User talk:Wiggy!

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

User Talk:Wiggy!/Archive
User Talk:Wiggy!/Cited by the Image Copz

Thanks for visiting![edit]

Thanks for stopping by. I enjoy hearing from other Wikipedians (most of the time!) and appreciate the company. Remember, new stuff to the bottom of the page and sign your edits with four tildes (~~~~) and check back for a reply. Keep well. Wiggy! 18:31, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Berliner FC Dynamo[edit]

It's all right with the section literature.--Fox53 21:37, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

:) ! Wiggy! 00:20, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dynamo Dresden Logo 1950'ers until 1970's[edit]

There is a former DD-Logo: http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270107266318#ebayphotohosting Please edit it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fox53 (talk • contribs) 16:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Point of clarifiication. I generally treat stuff off of eBay as a secondary source that requires other supporting references unless its an exceptional case. The wimpel for sale on eBay isn't significantly different from what's already posted on the page, and quality-wise isn't near as good as other available reference materials. There are many other well-cited logo examples already available as DD isn't some obscure club or one lost in the mists of history. On top of that, wimpel designs tend to be all over the place, as they are often just quickly produced, cheap souvenir items that don't necessarily follow any sort of graphic standard established by the club. Sorry, but I don't think this particular example from eBay needs posting. Its only a minor variation of the existing images and its from a second-level source. But don't be discouraged! Every once in a while a diamond appears at eBay! I fish there regularly. Keep your eyes open.
So, you're Fox53 now? Looks like some decent work on ice hockey clubs so far. Have fun, be cool. Wiggy! 17:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BFC[edit]

The logo of the BFC is false, then they haven't the licence. Therefore the logo is violet and the Dynamo-D is broken instead of swung. Otherwise they must pay for it to "Pepe". --141.76.177.36 13:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, N~, but it isn't clear what you are trying to say. Pepe doesn't own exclusive rights. The logo that is currently displayed is the one in use on the club website with the addition of a championship star. My own feeling is that a simple Dynamo logo should be displayed without the star, and the championship version with a star displayed elsewhere with a proper explanation of what it is. But, of course, you have a different view.
Now I have reverted your addition of the logo because the caption or explanation you have attached to it is written in poor English, it is unclear, and doesn't significantly add to the article. There is no direct connection between this logo and BFC's European Cup appearance - its just coincidental.
Wrestling over this stuff with you is getting tiresome and I really do not want to be fighting over this all the time. I'm simply interested in seeing a well-written, factual article in place. Maybe we make some peace. How about we display a basic logo (with no star) in the info box and display a championship logo (with a star and an explanation) further below? That represents an accurate up-to-date position.
And do me a favor by not adding unnecessary tags to articles I have edited. While the articles may need sourcing tagging something just because I edited it is counter-productive and is a waste of everyone's time. Go out there and be a good, productive editor. Wiggy! 14:06, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. if you have a link to current information about Pepe and the legal status of the logo (I see you've marked the item as 2007) please post it so eveyone can have a look. Wiggy! 14:16, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Green quarters[edit]

Many thanks!!!!!!!!! ChrisTheDude 07:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya Wiggy! On a similar note to my query with the green quarters, would you be able to take a look at the _redquarters14 pattern? The non-red quarters are showing up as solid white rather than transparent. Many thanks for your assistance! ChrisTheDude 08:57, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The image file is part of Wikipedia Commons and can't be directly replaced. I've uploaded a new file to Commons which includes the proper transparent background in quadrants 2&3 and made a request to have the bad file replaced with that. Dunno how long it takes, up to the admins over there now, so stay tuned. Wiggy! 13:19, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers!!!!! ChrisTheDude 14:46, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Feyenoord[edit]

