User talk:Libro0

/Archive 1
/Archive 2

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:47, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Libro0,

Thank you for creating 1892 American Cup.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

The article needs a copyedit to comply with MOS:DASH. In particular, soccer scores should be represented using an en dash (e.g. 3–1) instead of a hyphen (e.g. 3-1).

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Bennv123}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Bennv123 (talk) 07:27, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:RFC emblem.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. — Ирука¹³ 14:53, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:NHSCTrophy.jpg.

This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the image description page states the source and copyright status of the derivative work, it only names the creator of the original work without specifying the status of their copyright over the work.

Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the original image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

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

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. Thanks again for your cooperation. — Ирука¹³ 07:44, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:28, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:29, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Libro0,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged 1978 National Rugby Campionships for deletion, because it's a redirect that seems implausible or is an unlikely search term.

If you don't want 1978 National Rugby Campionships to be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

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

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:15, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Libro0 I am working to update/improve articles related to early American soccer. I noticed that on talk pages you listed information on multiple occasions, that might be included in the article, but I don't see a reference for where you are getting the information. What source are you using? Demt1298 (talk) 19:42, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Libro0 I just wanted to inquire why you added the See Also: 1895–96 National Association Foot Ball League season to the 1896 American Cup. What is the relation that you are referencing between these two articles? Demt1298 (talk) 15:01, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Same season, same sport, same region, and some of the same teams, AFA rules. Libro0 (talk) 17:30, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, LibroO, I recently transferred the AAFA Cup trophy image to Commons, where it was nominated for deletion so the nominator presumed it is a copyrighted one (I guess he assumed that because it is a color photograph).

The question is, do you have a link to the original version? if so, it would be very useful to provide a proof at the debate (although I have left my opinion anyway).

Thanks in advance, Fma12 (talk) 23:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Forget it, I've just found the original image (File:Dewar trophy 1914.jpg) which I had uploaded in 2016. Sorry! Fma12 (talk) 23:20, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the "WP:Vandal" summary edit is totally wrong so I'm everything but vandal. Let's clear it. First of all, I have been here for over 18 years, and I have had edited (and created) tons of association football articles.

I'll explain you the changes made:

1. The Clark logo is the company logo, not the football team emblem so why did you put it there? They are not the same thing. If I consider it could be removed, there is no vandalic edit on that.
2. When you revert a change, you are changing ALL the modifications. And I had also added a "nowrap" template to the template:football box to align the 'Kearny Rangers' name. With your revertion, this change disappeared.
3. My recent edits on U.S. football teams have been all in good faith and they have the purpose of improving the articles. You stated all without discussion. Some of these edits are questionable as to their improvement of the article. You sound angry at the changes, like if I or any user should ask you permission for editing. That's not how WP works. If you disagree with some change, open a debate on the respective article and ping the editor to discuss the point.
4. Harry Holden on Commons: if you refer to this image, I was based on Commons:Overwriting existing files where it is recommendable to upload the file separately when the new versions differs significantly from the original. And the colorized version (Ai maybe?) fits to that case. I could upload the color version as a new file, of course, to keep it there as an alternate version of the original black & white. And YES, a bigger image with better definition is always preferable rather than a small version.

Now I have to go out to work, but when I'm back, I'll revert some of the changes and will open a talk page on the 1887 American Cup to discuss some points that I consider relevant for the debate. Fma12 (talk) 09:49, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. It is not the Clark company logo. It is a Clark O.N.T. emblem which is appropriately 'representative' of the team named after the Our New Thread product. The team played on the company grounds and was made up of company employees, with uniforms made from that thread. How is the Clark O.N.T. emblem N.O.T. suitably representative of the team? It was extremely rare for any teams in that era to have an officially trademarked logo like modern franchises. If you have nothing to replace it with, the best option is to leave it. I consider it a very nice touch as opposed to leaving a pointlessly empty box there.

2/3. I made one revert and a few other changes to incorrect data that I found. The words on the screen cannot 'sound' angry since they make no noise. I opened up a discussion on your page addressing edits I felt were not all helpful. This is how WP works. There was a point of discussion on here. I took the original article and split it into two to do justice to each tournament. In the Talk I suggested merging the AAFA history in to USSF history since they are the same organization. You reintroduced a 'Main' page which is not wrong but rather formal. It now stands as an extremely redundant stub that can be simply merged and redirected to USSF history. The AAFA cup meanwhile is shown there when it was not awarded in both events only the second one.

4. Most of the photos I have uploaded have been reduced in size by a bot. Whatever quality difference you are identifying between the photos is negligible. For a period, technology limited photography and television/cinema to grayscale. However the world always existed in color. Why you would remove a photograph depicting a subject in its known natural color makes no sense to me. Take (1896 American Cup) for example. You removed a large color photo and replaced it with essentially nothing and move a black and white thumbnail of it to the infobox?!?! It is an AFA football tournament so the infobox has a representative logo of an AFA football. The team does not represent the tournament. Their photo is most appropriately placed in the Champions section clearly and colorfully visible with legible names. There was no improvement with that edit. A nice touch that all the articles should have if photos were available. Libro0 (talk) 01:22, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. I have added a correct template (see edit summary) to 1887 American Cup. In some known competition seasons (such as 2020 Copa Libertadores final or 2023 UEFA Champions League final those "winners" boxes are not even included (in fact, the template format does not allow to include other emblems rather than flags).

2-3. I'll reply to that discussion explaining the reason of my changes about the American Amateur Football Association Cup. Regarding the merger of American Amateur Football Association to the USSF, I have never complained about this. TW: redirects have sense when ONE article is involved. But in the case of American Amateur Football Association Cup, the tournament had two editions so redirecting it to only one of them, is leaving work half done.

