User talk:Gsfelipe94/Archive 1

Hello Gsfelipe, I have seen you are contributing with the results of Athletics World Championships 2013 and I guess you follow many Sport Events.

I would like to invite you on Totallympics, the first international forum about Olympic Sports. We are particularly focused on Olympic Qualifications but we follow every single Sport Event from all Olympic Sports, creating a huge database of Results.

We gather sport fans from all around the world to discuss about all sports and follow every event in the Road to Sochi 2014 and Rio 2016 Olympic Games. If you are interested in this, you can join us on totallympics.com and start to contribute with Results of events you are most interested in, being always updated about your Nation’s Athletes and Teams and representing your Nation on the forum.

Feel free to contact me for any problem or question, and I hope to see you soon on Totallympics, the home of Olympic Sports ! :)

OlympicFan2016 --OlympicFan2016 (talk) 14:30, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Unexplained removal of redlinks

Could you please explain why you did this? --bender235 (talk) 13:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I did it so people could see they did not have page and I wasn't expecting someone to create it soon but probably it was already saved here and I did not see it. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 15:09, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

So far, those athletes don't have Wikipedia articles. But that doesn't mean we can't leave redlinks to them. Wikipedia is not a finished project. New articles are created every day. And as a matter of fact, redlinks drive Wikipedia's growth. So, from now on, don't ever remove them. --bender235 (talk) 15:48, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I already know that. Thanks for the information anyway. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 16:19, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Why do you remove referenced information from Kim Won-Jin?

The information is an update, it's referenced, no need to remove it from the article. Please don't do it again. FvSBG (talk) 06:10, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

And also from Naohisa Takato. FvSBG (talk) 06:24, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Those are informations you do not see in other judokas' page. If we updated even the smallers championships these guys won, the page would have a lot of tournament informations. Take a look at Athletes medal page. We usually update the more relevant tournaments. IJF World Cup or Grand Slams are important but we should keep the medals restrict to Olympics, World Championships, Continentals Games (Junior/Youth tournaments that are also one of those I mentioned before) and Universiade as well. Imagine if every single tournament Usain Bolt won we updated the medal page? We could instead create a result table display as it would fit better in my opinion. But that's ok. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 14:56, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

This page is a good example of how the medal record should look like: Rishod Sobirov Gsfelipe94 (talk) 14:58, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Felipe, I understand your point of view and I do agree with it to a certain point. However I do not think that information like that should be removed like that once added to an article. Perhaps we should find other ways to implement results of these kind of tournaments into the article by adding sections in the main article, similar to the head-to-head results in the article of Rishod Sobirov. What do you think? FvSBG (talk) 17:09, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Probably we should work around something similar to the athletes page, with a box showing the results. Can you do that and leave just the most important tournaments for the medals record? Thanks Gsfelipe94 (talk) 18:00, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Azamat Mukanov

Hello Gsfelipe94,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Azamat Mukanov for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, 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. EzPz (talk) 03:49, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Sol Ky-Ong

The article Sol Ky-Ong has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Whispering 00:11, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Kyla Ross, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. PM800 (talk) 03:49, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Aliya Mustafina may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• {{MedalSilver|2010 Birmingham]|Uneven Bars}}
• {{MedalSilver|2010 Birmingham]|Balance Beam}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:26, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Your November edits

Hello! Thanks for all the work you're putting into MMA articles. The Wikipedia MMA community has worked out a consensus concerning how MMA articles are to be written, structured, and what kind of information is to be included and where, all of which you can read about at WP:MMA. One point in particular is that we are not to put future fights in the records tables of fighters. You can read more about that at WP:MMABOX but here's the relevant bit "Never add future bouts. The purpose of the record table is to provide a quick account of a fighter's past career, not to speculate about his/her future. Upcoming bouts that have been officially announced can only be mentioned within the body text at the end of the Mixed martial arts career section, provided that they are notable (covered by reliable third-party sources.)"