Hey Wiggy!, Thanks for copy-editing some parts of the Feyenoord article already. That's exactly what I was looking for and I'm looking forward to see this happening to the rest of the article as well. I hope you can find the interest in doing this, but with fellow Canadians Jonathan de Guzman and Jacob Lensky playing at the club this hopefully won't be too much of a bother to you. Cheers, SportsAddicted | discuss 19:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to make a contribution. Hope it suits. Thanks. Wiggy! 22:15, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It definately suits. The thing is when I see what I actually should have written I always have the feeling that I could have came up with that as well, but for some reason I don't, so it's always nice to have someone nearby that speaks better English than I do :) SportsAddicted | discuss 23:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for another round of copy-editing. I did however see you changed 1-0 and 5-2 into 1:0 and 5:2, which is not a common way to print a result. I know this is done in Germany, but as far as I know nowhere else in the world. I also removed the "by fans" part as everybody nicknames the stadium like that... fans, team members, press, fans/players/members from other teams as well as whoever you can think of. SportsAddicted | discuss 23:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. I see it's moving along and a number of folks are chipping in. This is good. Wiggy! 23:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's right, the more people are on it, the better the article eventually will be. SportsAddicted | discuss 06:58, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do you make kit images?[edit]

How do you make kit patterns that use Template:Football kit ? FootyStavros 01:19, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If the image uses an existing pattern I use Adobe Photoshop to change colours, do horizontal flips, move patterns from one image to another, etc. If I am making an image from scratch I use something like CorelDraw to create a new pattern and export it as a .png when its ready to go (just because I'm a regular CorelDraw user and can easily make it do what I want) and tune it up in Photoshop if I have to. There are other .png editors out there (including some freebies) that'll do the job as well. MS Paint will let you edit .pngs as well, real simple to use, but doesn't handle the transparent backgrounds that some kit images use. Hope that gives you a few clues. I imagine other folks have their own favorite apps for the job. You're trying to put together your own kit I assume? What club? (Good luck with it) Wiggy! 02:21, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do I make this image into a .png? I can't send any images to Adobe photoshop either. FootyStavros 22:33, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I use CorelDraw v7 (sometimes v12) and Adobe Photoshop CS to modify kits. CorelDraw allows you to export a file as a .png. Photoshop will handle .png files natively - you can open a file as a .png and save it as a .png. It also offers a Save for Web option that will save the file as a .png. You can open a .jpg (or other file format) under Photoshop, edit it, and save or export the result as a .png.
What software are you using for your work? It may just come down to developing some familiarity with the file functions of Photoshop (or whatever else it may be that you are using). Wiggy! 23:11, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I figured out how to do it. THANKS ALOT WIGGY. FootyStavros 23:24, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Woohoo! Congratulations. Wiggy! 23:31, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wait a minute. Ihe problem is that all my kits have to be on certain colour. I don't know how to make it with a colour you choose. Like for example:

FootyStavros's failed patterns

The arms and the body have my patterns on them. They're all supposed to be blue. But when I save them they change colours! FootyStavros 21:46, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is with the files you are uploading. Part of the image has to be transparent so that the background colour you select shows through the kit image that is laying on top of it. You can think of it as a cutout, I suppose. Mastering the use of graphic files with transparent backgrounds is one of the tricks that makes the football kit images work. Note that not all graphics software support transparent backgrounds. Improperly prepared transparencies will place the colour white in the area that is supposed to be transparent.
I've fixed your arms and will do the body as well. Wiggy! 21:59, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you fix this then? It's the real one. FootyStavros 01:21, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Saved as _thingoldsides rather than thingoldsidess to match standard naming convention. Wiggy! 01:36, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SC Verl[edit]

