previously which was not attributed at the time it was added, you must add attribution retrospectively, even if it was a long time ago. You can read more about author attribution and the reasons for it at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. Demt1298 (talk) 15:21, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Barr Theo, can you please help me with this Draft to improve like the other season from Campeonato Regional Centro you have been created? Thank you!

Help.Football.History

Done! Sorry for the delay. You must always add at least three references if you want to give your articles a better chance to stand. You now have a new blueprint for the others Campeonato Regional Centro. You can even elaborate on important matches as an excuse to add more references and make the article look better.

By the way, I am glad that my biggest fan has stuck around. I would also like to thank you for all of the edits that you make on my creations. They might be small, but are just as important because they usually correct the mistakes that I leave behind during the haste of my streaks. I should have thanked you for this back in May, but I just never did.

Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 15:17, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sadi Dastarac, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sadi Carnot.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Gérard Kleinermann. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 21:10, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Barr Theo, I have recently discovered your work on Eugene Maes and I was blow away by the quality of it. Maes is a player I have been researching for a while now, but could not find much information on him. I was wondering if you had any information about the overall goals he scored in his career as I believe he scored a considerable amount of goals at club level. If you don't have much information, would you kindly direct me to where I can find them, via newspapers etc.

Many Thanks, Kaizako10 Sexy Beast (talk) 18:16, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Always nice to know that my work is necessary and much appreciated.

No, I do not have this information. This link (https://gallica.bnf.fr/html/presse-et-revues/les-principaux-quotidiens?mode=desktop) will lead you to the rabbit hole of the Bibliothèque nationale de France#Digital library (Gallica), which has all of the main daily newspapers of France from those years. The best ones for this kind of work are L'Auto and Le Matin, but let me warn you... checking all of those official matches will take you hours.

Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 15:35, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply Theo, and don't worry I am prepared to spend many hours doing this research as I have done for many other footballers too! Sexy Beast (talk) 23:22, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Maurice Vandendriessche. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for writing the article! Have a blessed and wonderful days ahead!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 16:39, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Switzerland national football team results (unofficial matches), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Geneve.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:51, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One of your recent edits has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information.

This time, at Lolita Ortiz. I have to bring it up again because you clearly don't learn: do not copy and paste information to create Wikipedia articles. It does not matter the source or if you've run it through a terrible machine translator first. You cannot do this, it's not a matter of opinion, and if you don't know why you should stop editing completely until you understand. Kingsif (talk) 00:56, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thank you for the lots of football pages you have been created, can you please help me with the draft. Thank you! Help.Football.History — Preceding undated comment added 07:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Ernest Clere. Another editor, Anuwrites, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Anuwrites}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

ANU^writes 03:08, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1900–01 Copa Macaya table has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 11:11, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1901–02 Copa Macaya table has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 11:13, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1902–03 Copa Macaya table has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 11:13, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1902–03 Copa Barcelona table has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 11:13, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1928–29 Campionat de Catalunya table has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 11:15, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Northern France football team. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 20:12, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Campionat de Catalunya standings templates indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 14:52, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. I'm looking for experienced editors to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 03:24, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Doroteo Elorriaga. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit for review" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. JTtheOG (talk) 22:26, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Oscar Desaulty. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 23:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Jean Zimmermann. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 23:16, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Auguste Schalbart. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 23:28, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Étienne Morillon (footballer). Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 21:41, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited James Reeves (footballer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lincoln.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:52, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Alphonse Nicol. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:28, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Georges Prouvost. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:28, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Eugenio Vallarino. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:29, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Julio Chulilla. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:30, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on National Committee of Referees. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

IMO need to be more explanatory for the typical reader. It's missing basic info which it presumes that the reader would kinow. Happy editing!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:32, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Copa del Rey de vela. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:33, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Alfredo Gil (footballer). Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Really needs expansion. This would also help confirm that it has GNG type sources. Happy editing!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:35, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Antonio Alonso (footballer). Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work. Of course, an image would be a nice addition.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Guillermo Galiardo. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work. Of course an image would be a nice addition. Happy editing!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:37, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Joaquín Rodríguez Eguinoa. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work. Of course an image would be a nice addition.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:38, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on José María Steimborn. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:39, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Walter Potts (footballer). Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work. Has an issues with a reference that was invoked but never defined. Happy editing!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:40, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Fernand Defalle. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:41, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Karel Pimmer. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:42, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on André Allègre. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:45, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on André Billy (football manager). Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:45, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Constantino Errazquin. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start. One note....the whole article is a biography and so "biography" really isn't a good name for a section of the article.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:47, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Eduardo Corrons. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:48, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Gijón Sport Club. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start. One note: Has a reference that was invoked but never defined.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:49, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on USA Clichy. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:50, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on La Escocesa. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start. A wider image would be good to illustrate the facility.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:52, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Desiderio Esparza. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:52, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Juan José Petit. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:53, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Carlos Bacrot. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Charles Montagne. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start. An image would be nice.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:55, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Manuel Navarro Nogueroles. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:56, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on José Maria Tormo. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start. The whole article is a biography, so "biography" is not really a good section name. Happy editing!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:58, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on José María Urresti. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start. The whole article is a biography, so "biography" is not really a good section name. Happy editing!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Henri Beau (footballer). Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on 1897 Club Français v English Ramblers football match. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:00, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Antonio Arrillaga. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:02, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Lucio del Álamo. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:03, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on José Álamo. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start. Of course an image would be a nice addition.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:04, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Celso Pedro Blanco. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work. An image would be a nice addition.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:05, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Tonín Conde. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:05, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on José Luis Conde. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work. Of course an image would be a nice addition

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:07, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Tomás Estrada (footballer). Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:07, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Lionel Gasqueton. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:08, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Henri Gasqueton. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:09, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Edouard Wynn. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:09, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Henri Wynn. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:10, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Ronald Menzies. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:10, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Pablo Lemmel. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work. An image would be a nice addition.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:11, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Manuel Lemmel. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:12, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Charley Scheibenstock. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:13, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Romà Solà. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:13, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on André Sellier. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:14, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Maurice Beaudier. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start. Suggest expanding the prose. Has material in those sources to do it.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:15, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Gaston Brébion. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work. Of course an image would be a nice addition.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:16, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One of your recent edits has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Fram (talk) 13:57, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I note that your other recent creations also have parts translated literally or very closely paraphrased from copyrighted sources (like Pedro Nolasco de Soto), and/or contain partial unattributed translations (like Georges de Saint-Clair). You have already received warnings for these issues, and have repeatedly been blocked for other issues; I fear that if you continue like this, patience will run out and you will be indefinitely blocked from editing. Fram (talk) 14:06, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please be a lot more careful. You have now created Doroteo Elorriaga, but e.g. your sentence "he fell ill with pleura and remained out of action for a year and a half; during that time, he was recovering at Alegría-Dulantzi (Alegría de Álava)." comes straight from the source[1] with Google translate: "He fell ill with pleura and remained out of action for a year and a half, during which time he was recovering at Alegría-Dulantzi (Alegría de Álava)."

Your sentences "When the Civil War broke out, Elorriaga enlisted as a volunteer in the 'Gordexola' Battalion under the orders of Commander Luis Urkullu. After the battalion withdrew from the battlefront, it surrendered in Barakaldo to the national forces, being interned in the Carmelo prison in Begoña where he remained for three or four months. Once released, he joined the Naval, and during the 1938–39 season, he played for Deportivo Alavés. After the war, and being prevented from continuing at Athletic Bilbao due to possible retaliation, he signed for Zaragoza, then in the First Division."

The same source has "When the Civil War broke out he enlisted as a volunteer in the 'Gordexola' Battalion under the orders of Commander Luis Urkullu. After the battalion withdrew from the battle front, it surrendered in Barakaldo to the 'national' forces, being interned in the Carmelo prison in Begoña where he remained for three or four months. Once released, he joined the Naval and in the 1938-39 season he played for Glorioso Deportivo Alavés. After the war, and being prevented from continuing at Athletic Club, that is, being subjected to retaliation, he signed for Zaragoza, together with Urbano Ruiz Bilbao, and remained with this team during the 1939-40 and 1940-41 seasons."

