actually its not worth it....you choose not to work with people so might as well let you fight the world and see where it gets you. |
in final response (edit conflict) |
||
Line 419: | Line 419: | ||
:::Probably because he has been known to sockpuppet he assumes everyone else does too. -[[User:Djsasso|DJSasso]] ([[User talk:Djsasso|talk]]) 20:43, 4 June 2011 (UTC) |
:::Probably because he has been known to sockpuppet he assumes everyone else does too. -[[User:Djsasso|DJSasso]] ([[User talk:Djsasso|talk]]) 20:43, 4 June 2011 (UTC) |
||
:::: Djsasso, you know very well that the sock puppet allegation was demonstrated to be a false positive, and that all of the editors involved were unblocked. You have also read the top of this talk page where I have politely stated: ''"If you have come here to harass or bait me, please don't."'' Because it appears that you have intentionally ignored my request, I am now requesting that you stay off my talk page. Thank you. [[User:Dolovis|Dolovis]] ([[User talk:Dolovis#top|talk]]) 05:17, 5 June 2011 (UTC) |
:::: Djsasso, you know very well that the sock puppet allegation was demonstrated to be a false positive, and that all of the editors involved were unblocked. You have also read the top of this talk page where I have politely stated: ''"If you have come here to harass or bait me, please don't."'' Because it appears that you have intentionally ignored my request, I am now requesting that you stay off my talk page. Thank you. [[User:Dolovis|Dolovis]] ([[User talk:Dolovis#top|talk]]) 05:17, 5 June 2011 (UTC) |
||
:::::I don't know that. It was actually demonstrated to be probable. What you were given was a second chance. Or third since it happened twice. You also realize you can't ban people from your page right? -[[User:Djsasso|DJSasso]] ([[User talk:Djsasso|talk]]) 12:38, 5 June 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::::: Probable is far from confirmed, and in the end it was demonstrated to be an untrue allegation. That is why ''all'' of the accounts that you accused (the alleged socks and puppets) were unblocked. And yes, I ''can'' ban editors from my talk page, and you ''are'' banned from my talk. Do not post here again. [[User:Dolovis|Dolovis]] ([[User talk:Dolovis#top|talk]]) 13:05, 5 June 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Season numbers == |
== Season numbers == |
Revision as of 13:05, 5 June 2011
Hi there! This is my talk page, and I do hope that you will leave me a pleasant message to help make my day a bit brighter. I am open to hearing your constructive comments concerning my editing, but like all humans on this planet, I am more likely to take your comments to heart if they are written in a civil and polite tone. If you have come here to harass or bait me, please don't. If I do not want to respond to your message I won't. Don't take it personally. This is my talk page, so I will choose which discussions will continue, and which discussions will not. If you have been asked to stay off my talk page, then I ask that you respect my right to do so, and to refrain from posting your comments here. On a similar note, please don't censor my talk page. Just because you don't support what someone is saying is no reason to remove it. However, if it is clear and obvious vandalism, then please feel free to do it. That's not censorship, that's a neighbour looking out for its community, and I thank you for taking it on. A non-abusive heads-up on the antics of the contributor would still be appreciated, and even then, it may be better to just leave me to clean up my own page. You take care now, y'hear? Dolovis (talk) 04:37, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
AWB
Hi. Please don't use AWB to make formatting changes to the date pages like you did here. Those pages have special formatting that allows for better readability when editing the pages. If you have questions please ask. Thanks. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 23:57, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
- That edit was made in accordance with MOS, specifically WP:ORDINAL. Dolovis (talk) 05:09, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
- Actually, Mufka wasn't complaining about you changing "sixteenth" to "16th". He was bothered by the many places in which you compressed two spaces to a single space. Those extra spaces were being used by the editors of that page to keep "2008" aligned with "[[2008]]" (for example). I suspect that edit was probably performed automatically for you by AWB, so you didn't realize you had fiddled with their formatting.