Thanks for your rewrite of the article. Please tell me if my English was actually bad, as I'm always working toward improving it. I will accept "rivalry", although it is an animosity. ;) DevSolar 14:03, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your English looks to be quite good. "Animosity" is fine by me, I had toned it down some without really knowing how much of a hate on there was between the two groups of fans. I'd also be more inclined to include the highlights as part of the general history section just as a matter of narrative flow, but that's just my approach. I take it that you are a Verl fan? How is your side doing this year? Wiggy! 14:34, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You wouldn't happen to have a club logo image handy, would you? Wiggy! 14:35, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As for the animosity, well... any more of it, and visiting the derbys would become really uncomfortable. ;-) This season is looking good so far. Our team is virtually unchanged, with only a few reinforcements, as opposed to our strongest competitor SC Preußen Münster who assembled a whole new team after coming down from Regionalliga (for 1.5 times the funds we have available for the whole club, just for their first team.) But we're ranked 2nd, one point behind and one game less played, so it's looking good.
Club logo is tricky. There are lots and lots around on the 'net (like, at the top of http://www.scverl.de), but I couldn't solve the copyright issue sufficiently for any of them to dare a Wikipedia upload. :-( DevSolar 08:27, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's okay, I found one. The use of a sports logo is okay as far as it goes as long it is properly tagged {{logo}} or {{sports-logo}} when uploaded/posted. Maybe the goings-ons on in Sachsen will help cool off the fans. Only a point out with a game in hand is looking good. Still a dozen games or so to go? If your guys can keep that up you have a good chance at moving up. Good luck. Go Verl! Wiggy! 12:00, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, so far things stopped short of "real" violence. That's what I meant with "any more of it...". ;-) Twenty games to go. If you're really interested, check the German wikipedia entry, or the statistics thread in the fan forum. The moving up this year would be rather crucial... next year the 3rd Bundesliga will be formed, meaning that clubs still in the Oberliga (IV) by then only have a chance for qualifying for the new Regionalliga (then-IV) or staying in the Oberliga (then-V), while teams already in Regionalliga (III) have a (really good) chance for qualifying for 3rd Bundesliga (then-III), and cannot be relegated from Regionalliga (then-IV)... DevSolar 12:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WE DID IT! :-D 217.95.134.211 14:56, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well done and congratulations! Time now for the bigger fish. Go get 'em! Here's to another successful season in 2007-08. Wiggy! 17:14, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar[edit]

Football (soccer) barnstar
For bucketloads of great contributions, particularly in the area of German football, I award you this barnstar. Oldelpaso 21:59, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow. How cool is that? <blush> Thanks for the notice. Wiggy! 23:45, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

answer to your questione[edit]

I lived in Nicaragua for about 5 years then i left the country when Ortega was first elected because he had some very weird rules you buy a certain kind of meat your not allowed to buy any other kind of meat you were told were you could spend your money, Im originally from Amsterdam i moved to the U.S to work as Chef and i'm an Associate at a private catering company I'm in my late 40's my wife is from Mexico. I last visited Nicaragua in Dec. 2005 i went to san juan del sur, laguna de apoyo, lago colcibolca etc. I mean no trouble but i think the Tourism section should be backed up with proper information and not from a personal point of view or a government site that has absolutely nothing to do with it, i first got interested when i was searching for information on central america i wanted read about other countries that i plan to visit next and i can honestly say wikipedia is no help i wouldnt recommend it to anyone until these articles are fixed. It doesnt seem to me that your contributors are helpful i know they are volunteers but they are rather discouraging this is not a friendly welcoming site and Nicaragua being the only country in central america that i have lived in i'd like to see some sources. I will contribute but lately work's been busy but when i get a chance i will gather up some sources for things i would like to write. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Holand (talk • contribs) 05:42, 27 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for the reply. Sounds like you've skipped around some, from place to place. Living in Nicaragua at a time of such big changes must have been a little scary. I'm from Canada which, except for some occasional excitement over Quebec, is a boringly - but wonderfully - stable place to live.
As to fixing the article on Nicaragua, I'd maybe go about it a bit more gently. I know it can be a frustrating chore sometimes, but I'm sure that if you work at a bit at a time it without beating up on your fellow contributors that it could be put into decent condition - especially as it sounds like you have something useful to add. Don't get too wound up over it and spend some time building some credibility with the other contributors by making useful incremental edits and - most importantly - by showing them some respect. Calling everyone a dope and bad-mouthing Wikipedia won't get you anywhere and the site can only be as friendly as you help make it. Patience, persistance and politeness. Wiggy! 17:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