If you happen to disagree with the community on this point the proper course of action is to start up a new discussion about it on the project's talk page at WT:MMA and attempt to achieve a new consensus. In the meantime please respect the consensus view of your fellow MMA editors on Wikipedia. If you have any questions or comments you can reach me on my talk page. Thanks. SQGibbon (talk) 02:26, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

I understand that. I have no problem with the changes, though the usual action is to put fights on when there's less than a week for the event. UFC 167 fits that situation but I'll let it be edited on the next days. Thanks. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 04:18, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

The community consensus was that those tables are a record of fights that have already happened. There was no allowance made for fights that are going to happen really soon now. That some editors have taken it upon themselves to ignore the consensus view is immaterial. If you think that the MMA guidelines should be changed to allow fights to be listed that are going to happen within a week or a day or whatever then start up a new discussion on the MMA project and get the consensus view changed. In the meantime please respect the consensus that was already achieved and do not add future fights to the table. SQGibbon (talk) 16:22, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Once again, the tables are for fights that have taken place, not for those that are going to. It's a record of the results of those fights. If you think it should be different then instead of acting against WP:MMA consensus start up a new discussion at WT:MMA and achieve a new consensus. It's how things are done on Wikipedia -- when there is a disagreement people engage in discussions and reach a consensus view. SQGibbon (talk) 06:45, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to 2014 FIFA World Cup, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Uruguay is not through so you should not add them as in this edit QED237 (talk) 12:18, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't notice I added Uruguay already. I had it on "preview" and then I checked to save, but forgot to remove Uruguay. Thanks Gsfelipe94 (talk) 14:31, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

No big harm done, it can happen to anyone, just keep it in mind next time. QED237 (talk) 14:39, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Livescores and live updates

Hi. Based on Wikipedia policies and guidlines we should not provide livescores and live updates. This based on WP:LIVESCORES and WT:FOOTY consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 81#Live scoring and it has also been discussed many more times. This also applies to tables and list such as top goalscorers and other match info, which you can also read about at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 81#Live updates (again). The template for match in progress is not supposed to be used for regular matches but for events over several days and just becaue a template exists does not mean it should be used. Please wait until matches are finished before adding the statistics. Thank you. QED237 (talk) 21:34, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't see the harm behind it. It's not a regular match, it's the first one of the major club tournament of the year and it was updated only with important info. I've seen many big football competitions have the Template:Match in progress with no harm and when I used to be a regular reader, I used to enjoy finding that information. Football games do not last several days, so either this template is totally inaccurate or it shouldn't exist at all. I've just updated a thread with the goal of keeping a current information of something that was concrete and not to be a live report. It's been done with no problem in the past (there were no problems with the 2012 FIFA Club World Cup for example). It's something that hasn't really reached a full consensus and has been discussed, yeah, but still lacks a rule. I agree when it comes to update stats like goalscorers, but there's no harm when you see a "match in progress" and know that the game is happening and we're only providing the important information. It seems to be more of an argument about something so futile... Gsfelipe94 (talk) 21:54, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I cant say to much about how it has been before but previously a lot of editors has not had the power to enforce this consensus but just because you have made these edits and seen them before does not make them right. About the template I know it has been at template for deletion a couple of times just because being used incorrectly and people think it makes livescoring okay, but it has never been deleted because it is being used in other articles with other purposes. For more info read the consensus, most of it are to be read there and a consensus should be followed. QED237 (talk) 22:09, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I read the consensus and as I said, I agree with some of the things that were brought up there. I just feel (as many other do) that this is more of being so strict to arguments that don't take us anywhere. While I agree that the discussions should try to reach the best display of information around wikipedia, most of this seem to be nothing to do. Just like a while ago a guy decided to pick on MMA events and created a whole mess around that area. I still don't see the harm behind putting a maximum of 3 infos out there while the match takes place as it keeps people updated that right now that's the current situation and that also doesn't really make a harm to people that go out there possibly mad that someone is doing such a harmless edit. I'm not even an unidentified editor, I've been trying to keep as good as possible and do the right things here but anyway... I'm not saying all of this because I did similar edits or saw them, but just to say that this thing is not even a rule and honestly seems to be a decision of people that don't like the aesthetics of updates like that. It's something totally healthy. I'll try to keep it that way so I don't get more messages that bring more of that annoying discussion. Thanks for showing your side of it anyway. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 22:20, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I can totally understand how you are feeling and I was making these liveupdates until I got told to stop by a user that started receiving several warning-templates for this. At first I did not see any harm in it to. Anyway I hope i did not destroy you day, in that case I am sorry for that. Have a nice day. QED237 (talk) 22:47, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, I would find it strange if you ruined my day with this. I'm totally fine, no problems. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 22:49, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Once again, STOP with live updates. As I have been told earlier I go by notify,warn,block so you risk getting blocked. QED237 (talk) 22:20, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on 2013 FIFA Club World Cup. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. With this edit QED237 (talk) 21:30, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for 2013 FIFA Club World Cup Final