- However, this whole topic strikes me as odd, because I don't understand why any of those dates are wikilinked at all. Doesn't this say dates shouldn't be wikilinked just because they refer to events that happened to occur in the same year? There's a whole set of pages that are dedicated to showing all events that happened on December 20th or during 2008. That seems to be a direct violation of WP:YEARLINK, which appears to say you should only link dates if the events are connected topically. Am I missing something? Johnson487682 (talk) 18:38, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
- I agree with your interpretation of WP:YEARLINK. Dolovis (talk) 19:10, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
- The date pages are a bit out of the normal MOS. From the MOS: "not be linked unless they contain information that is germane and topical to the subject matter". In this case, the date articles are about dates and linking is appropriate. BTW, my comment above was about the spacing, which should remain consistent on the date pages. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 11:13, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- I agree with your interpretation of WP:YEARLINK. Dolovis (talk) 19:10, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Calendar date
I'm sorry, but I had to revert Line 34 of your recent edit. You changed "november" to "November" using AWB, but the text of that bullet point explicitly states that the lowercase is used for the month name in Hungary.Johnson487682 (talk) 13:23, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
AWB correction
I've just reverted your AWB edit to this page, as it introduced an error... Cdmackay (talk) 10:29, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- I am honoured to have inspired you to make your very first Wikipedia edit. I welcome you, and hope that you will continue to enjoy your time here proof-reading and otherwise working to improve articles. Cheers! Dolovis (talk) 12:31, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Myles Bell has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Non-notable junior hockey player. Currently in the news for his involvement in a car accident.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Canada Hky (talk) 00:02, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Dmitri Milchakov, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.eurohockey.net/players/show_player.cgi?serial=67685.
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.
If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 03:11, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
- This has gotta be a false positive. I looked at the EuroHockey page, and I can see there was no copyright violation. Johnson487682 (talk) 13:59, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
2011 NHL Entry Draft
Actually, the existence of a compensatory pick was already entered, and already referenced. Your faulty assumptions coupled with lazy editing wiped that out. You also introduced a counting error half way through the table that soccerholic had to fix. But then, forcing other editors to clean up after you is nothing new, is it? Resolute 18:33, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
- This discussion was started on Resolute's talk page, and that is where it should continue. I request that Resolute stay off my talk page. Thank you. Dolovis (talk) 18:49, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
The order of draft picks in the first round
Another issue: Is it necessary to show the order of draft picks in the first round? I refer to you posting references to prove the Oilers, Devils, Flames, Stars and Caps first round draft picks are the picks listed. I believe that all useful information about this is avaliable in other sections of this draft page, most notably in the draft lottery section. If you were to keep just some of the references in question, I personally believe links to show the Oilers and Devils picks are the most relevant. This is just my opinion, though, and thanks for your contributions. Ho-ju-96 (talk) 06:13, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- Without a doubt, showing the order of draft picks in the 1st round of the NHL Entry Draft is necessary information. The policy on the use of inline citations can be found at Wikipedia:Inline citation. Dolovis (talk) 11:05, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
One line articles
Just wondering, Dolovis, why are you creating so many one line articles about Van Gogh paintings, and not even including the image from the List of Works?
I would be happy to collaborate and at least give you some text that could go with several paintings, such as reference to the period / place the painting was made, etc.--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:46, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- The basic concept of creating a stub article is to provide adequate context for other editors to expand upon. Please feel free to build upon the Van Gogh article's as you find the time and inclination. Dolovis (talk) 22:01, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- I get your point, but you may want to consider from the Visual Arts MOS WP:VAMOS "Generally, very short articles (say less than 200 words of main text) on individual works or art are to be avoided, as the information can be included in the main article on the artist, or incorporated with other similar short pieces in a dedicated article, such as Portraits by Vincent van Gogh."--CaroleHenson (talk) 07:34, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Philip Kemi has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:04, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
: Note: This article was de-prodded on May 13, 2011 with the comment "article has 3 external links".