African Cup of Nations[edit]

Thank you for copyediting of the article. Keep up the good work. --ChaChaFut 01:19, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to WikiProject Germany[edit]

Welcome, Wiggy!, to the WikiProject Germany! Please direct any questions about the project to its talk page. If you create new articles on Germany-related topics, please list them at our announcement page and tag their talk page with our project template {{WikiProject Germany}}. A few features that you might find helpful:

  • The project's Navigation box points to most of the pages in the project that might be of use to you.
  • Most of the important discussions related to the project take place on the project's main talk page; you may find it useful to watchlist it.
  • We've developed a number of guidelines for names, titles, and other things to standardize our articles and make interlinking easier that you may find useful.

Here are some tasks you can do. Please remove completed tasks from the list.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me or any of the more experienced members of the project, and we'll be very happy to help you. Again, welcome, and thank you for joining this project! -- Kusma (talk) 07:03, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Abseits Guide to German Soccer[edit]

I just noticed that the Abseits Guide, used liberally as external weblink for German soccer clubs, is a bit fuzzy when it comes to the lower German leagues, especially when it gets to which tier that league was at the time (quoting only the tier of that league as it is today. It's somewhat excusable, as even the German Wikipedia doesn't give much info on this, and there were (and still are) some regional differences. I just want to mention that the website isn't exactly "encyclopedic" in its info. (Just one example: The SC Verl page misses the fact that Landesliga was (IV), not (V), in the 70ies (there was no Oberliga before 1978...) DevSolar 11:45, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It may not be "encyclopedic", but having made regular use of the site it is clear that overall the info there is of generally high quality. I find it a great place to get started in developing a club profile because it provides a quick, easy to digest overview. In reading the author's profiles it is often obvious that he's visited the club site and used other sources. I also appreciate the tongue-in-cheek character of some of his remarks related to things that are often spot on that can be tough to find elsewhere, especially if the club itself won't talk about a given aspect of their history. Details like league standings can generally be confirmed at other sites, but again, I think the summary material available at Abseit's is valuble for its conciseness and ready availability. As a fan you know as well as I do that the historical structure of German football leagues is more than a bit convoluted, but to me that's part of the fascination of the game in the country. As a web asset Abseits is tough to beat and I appreciate the effort that's gone into the site, but wouldn't consider it a sole source.
I've settled into something of a routine when working on a club page that starts with a visit to Abseits. Then I'll hit up a bunch of other sites which generally include the German Wikipedia entry, the club site and some of its fans pages, the historical league results archive at www.f-archiv.de, the club summary page at eufo.de (for teams from tier IV and higher), and various wappen (logo) sites. I also used to make use of Hirschi's Fussballzahlensalat for details on very early German football, but that's disappeared. www.fussballdaten.de is often useful for confirming results (standings, match scores, cup competition), as is rsssf. And whatever else I may come across - throw into a pot and stir. I've got into the habit of appending external links to Abseits, f-archiv, and eufo (after the club page) as being the most useful to readers who want to do some follow-up or start their own explorations.
I'll typically gnaw at an article for a bit and then walk off and see what comes up in the next fews weeks or months and re-visit if I find new stuff or simply do a review and see if the item stands up. Its great to see folks adding stuff (corrections, new facts, perspective) and watch an article grow. Wiggy! 15:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Founding members of DFB[edit]

