Talk:Terje Hauge

Edits by 219.79.195.195/219.78.201.209

Okay, to save this from dragging on indefinitely, what are your objections to my version?

SteveO, 18:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

You should have asked: Why should I and other people comply to your version?

Because I think my version is better. Recording the threats themselves is not relevant, nor is the part about Anders Frisk. You also removed some of the wikilinks I added. SteveO 13:24, 4 March, 2006 (UTC)

You think?! You removed my and others edition so can we remove things you added.

That's the idea. Whatever you submit, others are entitled to edit, with the aim of improving the article, making it more NPOV etc. I kept your basic edits, just modified them. Btw, this isn't some playground game, whereby you edit one person's edits just because they edited yours. So what are your objections to my version? SteveO 13:46, 4 March, 2006 (UTC)

My objection to your version is that I think the edition that I and others compiled (before you come here and mess around) is better than your edition.

In what way? Be specific. I have outlined my objections to your piece. What do you object to about mine? SteveO 15:24, 4 March, 2006 (UTC)

You are a loser and a fucking cunt

It takes two to tango, my friend. You even came back and re-edited your statement! Nothing like good, civilised debate is there? SteveO 16:59, 4 March, 2006 (UTC)

You better stop messing around. You think you are always right and the others are wrong. what an arrogant bastard you are!!

Hey, I'm not the one who launched into a personal attack. I'm sure we could have settled this dispute in a civilised way. You chose not to. That's not my problem. SteveO 17:05, 4 March, 2006 (UTC)

I think there is no way I and others who have worked together and agreed on this article to comply to your version, which you have changed drastically. So, stop messing around. Just stop being an arrogant asshole and think you work is more superior than the others and respect the work the ones who have contributed, not just mine.

Firstly, you aren't one to be lecturing me about respect, especially when you refer to me as an "arrogant asshole" in the same paragraph. Second, the edits I changed were only yours and another anonymous user, 202.40.137.197 (who also has a history of vandalism) and they were all related to the death threats incident. I didn't delete it, I trimmed it. When I asked you what you objected to in my version you said nothing, which is why this debate has gone nowhere. SteveO 17:20, 4 March, 2006 (UTC)

Yes......I still think you are. Why are you not an arrogant asshole when you insisted your version was better than the others! When you insisted your version was better in such an arrogant way, it was known there was not way you were going to discuss and even listen. And why would you expect other people to respect you when you disrespect others including their works? I think you are very funny. And suddenly you come here to mess other people's work. And you are the one who come here to vandalise, doing all the damages.

Well that's the idea! Everyone edits to improve articles. But it doesn't mean they are being disrespectful. No non-vandal here would edit a page if they thought the new version was worse than the last one. Would you edit a page and then say that? My edits were not about respect (or lack of it). Changing an article is about improving it, which is what I thought I could do when I edited this page. It is my opinion that the death threat quotes and the stuff about Anders Frisk were unnecessary here, which is why I removed them. You haven't yet given any reason why they should stay, which is what I asked in the first place. You also haven't said what edits of mine equate to vandalism. SteveO 17:40, 4 March, 2006 (UTC)

You are just like a fucking school bully.

And in my opinion, the Anders Frisk story is necessary because referees receiving death threats is a new phenomenon and it's not an individual incident.

Another gem. It's gonna be a long night! SteveO 17:45, 4 March, 2006 (UTC)

Finally, now we're getting somewhere. The Anders Frisk death threats certainly deserve a mention on Wikipedia (and they are), but I'm not sure they belong in the Terje Hauge article. Maybe it could have a brief reference, though? But certainly not an entire paragraph. Do you mean an individual incident for Chelsea? SteveO 17:55, 4 March, 2006 (UTC)

Okay, how about this?

A day later, reports emerged that Hauge had been the target of death threats on an internet chatroom in Norway by people purporting to be Chelsea fans, mirroring the events involving Anders Frisk a year earlier.

Terje Hauge is not the only football referee receiving death threats in recent years, so it's not an individual incident. Not necessary associated with Chelsea in terms of individual incident. Therefore, I insist the Frisk full version paragraph to be included in the article.

