User talk:Mattythewhite/Archive 56
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Mattythewhite. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 50 | ← | Archive 54 | Archive 55 | Archive 56 |
Alexis Mac Allister
Hi I noticed you and another user make a few edits here and there are a few problems. For starters you stated "Mac Allister is a family name originating from Scotland" which is redundant as not only did the Gaels in Scotland originally come from Ireland to begin with but Mac Allisters have been found in Ireland since at least the 14th century, so their Irish descendants aren't exactly "Scottish" anymore. It would be like saying "X is a family name originating from Normandy" for any English footballer with a historical Norman name.
Then you said Mac Allister "stated that he is aware of links to Scotland" which he did not say at all in the interview (which you removed as a source). He said the surname is Irish and he doesn't know why people keep claiming it's Scottish.
Lastly your source to apparent Fife ancestry states "Information on the move from Fife to Argentina is scarce, but reports from the Irish Times, tie the family links to Finglas in Co. Dublin". So there's no actual proof of Fife ancestry and you'd think Alexis would have mentioned it in the interview alongside his Irish family if there was. More speculative nonsense. Stevenbfg (talk) 23:59, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Stevenbfg: I restored content that had been previously added as part of a wider revert. If you can improve on the content, then great. Mattythewhite (talk) 18:11, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- No problem. We both seem to be on the same page when it comes to that user with no account edit warring without sources. If you report him, i'll back you up. Stevenbfg (talk) 18:53, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
Sock report
Good evening to you,
after what i saw/reverted at Rubén García (footballer, born 1993) (for the second time!), really i don't feel much imagination is required at this point, this IP you warned/blocked here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:70.125.139.219) is also the account User:Pablo Cepeda-Salas. Note how the latter was blocked back in the day (and it is CONFIRMED they are a sock of User:Olimpia de Minas, who also only "contributed" in adding honours); the ban was then lifted, but they continue making the same shenanigans (i.e. this, they added YOUTH honours to Bernardo Espinosa without any sources; they would have been unencylopedical even with one no? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bernardo_Espinosa&diff=prev&oldid=1276112402). Additionally, i have seen many instances of the 70 IP adding, as the sock Olimpia did, FRIENDLY honours to players bios; ALL three parties (70 IP, the two accounts) only edit in the same department, honours, no further proof needed i wager.
Brought this originally to the attention of @Yamla:, who had blocked O. Minas, did not receive one inch of a reply. Attentively c (talk) 01:25, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
- @RevampedEditor: I've given them a warning about editing while logged out. Mattythewhite (talk) 19:37, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
Sébastien Puygrenier
Hi Matty. At Sébastien Puygrenier, why did you change [[Category:Men's association football central defenders]] to [[Category:Men's association football defenders]]? Also, why did you remove his L'Équipe profile? As far as I can tell infobox caps are unverifiable now. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 19:13, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
Again, at Didier Digard, without the BDFutbol, L'Équipe and Soccerbase profiles, where's the verification for the infobox caps? Robby.is.on (talk) 20:45, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
- Hi. I don't feel we need the more specific position categories hence why I changed it. I mean, we don't have subcats for defensive midfielders or centre-forwards, so why do we for central defenders and full-backs?
- @Robby.is.on: The infobox appearance and goal data should be properly sourced to begin with, and an external links section is not the place for that. Mattythewhite (talk) 22:09, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for the explanations, Matty.
I don't feel we need the more specific position categories […].
Okay. But they exist. Wouldn't it be more constructive to initiate a deletion discussion of the categories instead of having editors editing differently and according to how they "feel"? To me, it makes sense to use the categories as long as they exist.we don't have subcats for defensive midfielders or centre-forwards
I don't know whether it has been discussed whether we should differentiate defensive and attacking midfielders. I'm skeptical whether that differentiation is as useful as that of central defenders and full-backs. I don't know what a centre-forward category would do for us – we do have a sub-category for wingers. The infobox appearance and goal data should be properly sourced to begin with
Okay, fair enough. How would we go about that without a stats table? The way I see it we're worse off without the ELs at Puygrenier and Digard. Robby.is.on (talk) 22:59, 23 February 2025 (UTC)- @Robby.is.on: That's fair regarding the categories. Having a project-wide discussion to establish consensus would be better than my drive-by changes based on personal preference.
