User talk:Mattlore/Archive 5

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Mattlore. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hi, Mattlore. I ran into a problem on the evaluation of the Grant Bell article. It states that this guy is the coach of the Central Comets, but I find that their coach is actually Wayne Barnett. It is likely that Bell is a coach of the Centrals of the Townsville District Rugby League of the Northern Division of the Queensland Rugby League. Could you check this out? And also, does the Rugby Project have a guideline for notability like Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Notability which is based on full professionals at a nationally recognized level. It seems coaches and players at Bell's level are very very minor league -- but I am not familiar with rugby players, so I am not even certain whether the Townsville Centrals are professional, semi-pro or possibly even amateur. Let me know. Cheers. — CactusWriter | ^needles 01:39, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

You're entirely correct, I misread the article and got the club mixed up. Yes WP:RL does have notability guidelines, in this case Bell is a former professional club coach and his notability stems from that, not his current role which is extremely minor in rugby league circles. Mattlore (talk) 03:44, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Found them here [1]

Okay, great. Thank you for checking on that. I've moved Grant Bell into mainspace. — CactusWriter | ^needles 04:48, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Nice work! --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:46, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

This user played a significant role in helping Grant Bell graduate from incubation.

I notice you have contributed significantly to Mount Albert by-election, 2009. A peer review of the article has taken place, and your help on fixing the listed criticism would be appreciated. Thanks, Adabow (talk) 09:32, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Please substantiate facts and cite references before editing. Your statement about Stuart Nash loosing the Napier electorate to Russell Fairbrother in 2008 is clearly false. RF was defeated in 2005. Chris Tremain won the seat in 2005 and again in 2008. Stuart nesh contested the seat in 2008 but lost

Sendervictorius (talk) 09:21, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I've replied at Talk:Stuart Nash. Mattlore (talk) 09:25, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey Mattlore, i saw your pictures that you put on SpecialWindler's page & i was wondering, if they were the heritage jerseys, what was the jersey that they were wearing against the Broncos? Josh the newcastle fan (talk) 10:04, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey Josh, They've got four jerseys this year - Home & Away, there heritage one (grey) and there 15th season one (blue).[2] They wore the blue against the Titans and Broncos because both of those teams opted to play in there white away jerseys due to the heat and NZ understandably didn't want to play in black...I don't quite understand why they have four myself tbh. Mattlore (talk) 10:09, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Howdy! Mattlore, I changed the infobox on the Tuuta article because of 2 points in the biography infobox MoS

"2) In reference to the yearXstart and yearXend parameters b) For unknown dates, both "yearXstart" an "yearXend" should be left blank."

Which seems to indicate no "19??" to me. And secondly...

"3) In reference to the clubX (where X can be a letter or a number) parameter a) The club/team allowed/disallowed shall be as follows: iii) The club/team should have it's own article on Wikipedia."

Which is why I would have left out Hornby.

However, the page is looking great because of your work, so I should hardly be pernickety. Cheers, Doctorhawkes (talk) 07:34, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Ah, okay - I'm not sure if I've read that MoS for a while. The standard I've been using for club/teams in the infobox is that it should be a first grade club, which means that I include NZ clubs until 1995 when the ARL/SL/NRL takes over. I generally agree with Jeff79's guidelines.

I'll take the point on the dates on board though, it seems sensible enough. Mattlore (talk) 07:42, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

[Can you please link me to that MoS - I can't find it]

Maybe it's more a case that we've been remiss getting some articles up for the NZ teams pre-Warriors. It's certainly something I'd be interested in knowing more about. Here's that link.

[3] Doctorhawkes (talk) 10:36, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Kia ora, Mattlore,
Thank you indeed for your edits to Fuifui Moimoi. I've taken the liberty to inline cite 'em.
--Shirt58 (talk) 14:08, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Please see the discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_New_Zealand/governments#Some_thoughts_on_by-elections. Schwede66 00:50, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Mattlore. You have new messages at Josh the newcastle fan's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

This user wants you to join WikiProject NZ politics.