This really are unacceptable copyright violations (and I presume they aren't the only ones), and you are skating on very thin ice here. Fram (talk) 08:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Carlos Villar (footballer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santa Catarina.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:52, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, nice work (Henry Bone) ! I didn't find the first name of "(H. ?) F. Roques" (only F. Roques in French medias), but there were at least 3 Roques in the Standard teams (W. Roques and E. Roques in the Standard's second team). Kind regards. Efilguht (talk) 09:52, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ! There was a Louis Strittmatter born in 1875 that could match with the photographies (blod hair, exposed forehead, 1.73 m), but I did not find any paper source to confirm it. Regards. Efilguht (talk) 23:01, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1940 FEF President Cup table has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:27, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Regarding your edits on the Gaston Peltier page I have a question about his dates. Where did you get his date of birth and date of death from? For the latter it states "Peltier died in Bayonne on 8 October 1951, at the age of 74." and uses the first reference for this, but that website does not contain his death details. Where does this info come from? Please can you post a link? Thank you. 2A00:23C8:3091:9000:854E:5FA2:ED21:BD5A (talk) 18:28, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nice catch. Thank you. Barr Theo (talk) 22:03, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JTtheOG (talk) 02:39, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The result was Keep. Barr Theo (talk) 12:25, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, can you help me with this draft to don`t get deleted? Thank you! Help.Football.History (talk) 14:50, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for your contributions on Charles Allé. Unfortunately, you possibly forgot to add an inter language link to the following languages : Français, Deutsch, and Italian on the article, which them have already an article about Allé. Thanks. QwertyZ34 (talk) 21:12, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed that. Robby.is.on (talk) 21:53, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. QwertyZ34 (talk) 06:24, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I previously did NPP reviews on a bunch of your articles and passed several of them which I considered to be edge case regarding wp:notability. Several others were been tagged by a senior NPP reviewer as not having any sources which have in-depth coverage. I was recently asked on my talk page to take a look at your lastest group of article creations. I looked at several of them and they had that problem. While the substantial amount of prose is often an indicator of having the required sources as discussed below, the prose content is mostly from turning stats and factoids from databases and other non-wp:notability coverage into sentences. Articles (or the topic of them) do need to pass wp:notability. For sports articles on the sort of topics that you work on to be fully compliant, they need multiple independent sources which cover the topic of the article in depth. Even with allowances for the various particulars, I think that a minimal standard is to have at least once source with medium-depth coverage of the topic of the article and I'd be inclined to pass ones of these types which have that. May I suggest trying to find at least one such source before creating an article on that topic. I don't plan to do anything (thumbs-up, thumbs down or tagging) on those articles. But if you have and identify any that you feel have that source, I'd be happy to take a look at them. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 17:53, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Ernesto Mejía (footballer). Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start. More sources with in-depth coverage would solidify

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:31, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Eusebio Blanco. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start. Sources with in-depth coverage would solidify

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:32, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article Francisco Guzmán (shot putter) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No sources with GNG coverage. Evidenced by having stats-only (and stats turned into sentences) type content only.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. North8000 (talk) 13:35, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Antonio Solé. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:36, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on François Barat. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:38, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Walter Lewington. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:39, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Georges Delolme. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:40, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Georges Meuris. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:41, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on George Scott (Roubaix footballer). Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:41, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Max Seemann. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:44, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Bill Dijxhoorn. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:44, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Bill Dijxhoorn. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:45, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Benito Daniel. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:45, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Léon de Janzé. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:46, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on ANVV De Zwaluwen. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:47, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Spanish Tennis Championship. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:48, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Jack Howcroft. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:49, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Walter Jestram. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:50, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Sid Wood (footballer). Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:50, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Alfred Wilkes (footballer). Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:51, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Aubry Wynn. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:51, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Renato Bardín. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:53, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Octavio Milego. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:54, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Francisco Salamanca. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:54, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Fritz Hansen (officer). Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:55, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Juan Estefanía. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:55, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on José Vidal-Ribas (sports manager). Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:57, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Alejandro Acha. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 13:57, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Albert Dubreucq. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:03, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on André Dubly. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:05, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on André Saint-Ignan. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:18, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Agustín Layola. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:20, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Augusto Ozores. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:21, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Carlos Altés. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:23, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on FC Atlético de Sabadell. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:24, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Real Sociedad Atlética Stadium. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:25, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on AUF Tarragona. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:26, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Denis Devaux. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:33, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Manolo Muñoz (footballer). Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:35, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Mariano de Mur. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:36, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Maurice Meunier. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:37, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Francisco Baonza. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:39, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Francisco González (manager). Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:40, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on José María de Aspiunza. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:40, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Louis Darques. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:44, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on José Mandaluniz. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:48, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Edelmiro Lorenzo. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:49, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Cyril Rutherford. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:51, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Claude Rivaz. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:52, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Copa Seamen's Institute. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:54, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on 1937–38 Catalan Football League. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Needs GNG sources. This is basically a "stats-only" article with "stats-only" type sources. Happy editing!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:56, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Lorraine Football League. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:57, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Spanish Amateur Championship. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:57, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Levante Championship. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Needs GNG sources to keep as an article. Basically a "stats only" article with "stats-only" sources. Happy editing!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:59, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Barr Theo. I thanked your creation of the article about Pío Wandosell because, due to my interest in the history of Cartagena (Spain) and its comarca, I had created the Wikidata item about that same person in 2021, and I thought you did a great job with your edition. Saudações! P4K1T0 (talk) 17:20, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please have a look, and help create the article, thank you! I will make all the seasons after we managed to publish the early editions! Thank you!Help.Football.History (talk) 11:19, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JTtheOG (talk) 21:36, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The result was Keep. Barr Theo (talk) 12:25, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JTtheOG (talk) 00:41, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The result was Redirect. Barr Theo (talk) 12:25, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article Alfredo Gil (footballer) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of notability, just statistics and match reports.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fram (talk) 16:31, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was happy to find your article on Edward; I created the article on his father, the botanist. (Every once in a while I try to write articles on folks who have an official botanical author abbreviation but don't have an article yet.) Quibble: My impression from what I read is that the firm of C. Whittall merely functioned under the umbrella of the Levant Company for a short period of years and then continued afterwards, not that it was merged into it. The Levant Company was dissolved in 1825, but the Whittalls were still in the business as late as the early 20th century.Brianyoumans (talk) 18:21, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JTtheOG (talk) 02:17, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The result was Keep. Barr Theo (talk) 12:25, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:RCD Espanyol seasons has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:51, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Miguel Márquez (footballer).