Harrias ^talk 01:02, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

3RR

I will just point out, that you are coming close to violating the 3RR rule on 2013 FIFA Club World Cup Final. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 21:23, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

And what is that? Gsfelipe94 (talk) 21:24, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

See WP:3RR. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 21:36, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

This is your last warning. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:2013 FIFA Club World Cup Final, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Do not cope my signature (as you did here) per WP:Signature forgery that clearly states ". Altering the markup code of your signature to make it look substantially like another user's signature may also be considered a form of impersonation". One more time and I will put you up for a block, and I consider taking you to WP:ANI QED237 (talk) 23:14, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thanks for your work on MMA-related articles! LlamaAl (talk) 04:12, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

2013 Copa do Brasil

Olá Gsfelipe94, e apenas o "–" sem nenhuma explicação dá a entender o quê? Na seção "Format" está a explicado que nas duas primeiras fases existe essa possibilidade. Os jogos estavam previstos, não foram realizados por conta da regra. Mas se você preferir, podemos mudar para Not needed, mas na minha opinião dá no mesmo. Jonas kam (talk) 16:00, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Sim, talvez era melhor deixar outro aviso, mas deixa esse estilo pra página da edição 2014 mesmo. Tá tranquilo. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 21:13, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

List of UFC events

Olá. Acho que é mais lógico que a ordem alfabética de locais onde já houve eventos do UFC seja feita pelo nome da cidade e não pelo nome do estado. A pesquisa fica (visualmente) mais simplificada. Foi com essa intenção que reorganizei a lista. É essa lógica que é usado nos eventos canadianos, por exemplo. Psycho-Krillin (talk) 18:53, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Essa ordem só é usada nos outros porque há diferença no numero de eventos, então a ordem é por quantia. No restante dos americanos, é dividido alfabeticamente por ordem de Estados e se há mesmo número de eventos nesse Estado, ai sim é ordem alfabetica de cidades. Sempre foi assim e não teve problema. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 19:29, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