4. If you haven't noticed yet, I uploaded the color version as a separate file (here). 4.a) However the world always existed in color. Why you would remove a photograph depicting a subject in its known natural color makes no sense to me Well, a black and white photo is always preferrable in cases when technology of those times only allowed to take that kind of pictures. You mentioned "natural color" but those photos were digitally manipulated to add color to them. What is "natural" there? If everyone thought as you do, most of the images on Wikipedia should be removed.

Team photo on articles: when the team photo is available, it is usually displayed on the tournament infobx (like this). The File:AFAball.jpg is a generic logo, not the logo of the tournament/cup or de association itself. Why should this be a better image than the photo of the winning team? 'that' does not make sense to me. Fma12 (talk) 10:10, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So in summary, there wasn't any significant point made here. I see lack of creativity and imagination. You basically want to restrict articles to what 'some other' articles have done. You want to be limited by how a particular template was designed. Sorry, but no. I deliberately made the box so I could put a non flag in there. What you put serves no purpose. It is not an international tournament. They do not represent a country or a state. As a company team they represent their brand. I also intentionally put a 'generic' ball because there is no official tournament logo. I also did it for consistency which you disrupted. If you know that actual color palette of a subject I strongly encourage its use. Black and white is not natural it is merely the 'original' format of the media. I never said B/W must be removed, or 'color for the sake of color' especially if it is not correct color scheme. Clark O.N.T. were known to be crimson. In favor of, AAFA cup ->neutral, 1887 AFA -> Restore, 1896 AFA-> Restore.

As for the example of 1967 Intercontinental, well that photo is used twice in the article. Its not a team photo rather it is a 'group' photo. Haphazard at best. Appropriate at the lower part of the article but not in the infobox. The other team and actions photos are well placed. Team photos should be in infobox on team pages not tournament pages. This belongs in the infobox. Libro0 (talk) 22:48, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, From the beginning, I have tried to be nice to you and try to reach a consensus, but instead I was met with a user whose attitude was hostile and less than cooperative. And my patience also has a limit. If your argument with phrases like So in summary, there wasn't any significant point made here. I see lack of creativity and imagination, my tone can't be as polite as it was at the beginning of this debate.

You are talking of "consistency" while putting an illustration of a generic low-quality ball but you dare to question other users when a photo of the winner of the season is included. I'm pretty sure that the image of the team is a much more representative image than any ball you randomly take from the web. Or in any case, leaving the infobox blank would be better than adding that awful ball. But calling "disruptive" to that edit, comes from a distorted point of view.

If you think that a customised "winner box" should be placed on the 1887 Cup article, go ahead. I just tried to give a propper format to that section but this is a minor issue after all. The problem is not discussing with you or any user that disagrees with the changes, the problem is your tone. Next time, try not to accuse other users of "vandals", "being disrupting" or "lack of imagination and creativity" because those terms do not help build a polite debate.

Finally, the 1967 Intercontinental poster you show me fits perfect for the infobox. I could use it. Fma12 (talk) 09:39, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your most recent edit and am unfamiliar with a T-T scoreline, what does it represent? Also, what is Derby Transcript, without information except the date on the publication I find it difficult to find anything using that name? Thanks. Demt1298 (talk) 13:25, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have always been reluctant to add stuff without complete data but this one I went ahead and put in for completeness. It looked silly just having the replay without the original game. It was supposed to be a Tie game. Derby Transcript is a newspaper and they don't elaborate much on games.Libro0 (talk) 14:09, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So it didn't report a score, just that it was tied? Also, the data about Derby Transcript (i.e. location) would allow other publishers to verify the data added. Demt1298 (talk) 15:06, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to go look at the microfilm or I can transcribe the Transcript here: November 16 states: 'A rattling game of football was played at Driving Park on Saturday, between the Ansonias and the Thistles of Newark, N.J. Two games had been played previously by these clubs, one of which was taken by the Ansonias and the other was a tie. The third game resulted in one goal for the Ansonias and a gigantic goose egg for the Thistles. Had weather been more favorable the attendance would have been larger.' There was no title or author. It was a weekly paper published on Wednesday so 'on Saturday' was Nov 12. Error-Thistles are NY not NJ. The November 2nd edition of the paper which was just after the October 29 match states: 'The American Football Association lately in session in Newark, N.J., has decided in favor of the Ansonias, as against the Thistles of New York. The New Yorkers will play off the game with the Ansonias on the 12th inst.' No title, no author. Comment- Now if there were 3 games one may have been an exhibition, friendly, league game, etc. So I assumed the first game was a tie and for whatever reason not stated, Thistles protested and it was not sustained. So only two of the meetings were cup ties. I didn't know what to do with this and since I haven't found anything else decided to just post it as is.Libro0 (talk) 16:11, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well I would suggest there are two options. If you used the Template:Cite news to use in the reference section, there is a quote section in that template that will allow you to quote the parts you assume suggest the tie. In addition if the data about Derby Transcript weekly paper (i.e. city, state) was added it would allow other editors to find on microfilm if doing research on the subject. The second option is to add the note section to Template:football box collapsible that the game is in and place in the note that the article did not list scores. Demt1298 (talk) 16:34, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added the note to the box. Derby is the town adjacent to the south of Ansonia in Connecticut.Libro0 (talk) 16:48, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:AAFATrophy.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.

This file has been deleted to prevent further vandalism. 174.128.153.62 (talk) 00:08, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]