Great Job you did here so far with all the Club infos. If you need help i'll try to find things. I guess some of the founding clubs are not existing any more especially the ones from Berlin. I will check out what I can find tomorrow. Greetings --Panth 02:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It has made for an interesting little side project within the context of German football, but I think I'm down to the real tough ones now. I found that a number of the clubs are long gone and so in some cases the available info in the articles is rather thin. In other cases I was surprised to find clubs still among the living. I might have material for one or two others salted away, but that's it for now. Thanks for your interest and I'm looking forward to see what you might come up with. If you can find additional material I'd be quite impressed. Good luck! Wiggy! 02:33, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok as i realize this is hard work to find information about the missing Clubs ;) I found a homepage of a Soccer History Museum in Dresden which might help us out with the Dresdner FC 1893. Unfortunately the page seems new and they dont have an email contact yet. Ill keep an eye on that. For Frankfurter FC Germania 1894 i found hints that it might still exist as VfL Germania 1894 but im not sure if it is the same Club and found no Club homepage. The same it is with FC Association 1893 Hamburg which might be the VfL 93 Hamburg e.V. which has a hompage [1]. I might check that as well. --Panth 13:17, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, its down to the tough stuff now, the cherry picking is over. I'll follow up on the leads you've provided. Thank you and good hunting! Wiggy! 14:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well you did it! After your nudge I found a page for VfL Germania 1894 here. It's got a clear reference to being the same side that joined the DFB in 1900. Wiggy! 14:19, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats good to hear ;) Maybe you could do me a favor now. I found a mistake on Bundesliga. Theres this this template on the Bundesliga champions on the right side where they are all listed. Instead of 1998/1999 Bayern München it states 1988/1989. Just a minor edit but i couldnt find out where the source code of the box is located.--Panth 11:35, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that club page had a pretty detailed history section that also included a number of tidbits that I'll be able to use in the articles for other clubs. I've made the fix of the error you pointed out on the Bundesliga page. Thanks again. Wiggy! 12:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP Munich Sports Task Force[edit]

I've just created a sports task force for WP Munich. I've noticed that you have been editing 1860 Munich. The project is broken down where you can specifically help out 1860 Munich related article. Kingjeff 01:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you are interested, you can sign up here and here. Kingjeff 01:34, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

older logos FC Carl Zeiss Jena[edit]

Hi! The older logos at FC Carl Zeiss Jena are also not correct all. Please have a look at [2]. It's in German, but should be self-explanatory ;-) Otherwise please contact me.

--J2w 15:09, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. Nice find! Where did you come across those old logos? I'll put together an updated historical logo image in the next day or two. Wiggy! 00:26, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have created this logos for the internet from paper versions from the club archive. The "green" logo on your pic is an older logo from another club in Jena (SV Jenapharm Jena, former: BSG Jenapharm Jena (1982-1989), BSG Chemie Jena (1951-1982)). --J2w 20:01, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#Regarding notability of Football (soccer) players[edit]

Hi, seeing you are interested in football this is an invitation to contribute to this discussion to clarify certain issues about football player notability. I think clearer guidelines are needed to avoid repeated inappropriate nominations for deletion and time consuming discussions. Cheers! StephP 20:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Türkiyemspor[edit]

I have fotos from Türkiyemspor Fans in the 90s and of Ümit Karan in Türkiyemsporjersey, also the original logo of the club ( a little bit of the logo wich was posted here, the blue is more open and about the number is written the club name once more. But I dont know how to post them, and the explaining here is to long. Is there a possibility to send as to you ? have a nice day--Batiberlin 02:11, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you have seen it or not, but I left an email address you can use at your talk page. I'll repost it here - wikiwiggy@gmail.com Wiggy! 23:38, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eintracht Frankfurt logos[edit]