(Regarding your comment attached to this edit: "the swing was against Labour not Rann") I disagree with that comment.
First, let me make it very clear that I agree that it can't be put into the article without a supporting reference - from my POV, (and yours too, I am guessing), that is indisputable. But, from my POV, the simple fact of the matter is that the swing was against Rann (& perhaps Foley, too). If I can ever find a supporting reference, I will add the statement back in. But not until then.
Did you revert it because it was unsupported POV? Or did you revert it because "the swing was against Labour not Rann"?
If the former, I agree with you. If the latter, could I impose upon you to explain to me why you think/say that?
With thanks in advance for your reply, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:04, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Hey Pdfpdf,

Thanks for taking the time to talk to me and not just revert it - I think we pretty much agree on the main points here. I almost didn't make the change but I decided to be bold and go with it because the change was unreferenced. I am no expert on South Australian (or any Australian) politics so I really have no idea what the mood was like before the election, but I did feel that, unless it is referenced, the swing against a party at an election cannot be attributed to solely (or mostly) the leader.

So I reverted it because it was an unsupported POV, not because of how I have interpreted the South Australian election results. Apologies on the unclear comment on my edit. Mattlore (talk) 01:13, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

No worries. Thanks for the clarification. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 07:39, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Be on the lookout for an article to update the page, but a pretty reliable source tells me that Siuatonga Likiliki has signed with Newcastle. Don't take my word for it though, i might be wrong, but keep a lookout for an article just incase. Josh the newcastle fan (talk) 13:00, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 03:04, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

On June 19, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 2010 New Zealand rugby league season, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 18:02, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello Mattlore, your prod has been removed from Celia Wade-Brown and it looks like we now have the article's subject writing her autobiography. Do you have time to deal with the editor? Schwede66 20:27, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey. I've placed a COI on the user's talkpage and have posted a notice on the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. Will see if I can edit the article, I'll at least place some citation needed tags for now. Mattlore (talk) 06:01, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

If you send me a WP email, advising of your email address, I'll reply offline with some further thoughts. Schwede66 06:16, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello Mattlore, I'm just drawing your attention to the accusation that you (amongst others) are lazy and inept. There you have it. Schwede66 00:42, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

haha. Mattlore (talk) 06:14, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

In this edit of yours you cited a stuff.co.nz reference. It usually pays to archive their links, because they rot after a couple of years. I find WebCite quite helpful for this. Also using citation templates like {{cite web}} makes it easier to keep references to a standard format. Thanks, Adabow (talk · contribs) 09:38, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey Matt. Just wanted to check with you what your feeling was about the apparent norm for pre-1995 domestic New Zealand club competition stats to be excluded from rugby league biography infoboxes. In the past I'd argued that up until the first season of the Auckland Warriors, other domestic club competitions could be considered 'first grade' for infobox purposes, but not from 1995 onwards (this argument's set out in more detail on my user page). Should this be re-thought?--Jeff79 (talk) 14:15, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey Jeff, your logic has been the norm that I've been following for some time* - have I messed up somewhere or has someone else challenged this logic? Mattlore (talk) 05:26, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

* The one exception is that I've usually counted all of the Lion Red Cup (1994-1996) because it seems weird to count the first year of it and not the other two. And I have access to complete statistics from the first two years of this competition.

Yeah, it was related to your addition of Lion Red Cup data. What you say about continuity makes sense though. I also say on my talk page that availability of data will strengthen the case for inclusion, and you seem to have all the figures. I'm also pretty sure I've seen cases of guys being selected to represent smaller nations such as Cook Islands internationally from the Lion Red Cup post '94. So it's fine, I just wanted to check with you.--Jeff79 (talk) 06:47, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

For clarity I've been using:

NZ Club competitions: 1908-1994

Lion Red Cup 1994-1996

NZ Warriors 1995-present

With provincial representative matches included only if the player has debuted for the province before 1994.

Mattlore (talk) 07:10, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mattlore,

I tried to update this site in relation to Hone Harawira birth name. I notice that my updates keep getting removed... can you explain why, when it is common knowledge that Hone Harawiras' 'original' name was John Hatfield.....?

Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.185.18.69 (talk) 09:08, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

I have nominated World Match Racing Tour, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Match Racing Tour. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. WuhWuzDat 17:29, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for Disruption, at South Sydney Rabbitohs, reverting against talk page consensus.. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. -- Cirt (talk) 14:39, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Mattlore (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I think a block is a rather out of proportion response in this situation. I have tried to remain calm and civil in what has become an edit war between YellowMonkey and Jeff79 over several pages, both who constantly insult each other with there edit summaries. (I presume they have been both blocked also but havent looked?) The talk page (at Sydney Roosters) hasn't finally been concluded but the consensus seems to lead towards remove unless they have done something significant that can be mentioned on the page. Being involved in this fracas doesn't take up a large proportion of my time here on wikipedia and I don't think a block is justified, some sort of warning would be better. If a consensus has been deemed to have been reached at Sydney Roosters then can we instead close that vote/discussion and apply that decision to the pages, something that I can easily support.

Decline reason:

It is clear that the few edits at South Sydney Rabbitohs are part of a wider pattern. However YellowMonkey and Jeff79 may have behaved, your contribution has not been as constructive as it might have been. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:22, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I have posted a note about this at User talk:Cirt#Unblock request from Mattlore. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I have read your query on my talk page. I don't think right now I have time to give your question the attention it deserves, and rather than give a rushed answer I will try to deal with it in a couple of days. Having said that, I confess I have sometimes said the same in the past and then forgotten about it, so if I haven't got back to you within 48 hours from now please do remind me. JamesBWatson (talk) 18:12, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Mattlore (talk) 19:15, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Well done on this edit. Seems like a solution to the raised eyebrows of people who don't know what's going on. Don't know why we haven't seen this before; right under our noses! Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:26, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! The thought struck me today for some odd reason and I thought I'd just be bold and do it without discussing it first. Hope everyone else likes the change too. Mattlore (talk) 05:49, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I think I might create a similar template for the new Auckland Councilors - seeing as there are only 20 of them (or 21 including Mayor) - and they seem like they will all be deserving of there own pages once elected. Here is an example: User:Mattlore/sandbox2 Mattlore (talk) 05:51, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Ah, is that what's going on? I was a bit confused this morning, but couldn't put my finger on it why parlboxes look different. Now I know. Good call.

As for the Auckland draft, I'm not sure that I would call it 'ticket'. That sounds a bit too colloquial. The general idea is good, though.

And I'm glad that you are out of the dog box now. Schwede66 06:19, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not sure about "ticket" either, but the labels are easy to change. I might go have a look at what the council website is calling them. Thanks, I allowed myself to get dragged into two other editors battle, but I've since served my time...heh. Mattlore (talk) 06:29, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Auckland Council uses "affiliation". [4]

Hey mate, in tables, is it possible to have this command (style="font-size:90%") & this command (style="text-align: center;") running at the same time? I've tried to do it on the List of Knights players page to make it tidier & roomier but it wouldn't work. Josh the newcastle fan (talk) 03:37, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey, I haven't had time to have a play around with this yet - though I will try and do so in the future. In the mean time have you tried adding <center>text</center> to the titles to get it to do it that way? Not sure if it would work, but its an option. Mattlore (talk) 05:27, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, that works. The only problem is i have to put it around every single piece of visible text. It'll be a big job, i will attempt it, but yeah, it's gonna take a while. Josh the newcastle fan (talk) 08:27, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Done. Josh the newcastle fan (talk) 07:00, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

You are going to absolutely hate me; I've found the code you were looking for was (style="text-align: center; font-size:90%") although it doesnt seem to work alongside sortname. Mattlore (talk) 10:10, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Haha, i'll probably just leave as is. Josh the newcastle fan (talk) 12:37, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

		The New Zealand Barnstar of National Merit
		for dedicated and high-quality work documenting rugby league in New Zealand
		this WikiAward was given to Mattlore by dramatic (talk) on 09:08, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

You may wish to transfer this to your user page. dramatic (talk) 09:08, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Mattlore. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports).
Message added 08:55, 15 September 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Mattlore. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports).
Message added 09:35, 15 September 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Mattlore. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports).
Message added 06:45, 16 September 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Matthew Sturm, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.matthewsturm.com.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 06:21, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

