User talk:NeilCanada

MBisanz Good luck, and have fun. --MBisanz ^talk 07:08, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, you did the right thing. Basically Cluebot has a list of rubric and it saw a new user cutting out 80% of an article, so it reverted. You can remove any warnings from your own talk page, so feel free to edit that section and cut out his warning. Good work BTW. MBisanz ^talk 03:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No idea really. I would just start searching for "Template:..." and eventually you'll find what you're looking for or see something close and the article will have a link to a category page. That's what I did when I was making some templates for the Champions League and UEFA Cup articles. Good luck. -- Grant.Alpaugh 19:34, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Neil, I appreciate your support in the debate, but I'm supporting the change to W-L-T, and so should you. In US and Canadian sports (NHL, MLS, USL, CFL, NFL, etc.) we use W-L-T and so should the articles about those sports. As long as everything transitions to the US and Canadian standard (i.e. Away-Home too), I think we should move to the more widely used format in our countries. I hope you won't fight the transition to that format in those articles. -- Grant.Alpaugh 19:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In others central american countries, like Honduras, Guatemala or El Salvador they play round robin on a single group (at least in the first stage). In Costa Rica (were I live), there is a group draw before each tournament conducted by UNAFUT, and they put the most popular and stronger teams (like Saprissa and Alajuelense) in differents groups, so the groups remain balanced. They switched mid season so the others teams can have at least one home game against the aforementioned teams. Herauseo28 (talk) 18:18, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Neil, question about the discussion, is the vote changing just MLS tables from WLT to WDL or like serie a or la liga pages to WLT as well. I didnt really read the whole discussion, it's waaaay too long, and I don't feel like reading all that lol --Muppeteer (talk) 05:12, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I think your idea is good as far as how to organize the different rounds, but until that information is officially released by CONCACAF, a simple list of the teams that qualified should suffice. I think my layout does a better job of showing both rounds in the same format. -- Grant.Alpaugh 17:00, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You felt violated because you have claimed ownership over the Candadian Championship article. I appreciate that you've done more work than anyone on those articles, but you must remember that if the community decides to make a change to articles, you have to respect consensus. I know you were just fooling around, but that is a bad habit to get into. Anyway, have a good one. -- Grant.Alpaugh 23:00, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When I say there was consensus, I'm in no way talking about a vote. Voting doesn't mean anything on WP. We agreed to represent North American soccer articles in W-L-T and Away-Home because MLS/USL does so, we did so because that is the format used predominantly in North Amerian sports, even in soccer. That was the logic behind the decision, and either way your claiming of ownership over the article is unacceptable on WP. -- Grant.Alpaugh 01:51, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I make them using a vector image program called Inkscape. It's free, so you don't have to worry about the financial aspect of it. Then I just take a pre-existing lineup image, move the elements around a bit, change the colours, overwrite the text and save. It's really that simple. Good luck dude. – PeeJay 20:10, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK Neil, I don't mean to bother you when the game is ready to start (yes, I'm watching it, too - advantage of living in a border city), but you can't have it both ways. You mentioned that the way the league (or in this case, association) presents the format should be correct. I have pointed out (not to you, but Grant) that the CSA uses W-D-L (which I have reluctantly accepted for this page) and Away-Home. Yet it is listed as Home-Away on the page. If you agree with me that the CSA provides the correct format, please change it back to Away-Home as it otherwise conflicts with your opinion (you can work around the template). --Otav347 (talk) 03:04, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I give up. I've had enough arguing over this page. In my opinion, it isn't worth the effort. There's no need for me to wait to see the archives as I'm watching the game right now (CBC 9 Windsor). This isn't the first game I've seen CBC do, so I know how they present it. And even though they do put Home-Away (they've done it for Toronto FC MLS games as well), if you noticed, before the game started, they put up the standings (with the USL matchup results listed as well) in the W-L-T format. I've never seen CBC do it any other way. But enough of that. Keep it whatever you feel is correct. Canada isn't my territory to cover, anyway. Enjoy the second half; I will. --Otav347 (talk) 04:13, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is the first tiebreaker for the Canadian Championship? 76.68.72.9 (talk) 00:57, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tiebreakers are 1. Goal differential 2. Most goals scored. 3. most away goals scored. 4. drawing of lots. Depending on what happens in the last three games any team can still win. Not likely that Vancouver will, but they are mathematically still in it. I also commented on the 2008 Canadian Championship talk page with a link to the relevant CSA article. NeilCanada (talk) 01:05, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Montreal's magic number over Vancouver is 1. So, if Vancouver loses on Tuesday, they're out. Kingjeff (talk) 03:20, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Even a tie puts Vancouver out. So they're in the definition of what a must-win situation. Kingjeff (talk) 13:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is so wonderfully convenient for this discussion to be here. You were the only person arguing that these articles should be in a different format from the rest of the American/Canadian sports articles. The NBA, MLB, the NHL, the CFL, MLS, and the USL all use the Away-Home and W-L-T format. The CSA only uses it because it is mostly concerned with Canadian national team competitions, which use the international format for obvious reasons. Otav and myself specifically disagree with you, and the broader community engaged in the discussion last season agreed with us, and you alone don't have the ability to hold that up. -- Grant.Alpaugh 21:35, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Beyond the fact that you are making an assumption regarding the reasons for why the CSA did something this is a different issue than the format of USSF articles. I already said a bunch on a message on your talk page so I'll leave it at that for now.NeilCanada (talk) 21:48, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The basic rationale for the change to W-L-T was that North American sports use this format (and for this context I would lump Mexico into the rest of Central America, as for the most part Canadian sports are very much intertwined with American sports, where the same is not true for Mexico). As I said above, every major league in the U.S. and Canada uses this format, and the fact that it wasn't changed by other users lends more to the fact that the templates you use are based on the international format, and don't have a way to change between the formats, so when you enter "homeplayer1" etc., it only displays in the international format. I also don't think that my assumption on why the CSA lists their results in the format they list them in is warrentless, as the CSA (an organization in such disarray that they have never had to deal with organizing a domestic competition of any kind before) is without a doubt primarily interested in the various Canadian national teams, at least insofar as their website is concerned. The main point is that these three articles are not so unique that they should differ from the rest of the U.S.-Canadian articles on Wikipedia. -- Grant.Alpaugh 01:53, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was just an oversight, I guess. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 10:39, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]