Your page moves and overwriting of articles is horrendously disruptive. GiantSnowman 20:27, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's not how you are supposed to do things. Why didn't you just create a new page for the poet? Brianyoumans (talk) 20:42, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I explained that on the discussion. Better to recycle than to waste. But it seems that is considered vandalizing, so it won't happen again. Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 22:33, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus Christ , you don't need to go so hard on me! I literally warned you about it and specifically explained my move at the start of the discussion. I was obviously not trying to vandalize anything. Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 22:30, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Juan Astorquia you nominated for GA-status according to the 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Lucfev -- Lucfev (talk) 10:06, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article Juan Astorquia you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Juan Astorquia for comments about the article, and Talk:Juan Astorquia/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Lucfev -- Lucfev (talk) 21:22, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, what justification did you use to determine that there isn't a PRIMARYTOPIC? The cricketer is in the hall of fame. The footballer isn't known by anyone outside of his club. The-Pope (talk) 12:01, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@The-Pope:. Pageviews. The cricketer has 280 while the footballer has 110. To be a primary topic, the cricketer needed 10x the total of the other page... Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 12:11, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a rule. The actual guideline states that long term significance can be measured in many different ways. Being a run of the local sportsman vs a Hall of Fame international is fairly clear as to which person has long term significance. Please do a WP:RM next time. The-Pope (talk) 12:43, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

jlwoodwa (talk) 06:15, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jlwoodwa:, It seems you made a mistake... This page was created by User:Agne27, not me. Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 00:59, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but you requested its undeletion, so I thought you'd like to know about the AfD discussion. jlwoodwa (talk) 01:10, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jlwoodwa:, two weeks ago, I requested the undeletion of Javier Mandaluniz (a prod from 2013!), and no one felt the need to warn me about its AfD discussion. I don't know why you would think any differently... Barr Theo (talk) 01:19, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a "warning" in the sense of {{uw-vandalism1}}, it's just letting you know so you can participate in the discussion. jlwoodwa (talk) 01:20, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barr Theo. Thank you for your work on Carl Blidberg. Another editor, North8000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:05, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to France national football team results (1920–1939). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. 🌙Eclipse (she/they/all neos • talk • edits) 19:09, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Mauro Arbiza. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. 🌙Eclipse (she/they/all neos • talk • edits) 15:38, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article List of France international footballers (1–4 caps) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

List of France international footballers is a featured list because it goes beyond database-like listing of players, positions, tenures, caps, and goals to offer a well-sourced introduction on the overall group. In comparison, this clearly fails WP:NOTDIRECTORY in listing the French international footballers with the least appearances who inherently have the least coverage. The See also section has a wikilink for a future article on those in the middle 5-19 caps category, but it is hard to see what else about the French international team could be said from database-like listing of all the less prominent players that did not make the cut of list of France international footballers, as exhibited by all of this article's citations being to sports statistics sites.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ViridianPenguin🐧 (💬) 19:28, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The same applies to Josep Gumbau, in case you wanted to search for sources for him. JTtheOG (talk) 04:14, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JTtheOG: Jeeez, we are stalking each other so damn hard right now. But yeah, it seems that you have finally founded my previous account: Clenixon. I'm honestly surprised that it took you so long. All you had to do was to scroll this talk page to December 2022...

Anyways, if you think my current articles lack SIGCOV, then you should take a look at some of the ones that I created with Clenixon in the summer of 2022. In my defense, I was still a teenage noob back then, and I also got extremly luck, because at the time, the now retired Styyx was constantly reviewing my articles indiscriminately. But I'm glad. Because if someone had done to me in 2022, what you are doing to me now, I would have probably got discouraged and given up from Wiki. I know you are only doing your job, but sometimes your inflexible and uncropomising "by the book" policy and excessive rigor might discourage young editors, like ProudWatermelon. But that's just how I feel. Styyx's indiscriminate approach was certainly reprehensible, too.

As you know, I'm currently in the middle of a streak, so I'm trying to do the minimum of non-creative edits as possible; therefore, if you could stay away from Gumbau and Clenixon until June, I would really appreciate it. Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 05:59, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't stalk anyone. I review new pages and work on improving existing ones and frankly, there are hundreds of articles you created with more than a few problems. Now... that's perfectly okay because we're all here to learn and collaborate, but that's what happens when you churn out hundreds and hundreds of pages so quickly... so I'll try and improve a few at a time when I can. You, however, are the one (apparently) watching my every edit, which I guess I don't mind, but I had no idea Clenixon was your old account, nor did I know Clenixon created the Felgueroso article, nor do I care if it was you or someone else.

ProudWatermelon was rude, dismissive, and unwilling to collaborate from the very beginning. I began fixing some poorly-formatted pages they had created and, in their very first interaction with me, they told me to stop destroying the structure it looks like shit and reverted five of my edits in rapid succession with zero policy-rooted rationale except "I don't like it". They then engaged me on my talk page with more confused rubbish, despite my best efforts to keep it cordial. All my interactions with them tell me is that they would've "given up" sooner or later because they were not clearly WP:NOTHERE to build a Wikipedia, which is an extremely collaborative effort.

If you want to revisit our convo from 1 April, reviewers like North8000 and I had been routinely passing articles of yours with scant coverage and unreliable sources, despite technically not meeting requirements. Despite this leeway given to you (or probably because of it), you began creating more articles with less and less coverage, perhaps knowing you'd get a pass from us, and it got to the point where they were sourced only to databases, fansites, and passing mentions. At which point, North8000 and I began taking a closer look at your articles, and you proceeded to criticize us on both of our talk pages for being "too picky". I had plenty of flexibility in regards to your pages, as evidenced by the hundreds that I reviewed, but you can't blame me for the decrease in flexibility that was afforded to you after that.

With that being said, nice work on the vast improvements you've made to your pages since 2022.

JTtheOG (talk) 07:18, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

“you began creating more articles with less and less coverage”, I would have done it regardless of leeway or not, because it was bound to happen. I started with the well-known and top-tier footballers, and now I’m getting down to the “bottom”, and the deeper you go, the scarcer the coverage gets. It was inevitable. Perhaps I should leave Spain/France, and go to Italy or something.

“databases, fansites, and passing mentions”, bro, 70% of my Wikipedian empire is built upon that. Its not my fault that my creations are victims of recency bias. Luckly, the likes of WP:COMMONSENSE, WP:BASIC, and WP:OFFLINESOURCES are on my side. So, you see, you might hold the strongest card (WP:SIGCOV), but I have many (please, don’t take this line too literally. I wanted to say it for a while because it sounds cool.).

I never criticized you for being "too picky"… I was just genuinely confused as to why you were reviewing less and less of my articles, and I was confused not only because I thought we were allies at the time, but also because you are the only reviewer who doesn’t review my articles, unlike Ryan shell, QEnigma, North8000, Sophisticatedevening, Pichpich, DragonflySixtyseven, and Kj cheetham. That’s seven!

I also never criticized North8000 for being "too picky"… on the contrary, I thanked him for his leeway. The only thing I criticized him for, was for flooding my talk page with NPP reviews lol.

And yeah, your decrease in flexibility is totally understandable. It can be annoying, but at the end of the day, you are just enforcing Wiki policies. Barr Theo (talk) 17:59, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. Don't you think you are getting a little bit TOO picky with your reviews?

Why would we not be allies? I've been cordial with you since our very first interaction and provided advice to you when I can, despite your occasional presumptuousness. I've been patient in explaining my processes and appropriate policies. I've used links to guidelines in my edits to guide your future articles. I've pointed you to places to find new sources. I've reviewed hundreds of your new creations. Unfortunately, though, despite my many praises of your work, you've decided that I'm not an ally because you take an inordinate amount of ownership of the articles you create (I've never heard of a Wikipedian empire) and you disproportionally value frivolous stats such as a "deletion ratio". I guarantee you would enjoy your Wiki experience even more if you stopped worrying about these things. Cheers,

P.S. I amended what appeared to be a mistake in the Miroslav Široký infobox, but if it wasn't a mistake, let me know. JTtheOG (talk) 23:48, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JTtheOG: You are totally right. You have been very patient and helpful towards me, but I have been unable to appreciate it because I was not used to this kind of “constant scrutiny” (the WP:LEADCITE was particularly annoying), but I have come to realize that it is not harassment to track a user's contributions for policy violations.

I was also unable to appreciate your efforts because you jeopardized my “frivolous stats”, especially my "deletion ratio" on multiple occasions… yeah, I guess I still have a lot to mature on this front… I’m sure you are right about “no stats = better Wiki experience”, but I have always been a stats guy, from Watchmojo’s TopTen stats, to Messi v Ronaldo stats, and now Wikipedia stats. It’s in my DNA.

I also want to apologize for my “occasional presumptuousness”. Sometimes, I simply cannot control the urge to boast about my many accomplishments in Wikipedia. Speaking of which, did you know that I currently have +100 articles assessed with B-class?? I mean, how crazy is that? That’s like 10% of my overall empire. Meanwhile, you only have a mere 8 Bs!... But to fair, you have 12 GAs against my 1. Which brings me to my next point.