I don't see how an incident fairly irrelevant to this article needs such coverage here. This article needs to stick to just the events surrounding Hauge, with maybe a very brief reference to Frisk because of the Chelsea connection. Joe Cole and Steven Gerrard (to name just two) have also received death threats in recent years, but I don't think the stories about one player need to be mentioned in the other's article. A full description can be put into the Anders Frisk article or on a general article about referees in football (if it hasn't already, I'm not sure). SteveO 18:18, 4 March, 2006 (UTC)

okay......if you insist to do it your own way, I can do nothing. am just getting tired with people like you. Okay, you win, I lose.

The feeling's mutual. This has taken 24 hours. SteveO 18:24, 4 March, 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to see that a bully has won.

Remind you that you don't rule over anyone here but it seems to be anything that is going to be published has to be censored and get your approval. That's utter ridiculous.

Perhaps if you'd been just a little more constructive in your arguments (rather than calling me a cunt, a bastard and an asshole ;-)), the bully might have been taught a lesson? SteveO 18:32, 4 March, 2006 (UTC)

well.........indeed you are. There is no place for discussion with people like you. You pretend to listening to others while insisting to do it your own way and speak as if others have to comply to you and get your approval for the versions! Don't get us wrong.........you don't rule over anyone here. Get lost, you scum!

For this to be a discussion, we'd have to be discussing something first. All you've done is largely avoid talking about the article and just insulted me. It gives the impression that you don't really have much to defend, or are just incapable of a civilised debate. It took about a dozen replies here for you to even mention the content of the article. I offered to compromise and you rejected it. If you're going to edit Wikipedia, then you really shouldn't be so sensitive and take it so personally. Your edits are there to be edited and I've edited them. We disagree on the edits, although you've been very vague about what it is you object to, and here is the place to settle those differences.

So come on, if you really are serious about your edits, defend them. Well, to be fair, they aren't actually your edits, unless the vandal with a grudge against Chelsea FC at 202.40.137.197 is also you. SteveO 3:58, 5 March, 2006 (UTC)

I recommended administrator to delete this article forever to avoid further vandalism by the bully, SteveO. Don't get us wrong, I see your it as a compliance rather than a compromise. So, drop the act.

Sorry but clearly it was an abusive of power, biased, and an endorsement by Shane the administrator. You fail to punish the person who is only interested in destroying other people's edition for his own personal preference, and in the same time victimising me. Surely, you have been conned by a scum who have been a great actor throughout.

You would have been much better off if you had acted polite and not turn to name calling and insults. As I have seen this discussion, one has been willing to discuss the content of the article, the other has just been throwing insults and talked about being a victim of something. The proper way to resolve content disputes on wikipedia is to discuss on the talk page. I hope you are willing to do that and to do it in a civil way. Shanes 13:00, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't often throw insults at someone in my life. But if I did, it was only because the those insults were reserved for someone who truly deserved it.

Well, Wikipedia:Civility is an official policy that applies to everyone and everywhere here on wikipedia. So, even if you see someone as "deserve" being insulted, don't do it. Just stay cool and try being the most polite and nicest guy in the debate. It's hard, close to impossible, many times. But try. It will give both you and your edits much more weight and respect. Shanes 13:36, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I think even the calmest person in this planet cannot keep his cool when meeting this kind of person and obviously I am not the calmest one.

For future reference, can you tell me what it was I said which provoked you into insulting me the way you did? As far as I know, all I did was politely object to your opinion. SteveO 14:02, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

SHANES: make no mistake, I am very disappointed about your handling but no ill feeling towards you. I think I have made my position very clear I never negotiate and disscuss with bullies, just as the US Govt never negotiate with terrorist.

You need to lighten up mate. This isn't some life or death situation. It's an online encyclopedia. Btw, if you'd said you weren't prepared to discuss at the start it would have saved us all a lot of time. SteveO 14:31, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

You should get an Oscar for your great acting skills.

Anyway, no matter what the responses will be, conversation will be ceased and I am not interested in having conversation with actors or hypocrites or bullies or whatever.