"Sempre foi assim" não é um argumento assim tão bom. Por exemplo, o template de artigo para os eventos de MMA também era de uma maneira até ao UFC 65 (e não tinha problema) e, depois disso, mudou-se. Ficou mais legível e não tornou os artigos mais longos.
Em relação à listagem de eventos, há algum motivo forte (tirando "sempre foi assim") para que não seja alfabeticamente ordenada por nome da cidade? Uma solução de compromisso é uma wikitable sortable, organizável por nome do estado ou nome da cidade ou quantidade de eventos (em que a listagem por omissão coincide com a actual - ver List of countries and dependencies by area, por exemplo).
Psycho-Krillin (talk) 21:13, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Não entendo qual o argumento que você percebeu que servia para aplicar as mudanças. Quando se organiza por nome de cidade somente, fica uma ordem toda desordenada com os Estados. Se já era assim, foi visando organização. Sempre ficou fácil porque já se tinha os eventos por estado ali e junto as cidades do Estado, da forma que está hoje. É assim que costumam organizar com relação aos EUA. Isso é simplesmente uma questão de em que ordem a informação fica disposta e não se muda tamanho de artigo. Adicionar tabela sim é aumentar informação sem necessidade, até porque acho que tem regras quanto a WP de MMA. Se eles já não adicionam a bandeira do país ali embaixo, imagine tabela. Acho que essa forma facilita a análise geral por Estados e já se pode observar no mesmo bloco em que cidades nesse Estado ocorreram eventos. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 22:04, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

UFC Fight Night 38

UFC Fight Night 38 now redirects to the List of UFC events but an earlier version has the same date as what you are calling 39. I based my change on that but one or the other has to be changed.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:19, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Someone didn't pay attention to the right order of the events. UFN 35 just happened and there are 3 scheduled before the Natal event. I believe that when the page of the event is created, they'll fix this. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 16:23, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough - I'll let it be.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:27, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Tyson Nam may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• |Decision (unanimous
• |}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:40, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

re: Protect article

Hello. I do not know any admins who patrol MMA articles, but that's OK. There are several approaches to dealing with the IP. Start with leave escalating warnings on their talk page about their disruptive editing and ignoring the Wikipedia Manual of Style and the WP:MMA guidelines for article names and style. Also be sure to mention edit warring WP:3RR. Invite the IP to discuss the name issue on the relevant talk pages. Basically what you need to do is always take the high road and be super nice and accomodating. Read WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF. If you behave well then when admins do get involved they will take your side. I see this all the time and experienced editors know this.

The good news is that the MMA project on Wikipedia is still under discretionary sanctions from the admins due to repeated bad behavior in the past. Basically an admin is free to block or protect a page without going through the normal escalated warnings in order to curtail behavior that is detrimental to the MMA project and Wikipedia as a whole.

Once you feel like you've given the IP enough time to change their ways and/or they refuse to engage in discussions despite your repeated requests then bring it up at WP:ANI. You'll want to provide diffs of their behavior along with diffs demonstrating that you've made a good faith effort to deal with them. Providing diffs of other editors trying to reason with the IP without success (like me) is also helpful. At this point you'll also want to mention the discretionary sanctions which will hopefully encourage the admins to act quickly and without giving the editor any more time to be disruptive.

Based on that IP's behavior I strongly suspect that they are a sockpuppet of a blocked editor using a different IP address. I haven't taken to the time to look into it deeply so I wouldn't bring up that point without some actual evidence.

Good luck and don't despair. It's also helpful to remain patient even though it can be difficult when dealing with disruptive and non-communicative editors. SQGibbon (talk) 19:32, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hello, I noticed you reverted an edit to the article Josh Thomson. I read that edit summary and noticed similar ones on other articles. Remember, IPs are human too, and please remember to not attack other editors, including through edit summaries. Edit summaries are made for describing an edit's purpose. Remember, comment on content, not the contributor. Attacking other editors, including IPs, can discourage them from trying to improve the encyclopedia in the future. It seems to me that some of the other editors were editing in good faith and/or might have been unaware of Wikipedia's policies. Thank you! – TCMemoire 04:15, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

I agree with user:TCMemoire. The comments about IP editors are out of line. I was an IP editor for 2 years and had around 12 thousand edits. There are some IP editors that have made huge constructive contributions to WP. There are many 'registered' editors that vandalise and cause other problems. Remember to Assume good faith.
• On another point, please remember to provide an edit summary when editing pages, as you did not do so with a recent update on the Lydia Lassila page. In fact you rarely seem to provide an edit summary. "Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field." Regards, 220 of ^Borg 00:51, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Sourcing