I have thoroughly enjoyed your numerous “clean-ups” on my articles. They are always so professional and… “Wikipedian-like”. So, could you please clean-up Josep Elías, José Luis Gallegos, José María Gayarre, and Edmond Weiskopf. I’m planning to name all of them to GA status on June 1st.

PS: Thanks for all those reviews on 17-18 May. What was that? A change of heart? Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 23:59, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Barr Theo

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username ViridianPenguin, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've proposed an article that you started, Wou Broese van Groenou, for deletion because it meets one or more of our deletion criteria, and I don't think that it is suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. The particular issue can be found in the notice that is now visible at the top of the article.

If you wish to contest the deletion:

1. Edit the page
2. Remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. Click the Publish changes button.

If you object to the article's deletion, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the issues raised in the deletion notice. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|ViridianPenguin}}. And remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

ViridianPenguin🐧 (💬) 18:03, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Barr Theo. I trust you're well. I noticed the above named article and then Herbert Whittall (footballer, born 1884), which, according to their date of birth, are different people. But you're citing the same Olympedia entry for both of them. BTW, the Olympedia entry is clear on the latter and not the former. Can you explain further? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:00, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanderwaalforces:, “According to their date of birth, are different people”, hold on… so, you only realized that they were different people because of their birthday? Perhaps if you had actually read their articles, you would have realized that they are father and son, and both are mentioned in that source. Yes, it focuses predominantly on the son, but it also covers info related to the father, such as family members, including both ancestors and descendants.

I hope you are doing well as well, and kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 23:59, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon? Are they the same or different people? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 05:06, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanderwaalforces: The answer to that question is in my previous reply, so perhaps you should read it again. Or perhaps you should simply read both articles and find out on your own. It’s not that hard. Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 14:59, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Barr Theo. Last December, you published the article Star Club de Caudry. It is undeniable that you have translated it almost word by word from the French or from the German version, both whose author I was ten years ago.

Even though you have shortened these originals a tiny bit, your article is a copyright violation. The policy and rules in en-WP are quite clear about that: A translation is a derivative work. Wikipedia articles are under a copyleft license that requires attribution to the original source and authors in all derivative works (→ Wikipedia:Translation) and the new, translated article must credit the source article (→ Help:Translation#Licensing). But you neither imported the original Revision history, nor did you name the source in your Edit summary.

To avoid further problems, I propose that you copy your English text locally on your personal computer, demand deletion of the article and go to Wikipedia:Requests for page importation. Receiving that you can restore your translation and everything's allright.

Greetings from --Wahrerwattwurm (talk) 12:48, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Wahrerwattwurm: Thanks for warning me. When I copy stuff from foreign Wikis, I give the credit to the source article on my edit summary (Spanish Second Category Championship, Catalan Football Championship of Second Category, Galician Amateur Championship, United SC (1894), Pedro Ispizua), but I didn’t do that with this article because, as you said, I thought I had shortened it and scrambled it just enough to avoid a copyright violation. My mistake.

Shortening and scrambling was minimal, so it's a copyright violation anyway. --Wahrerwattwurm (talk) 12:38, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have now credited the source article on my edit summary, so there is no need to undergo that process that you just described. Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 14:59, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's - only or at least - the second best solution. I only can hope that in the future you import the original Revision history completely. --Wahrerwattwurm (talk) 12:38, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JTtheOG (talk) 07:25, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:03, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This conversation originally took place here, but I copied/pasted it and placed it here because I enjoyed it too much.

@Asilvering: hello again, latin-speaking lady. Bbb23 blocked my old account User:Clenixon just six days prior to the 2022 FIFA World Cup final, so I was wondering if I can have it back now? Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 16:59, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-Asilvering comment) @Luis7M: I agree that that wasn't a great block; Bbb's tendency toward first-offense indefs for even marginal sockpuppetry cases is an angle we didn't get into above, but was also a problem. However, for better or for worse, you were unblocked with a 1-account restriction, so if you would like to resume using Clenixon as a disclosed alternate account, you will need to either get permission from the unblocking admin (Seraphimblade), or appeal here at AN. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 17:18, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, what do you think of this, @Seraphimblade:? Can I resume using Clenixon as a disclosed alternate account, as per @Tamzin: above. As you know, my original case of sockpuppetry was purely aesthetic and never ill-intended, and it would continue to be so, but this time as a disclosed alternate account. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 17:41, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "purely aesthetic"? -- asilvering (talk) 18:38, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilvering: I mean this and this. Please tell me if those aren't the contribs page with the most unique timestamp columns that you have ever seen? And both of them lasted for a full month!! Not as impressive as speaking Latin, but still pretty cool, right? Luis7M (talk) 18:57, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) @Luis7M: So, let me get this straight... you sockpuppeteered for the timestamp columns? Worgisbor (congregate) 19:06, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Worgisbor: Precisely!! And if you take a closer look, you will notice that these "creative streaks" are always made in pairs, often with alphabetic connections or simple name similarities. It's not my fault that I'm obsessed with symmetry and shit... Luis7M (talk) 19:12, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Luis7M I'm speechless. But also, I think you'd really like Latin. -- asilvering (talk) 19:19, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilvering: Of course you are speechless! My timestamp columns are simply breathtaking! (especially the one from March). No one will ever be able to match these timestamp columns. No one!! Vitam mihi acquirere necesse est. Luis7M (talk) 19:26, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Luis7M: You know what? Fair. Worgisbor (congregate) 19:25, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Luis7M: Given the situation and circumstances, I think you should either be editing under Clenixon or under Luis7M, with the other blocked. Given that you have participated the most as Luis7M, my recommendation would be to continue to only use Luis7M. If you prefer the name Clenixon, then maybe there can be an account rename done in a way that works. --Super Goku V (talk) 06:35, 7 June 2025 (UTC) (Non-administrator comment)[reply]

@Asilvering: and @Tamzin:, I would like to preserve this conversation in my own talk page. Given that you are admins, I assume you can help me with how to do it. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 13:17, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I apparently did not get the ping above for whatever reason, but I'm not certain why you're requesting to again use multiple accounts. Without knowing the intended purpose (unless it's the timestamp discussion, which I don't think is sufficient justification), I don't think I'd be in favor of it "just because". Why do you feel you need to operate two accounts again? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 03:05, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Seraphimblade: This conversation came about after Bbb23, the user who blocked me for sockpuppetry, was recalled for misusing the blocking tools.

I wanted to operate two accounts again for purely aesthetic reasons, so that I could manage the timestamp columns better (big edits for one and small edits for the other), but if that is not a sufficient justification, and if "just because" won't work either, then I guess there is nothing else to discuss. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 11:13, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	Here's your barnstar for making the topic of Spanish footballer biographies (and a couple more) ever more expansive! Keep up the good work (and maybe begin to archive your messages)? Yelps ᘛ⁠⁐̤⁠ᕐ⁠ᐷ critique me 05:31, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I left a question as to why you included Christopher Snowdon in your multiple undelete. However, that whole process looks disruptive to me. PROD creates an uncontroversial deletion of a matter that is, as you demonstrate, trivially restored should someone wish to write the page with newly found information. It seems apparent that your interest in these articles, however, existed only in reversing the PRODs of one user (and even then, you appear to have added at least one that you had not thus intended). So now we have 20 articles to take through the deletion process consuming many hours of editor time, for no reason. And when these are deleted they will then be harder to restore for anyone who wants to develop the article. This does no one any favours. Please don't do this. It is not good for the encyclopaedia to make articles that should not be there harder to remove, and articles that should be there harder to restore. Neither is it good for the encyclopaedia to tie up so much editor time without any actual reason for doing so. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:53, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Consider the above a strong warning. Grudge actions are disruptive behavior and are grounds for having your editing privileges removed. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:25, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sirfurboy: and @UtherSRG: I had no idea that most of these had been PRODed by JTtheOG, (All I knew was "Liz deleted page [insert name] due to expired PROD"), because if I had known, I would have surely stayed away from them, given the recent quarrel between us. The last thing I wanted to do was to "poke the bear" even more. It is not so much who PRODed them, Sirfur, but who created them (UncleTupelo1).