The article Alexandr Galchenyuk has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:06, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
: Note: This article was de-prodded on May 15, 2011 by a 3rd party with the comment “Are you freaking kidding us? He played NINETEEN PRO SEASONS”
The article Aleksei Vasiliev (ice hockey b. 1984) has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:07, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
: Note: This article was de-prodded on May 15, 2011 by a 3rd party with the comment “sources already exist”
The article Cory Dosdall has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:07, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
: Note: This article was de-prodded on May 15, 2011 by a 3rd party with the comment “sources already exist”
The article Ziga Pance has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:08, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Matej Hocevar has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:08, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The article David Rodman has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:08, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Mitja Sivic has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:09, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Ziga Jeglic has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:09, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Jeremie Romand has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:10, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Damien Fleury has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:10, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Julien Desrosiers has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:10, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Nicolas Arrossamena has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:11, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Teddy Trabichet has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:11, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Maxime Moisand has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:11, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Jonathan Janil has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:12, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Ronan Quemener has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:12, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Jesper Jensen (ice hockey b. 1991) has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:13, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Michael Eskesen has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia: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. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:17, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- I've tagged many articles you created with BLPPROD. I removed all the messages left here because there's no need to clutter up your talk page. While you're going through the trouble of creating the pages, add at least one reference to avoid the trouble of BLPPROD. 22:15, 13 May 2011 (UTC)-- Mufka (u) (t) (c)
Re: BLP-PRODs
To Mufka: Stop your mass BLP-PRODing of articles that I have created. Each of the articles that you have prodded contain links to verifiable sources, as is required for biographical articles. I do not know what WP:POINT your are trying to make, but your edits are disruptive. If you continue to make such disruptive edits you will be reported to WP:ANI. Dolovis (talk) 22:25, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- It appears that you may have a misunderstanding as to what a source is. An external link is not a source. All of the BLPPROD tags that I placed were valid. Also, please don't threaten ANI reports in your first communication with another editor on something that you have a dispute on no matter how frustrated you may be. That doesn't show that you assume good faith. Rather than creating a high volume of articles, it might be a good idea to focus on developing just a few good ones. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:56, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hockeydb.com [1] and eliteprospects.com [2] have both been accepted as reliable sources, and every article that you BLP-prodded is linked to one or more such reliable source that verifies the content of the article. If you wished to open friendly communication before you started your WP:POINT prodding campaign, then I assumed you would have done so. Instead you started mass-prodding, and only ceased after I delivered to you the appropriate warning. Rather than focusing on deleting articles about notable athletes, why don't you instead focus on improving references and adding content? Dolovis (talk) 23:30, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- Those external links might indeed represent reliable sources, but you did not add them to the articles as references, you added them as external links which are meant to lead the reader to other items of interest on the topic, not to be used as sources for the content. I see that you are sensitive to having the articles that you created be criticized, and I thought that you would be receptive to the fact that I removed most of the canned warnings and left a personal note above. But alas, that was not the case. As you create new articles, it's very easy to add a source at the time of creation. You went through the trouble of adding external links, but if you had called just one of the links a reference, you wouldn't have a problem. There is a difference between an external link and a reference. Please keep that in mind. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 00:00, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
- In the space of 13 minutes you BLP-Prodded 19 referenced articles about notable athletes (more than one article per minute), only stopping your massive prodding after I sent you a warning. And you are now trying to tell me that you feel justified because you wanted to teach me that I should be using the heading “References”, and not "External links"? That is, in my opinion, an example of disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate a point. I am not sensitive to constructive criticism, but I did not see any such thing in the 19 deletion notices that you posted to my talk page. Please keep in your mind, as I do in mine, the wiki-principle of common sense. Dolovis (talk) 00:47, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