Thank you for updating the Lydia Lassila page with her Sochi Winter Olympics medal results, but please remember that you need to provide a source, especially for Biographies of living persons (BLPs). Here you have added correct information, but no source. (Or edit summary!) Regards, 220 of ^Borg 00:51, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

The Amazing Race 24

Holy shit stop changing the god damn images and their layout. It does not have to be 100% identical to other pages.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 18:33, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Just because you want it to be like that? What Ryulong wants it's what the article has? And the whole "holy shit" rage here is funny. Definitely worth a talk with an administrator. It doesn't look good at all that way and it's according to previous articles. Cool off, hot head. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 18:36, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

TUF

Please stop changing the colours to incorrect ones. For one example, you've been changing Nelson's team to the secondary colour. Please see this link for proof. Silver/grey was clearly the primary colour used for their team. Paralympiakos (talk) 19:09, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

You're the one that came over and started changing. I saw videos of TUF 3 for example and the color that someone updated (some of those weren't my changes) is right. Nelson's team is blue (even though Colton Smith wore a short that was only displayed in gray - Bubba on Jones/Sonnen wore a short that was only displayed in white and that doesn't mean the main color for the team was white) as you can check on the poster for the finale or the cast. And other colors you simply changed to standard ones as there are differences in shades and that's what we display there like Minotauro/Mir or Jones/Sonnen. I'll revert to those colors and if you want to make a case for it, create a discussion on the talk page. Thanks Gsfelipe94 (talk) 19:33, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Abbreviations

Hi GsFelipe – why do you find this edit unnecessary? Why is it preferable to explain what the abbreviation means on a different part of the page rather than in the text itself? More over, no explanation is given for the meaning of terms such as "Area record", "Season's best" or "World leading" which are not intuitive to many readers. This template allows quick and simple links to our articles explaining those acronyms. SFB 19:45, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

They're not usually updated like that in Athletics events. Take a look at previous articles. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 19:46, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

That's because this is a new template. It was created at the request of several editors who wanted a better way of both explaining and linking common athletics abbreviations – particularly because we now have the article athletics abbreviations to explain these. People are always working towards better ways of doing things. Not so long ago, we had no details results links, or sortable medal tables, or schedule tables. As you have not given a reason why this template this is not a good idea (and other editors have supported it) I am going to restore the edit. If you have any concerns or suggestions for improvement, then please raise them in the above linked discussion. SFB 10:18, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Jan Kudlička may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• }}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:37, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

TAR24

Discussions have reopened and we would appreciate your input. Shadow2 (talk) 22:40, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

List of ufc events

I don't know what your sarcastic comment was about but The international ultimate fighter finals have been called fight nights since they begun so why change it now?! And it isn't out of the blue I have been editing ufc for months now thank you. Lukejordan02 (talk) 23:39, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, They've been called that way until a few days ago when UFC decided to call them from now on as TUF Finales, though they fall into the category of Fight Nights. You're the only one making changes as you wish and it doesn't matter if you've been editing for a long time but you're doing it wrong now. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 00:30, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Please show me evidence to back up this claim of the UFC have decided to call them TUF finals.Lukejordan02 (talk) 01:24, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Just take a look at the main MMA media, specially MMA Junkie. Also, take a look at the official pages from UFC events. It's been there since it's been established and that's why everyone but you has changed it to the way it is. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 02:58, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Look on ufc.tv fight pass Event Access UFC Fight Night: Werdum vs. Browne UFC Fight Night: Bisping vs. Kennedy UFC Fight Night: Nogueira vs. Nelson UFC 171: Hendricks vs. Lawler UFC Fight Night: Shogun vs. Henderson 2 UFC Fight Night: Gustafsson vs. Manuwa UFC Fight Night: Kim vs. Hathaway UFC 170: Rousey vs. McMann UFC Fight Night: Machida vs. Mousasi UFC 169: Barao vs. Faber UFC Fight Night: Henderson vs. Thomson UFC Fight Night: Rockhold vs. Philippou UFC Singapore: Saffiedine vs. Lim UFC 168: Weidman vs. Silva 2 That is a selection of events to watch on fight pass look at the names it doesn't say ultimate fighter final it says fight night Please see sense, them events have been on wiki for ages now and you have only decided to change the name of them in the last week.Lukejordan02 (talk) 15:15, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