• First, I have created User:Mattlore\Kalifa Fai-Fai Loa. I am not 100% sure whether this was a good idea, as policy is that articles created by banned or blocked users should be deleted. Perhaps it will be best if you substantially rewrite the article.
• Second, apologies for not responding to your query about the problems at South Sydney Rabbitohs. When you first asked me I thought I would come back to the question within a day or so. I then forgot about it, and by the time you reminded me so much time had passed that I did not remember what was involved, and to give the sort of detailed answer I originally had in mind I would have had to spend quite a long time re-reading numerous edits to remind myself. Rather than do that I have just made a quick glance over the matter, and will give you a very brief answer. It seems to me that you made perfectly good faith attempts to clear up a situation in which other editors were being uncooperative. However, I think it would have been better to have at first made more of an attempt to discuss the matter, rather than making several reverts. In cases like this, even if I am quite convinced that the editors involved will not respond to attempts at discussion, I still tend to go through the motions. That way it will be quite clear that I have not been involved in escalating the problem. (There is also, of course, the faint possibility that I will be happily proved wrong, and the editors will respond to attempts tat discussion.) JamesBWatson (talk) 20:24, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

The article Howick Hornets has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Amateur sports club failing notability requirements. Cup win covered adequately in season article

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

I think we can get away with covering teams in the top level of competition in the country, which the Auckland club league isn't. Amateur clubs with specific notability (like being the first, or having won umpteen premierships, or winning an international clubs league) can apss with appropriate sources. dramatic (talk) 08:09, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

In June you added Pt Chev Pirates to the clubs this person played for, with an offline ref. An anon has recently changed this without explanation, and I have reverted the edit. Could you please check your source and restore the edit if you made a typo earlier.-gadfium 05:50, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I had a check and he definitely played for Pt Chev. It could be that he played for Marist as well but I haven't been able to find a source for that. Mattlore (talk) 22:07, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Mattlore. You have new messages at Josh the newcastle fan's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks for this nomination and discussion. I was slightly unsure of what to call this, so I appreciate the immediate feedback. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 03:29, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

No worries. And thanks for doing all the categorising work you are undertaking - I didn't want the CfD to dishearten you! Mattlore (talk) 04:07, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Rules have changed here if you want to see it go to the notability page on wikipedia and see rugby league

A player, coach, or referee of rugby league football is presumed notable if they:

1. Have appeared in at least one competitive international match between Full members of the RLIF and/or Full or Associate Members of the RLEF and have appeared in any of the top 20 ranked countries by the RLIF ^{(see Notes 1 & 2)}, or
2. Have appeared in at least one match at a Rugby League World Cup tournament, or
3. Have have appeared in at least one match of a fully professional domestic Rugby league competition:
   • National Rugby League ^{(see Note 3)}, or
   • Super League ^{(see Note 3)} including Challenge Cup appearances, or
   • Co-operative Championship

Other players and personalities surrounding the game are notable if they meet WP:GNG.

I have reverted the changes to the rules you made to the rules w/o discussion. Also it would be good if you can sign your posts so I don't have to work out who left the message on my wall. Thanks, Mattlore (talk) 04:28, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Check the rlef website Jamaica is a associate member so their players are notable enough for wikipediaYoundbuckerz 07:58, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

But Canada and the USA are not so they haven't played in a "competitive match between..." Mattlore (talk) 19:28, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

I agree 100%, another user told me otherwise and removed them from America's Cup article. I read the guideline and restored what he deleted which included two links to new articles I had created. Can you keep an eye on it for me? The only way to see if there is an article is to link it, and it is more likely someone will create one if a redlink is there. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 20:27, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw the history on the main page. Will intervene if needed as the policy seems pretty clear at the moment. Mattlore (talk) 04:21, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Cameron Bell (rugby league), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.cameronbellproperties.com.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 02:57, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I noticed that you removed two categories from the BMW Oracle article. Since your edits are usually very helpful, I suppose that you have a good reason for this change. Maybe you could post that to the article's talk page? Otherwise people might wonder why the categories were removed, since they were factually correct and relevant.--Gautier lebon (talk) 08:49, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Hey, don't have time to write a full reply due to the festive season but basically; America's Cup Challengers 2007 was removed because other editors have decided it should only contain individual yachts not teams and Sailing teams was removed because it is part of the America's Cup Sailing teams category. Mattlore (talk) 07:45, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

OK, that is good enough for me. Happy holidays.--Gautier lebon (talk) 12:15, 29 December 2010 (UTC)