To Mufka: The above discussion is over. Please do not post any more comments on my talk page. Thank you. Dolovis (talk) 00:48, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
Jakub Kovar / Jakub Kovář
Hello, why did you move the page Jakub Kovář back to name Jakub Kovar? I don't understand this revert, correct form of his name is with Czech diacritic Jakub Kovář. Pronunciation with/without diacritic is in the Czech language different. I added interwiki from cs Wikipedia. Sorry for my bad English, with greetings --Midi7 (talk) 14:40, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- This is the English Wikipedia, and according to the policy of WP:COMMONNAME and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English), a biographical article does not use the subject's name as it might be spelled in Czech (with diacritics) as its article title, nor does it use the person's legal name as it might appear on a birth certificate or passport; it instead uses the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources. The use of "Jakub Kovar" is verified by the sources used within the article, and "Jakub Kovář" is not supported by the sources used as references for the article. Dolovis (talk) 14:48, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- Most of articles of Czech people are in English Wikipedia with diacritics. It's the same as I write Nový Jork, but correct English form is New York (bad example, but it's similar). I think that web pages in English use form Jakub Kovar because English keyboards haven't keys á é ě í ó ú ů ž š č ř ď ť ň. Sorry, but it isn't correct. --Midi7 (talk) 15:11, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- To quote the first sentence (and central policy) of Wikipedia:Verifiability: The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true. Your example of 'New York' is a good example, as most English-language sources will verify it as the commonly used form of spelling. Dolovis (talk) 15:19, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- OK, it's English Wikipedia, so leave this topic. People who are native speakers of English never understand rules of inflective languages with declension, diacritics, grammatical cases, ... --Midi7 (talk) 15:28, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- Those of us that have studied German and Latin do - we just can't see the necessity when we've managed to grow out of it. Seriously, both forms should be present when there's a diacritic or similar problem. One or other should be a redirect - probably the 'correct' form as the title and the anglicised form as the redirect. (BTW - I wouldn't have trouble understanding Nový Jork and can pronounce ř even though I can't speak Czech.) Peridon (talk) 22:02, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- OK, it's English Wikipedia, so leave this topic. People who are native speakers of English never understand rules of inflective languages with declension, diacritics, grammatical cases, ... --Midi7 (talk) 15:28, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- German language is more similar to Czech language than English. In German are four cases; we have seven, but four German are the same as in Czech. If I say some sentence in German as well as in Czech, many Germans will understand. But in English I have to say it different and it's in our language nonsense. It's problem of my sister - she doesn't understand English. In English are auxiliary verbs, we haven't it. For Example sentence Where do you come from? we say only with two words (Odkud pocházíte?) and verb do is in Czech form nonsense; it doesn't exist in our language. And in German it isn't too (Woher kommen Sie?). So some Czechs don't like people from USA or United Kingdom because thinking of this people is different (as well as language). Germans are for us closer than US or UK people, but older generations don't like Germans too - due to history. Sorry for my bad English, I hope you understand me. :-) With greetings, --Midi7 (talk) 04:35, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind, but I've reinstated your redirect left by the page move. I've done this because I consider it to be a sound redirect to a title with accents that most English speaking users won't use. If you really want it gone, let me know - but I think it is of value. Peridon (talk) 16:46, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
One-line stubs
It isn't useful to create one-line stubs that state "X played for Y at the 20xx IIHF World Championship". A reader would click on a link hoping to find more information on the player; this sort of one-line stub defeats the purpose, as it is redundant to the team page. If the reader searches for the item, then that information would be better conveyed by the team page. All of this would not be as problematic if your creations didn't have to prodded (correctly!) for lack of sourcing, and then renamed, or they required other basic fixes. Wikipedia has more than enough biographies of marginally notable people that are underwatched, and adding such BLPs, which are one line long and unsourced, makes this problem worse. Maxim(talk) 21:43, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- The basic concept of creating a stub article is to provide adequate context for other editors to expand upon. Please feel free to build upon the ice hockey article's as you find the time and inclination. Dolovis (talk) 23:10, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- I don't think you undestand WP:BLP, and consequently, the ethical issues with creating an underwatched substub that is unlikely to be expanded, on a marginally notable athlete, which is freely editable and most likely one of the top Google hits on the person in question. You really shouldn't be editing biographies of living people if my previous assumptions are correct. Maxim(talk) 00:35, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
