User talk:Veila

If you want User talk:Veila/Duncan Ferguson WIP deleted as well, just tag it. - brenneman^{T}{L} 11:46, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice edits, but please make sure that the box width isn't finite. Stuart Whitehead for example; Bromsgrove Rovers was on one line before. The box needs to resize with longer club names. Laters! Slumgum 01:15, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stuart Whitehead doesn't have breaking problems for me with fixed width, could be a browser specific issue? But the point is still valid, Michael Ballack's youth club is BSG Motor Fritz Heckert Karl-Marx-Stadt! I've backed out the width component for the time being as it breaks layout on too many boxes. Veila 01:25, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was okay last night, after edit "three" I think. Looks good now. Slumgum 17:59, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

		An Award
		I award Veila this Working Man's Barnstar Award in recognition of the work carried out upon not only the Template:Football player infobox but also the large number of articles which it affected. Thanks for being bold. Slumgum 23:06, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating in the Football AID vote this week.

FC Dynamo Kyiv has been selected as this week's collaboration. Please do help in working to improve it.

Hi Forbsey, I noticed your edits to a couple of pages on my watchlist (Duncan Ferguson and Mikel Arteta) where you added wikilinks in the football player infoboxes. I tried to stimulate some discussion on a style guide but nobody seemed all that interested. Since your wikilinking is contrary to my personal opinion on the matter, I'd really like it if you could add your thoughts to infobox's talk page on why you support wikilinking in infoboxes. It might cause some more opinions to come out of the woodwork. ⁂veila# 07:48, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Veila. Thanks for pointing that out, until now I always wikilinked the clubs on football infoboxes. I'm not too fussed about whether or not the clubs should be wikilinked. The wikilinks will already be in the article so doesn't really matter. Thanks again. Forbsey 17:42, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, of course, but I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen: as I understand these things, {{qif}} is notoriously difficult to deal with, and we've got no idea when the developers will get around to putting conditionals into MediaWiki proper or what they'll look like when they do. I've added the infobox to my watchlist just in case. ～J.K. 01:12, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Glad to see another follower of the worlds most popular game! A little issue. After this renaming of soccer, a big debate was on what it should be called here. I wasn't involved, but it was agreed that football will be known as football (soccer), rugby will be known as rugby football or rugby and aussie rules will be known as australian rules football, to differate the three. All the other clubs have changed, including the wording on football federation and a-league. We just don't want to see this aguement flaire up again because it's been pretty peaceful recently. Cheers and I hope you enjoy seeing Melbourne Victory win all the time next year, lol!

Silat, I'm really not looking to start a fight over this, but I just don't care what was "agreed". There's a whole article of disambiguation being wikilinked by the use of the football link and adding the bracketed explanation hurts the readability and aesthetics of the text. Frankly, anybody who has a problem with the use of the generic term as a link to a detailed article is missing the point or trying to stir up trouble. Oh, and please remember to sign your posts. ⁂veila# 13:09, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all! I agree with you about the undersireability (which I've probably now mispelled) of "football (soccer)", but I'll take it over edit warring any day. We've finally got something that only really silly people have been fighting over, and I don't intend to see fighting over so silly an issue (some people even attempted to do site-wide changes to Australia-related articles) crop up again. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 12:35, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image is not a copywright violation, identical picture is published on several websites and newspapers as it is a free press image —Preceding unsigned comment added by SenorKristobbal (talk • contribs)

You shrunk the squad too much so I reset so it is now to the standard size of squad templates like Arsenal, Chelsea and West Ham. A reserve squad template sounds like a good idea. I also fixed an error where there was a } next to Joleon Lescott. Vidarsson is off both the reserve and first team squad lists on the official site. This could be an error on their part but I am keeping it up to date with that (hence also removing David Weir for now) —Preceding unsigned comment added by SenorKristobbal (talk • contribs)