- Hmm, we could restore the ELs, or even better would be to include them in the references section (like here). Mattythewhite (talk) 17:33, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks.
a project-wide discussion to establish consensus
I'd welcome that. For infobox stats, I'd be fine with the Keith Fahey solution, it's clearer than ELs. Robby.is.on (talk) 10:49, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks.
- Thanks for the explanations, Matty.
Precious anniversary
 | |
| Eight years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:30, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – March 2025
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2025).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Oversighter changes
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment is open to discuss whether AI-generated images (meaning those wholly created by generative AI, not human-created images modified with AI tools) should be banned from use in articles.
- A series of 22 mini-RFCs that double-checked consensus on some aspects and improved certain parts of the administrator elections process has been closed (see the summary of the changes).
- A request for comment is open to gain consensus on whether future administrator elections should be held.
Technical news
- A new filter has been added to the Special:Nuke tool, which allows administrators to filter for pages in a range of page sizes (in bytes). This allows, for example, deleting pages only of a certain size or below. T378488
- Non-administrators can now check which pages are able to be deleted using the Special:Nuke tool. T376378
Miscellaneous
- The 2025 appointees for the Ombuds commission are だ＊ぜ, Arcticocean, Ameisenigel, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, Galahad, Nehaoua, Renvoy, Revi C., RoySmith, Teles and Zafer as members, with Vermont serving as steward-observer.
- Following the 2025 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: 1234qwer1234qwer4, AramilFeraxa, Daniuu, KonstantinaG07, MdsShakil and XXBlackburnXx.
They don't give a rat's derriere about your notifications/warnings, please see this (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abel_Aguilar&diff=prev&oldid=1278350130)! I cannot prove 100% that this account and the 70 IP are the same individual, but if i'm wrong in my assumption that will only mean we have TWO people engaging in wrongdoings.
Attentively RevampedEditor (talk) 00:14, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
- @RevampedEditor: Warned for adding unsourced content. Mattythewhite (talk) 14:20, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
A technical question, one i feel that you, as an administrator, will be able to reply: if it is CONFIRMED in this user's page that they are a SOCK, why is it that they are still not blocked (not that it matters one bit, they'll just get another account and continue to say "it's not me"!)?
Attentively, thanks in advance --RevampedEditor (talk) 18:13, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
- Last input here: the 70 IP is also fairly active (please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/70.125.139.219), doing the same crap! I reverted them at Alberto Rivera (footballer), but was immediately reverted by a user that does tons of edits on former Real Madrid players! --RevampedEditor (talk) 00:09, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
Situation at Rivera taken care of, i added tons of refs there. And before you ask, yes i also edited with an IP there before doing so with the account, but i don't pull the stunts the 70IP nuisance pulls! --RevampedEditor (talk) 02:02, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
- @RevampedEditor: I think we'd need a WP:CHK to be certain before considering a block based on sockpuppetry. But I've warned them again after seeing your recent revert. Mattythewhite (talk) 21:06, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
The European Destubathon
You are invited to participate in The European Destubathon in April. Almost $3000 in Amazon voucher prizes, including prizes for 5 different entities of the UK and Ireland, which can be used to buy books for content, though it can also be treated as an editathon if you're not interested in competing! Minimum content to be added to each article just to ensure that they're over a stub, though longer expansions also welcome. Entries at the end of the contest will be tipped into the 50,000 Destubbing Challenge and European Challenge/20,000 Challenge for UK and Ireland entries. Previous contests were really enjoyable and I'm hoping this one will be too! Sign up if interested. Thanks! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:59, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2025
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2025).
Administrator changes
Bureaucrat changes
CheckUser changes
Oversighter changes
Miscellaneous
- Sign up for The Core Contest, a competition running from 15 April to 31 May to improve vital articles.
Administrators' newsletter – May 2025
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2025).
Administrator changes
Rusalkii
NaomiAmethyst (overlooked last month)
Interface administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, administrator elections were permanently authorized on a five-month schedule. The next election will be scheduled soon; see Wikipedia talk:Administrator elections for more information. This is an alternate process to the RfA process and does not replace the latter.
- An RfC was closed with consensus to allow editors to opt-out of seeing "sticky decorative elements". Such elements should now be wrapped in {{sticky decoration wrapper}}. Editors who wish to opt out can follow the instructions at WP:STICKYDECO.
- An RfC has resulted in a broad prohibition on the use of AI-generated images in articles. A few common-sense exceptions are recognized.
Miscellaneous
- A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in May 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles in the new pages feed. Sign up here to participate!