This isn't the first time that this problem has been brought to your attention. These one sentence sub-stubs are not beneficial to the project, are very unlikely to be expanded - god knows you'll never do it - and show only that you can read the roster page on the IIHF's website. Since polite discourse has failed to yield any results, I have therefore deleted your latest batch of sub-stub BLPs per WP:IAR. If you wish to find sources to re-create viable articles, feel free to do so, but for the benefit of Wikipedia, take the effort to do a reasonable job of it yourself. Don't try to download the work of creating viable stubs to other editors. Resolute 00:37, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- Given these concerns from multiple users about this user creating one-line stubs, I have revoked autopatrolled privileges to ensure the normal review process of new articles created by this user. Toddst1 (talk) 18:17, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Diacritics in ice hockey artcles
I don't mean to bother you, but I think you're somewhat misguided about diacritics. I've seen the discussions up top and I've read your points, but those policies/guidelines do not represent what is actually occuring. Wikipedia policies are descriptive, and not prescriptive, so while on the letter of them the diacritic-less titles might well be correct, the reality is that they seem to be universally used; for example, in hockey, as far as I remember individual player pages have always been with diacritics. While the actual rule may be contradictory to the status quo, its intent (consistency) would be best implemented if article titles weren't named against the status quo. Maxim(talk) 22:23, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- You are correct in that there are a small group of dedicated editors who have been spending their efforts to wilfully ignore and supplant the existing wiki-policies concerning the use of diacritics in articles. It does not follow, however, that such insurgent tactics have resulted in re-setting the status quo. And, with respect, your memory is clearly faulty concerning the use of diacritics in individual player's pages. Allow me to refresh your memory by quoting the Guideline in a Nutshell from Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ice hockey): “Hockey article titles should use the most common spelling in English as described by reputable reference books and media outlets. In most cases this means the omission of diacritics and other characters not commonly found in English.” Dolovis (talk) 23:23, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- You do see that that page is marked as historical right? Because it was supplanted by a new consensus to use them. A very great many things on that page are very out of date including things like naming articles Joe "Smoking Gun" Smith. You have had a number of editors on both sides of the issue show you the current consensus on the situation. -DJSasso (talk) 00:19, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- Dolovis, please see Wikipedia:HOCKEY#Wikiproject_notice. You've brought two threads to AN/I that went against you, and you're continuing to try to unilaterally get your own way. For hockey articles, all player pages get diacritics. This has been the status quo ever since this dios problem was resolved. Darwinek brought a similar threat to WT:HOCKEY lately, again, it was in favour of status quo. The onus is on you to change the current practice -- you are the one use renegade tactics. With this in mind, I would be interested in a reason to not revert your most recent page moves, that excludes the nonsense from my talkpage. Maxim(talk) 00:28, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- The moves were reverted for the reason given in the edit summary, which is to invoke the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. This is the English Wikipedia, and according to the policy of WP:COMMONNAME and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English), this article does not use the subject's name as it might be spelled in non-English languages as its article title; it instead uses the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources. This includes usage in the sources used as references for the article. You have failed to find any reliable source to verify your preferred form of name. If you wish to pursue this matter the process it outlines at WP:BRD. Dolovis (talk) 00:43, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- Continued WP:POINT moves like you have been making will eventually land you blocked. You have been shown the community consensus to use diacritics on hockey articles. Yet you continue to move them against the consensus of the community and you do so by trying to sneak them by using db-author to delete and recreate articles and placing them as uncontentious moves when they clearly are. Such actions are likely sanction-able. You have had numerous users tell you to stop. At both of the ANI reports you tried to make and at the hockey project and by many uninvolved editors on your talk page. Maybe its time to stop and think gee maybe its you that is against consensus when you keep seeing everyone disagree with you. Using or not using diacritics doesn't change that the name is still the common name. Really considering you were creating articles with them awhile ago yourself it makes no sense why you are suddenly so anti-diacritics other than to try and cause trouble or to make a WP:POINT. -DJSasso (talk) 00:49, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- The moves were reverted for the reason given in the edit summary, which is to invoke the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. This is the English Wikipedia, and according to the policy of WP:COMMONNAME and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English), this article does not use the subject's name as it might be spelled in non-English languages as its article title; it instead uses the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources. This includes usage in the sources used as references for the article. You have failed to find any reliable source to verify your preferred form of name. If you wish to pursue this matter the process it outlines at WP:BRD. Dolovis (talk) 00:43, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- Howdy Dolovis. Nobody hates the usage of those non-english symbols, anymore then I