As I have already explained to UtherSRG in April, all I'm trying to do is give a second chance to these articles. The first time I did it was with Javier Mandaluniz in mid-April, and it was an absolute success. But yeah, after this, I surely won't make another "multiple" thread. Thank you for the patience.

Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 12:35, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please only request such undeletions for articles that you intend to improve immediately. Do not do it in the hopes that someone else will make the improvements; if they were going to do it, they would have done it before the article was PROD'd. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:42, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@UtherSRG: My first experience with this was Javier Mandaluniz, which was improved by someone else, so I wrongly assumed it to be the norm. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 13:09, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@GiantSnowman: This might help explain why you are seeing a large number of AFDs created in a row. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:59, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would both ask and advise you not to waste community time. You have a really novel attitude towards deletion and "streaks". Please stop this. Geschichte (talk) 16:55, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• (watching) @Sirfurboy, UtherSRG, and Geschichte: if you think there's a pattern of curious judgement on display, you might be interested in this discussion on User:Drmies's talk page. Mildy bizarre to say the least. —Fortuna, imperatrix 17:14, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Fortuna imperatrix mundi: oh yes, that's when I met @Asilvering:, the latin-speaking lady. She's very cool. Just yesterday, we teamed up to unblock @Sinead RAU: and Criticalthinkinghorse. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 17:26, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm all for people finding ways to have fun on our Very Serious Website, but please do let sleeping PRODs lie unless you're going to be improving them yourself. -- asilvering (talk) 18:19, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Asilvering: yep, pretty much sums it up... Luis7M (talk) 18:27, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  So, now that multiple folks have told you essentially the same thing I said back in April, are you on the proper path now? - UtherSRG (talk) 18:32, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @UtherSRG: well, for obvious reasons, I can't answer this question with a "no". But either way, do you really thing I'm going to try to pull off this again? I'm not that stubborn and I know when to stop. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 19:04, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Of course. But I was more interested in seeing how you'd answer than whether you'd answer in the positive or negative. You've attracted a lot of attention here. I do hope that has impressed on you that we take this project seriously, even when we are having fun. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:54, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@UtherSRG: And I was aware that your question was a trap! Do you really think I would be naïve enough to fall for these tricks!? Do you really think I would be stupid enough to say, “I still believe I’m right, so we shall see”. I’m no noobie, okay. Tomorrow, this account will turn three years old. I have been here long enough to understand how the game is played.

Being stubborn and insisting on this matter would almost certainly be a “suicidal move”, especially because I have a lot of skeletons in my closet. After what happened here, I suspect that I’m only 2-3 “screw-ups” away from getting blocked for a third and final time, which would be devastating, given that I’m at the absolute peak of my powers. It’s time to stay low.

Kind regards. (PS: Don’t take the first paragraph too seriously. I'm just over exaggerating for dramatic effect). Luis7M (talk) 01:59, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Could you please use the talk page to move pages next time? I am doing this over John Brodie (footballer, born 1862) being moved to Jack Brodie. It's a good idea to argue for a common name in the article title, but it's best to discuss it first. Thank you Servite et contribuere (talk) 13:26, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Servite et contribuere: Listen, there is no need for a discussion if the move is uncontroversial. I and @Ortizesp: have done dozens of uncontroversial COMMONNAMES without any need to discuss them first. It's a common practice. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 13:35, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Luis7M I am totally aware that there is no need for a discussion of uncontroversial moves. However, I honestly (Maybe just at the time) did not agree with moving this page undiscussed. Do keep in mind I am not well aware of the subject. I just thought it would have been better if it was discussed. I think it would have been moved anyway, but I still think a discussion is better. I feel undiscussed moves should only happen in limited circumstances. I just did not think this was one of them. Thank you Servite et contribuere (talk) 13:40, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted the move as well. Given your history of questionable judgement, please consider anything you do to not be uncontroversial, Luis7M. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:13, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UtherSRG I (Luis7M could also open one, doesn't matter who does it) might open a Requested Move. I do have evidence from one source that this is the common name. But it is definitely best to Discuss it first. Servite et contribuere (talk) 14:16, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@UtherSRG: please read Wikipedia:COMMONNAME. "Given your history of questionable judgement", you talk as if my history is filled with questionable judgement, when actually, I only had questionable judgment about deletion/undeletion stuff, which is quite different from my judgment about changing page names per COMMONNAME. I will indeed consider anything I do about deletion/undeletion stuff to be controversial, but nothing else.

For instance, if I were to add some sources to some articles. Will that be considered controversial, too? That doesn't seem very fair. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 14:24, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Luis7M, your history doesn't need to be filled with questionable judgement; your judgment just needs to have been questioned. Which it has:

1. Your bizarre responses: [2], [3].
2. Or your edits found unhelpful: [4].
3. Again: [5].
4. And again: [6].
5. Or had administrative action taken against you... three times twice in 14 months: [7].
6. Talk page trolling: [8].
7. (Called trolling by an admin: [9].)
8. Which you reinstated: [10].
9. And the "plain annoying": [11].
10. And the username request that was "so close to attempted impersonation": [12].
11. And the socking: [13].
    And that lot's from just the last couple of months; perhaps you should expand your definition of what you "consider" controversial so that it matches what all these other editors have been telling you. —Fortuna, imperatrix 15:31, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @Fortuna imperatrix mundi: "Or had administrative action taken against you... three times in 14 months", it was actually four times, two blocks and two unblocks, and those were... 14 months ago. Luis7M (talk) 15:50, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    In the interests of justice, I've adjusted. —Fortuna, imperatrix 16:03, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @Fortuna imperatrix mundi: "And that from just the last couple of months", this also needs adjusting, because apart from those administrative actions, everything else is from May and June (hence, it should be "the last couple of weeks"). And honestly, I feel like most of those are just a matter of opinion. Different people see things differently.

    1. For instance, you might find some of my responses bizarre or out of line, while others will cut me some slack after recognizing it as my "friendly conversational style", [14] or after recognizing it as my sense of humor. [15]
    2. Altenmann considered those edits unhelpful, but I was simply trying to talk to him. It was obviously not ill-intended.
    3. I immediately recognized that the reinstation of the troll was a mistake.[16]
    4. [17] The reviewer of my username request thought it was "so close to attempted impersonation", but in that same thread, another experienced reviewer thought "I have no problem with the rename, I don't think it's too similar". See what I mean? Different people see things differently.

But yes, at the end of the day, my judgment was indeed questioned, so... Luis7M (talk) 16:30, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"... so I will try to see how others might perceive my actions."? "... so I will stop and take a pause and ask someone for advice before acting."? These and other similar completions of that sentence would be appropriate for someone who understands the point of being told one has a history of questionable judgement, and then had that assertion proven by another. At least, that is, if they desire to integrate themselves better into the community. Do you? Or do you plan to continue to act in a manner that, if unchanged, is likely to find you being blocked again? - UtherSRG (talk) 23:43, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@UtherSRG: Hmm... I suppose that's another one of those questions where you are only interested in seeing how I will answer, right?

Listen, of course I want to integrate myself better into the community, but having my judgment questioned by others is something that is out of my control. For instance, sometimes my judgment is questioned even when I'm doing something in good faith, like that username request or asking a question to Altenmann on his talk page. It's just something that is bound to happen every now and then, you know.

As for the rest of Fortuna's list, it is mostly the result of my immaturity, but that's something I guess will change as I grow up, and as I become more mature and more... adult and serious, like you. But obviously I can't change my personality overnight... It is a process. After all, "we are all here to learn and collaborate".

Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 00:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Fortuna imperatrix mundi: Anyone who proudly asserts to be having a lot of fun on a self-aggrandizing crusade at the detriment of the project and their fellow collaborators is clearly not interested in integrating into the community. I would invite you to attempt to parse through this or this. JTtheOG (talk) 01:14, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JTtheOG: Fortuna already knows about the requests for undeletion, given that he participated in the "multiple undelete" thread. I'm assuming that he did not include that on his list because he was giving examples of questionable judgment unrelated to the "deletion/undeletion stuff", given my previous reply.

Regarding the other two points you brought up, well, I already adressed them in the last setence of our last conversation, so I will repeat it: "yes, preserving my 0% deletion ratio has been fun, but as I said at the beginning of this thread, it's also been a burden, namely for situations like the Miguel Márquez shitshow". In fact, it was such a burden that I even told you that "I was secretly hoping for Martín Urdiroz to be deleted (hence why I didn’t vote at first)", because I wanted this "self-aggrandizing crusade" (your words) to finally come to an end, so that I could subsequently become a better collaborator. If that is not proof that I'm clearly interested in integrating into the community, then I don't know what is.

Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 01:44, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can end it anytime you want. JTtheOG (talk) 02:01, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JTtheOG: I don't have the will to end it myself, JT. Certainly not after everything I did. All the shenanigans I pulled. It's gotta be you, JT. It's gotta be you... No one has earned it more. (PS: Don't take the first paragraph too seriously. I'm just over exaggerating for dramatic effect).

In a more serious tone, though, my original goal was simply to reach 1,000 articles with ZERO deletions, and then take a print. I already have that print well-kept in my wooden chest of "my life's greatest accomplishment", so in my mind, the streak is already over. Martín Urdiroz should have been the officialization of that...

In fact, you can find that print here: [[File:Luis7M's stats.png]], published on 27 May. I had to retake it because of my username change, which took place on 27 May. Luis7M (talk) 02:17, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brother this goes way beyond a “deletion ratio”. JTtheOG (talk) 02:46, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JTtheOG: I agree, and that's why I'm currently addressing the rest with Uther and Fortuna. Luis7M (talk) 03:04, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Give yourself a timeout. Take 2 weeks off even looking at Wikipedia. - UtherSRG (talk) 10:14, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@UtherSRG: I was actually thinking about spending the rest of June completely away from everything that isn't the mainspace. That is, no talk pages, no AfDs, no requests. Luis7M (talk) 11:04, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You would be better off touching grass for two weeks. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:11, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, welcome, welcome Luis7M! I'm glad that you are joining the June 2025 drive! Please, have a cup of WikiTea, and go cite some articles.

Cielquiparle (talk) 02:25, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw that you referenced a lot of unsourced articles by using Discogs. However, per Wikipedia:DISCOGS, it is considered an unreliable, user-generated site and should not be used as a reference. Can you please replace it with a better source, or remove it again? Fram (talk) 14:33, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Fram: Thanks for letting me know. Feel free to revert the edits in which I did that. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 14:47, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Normal reaction would be that you, who knows best which articles you edited with this source and who actually introduced the error, would revert your own edits, not ask someone else to do so while you continue with other edits. Fram (talk) 15:16, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Fram: All right. Wikipedia:DISCOGS states that "external links to the site may be appropriate", so I will remove the Discogs refs and place them on external links. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 15:22, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please readd the "unsourced" tags at the same time as well. Thank you! Fram (talk) 15:39, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you are going to disambiguate a page, as you did with Peter Krieger, please ensure that you fix all incoming links, otherwise they will just link to a dab page... GiantSnowman 06:57, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The one who usually takes care of that is Rodw, not me. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 12:12, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And if you move a page away from its long standing title because it is not the primary topic according to you, absolutely don't change the link to point to someone less known by that name as you did at Peter de Smet. Perhaps don't move pages until you get a better feel for what is and isn't generally accepted, but use WP:RM instead. Fram (talk) 07:46, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Fram: If you take a closer look, you will notice that the one who misjudged the primary topic in Peter de Smet (disambiguation) was Rotideypoc41352, not me. My intention was for the disambiguation to be at the base, given that the comic-strip artist only had 200 views. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 12:12, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't blame your own actions on what someone else did on another page please. You created Hendrik Groen, moved the existing Peter de Smet page to a new title, and then retargeted the redirect to your own new creation. All of this is your choice and your responsability. Fram (talk) 12:23, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Fram: Yes, but I turned "Peter de Smet" into a redirect in order to then ask WP:RM to change the disambig title from Peter Smet to Peter de Smet, so it was only going to be a temporary move... Oh man, this is kinda hard to explain, but my intention was for the disambiguation to be at the base, given that the comic-strip artist only had 200 pageviews. Furthermore, none of the three Peter Smets meets PRIMARY TOPIC because none of them have long-term significance or a sufficient gap in pageviews, so I still think that the disambig should be at the base. Can you please help me with that? Luis7M (talk) 12:32, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can use WP:RM to do the full complex of moves in a single request. Please leave determination of ptopic to those with more experience and less questionable judgment. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:50, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@UtherSRG: Notice taken.

Well, given that you are an experienced editor with good judgment, what do you think of the ptopic of Peter de Smet? Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 16:06, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's a discussion for WP:RM. I use my good judgment to stay away from that realm as it is out of my wheelhouse. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:09, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. @Luis7M: Your judgment is still obviously questionable. I did suggest a full 2 weeks off of Wikipedia, not just from non-mainspace. I suggest again that you take that time away, before you run further afoul and get blocked. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:58, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@UtherSRG: As you can see above, this was a simple misunderstanding. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 12:12, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Regarding your edit to the Samroeng Chaiyong article, thanks for catching the typo in the birth date (it should have been 12, not 2). I've restored the note on the year ambiguity, though, since it's unclear where Olympedia got their year conversion from. Also, I wanted to ask why you removed the WP:list-defined references and inserted them into the article text. Per WP:CITEVAR, such changes should be discussed first. Or was it perhaps done by a semi-automated tool you were using to edit? --Paul_012 (talk) 07:22, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Paul 012: I don't use semi-automated tools. I added those refs into the article text because that's the typical standard. I had already done that a few times and no one objected, so I had no idea that WP:CITEVAR was even a thing, but now I know. Thanks for letting me know. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 14:03, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Atli Gregersen, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources to see how to add references to an article. Thank you. GiantSnowman 10:32, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@GiantSnowman: The only content with no references was the Honours section, which took me about 30 seconds to fix. Thanks a lot for your precious help. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 12:50, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If it was that easy you should have done it in the first place. GiantSnowman 12:52, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I've worked up the Draft:List of Cape Cobras cricketers that you produced for us (thanks again, btw, for that – I appreciate the work). I've added a lead which is quite complex because cricket teams in South Africa are also quite complex during this period. Could you take a look and suggest any changes that you think are needed – the lead seems too complex for my liking really Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:46, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:List of Titans cricketers is done. I should have Draft:List of Knights cricketers done in a few hours. Unless you tell me otherwise, I'll let you push them to mainspace Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:23, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And Draft:List of Warriors cricketers is done Not going to get the other two done till the weekend probably Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:16, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Imperial Lions draft needs to be moved. Imperial seems to have been a commercial naming rights thing. I've moved the team article to Lions cricket team (South Africa). I'm not 100% sure what the list needs to be moved to – maybe List of Lions (South Africa) cricketers? There are two other sides that go by the name Lions... Blue Square Thing (talk) 15:59, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Blue Square Thing: It's your call bro. I'm simply the creator of lists. The rest is not my concern (especially because I'm not that deep on cricketers). Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 16:06, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In that case I would think that's the best name. I'm not entirely sure what happens when you rename a draft, so if you could do that bit it'd help – I generally work in sandboxes rather than with drafts Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:24, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And Draft:List of Dolphins cricketers is ready to go. The KwaZulu-Natal let will take a little longer as it'll be much, much longer Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:25, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And Draft:List of KwaZulu-Natal cricketers is done - the final one. Thanks for these. It's helped me to understand the order the others need to be attacked in and the issues related to them - the multiplicity of teams for Natal, for example, makes things complicated Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:51, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from hijacking pages, as you did with César Medina. Should you believe the subject you were writing about deserves an article, please use the Article Wizard, which has an option to create a draft version that you can then get feedback on. Please also see Wikipedia's disambiguation guideline which indicates how to handle separate subjects with similar names. If you continue to hijack an existing article, you may be blocked from editing. If you have any questions, you are always welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. Dl2000 (talk) 22:26, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dl2000: César Medina the Peruvian does not meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT and it will be deleted sooner or later. César Medina the Panamanian, however, meets WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. So what's the problem, exactly? I'm simply taking a shortcut.

