User talk:Wkg321

Wkg321, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Wkg321! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Gestrid (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

22:05, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Juan Cuadrado

No source indicated the deal was effective on 1 July. No such source to support the deal still need transfer window for these kind of multi-year loan with obligation to buy. Matthew_hk t c 03:54, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

June 2017

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Nathan Thompson (English footballer). This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Mattythewhite (talk) 18:09, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Luke Moore (footballer, born 1988). Mattythewhite (talk) 22:48, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Connor Hall for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Connor Hall is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Connor Hall until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Quentin X (talk) 14:22, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

July 2017

Hello, I'm JMHamo. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Willy Caballero, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! JMHamo (talk) 21:42, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox dates

Hi, when updating infobox stats you should update the |club-update= or |pcupdate= parameter for club stats, or the |nationalteam-update= or |ntupdate= parameter for international stats, by adding five tildes (~~~~~), which generates the specific time the update was made. Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 12:03, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Wishart

Hello. When you have a minute, please can you go back and fix the stats table. Thing is, if you say a row is sourced to e.g. Soccerway, then you have to use the figures that Soccerway publishes, not ones that you've got from somewhere else. If you intend to keep the more complete and accurate figures, you have to add sources that verify those figures, even if it means adding several sources for each row.

I have memories of very similar conversations with an editor with a username very similar to yours... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 14:55, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Jarrett Rivers, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Giant Snowman 08:42, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Harry Smith (footballer, born 1995). This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Giant Snowman 17:32, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Footballwebpages.co.uk

Hello. Does the site retain stats for previous seasons, or is it purely a current-season thing? I happened to notice on Reece Beckles that you're citing the same url for this season's stats as you did for 2016/17, BUT the page only contains his 2017/18 appearances. So you'll need to change the 16/17 source to something that actually contains the right season. Imagine this must apply to a lot of the pages you update... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:49, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Squad updates

When you update squads (as you've just done at AFC Fylde, could you please also update the "Updated" parameter? You've just amended the squad but left it as "As of 24 August 2017". Cheers, Number 5 7 14:36, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Simon Bloch Jørgensen, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Giant Snowman 14:00, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Dermot Drummy. Mattythewhite (talk) 22:39, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Wkg321. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jack James (footballer, born 1999)

The article Jack James (footballer, born 1999) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. The subject has not played in a competitive match between two clubs from fully professional leagues.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. LTFC 95 (talk) 18:56, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at Ricky Shakes, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Unexplained removal of sourced content and references. Mattythewhite (talk) 18:51, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:58, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sanchez Watt

As far as I can tell, Soccerway – which is the source given in the career stats table – doesn't have data on Watt's league appearances for Billericay Town. Would you be able to share your source? Regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 17:37, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

{{subst:uw-unsourved4|Joe Ward (footballer, born 1995)}} Giant Snowman 20:18, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Updater

Please don't remove {{English football updater}} from articles. If a league season has finished, then please edit the updater template, rather than removing it, which means future updates won't automatically be made. Thanks, Number 5 7 14:58, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve 2018–19 SBV Vitesse season

Hi, I'm Boleyn. Wkg321, thanks for creating 2018–19 SBV Vitesse season!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please add your references.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Boleyn (talk) 14:51, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, can you please respond? Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 08:18, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Releasing players

They will not leave clubs until the end of the season ie 30 June - please do not remove them until then. Giant Snowman 07:38, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As you have been told, players will not move until 30 June/1 July. Do not add players until then (ie Will De Havilland). Giant Snowman 16:15, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2018

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Bobby-Joe Taylor. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. JMHamo (talk) 20:24, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Steven Watt (footballer). Giant Snowman 16:21, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Tranmere Rovers F.C.. Giant Snowman 14:59, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Giant Snowman 14:36, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Wkg321 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Blocked for editing Shamir Mullings, however, saved the page accidentally without adding sources, following this, I went to re-edit the page and when I went to publish my edits I was blocked. Obviously I have had two previous accounts of 'unsourced content', but have since learnt and understood the guidelines. Thanks

Decline reason:

You say you have since learnt and understood the guidelines. But this just isn't true. You've received several warnings since your previous block. You also admit to adding unsourced content here. I'm afraid your unblock request doesn't convince me we can be sure you cite all future edits. Yamla (talk) 00:24, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Wkg321 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

These offences have simply been accidents, I've only had three or four in the last six months. I would say I never aim to disrupt any articles and believe I've been treated unfairly. As stated, this edit on Shamir Mullings was a pure accident.

Decline reason:

The unblock template is not a reply button. Please do not use it as such. Multiple requests will not speed up your unblock in any way. SQL ^{Query me!} 17:09, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You seem to think three or four violations, after a previous block, are acceptable. Instead, you should be giving us reason to believe there'll be zero violations in the future. --Yamla (talk) 00:42, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Without fail I always tend to source my materials, however, these three/four accounts have been pure mistakes, I honestly don't understand this treatment, especially when they're editors which usually never source their material or make disruptive edits. I would like to think I make very constructive edits which benefit and complement articles allowing visitors to read up on players. I don't understand how three or four mistakes warrants a block, of especially a week. Furthermore, surely editors should be rewarded more for constructive edits, instead of been given negative feedback for one or two accidents? Thanks --Wkg321 (Wkg321) 18:24, 17 July 2018 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Wkg321 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #22111 was submitted on Jul 18, 2018 15:15:23. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 15:15, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your sourcing

You have been previously warned about, and blocked for, your sourcing (or lackthereof). Please also note that sources, when used, must be reliable - I've had to strip the Jacob Maddox draft because nearly all of the sources you used weren't reliable. There was also lots of unsourced content in there. If you continue then you will be blocked again. Giant Snowman 08:05, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Drafts

Before creating a draft please check nobody else has created one in their own userspace - you have now duplicated Alex Addai and Ashley Nathaniel-George and Jacob Maddox, all of which were created in my user space before your own drafts, which I have had to merge to maintain the history. Please be more careful. Giant Snowman 09:34, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2018

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Tammy Abraham. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:43, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Nathan Baxter (footballer). Giant Snowman 16:04, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Reece James (footballer, born 1999). Giant Snowman 07:30, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Dior Angus

Hello, Wkg321. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Dior Angus".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Sam Sailor 10:52, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Will McGuffie for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Will McGuffie is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Will McGuffie until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

J Mo 101 (talk) 14:56, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mwiya Malumo for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mwiya Malumo is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mwiya Malumo until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

J Mo 101 (talk) 14:57, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]