do. But, you are heading towards a block, by not abiding by the NHL players page agreement at WP:HOCKEY. GoodDay (talk) 00:58, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- You're not being reasonable Dolovis. You know full well that setting up multiple discussions at various talk pages won't help to resolve the issue. You should also be fully aware that you moved a dozen pages after a number of editors pointed out the current agreement about hockey players. If you want to reexamine this agreement, then make your case at that central location instead of creating twenty small-scale fights. Pichpich (talk) 03:23, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- Howdy Dolovis. Nobody hates the usage of those non-english symbols, anymore then I do. But, you are heading towards a block, by not abiding by the NHL players page agreement at WP:HOCKEY. GoodDay (talk) 00:58, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello Dolovis. I have reverted your last moves since you have not provided an acceptable explanation. To change the status quo, you are the one that has to initiate discussion at WT:HOCKEY or similar. Unilateral moves, in face of numerous objections from both sides of the debate, are not the solution. Maxim(talk) 17:12, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Revert explanation
I had to revert some of your edits to Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (use English) because you removed large part of several sections. I've noticed you tried to fix it yourself, but unfortunately, you did not. Feel free to check if there is anything you would like restored from the edits I was forced to revert. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:42, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks
Dolovis, Thank you so much for capturing a few Van Gogh articles about the Old Tower at Nuenen that needed to be redirected. Very much appreciated!!! I've not seen anything about bolding titles of paintings in the WP:VAMOS or in practice. Just so I better understand going forward, did you bold the names of the paintings in Old Church Tower at Nuenen ('The Peasants' Churchyard') image captions because of the redirect? Another reason? Thanks again!!--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:49, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
- Good work on the Old Tower article! It is a very effective way of organizing the information for these paintings. From my observations, it is common practice to bold the titles that are redirects. I do not know if this practice is suggested is in the manual of style or not, but I think that it improves the appearance of the article, and also assists the reader who may have found the article by way of the redirect. Dolovis (talk) 15:05, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks, makes sense. We'll see if one of the VA editors disagrees, but it does catch your eye.--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:39, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
2011-12 team Hockey seasons
Hey, great to see someone else working on these with me. Could you please leave the player signings at the bottom of the transactions sections so we keep the seasons looking uniform? It was like this at least the 3 previous seasons, so let's try to keep it that way. Also when using a signing reference, could we please try to use the team's official website? "team.nhl.com" That way we aren't sending people to many different websites if they want to look at the reference. Appreciate the fact that someone else is doing it with me, I've definitely felt like I've been working alone on these pages! Thanks! Piemann16 (talk) 14:34, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
- I am happy to collaborate with you to keep the teams' current season pages updated. It is my opinion that putting the Player Signing at the top of the Transactions section makes logical sense, as this section will (hopefully) provide a comprehensive and chronological list of all of the team's signings throughout the year - with the transactions below it breaking the signing down by type of signings as appropriate (such as Free Agent signings). If uniformity is your only concern, then previous season's article can also be edited to conform. As for references, while team.nhl.com does often provide a Press Release for signings, other sources may also provide the required verifiability, with the additional benefit of potentially providing additional editorial information that may not be included within the standard NHL press release. There is no reason why we should not include more than one source if available. Cheers! Dolovis (talk) 14:59, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Definitely see what you're saying about the multiple sources, I've been using the "Player signings" section as a place to list signings of prospects or re-signings of players that were previously under contract with the team, the seperating and free agent signings in the free agent section rather than listing the signings twice. I guess it's all up to personal preference, so since I've been the main editor for a few seasons that's how I saw it, but now with more people working on it, it surely could be a topic to bring up to a possible vote or something like that. Piemann16 (talk) 15:44, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
- Are you saying that you are open to my idea of moving the player signings to the top of the Transactions list? If so, I will continue to put the player signings in chronological order at the top, and to establish a uniform template for all the teams for the 2011-12 season. It is easier to decide upon a format now and add to it, then it will be to try to update multiple articles to conformity at a later date after numerous signings have been listed. I look forward to your continued feedback. Dolovis (talk) 16:23, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