By the way, I have created +1,000 bios without the help of Article Wizard, and I will continue to do so. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 22:46, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Holy cow, I have just realized something!! Medina will be checked by Robby.is.on because this user always checks every single article that gets mentioned on my talk page, and Robby also always removes the FootballDatabase.eu profiles per WP:WPFLINKSNO, thus leaving Medina with no sources, which will result in Medina becoming a "BLP unreferenced", which will attract a lot of eyes, and those eyes will soon realize that Medina does not meet GNG and will tag it for AFD, which will result in Medina the Peruvian getting deleted, which will allow me to then replace it with Medina the Panamanian... Wow, this is some serious Sherlock Holmes stuff right here.

Of course, all of this could have been avoided through my shortcut, but policies are policies, so I understand where you are coming from. Luis7M (talk) 00:46, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you have actually found that the Peruvian player does not meet GNG, why not take the article to AfD yourself? Robby.is.on (talk) 10:40, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Robby.is.on: I have never put up an AfD before, and I surely won't start now. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 13:08, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Right. You would much rather prefer to do some petty bullshit like this to get an article deleted. JTtheOG (talk) 21:34, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JTtheOG: I actually tried to bypass the deletion altogether by replacing César Medina the Peruvian, who does not meet GNG, with César Medina the Panamanian.

Anyways, I'm glad you are here. Could you please put an AFD on César Medina, given that he is a player from the internet age who does not meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. Thanks. Luis7M (talk) 21:45, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No. You have the tools to do it yourself. JTtheOG (talk) 23:42, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Robby.is.on: You often remove FootballDatabase.eu per WP:WPFLINKSNO. Are you not going to do the same with César Medina? Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 00:03, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Editing the article is pointless when it should be deleted. Robby.is.on (talk) 00:37, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Soler, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Jiltedsquirrel 🌰 ^{(talk || contribs)} 04:00, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not change the formatting of infoboxes as you did here - it should be displayed like this as per {{Infobox football biography}}. GiantSnowman 15:19, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@GiantSnowman: Seriously? I literally added +12,000 bytes to Georges Crozier, and instead of a "thanks for your valuable contribution", I get a message about infobox formatting... Just wow. Luis7M (talk) 16:10, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your valuable contribution - except messing with the infobox. GiantSnowman 17:10, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just a courtesy message to notify you in case you haven't seen the Wikipedia:The World Destubathon contest update in the last few days that we've decided to run the full month until the 16th of July. For those who have been too busy to contribute, we would love some help in reaching 4000 articles by Wednesday night! At present we're about 480 articles short!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:54, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		Citation Barnstar
		This award is given in recognition to Luis7M for collecting more than 415.5 points during the WikiProject Unreferenced articles's JUN25 backlog drive. Your contributions played a crucial role in sourcing over 9,500 unsourced articles during the drive. Thank you so much for participating and helping to reduce the backlog! – DreamRimmer Alt ■ 15:48, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	You Kicked It Off!
	You started something that no one else did. You kicked it off when no one else did. Never mind the danger! Blue Square Thing (talk) 20:11, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is the title of Juan José Cañas (writter) intentional - or should that be (writer)?— Rod ^talk 14:31, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Rod: Cearly a mistake. I meant writer. Thanks for noticing. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 22:14, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for football edits! --Mishary94 (talk) 00:59, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gatoclass (talk)) 00:02, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JTtheOG (talk) 20:33, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Luis7M, your recent request at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests has been removed because it remained inactive for seventy-two hours after being contested. If you would like to proceed with your original request, please follow the directions at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Controversial.

This notification was delivered by TenshiBot. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=TenshiBot}} on the top of your current page (your user talk page) TenshiBot (talk) 00:04, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Luis, I'm Squawk7700. I recently noticed at NPP that you created a second account while you (to the best of my knowledge) are technically still subject to a one-account restriction (in spite of WP:VALIDALT). After all the troubles you already went through because of second accounts, I just want to spare you from even more trouble; wouldn't it be better for you to retire that one now before the drama? Best, Squawk7700 (talk) 10:13, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per Squawk7700 above. You knew not to make a second account, and yet you did it anyway. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:48, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Squawk7700: / @UtherSRG:

If I had known that the consequences of creating a disclosed alternate account would be an indef blocked, then I would never have done it, and much less named it Luis 7M the Second. That's basically asking for it...

I genuinely thought that the action of disclosing my alternate account would protect me from such perils, especially because that “one-account restriction” is obviously meant only for undisclosed accounts, but apparently I was super wrong.

Uther, once you unblock me, the first thing I will do is make an appeal at ANI about having a disclosed alternate account. I guess, that’s what I should have done before. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 20:22, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The response from the previous admin who unblocked you previously: I'm unblocking your account subject to a one-account restriction. Specifically, you may not operate any account except for this one, and may not intentionally edit while logged out. If you accidentally edit while you are logged out, you may correct that by immediately claiming credit for the edit using this account. Emphasis mine. Note this doesn't say "but you can make another account if you disclose it". That would not be a "one-account restriction". So no, I'm not going to unblock you. I'll let another admin evaluate the situation and decide how to proceed. - UtherSRG (talk) 22:19, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In March 2024, when you were blocked for other reasons, you intentionally edited your talk page while logged out. Seraphimblade (the admin who placed the one-account restriction) participated in that discussion, making it clear that this was a violation of the restriction, and asked you: Do you understand that, going forward, you cannot do that, period? Your response was that you did.

This isn't exactly the same scenario (logged-out editing vs. an alternate account), but this part is the same: you edited outside your single account, you disclosed that fact, and it was still a violation of your one-account restriction. jlwoodwa (talk) 01:48, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, just two months ago you were asking about having one of your old accounts unblocked as a disclosed alt account, got a generally negative response, and seemingly moved on. jlwoodwa (talk) 08:05, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@UtherSRG: Using a disclosed alt account while having a "one-account restriction" would be the equivalent to disclosing my arsenal of weapons while having a "ban on the possession of firearms". Do you really think I was in such a hurry to get myself indef blocked? Of course not... I only did it because I was under the assumption that the "one-account restriction" only covered undisclosed accounts and IP addresses. Otherwise, I wouldn't have dared...

@Jlwoodwa: I had completely forgotten about that conversation, and I only recalled it yesterday, when I was scrolling my talk page after I got blocked. It was then that I noticed Tamzin’s advice to make an “appeal at ANI”, which I then used in my first reply. I wish I had remembered that before.

Still, the fact that I disclosed my alt account shows good faith. And in fact, I never used multiple accounts to deceive or mislead other editors, disrupt discussions, distort consensus, block evasion, violate community standards and policies, ETC… That’s something you can easily confirm.

Now, does this misunderstanding really warrant an unblock request, or should I make one? Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 22:22, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Given your repeated lack of judgement on previous occasions, I've lost whatever little shred of AGF I had left for you. If you still feel that the block is incorrect, feel free to request an unblock. - UtherSRG (talk) 04:48, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@UtherSRG: This is actually the first time you are describing it as "lack of judgement". Previously, you described it as "questionable judgement", and there is a huge difference between the two.