You're the only one stirring up the pot. Create a discussion so you can see a bunch of people disagreeing with you, but stop changing it because you want them to be like that. All media is reliable source, including the ufc. They sometimes name the events in a way that looks better for locals, like "UFC Sweden, UFC Macau" and so goes on. UFC Fight Pass calls all the events that aren't PPV's as fight nights? So you're renaming all of them like that then? Out of your mind. Take a look at this one for example: http://mmajunkie.com/2014/04/tuf-brazil-3-finale-gets-new-name-three-new-fights-with-jason-peralta-brandao-ortega-hobar-munhoz/ Can you read? Gsfelipe94 (talk) 16:44, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Fine I'm sick of this I will agree that they are best as they are if YOU change the name of the UFC China final to as that is the sameLukejordan02 (talk) 18:54, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

You're being so stubborn that you don't even remember that I wrote in one of the edit summaries that this changes start with the TUF Nations finale... Therefore, the Macao event is still name Fight Night: Kim vs. Hathaway. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 21:14, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm being stubborn? Look at yourself you have a attitude problem and it doesn't start with the nations after doing much research into it I found it starts at the UFC China one which was the first ultimate fighter final of 2014. Which people were editing the name of with the nations one at first. Lukejordan02 (talk) 22:13, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

http://mmajunkie.com/2014/03/tuf-china-finale-play-by-play-and-live-results/ http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1977177-tuf-china-finale-live-results-play-by-play-and-main-card-highlights http://www.mmafighting.com/2014/3/1/5458116/tuf-china-finale-results-kim-vs-hathaway http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2014/3/2/5459566/ufc-tuf-china-finale-kim-vs-hathaway-results-recap-winners-losers-sunday-perspective These links back up what I am saying.Lukejordan02 (talk) 22:18, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

You're delusional and it seems to me that you don't really want to look for the right information. I'm done talking to you. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 22:37, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

You like to call people names don't you I find info the same as you then when I show it your say its wrong You sir are a hypocrite.Lukejordan02 (talk) 22:46, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

No I'm not. I'm just smart enough to not waste more time discussing obvious things with you. You're not able to interpret what we say and simply mix everything up. It's pretty obvious at main mma media like MMA junkie, MMA Fighting, Sherdog (...) that now they're calling TUF finales events from other seasons that way instead of simply "Fight Nights", unless they take place in a PPV. The events' pages in the UFC website or the overall events page show that and you simply mix a bunch of stuff trying to justify the crazy things your mind tell you to post here. I'm not attacking anybody, but you can't catch a break and take a smart look at all that has been said, specially because it's very simple and easy to understand. I've also said that they started it now, therefore UFC Macao is and will still be named UFC Fight Night: Kim vs. Hathaway. I've mentioned it in edit summaries before and even in this conversation. Still, you don't seem to read that or maybe understand. This final reply sums up everything that you need to know and if you still don't understand, I can't help you. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 22:51, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

I know your brazillian but please use a translator if need be I have researched into the names And ufc china is and always was called TUF CHINA FINAL if you look at any mma website that it what it is called and the web links aren't from now they are from February when the event took place so they haven't been renamed now that is what it has always been called. Lukejordan02 (talk) 22:53, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Being Brazilian means nothing as I have no problem whatsoever with English. Might speak it even better than some Americans. You on the other hand need to learn a lot how to read. Good luck. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 23:05, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Did it take you 15 minutes to think of that comeback? And I know being Brazilian has nothing to do with it but you just aren't getting what I am saying are you. You make one statement and then when you are on the other side of the fence you change your mind I am a little tired of you trying to belittle me Why all of a sudden are you trying to be the wiki police.Lukejordan02 (talk) 23:15, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey, Gsfelipe94 and Lukejordan02, I posted my opinion about this issue in my (talk) page, if you're interested on reading it ;) Psycho-Krillin (talk) 19:37, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