Okay. It's been an interesting experience (not to mention a waste of time). Take care and maybe try to lighten up a bit. SteveO 14:41, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

SHANES: You should ensure that I am continued to be banned from editing or I will come back and get rid of the current crap version, which a scum insists it's the best version ever.

Well even if you're going to keep responding, I'm not. I have better things to do than keep reading your contributions, however enlightening they may be. Perhaps you would do well to take some of my advice, though? Cheers. SteveO 14:51, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I think that message was to SHanes, am not expecting responses from others.

SHANES: There is no way I bow to the unjustice and comply to that arrogant bastard. That guy reverted my edition based on the fact he claimed arrogantly that his version was better than the others. Well......you better tell me if that was a resason good enough. ALSO, Why didn't he need to start a discussion before he changed the previous article while I am asked everytime to start a discussion to so-called defend my edition?! Why he wasn't asked to defend his action while I was called to defend my edition?! This is absolutely ridiculous and obviously, there is a double standard. This guy changes others edition for the sake of changing it. He only knows to mess around and stirs up trouble. I am just here to defend my rights and not let it exploited by some troublemakers. By the way, I think I have better things to do but the only reason why I come back and persistently reverting it back to the changed version only because there is absolutely no justice. I don't want to accuse you but I think your handling is a very one-sided and biased.

SHANES: One last thing, I won't be defending myself for swearing or insulting someone. But that's the only way to let my feeling known about the injustice in this whole saga and I don't think many people can restrain themselves from swearing and insulting at people who has been a bully and behaved constantly arrogant and unreasonable throughout. And the sorry thing is someone is being the accomplice to wallow in the mire with the criminal.

хауге - на кол. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.52.77.43 (talk) 13:54, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Champions League Final

Well Hauge had a shocker tonight and should never be allowed to ref another important game again. Disgraceful!

His address and kids schools addresses are now online with both Chelsea fans and Arsenal fans up for 'doing' something. The guy has screwed a great match. Personally I think any hate towards him is deserved. He really fucked up a great game. It is not the first time he has done this. If you go to Football 365 forum they are saying the match was a waste of time because of him.

Check the newsgroups and you can find his kids schools, pictures of them and his home address.

This guy is in trouble. On the Chelsea Headhunters forum they are calling for a truce with Arsenal Firm to get him. Arsenal forums and Barcelona are saying the same thing.

He should not be a ref again.

Why doesn't this article mention that Arsenal's goal came from a dive which the referee missed?

That is why the page is semi-protected. Due to biased views of the game. Hauge himself did conceed that he may have made the wrong decision send Lehmann off.

Well said, but you spelt "champions league" wrong. haz (user talk) 14:09, 18 May 2006

Cheers mate. But I wasn't the one who spelt it that way. You got the wrong bloke.

SteveO is the scum who has made most of the vandals in this article. He is a typical Chelsea scum fan.

Hello my friend. I've left a message on your talk page. SteveO, 13:31, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

To the complainers: Get off the Ref's back. He called about as good of a game as you can as a Ref. True, he didn't HAVE to send of Lehmann, and COULD have allowed the goal, but he had blown his whistle already. It happens. Remember, Arsenal's only goal came off of a dive. The ref made mistakes both ways. All refs do. Aresnal played better in the first half, but couldn't put more than one in, and ultimately lost to a team that played better in the second half. 70.232.113.196 21:07, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Fuck off those Chelski scum fans who has actively been manupulating and blocking others from editing and telling the truth i.e. Hauge got threats from Chelsea fans and this club fans are all shameless for all the dirty things they have done. They are shame of world football.

HOW I PRONOUNCE TERJE HAUGE? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.132.34.180 (talk) 16:12, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Terje Hauge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060614180519/http://www.uefa.com:80/uefa/news/Kind=268435456/newsId=421629.html to http://www.uefa.com/uefa/news/kind=268435456/newsid=421629.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:20, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Terje Hauge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20100109110600/http://www.fotball.no/Utdanning-og-kompetanse1/Dommer/Toppdommer/2009/UEFAs-rangering-av-dommere/ to http://www.fotball.no/Utdanning-og-kompetanse1/Dommer/Toppdommer/2009/UEFAs-rangering-av-dommere/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:40, 5 December 2017 (UTC)