You're welcome to change things like size and so on, but please be careful, your edits caused breakage across every page that includes the box. The |} after Lescott is the result of a Wikipedia shortcoming regarding the <noinclude> directive, it doesn't appear when the template is used on a page. ⁂veila# 09:48, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing that happened was the box is right at the bottom (i.e. below profile at the side) This is standard for all teams so use fb start/end templates only cause the box to be harder to read and stop it being standard (like Liverpool, Man United, Arsenal, Chelsea , etc.) SenorKristobbal 14:18, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stop shrinking the template. I fail to see how it is "broken" and if it is fix it by keeping it standard size and stop shrinking it as it is hard to read and non-standard. Other things I have done to the template were removed for being none standard so I don't see why you should be any different. SenorKristobbal 12:50, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of being precious about your edits, perhaps it would be more sensible to read what I'm saying. Start with the talk page. ⁂veila# 14:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I'm not sure what simply adding the fb start/end templates does to the squad templates. I don't think there's any need to use them unless they make noticeable improvements. My original squad template was a change of use of Template:Arsenal F.C. which doesn't use the fb start/end things either.

Template:England Squad 2006 World Cup has been changed to a more standardised input thingy. I do quite like it, but it has two faults:

• The blank spaces around the flag is wider than usual. (See Owen Hargreaves for an example)
• It's limited to 23 players.

I'm not sure, but I think it may be possible to create one of indefinite length for club squads. Some clubs squads have new players without assigned squad numbers, and I would say there's no need for logos or flags on the club templates.

I've noticed that the german version (de:Vorlage:Navigationsleiste Kader des FC Arsenal) uses no club colours, no squad numbers, and a pointless open/close button. It is, however, a standardised format, (not just for football squads) which could be a good idea.  SLUMGUM  yap  stalk  18:41, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes pretty much what I'm saying. I've reverted back to my old template with improvements suggested: Everton F.C link fixed, | next to Lescott gone and I also fixed the end so it doesn't merge with other parts of the article (I think this is what you meant by breaking but you weren't 100% clear). All adding fb does to it is squash it and as Slumgum says theres need to use them unless they make noticeable improvements. I also removed the flag and emblem before even reading this Slumgum comment as I also think there isn't really a need for them.

As for the German standard idea I doubt people would like a lack of numbers and colours. You could get around the numbers thing by staying with standards (perhaps using Tim Cahill|17. Cahill but I'm not sure about colours. SenorKristobbal 20:10, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I saw Arsenal and Man City were featured so I thought why not eh? I see you've put some work into it too so thanks a lot for the input. There has been an objection and I have started to rectify the points brought up on here. SenorKristobbal 13:02, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on getting a photo from the Howard Kendall testimonial to replace that one. Some guy from NSNO told me he has had legal problems using photos of premiership games. I know Man City uses an FA Cup game photo but that could cause similair problems. As testimonial games don't have photo rights there won't be any problems. SenorKristobbal 11:43, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yay its featured. I've nominated it to be today's featured article here. Could you possibly read through it and check it makes sense? SenorKristobbal 18:45, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

changed to the other pic (of the sign). MUFC isn't featured. If you meant MCFC they actually used a picture of the ground. I changed it to the picture of the sign. Can't use the crest as a fair use bot will remove it if its used anywhere but the everton or everton ladies page.

Everton have been in top flight longer than anyone else as the football league is older than any other league by a fair way Everton have only been out of top flight for 4 years I think.

I'm leaving Liverpool off...I don't want them getting extra hits for this! All the other points are good though SenorKristobbal 19:22, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote about it on the article's talk page per your request. --Awiseman 21:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating in the Football AID vote this week.

Turkcell Super League has been selected as this week's collaboration. Please do help in working to improve it.

Could you please comment here saying it'd be a good idea if you think it would. The more people who say it'd be good featured the better. I voted for Dixie too! SenorKristobbal 00:15, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating in the Football AID vote this week.

Dixie Dean has been selected as this week's collaboration. Please do help in working to improve it.

I noticed you supported the Everton FA status I've now given it a specific date request here as its the date Everton won the Cup Winners Cup. Please comment on it if you agree! SenorKristobbal 18:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Veila. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Dixie Dean.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Veila/construction in progress. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 00:44, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I hope you are feeling great. I would like you to view my comments here. Your views on this matter would be much appreciated as well! --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 03:41, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Everton has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Mhiji 00:22, 10 January 2011 (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) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]