- I would prefer to keep the player singings at the bottom (have it going trades, then free agents acquired/lost next to each other, then the waivers, then player signings) and only including the prospects and re-singings in that "Player signings" section if you are ok with it, keeping any free agent signings seperate (maybe adding a date category to that section). I think keeping it this way (as I have done in the previous 2-3 seasons of team season pages) would be less work on both of us and I feel like it looks nice on the previous seasons. Again, nice to see passion about keeping these season articles going strong and I am definitely open to suggestions/changes! Piemann16 (talk) 17:02, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Eric Gryba has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Non-notable hockey player. Less than 100 AHL games, no major awards, not a first round draft pick, no press coverage beyond routine mentions that he was in the lineup.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
Speedy deletion nomination of Winnipeg NHL Team
A tag has been placed on Winnipeg NHL Team, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}
) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Dr. Pizza (talk) 06:06, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- I have userfied it here because yes, irrefutable, but not done yet. Your work will be useful over the next week. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:54, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- I don't know how major Wikipedia edits work, but I knew in general that there is no Winnipeg team yet. Thats all. It wasn't anything against you. :) But If it wasn't me, someone else would have. So i apologize for coming off like a newbie. But this place goes by facts, not speculation. And that was my own Criteria that i went by.--Dr. Pizza (talk) 13:45, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Appropriate notification
- If you think that my edits are quick, perhaps you should look into getting a faster Internet connection for your own computer. I did not use any bot or automated editor, if that is what you are asking. I gave appropriate notification to those editors who had contributed to Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (use English). Following the edit history for the article, I made the limited posting that was neutral, nonpartisan, and open. Dolovis (talk) 13:21, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Michal Jordan has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. USA1168 (talk) 22:05, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Winnipeg NHL team
I should be around when the announcement happens, so if there is a need for some moves and redirect deletes (should they go with Moose or Jets as a team name), I'll try to take care of it quickly so the draft article can go live. Otherwise, other admins will undoubtedly be around. I half suspect that someone's going to create another new article about 2 seconds after the press conference starts, so probably a history merge will be required also. Resolute 13:44, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
- Why not just move it now (2 hours early) and save all the trouble. Once an official name is announced it can be moved to the correct team name title at that time. Dolovis (talk) 14:02, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
- For the same reason it was userfied in the first place: It is speculation until the league confirms. It's only about 90 more minutes... Resolute 14:32, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
- It passed the point of speculation 10 days ago. Dolovis (talk) 14:50, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
- I get what you are saying, and you are probably right. But officially, there is no Winnipeg NHL team until so announced. FWIW, at the end of the 1994-95 season, the Winnipeg papers were lamenting the demise of the Jets and how the team was moving to Minnesota in the summer. What appears to be a done deal isn't always so. Resolute 15:12, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
- It passed the point of speculation 10 days ago. Dolovis (talk) 14:50, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
- For the same reason it was userfied in the first place: It is speculation until the league confirms. It's only about 90 more minutes... Resolute 14:32, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
- Heh, I see you moved it already anyway. No worries. I did delete the cross-namespace redirect, however. Resolute 16:17, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
Steinbach, Manitoba
Hi Dolovi, you may want to keep an eye on this pape. A user by the name Skol fir has been posting false information. Best Babafat22a (talk) 17:20, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
I struck out the above inappropriate comment according to your own instructions above. This was pure vandalism. Period. --Skol fir (talk) 06:57, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- Dolovis, I happen to be a victim of WP:Wikihounding by a purely disruptive editor, User:Porgers, who has been using numerous sockpuppets over the last two weeks. If you look at the pattern of edits he has done, most tend to be nonsense and unfounded, just what he is accusing me of doing. His message to you was a red herring. As for User:Toddst1 removing the comment above, he was just following through on removing any false accusations being spread by this person. I am surprised that you allow such a vindictive comment to sit on your Talk Page without at least qualifying it. Therefore, I am doing so. Carry on. --Skol fir (talk) 15:02, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
WikiCup 2011 May newsletter
We're half way through round 3 of the 2011 WikiCup. There are currently 32 remaining in the competition, but only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. Casliber (submissions), of pool D, is our overall leader with nearly 200 points, while pools A, B and C are led by Racepacket (submissions), Hurricanehink (submissions) and Canada Hky (submissions) respectively. The score required to reach the next round is 35, though this will no doubt go up significantly as the round progresses. We have a good number of high scorers, but also a considerable number who are yet to score. Please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. Also, an important note concerning nominations at featured article candidates: if you are nominating content for which you intend to claim WikiCup points, please make this clear in the nomination statement so that the FAC director and his delegates are aware of the fact.