The only reason you don't have any AGF for me is because we had one strong disagreement on how WP:RFU should work... I’m a firm believer in m:where articles go to die and you are not. That's it. I shouldn't have tried to force it, but I did, and I have already expressed my regret about that and moved on.

All the following disagreements between us and "questionable judgements" were over harmless stuff that happens every day. None of which made in bad faith. So, you see... I’m truly not the "monster" you think I am, Uther. I would like to challenge you to name one single thing I have done in bad faith. Just one. If you can’t, then I’m deserving of your AGF. Kind regards.

PS: Regarding the unblock request, I think I might make one later this month. Luis7M (talk) 23:22, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to get articles deleted because you want to "break another editor's streak" is pretty bad faith (not to mention NOTHERE): I brought it up precisely because I wanted to break Dude70's streak. I was expecting him to put up a fight, not to straight up give the green light for someone to delete those articles...
This was a good block. JoelleJay (talk) 15:57, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JoelleJay: I strongly oppose deletionism. Hence why I have never started an AFD. I never did it and I never will. This belief, however, was corrupted by my desire to hold the greatest undeleted streak that Wikipedia has ever seen. For this end, I sought the deletion of Óscar Daza as a means to break Brazilian's streak.

But in my defense, Joelle, it must be said that Daza does in fact have lack of SIGCOV. And this point can be easily proven by simply placing an AFD on his head.

Speaking of AFDs, no less than SEVEN of my articles have gone to AFDs, and not a single one of them was deleted. Not one! And you wanna know why, Joelle? Because all of my subjects are from the pre-internet era. Daza, however, is not from that era. And for that, he shall not survive an AFD.

Tell me, Joelle, is it really bad faith to suggest an AFD on a subject who does not meet SIGCOV, even if such suggestion was made with ulterior motives? Hmm? Frankly, I don't think so...

Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 19:22, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's literally bad faith... JoelleJay (talk) 21:43, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jlwoodwa and JoelleJay: Are we ready to remove TPA? - UtherSRG (talk) 22:59, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JoelleJay: Suggesting to AFD a subject who does not meet GNG is an action that does not harm the project... If your best example of my "bad faith" is an action as harmless as this one, then I'm confident I will achieve absolution. Kind regards.

@UtherSRG: What is TPA and what does that mean? Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 23:12, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stop suggesting the deletion of Daza or your ability to edit this talk page (TPA) will be removed. I like your editing abilities and hopes there will be a way for you to stay, but you need to stop with the silly obsession over 'undeleted streaks' which is only making things worse. Maybe wait a few weeks to reflect, then make an unblock request if you understand the reason for the block and can agree to do no more of this silliness. BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:02, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no longer obsessed with "undeleted streaks". I was simply giving some context to @JoelleJay:.

You seem to be the only one around here who can differentiate silliness from bad faith. I really appreciate that. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 00:22, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Why do you need this second account? BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:03, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I stated it here, User:Luis7M the Second. Luis7M (talk) 00:06, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Why can't you edit surname articles with this account? BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:08, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I can, but I want to use this account only for surnames that are related to my subjects, and the alt for everyone else. The same goes with the disambigs. I think this is called Wikipedia:Single-purpose account. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 00:12, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  You may want to, but the thing is you're under a restriction that you can only use one account, period. Its questionable whether you'll even be unblocked: I'd suggest agreeing to use only this account if you get unblocked. BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:14, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  And that's exactly why I will make an appeal at ANI about getting an approval to own a disclosed alt account... Luis7M (talk) 00:18, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I expect people will want to see a stronger reason other than that you'd like to have a second account, especially given that you're under a restriction that you're not supposed to have multiple accounts. You should be willing to have just one account if you're going to be unblocked. BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:22, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm confident they will take my side. I have never used sockpuppetry for ill purposes. I simply do not want to mix oil and water. Kind regards. Luis7M (talk) 00:29, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Please just be willing to have one account. I want to see you stay here but insisting on having two accounts – when that is the very reason you have been blocked – isn't going to help. It doesn't matter whether your disambiguation pages created and articles created are tied to the same account. BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:33, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Sorry Beanie, but I believe that someone who never used sockpuppetry for ill-intended purposes should not be denied the right to have an disclosed alt account. I will only succumb to that fate if the ANI judges it so...

  Thanks for helping me, but my mind is settled. Luis7M (talk) 00:49, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Look at the decline of your request above. There's no chance you'll be unblocked if you're not willing to have only one account. Would you rather be able to edit with one account or not be able to edit at all? BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:55, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• @Yamla: If I may, I created Edmundoss before I even knew anything about sockpuppetry, and the only reason why I logged into it in July was precisely to disconnect its Gmail, so I could re-use it to create Luis the Second in July. Surely, you can't refuse my unblock request over this, right? Luis7M (talk) 01:05, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than accept the feedback and advice that innumberable editors have tried to give you this week and when you were unblocked with a one edit restriction, you dug deeper to the point that it's indistinguishable from trolling. You retain access to email and UTRS and I hope you won't be disruptive in either forum @Luis7M. Star Mississippi 01:42, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to email me if you like. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:56, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think editing WP is just not a good fit for someone whose hyperfixation behaviors are this inflexible. I get the appeal of imposing arbitrary constraints and goals on oneself, like confining certain edits to one account or only posting comments at 00s or achieving "streaks" of whatever, I do the same thing occasionally; but as soon as it starts interfering with other people's work or your own productivity you have to be willing to breach those self-restrictions without drama. Even when you think it's unjustified. JoelleJay (talk) 03:29, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If I can give my two pennies worth over this as someone who edited in similar areas to Luis7M, I must say that his attention to detail on football biographies was breathtaking. So many pages on historic players are merely statistics or lists of teams, but Luis's always came out fully formed, and the quality of his English is perfect. However, on an interpersonal level, what I've read about his conversations with other people has not been very good. He seemed to hold grudges about constructive criticisms and revisions, particularly from User:JTtheOG and User:BrazilianDude70 (two users I communicate with regularly) and refused to drop the stick in those interactions. Openly saying multiple times that he was proposing deletion of a page BD made just to break a "streak" of undeleted creations by our Brazilian friend was WP:NOTHERE and WP:POINTy.

However I don't know if this "saying-the-quiet-part-out-loud" was a sign of something else, especially when combined with the obsessions with "streaks" or the numerical quirks like only editing at :59. That's in no way an excuse for all the grief that has been handed out to other people.

There's no doubt that this behaviour with other people would have ended in an indef much earlier if Luis had been editing on topics with more watchers than footballers from 100 years ago. I think that Luis's skills in research and writing are useful for the project, but they're negated by his personal interactions. I would have suggested an interaction ban from JT and BD, but it seems that anyone who slightly interferes with his work becomes the next point of obsession. If you're reading, Luis, maybe I'd recommend writing your own website or a book, probably self-published. Unknown Temptation (talk) 17:21, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He also professed he was "actually having a lot of fun with this "self-aggrandizing crusade" about preserving [his] 0% deletion ratio" after causing this mess, which was, of course, not the last time he overwrote an article. JTtheOG (talk) 19:25, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've been thinking if I should give my two cents about this as well, but after seeing Unknown Temptation's reply, I think I will. I want to start by saying I've never actually interacted with Luis, but we both edit football articles. Luis, your research and effort to articles is fantastic, and you put great effort into articles. Genuinely.

However, going after BrazilianDude70, one of our most prolific and well-respected editors, refusing to nominate an article for deletion because you haven't before, and calling asilvering the "latin-speaking lady" was stuff that was unnecessary to the project and upsetting to me.

Listen, you have real skill and potential. Take some time to reflect and journal, and keep researching. I agree with Unknown Temptation, you could make a great book about historic footballers! RossEvans19 (talk 18:39, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Luis7M. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Florencio Peña, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:06, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hi

Epstein Orange Juice (talk) 23:25, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]