Hi,Wiggy! I noticed your great work on German football and especially the logo section. I wondered if you could upload the old logos for Eintracht Frankfurt for they are missing and I'm not in the picture right stuff. That would be very appreciated by me as I'm keeping the Eintracht page up to date. I'm not sure if you are familiar with German but anyway: Schönen Gruß nach Kanada! ;-) -Lemmy- 10:45, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I will look around and see what I can find. My German is not very good, but I am getting by with the Google-machine. Für deine guten Wünsche danke. Good work on the Eintracht page. Wiggy! 11:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oi,Wiggy. I created a new section in my favourite article. May I "misuse" you to have a swift cross-read? All the best -Lemmy- (talk) 17:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've copy edited your material if you want to have a look. Nice addition to the page, Lemmy! Wiggy! (talk) 18:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fantastic as always!:-) Thanks! -Lemmy- (talk) 19:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football[edit]

No worries - you fixed it before I saw your edit. But thanks for letting me know. Cheers. Ytny (talk) 20:05, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto FC[edit]

Thanks for your note about fair use rationales. I noticed your interest in soccer, and wanted to suggest that you take a look at Toronto FC and make any improvements that seem appropriate. --Eastmain 00:24, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationales[edit]

You might want to add the fair use rationale that I added at Image:SpVggUnterhaching.png to *all* the football (soccer) logos which you have uploaded. I realize that doing so will be a lot of work, but it might be good insurance against having the logos tagged for deletion by another editor or a bot. --Eastmain 00:34, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I was figuring on something like that. There's close to 300 images, though, so it's not going to happen within three days or one week or whatever asinine target the BCbot has in mind. I don't have a bot and I do have a life. While I can appreciate the need for images being properly tagged, the approach is heavy handed. Assembling a group of editors to facilitate a transition alongside the bot's work would have been a friendlier way of meeting the objective. The arguments over what constitutes a proper fair use rationale that then follow the bot around are just adding insult to injury. It has me hoping that BC loses his wallet and gets caught in the bureaucratic circles of hell. He should be able to appreciate the irony of it all on some level given that there will be lots of mindless nobs around who will insist only on doing things right and filling out the necessary forms just so - even if they're out of date, or change every other day. Wiggy! 01:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merging the West German soccer team[edit]

I see you were involved in the discussion for merging the West German soccer team. I have put a voting section here. Kingjeff 14:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning User:Kay Körner[edit]

Sorry to bother you; I've been following your exchanges with the user above, and I cannot fail to notice his, let's say obvious bias, concerning GDR football and the GDR herself. I've left him messages in German, as his English is probably not good enough to understand what we want of him. If you encounter real problems, just let me know. Lectonar 20:19, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is no bother. Thanks for the notice and your consideration. I don't know how long you have been following, but it is a stupid, petty little drama that's been going on for months now and this is pretty much as quiet as it has been. Kay's English is clearly not that good, and he's got a clear POV. He has been approached in German before, but to no real effect. Nonetheless, no harm in trying. You may have the magic touch. Thank you for your offer and I'll give you a shout if it ever escalates again. Wiggy! 22:41, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FC Bayern Munich Taskforce[edit]

Would you like to join a FC Bayern Munich Taskforce at WikiProject Munich? Kingjeff 20:56, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be interested? Kingjeff 22:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll drift over and have a look. I'm giving it some consideration. I didn't enjoy my last turn there because of an overly aggressive, narrow minded editor, but he looks to have pretty much gone away. It's the major German team and deserves a better article. Should be headed to a feature. Wiggy! 22:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This would be a group thing and we're not just talking about the article FC Bayern Munich. Here is the main page for the task force. If you do decide to participate in anyway, the current roster would be a good place to start. A lot of these players are either Stub-Class or Start-Class. Kingjeff 03:21, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

here is the Task Force. I'm very keen to have you involved. Kingjeff 00:00, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oberliga Hessen teams[edit]

Hi, Wiggy! I have just updated all Oberliga Hessen teams. The promoted sides are missing. Maybe we could add them together. One more note: The current Oberliga team FSV Steinbach will be renamed FSV 1926 Fernwald on July 1st. Could you change the logo? I will switch the whole article on July 1st. Thanks again for your efforts! -Lemmy- 21:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great, sounds like a plan. I'll chip away as I have time and add logos where I'm able. Nice to see all the German league stuff coming together. Just about at the 300 team article count which compares favourably to what's available for many other countries. I see your name pop up all the time, so I'm equally appreciative of your work. Thanks and keep well. Wiggy! 22:06, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SpVgg Unterhaching Task Force[edit]