A running total of claims can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:25, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
No rollback rights
Your user page states that you have rollback rights. You do not. You shouldn't display that userbox. Toddst1 (talk) 02:37, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- I did not even realize that I had a rollbacker userbox there until you pointed it out. I think that I must have been trying to add an Autopatrolled rights user box and just made a mistake. I have removed it. Dolovis (talk) 03:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
ANI discussion
Just a heads up, another editor has started a thread at WP:ANI that involves you. Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Dolovis. Resolute 04:11, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Hockey players
Hi, Vitali Koval is the same of Vitaly Koval. And Evgeny Skachkov = Evgeni Skachkov. --Benj05 (talk) 12:47, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- Right you are, thank you for catching that. I have now converted the new articles into redirects. Cheers. Dolovis (talk) 13:50, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
The article Zack Phillips has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Non-notable junior hockey player, nominated for minor QMJHL award, but did not win.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Canada Hky (talk) 23:04, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Answer to...
What is your relationship with User:Darwinek?
What is your relationship with User:Darwinek? Dolovis (talk) 20:23, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- I dont have any relations with that user and dont know who he/she is. Why? Ratipok (talk) 20:33, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- None. It seems your paranoia is rising. - Darwinek (talk) 20:42, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- Probably because he has been known to sockpuppet he assumes everyone else does too. -DJSasso (talk) 20:43, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- Djsasso, you know very well that the sock puppet allegation was demonstrated to be a false positive, and that all of the editors involved were unblocked. You have also read the top of this talk page where I have politely stated: "If you have come here to harass or bait me, please don't." Because it appears that you have intentionally ignored my request, I am now requesting that you stay off my talk page. Thank you. Dolovis (talk) 05:17, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- I don't know that. It was actually demonstrated to be probable. What you were given was a second chance. Or third since it happened twice. You also realize you can't ban people from your page right? -DJSasso (talk) 12:38, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- Probable is far from confirmed, and in the end it was demonstrated to be an untrue allegation. That is why all of the accounts that you accused (the alleged socks and puppets) were unblocked. And yes, I can ban editors from my talk page, and you are banned from my talk. Do not post here again. Dolovis (talk) 13:05, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- I don't know that. It was actually demonstrated to be probable. What you were given was a second chance. Or third since it happened twice. You also realize you can't ban people from your page right? -DJSasso (talk) 12:38, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- Djsasso, you know very well that the sock puppet allegation was demonstrated to be a false positive, and that all of the editors involved were unblocked. You have also read the top of this talk page where I have politely stated: "If you have come here to harass or bait me, please don't." Because it appears that you have intentionally ignored my request, I am now requesting that you stay off my talk page. Thank you. Dolovis (talk) 05:17, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- Probably because he has been known to sockpuppet he assumes everyone else does too. -DJSasso (talk) 20:43, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Season numbers
Hello. I notice you're creating BLP articles. Just note that "2011" in a roster at Eliteprospects' website is the ending year of the season. In other words, it should be 2010–11 Elitserien season. Thanks in advance, HeyMid (contribs) 22:11, 4 June 2011 (UTC)