UFC Fight Night: Cerrone vs. Miller

Hi I have created a page for UFC Fight Night: Cerrone vs. Miller, it is the first page I have created so could you help me to improve it kind regards.Lukejordan02 (talk) 21:37, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

You are very condescending...

The fight was clearly ended with multiple elbows and which started with cleanly landed punch, set up by that head kick. This seems to be a repetitious, automatic problem with you revising things and undoing peoples' revisions or lack thereof. So please, simply "google" a '.gif' file and you'll SIMPLY see what I see, numbnuts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bl1tzkrieg1940 (talk • contribs) 21:01, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to The Ultimate Fighter: Team Edgar vs. Team Penn may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *[[Mark Coley, Cody Mumma, John Poppie, Doug Sparks, Daniel Vizcaya and Kelly Anundson.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:50, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2014 FIFA World Cup. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:25, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

lol. Disagree with you once and then there's "edit war". Good to know. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 19:27, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Ultimate Fighter Edits

Hi, I am really sorry I was that use to reverting that I did it without checking the edits, your colour updates I really useful thanks, I only made 2 small changes and that was to shorten multiply who coaches both to multiple coaches and I removed rich franklin from the Liddell vs Ortiz and just left in in the note because he is not featured on the DVD cover for example so I removed the name from the coaches section to avoid any confusion and to generally make the box smaller and tidier. kind regards. Lukejordan02 (talk) 00:10, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Vítor Miranda ou Vitor Miranda

O site pessoal dele (http://www.vitormiranda.com/) escreve Vitor. Assim sendo, vou repor como tinhas. Tinhas razão mas ser prepotente não ajuda a justificar. 1 abraço.Psycho-Krillin (talk) 17:19, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Não fui prepotente. Falei desde o início que não tinha esse acento e você continuou a simplesmente mudar porque achava que tinha razão, quando eu disse que nomes não necessariamente seguem as regras. Desculpa se entendeu outra coisa como arrogância. Abraços. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 17:33, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

UFC

OK, fair enough I made a mistake, but there was no need for the attitude off the IP address user.

You do that and in the mean time go and get anger management classes and think about wether or not you should be editing on a PUBLIC WEBSITE as you clearly don't no how to get on with other people! (By the way you've used that "joke" before please come up with something more original.)Lukejordan02 (talk) 04:26, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Since you have finally took your head out of your arse for a moment to do something useful on the list of UFC events I think that looks good now, my main point before was that it was stupid and confusing to people to have it listed differently on 2 different parts of the same page you have now made them match, well done. Lukejordan02 (talk) 13:07, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

I just wrote what the announcer said, there is no need for the attitude you could just kindly correct me. Lukejordan02 (talk) 00:31, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

It wasn't directed at you. Actually I had the page open for the update and you still hadn't updated it. I wrote it as a reply to what Buffer said. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 00:37, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry I just thought that you thought I was trying to vandalise the page and I was just trying to help, by the way an IP address has changed it to Verbal Tapout just to make it clear it wasn't me and I haven't reverted him but I am letting you know so you can it is right to do so, kind regards. Lukejordan02 (talk) 00:42, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I have just reverted a user on the event page who had put it as TKO again and he reverted me saying according to sherdog, which is right? Lukejordan02 (talk) 02:07, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Sherdog is a official source, but they also put a lot of stuff wrong as we've seen in recent events. I say we keep it as sub via heel kick. It wasn't TKO, the guy tapped out (verbally and with the hand), but regardless of that, it doesn't mean that because someone updated it like that on Sherdog that he holds the exact truth. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 02:11, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough I agree Sherdog made a balls up with a match on the last event card as well but could you revert him this time as you might be able to get through to him better, cheers. Lukejordan02 (talk) 02:14, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Live updates

Thanks for your edit to the Arjen Robben article, but it's better not to update articles while matches are still being played. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:38, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Egidio Arévalo

If his common name is "Egidio Arévalo Ríos", you should request for his article to be moved. Until then, what is the point in piping the link? He is also commonly known as "Egidio Arévalo", so the "Ríos" seems superfluous. – PeeJay 21:12, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

All I see here is someone trying to get some uncalled for confusion. He's been playing for ever with this name, it's even written in his shirt. It's part of his name and that's how he's called. Someone that created the article just used "Arévalo", but he's called Arévalo Ríos by the media where he plays, specially here in South America. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 21:17, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

No one is trying to create any confusion. I'm just saying, if the article is currently at the wrong title, instead of piping to a different name, you should move Egidio Arévalo to Egidio Arévalo Ríos. If you can produce sufficient sources to say that is the name by which he is most commonly known, the page will be moved and we won't have to worry about this any longer. – PeeJay 00:00, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

No copyrighted logos or crests on kits on English Wikipedia.

Edits like this are a violation of copyright policy and WP:FOOTY guidelines. The kit was fine without the logo but you decided to add it in and did so without explaining why. Please keep copyrighted logos and crests off kits. Other wiki projects have different copyright guidelines and so it's acceptable for them, but not on English Wikipedia. Thanks. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:15, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Iran - Trinidad & Tobago match

The match was an official friendly and neither team made more than the 6 substitutions allowed by FIFA to count it as an official friendly. There was another World Cup warmup game in which R. Lukaku of Belguim scored a hat-trick. The Belgium coach, however, made 7 substitutions and the game was recorded as an unofficial match. You are correct about the match venue though. It was held at the following venue: http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/CT_Joaquim_Grava. Please correct all changes made in regards to this match. Thanks. You can also see the Iranian goalscorers profiles on FIFA (http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/players/player=362641/index.html) which include this match.

Gastelum's weight / catchweight

Tem havido vários eventos em que lutadores falham o peso e o UFC / as comissões atléticas não mudam a luta para catchweight. Se prestares atenção durante a emissão, vais ver que a luta é anunciada como welterweight.
O UFC anuncia lutas como catchweight quando o peso combinado antes da luta não é o do limite de uma das divisões, ou porque houve um lutador a aceitar a luta com muito pouca antencedência (exemplo: primeira luta do Costas Philippou no UFC), ou porque são 2 lutadores de categorias diferentes e, em vez de um deles mudar, contratualizam um peso intermédio (para este caso não me lembro de nenhum exemplo assim de repente, teria de ir procurar). O Dana White já disse várias vezes que não gosta de catchweights.
Mas ok, fica atento à emissão, vê como eles vão anunciar a luta entre o Gastelum e o Musoke.Psycho-Krillin (talk) 23:58, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Sim sim, eu concordo e também já vi anunciarem na categoria normal, assim como acho que é o que vai acontecer hoje. Porém é de certa forma padrão escrever ali pra deixar notório que a luta foi realizada naquela categoria. Até porque se por algum motivo o Musoke alegasse que não aceitaria lutar pq o acordo é 171, qualquer peso acima disso torna a luta uma "catchweight". Então é questão de nomear assim porque houve falta de bater o peso da divisão, mas ao mesmo tempo não interfere pq a luta ocorre de fato dentro da divisão dos welterweights. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 00:05, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Nederlands Tactical Formation

Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2014_FIFA_World_Cup_knockout_stage --The Mercenary 73 (talk) 18:10, 29 June 2014 (UTC)