Would you like to join the SpVgg Unterhaching Task Force at WikiProject Munich? If you are interested you can sign up here. Kingjeff 01:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for the heads up. He doesn't know any english? Kingjeff 03:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Only of the most rudimentary sort. Check out some of the articles under his contribs link and you'll clue in in about two seconds. Its just not there. Wiggy! 03:43, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He sounds like an Ossi. Kingjeff 03:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. Nothing wrong with that, but no need to be obsessed with it to the point that you can't contribute. Wiggy! 04:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edit to MS 1860 Munich (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 02:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MS 1860 Munich[edit]

This is a redirect. I've never heard of this name for 1860 Munich. Kingjeff 16:42, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody set up a spoof page (based on the original) which I blanked. A bot came along and reverted that thinking it was vandalism. I blanked it again but added a speedy delete tag, then someone else came along and attached a redirect which isn't quite right. It just plain needs to be nuked and I'm just not familiar enough with the process and haven't had time to better deal with it yet. Wiggy! 17:35, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Then maybe the speedy deletion tag should be added again. Kingjeff 18:15, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sportvereinigung Dynamo[edit]

None of the many reasons are actually cause for speedy. If you think the article is that bad, it looks like you'll have to use AfD, considering that there's opposition. I know it's a pain, but they're going to have their debate. Maybe it will settle things.  :) DGG 23:29, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Germany national under-21 football team[edit]

The Germany national football team and the U-21 team might be merged. I've already started a discussion and vote for this. You can join the discussion here. Kingjeff 16:50, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Viktoria Aschaffenburg[edit]

Why did you move this out of the article:

"* DFB-Pokal: 87/88 Quarterfinal (winfall viktory in the second round against former leader of the Fußball-Bundesliga 1.FC Köln)"? Is there a misetake? Berlinschneid 22:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, no mistake. "Honours" generally refer to divisional championships, cup wins, or finals appearances (i.e. vice-champions, cup finalists). The win to advance to the quarter final may have been exciting and significant in the club's history, but was not any form of recognized honour - it was simply an appearance in cup tournament play. The game you reference was actually a second round match. The team went on to defeat Hessen Kassel in the Achtelfinale before going out to Werder in the viertelfinale/quarterfinal. That's not clear from your entry and the team's cup performance is touched on in the main article. I'll work it into the main article if that will do. Wiggy! 00:51, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
O.K. That’s nice. And your are right, the win to advance the quarter final is nothing special. But as a long time supporter of the club, it was a great time. Particularly with regard to the depressing years which followed. I know, feelings should not find the way into a encyclopedia. But I think now it is a good compromise.  ;-) Berlinschneid 22:01, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for that. I'm from Canada where the football (soccer) is rather poor. Hockey is the game over here and my local team is the Toronto Maple Leafs. They have not won the big prize (the Stanley Cup) since 1967. But I was at the deciding match of their seven game semi-final series in 1992(?) which they lost to Los Angeles. No honours, but wow, what a thrill to see the team go that far - just one game away from the Cup final. So I understand your feelings. Why can't our teams win? Maybe one day. Aschaffenburg had a decent season last year - maybe this will be their year.
My dad is from Berlin and I grew up playing football, not hockey, so that is why I am writing Wikipedia articles about German football teams. I find the tradition of the game in Germany fascinating.
A small detail of English usage for your user page - you want to use 70s (to refer to the decade of the 70s), not 70th (which would be used to refer to a place/platz - which would be a very bad result). Good luck to your club! Wiggy! 00:20, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FSG Südkreis[edit]

Why did you remove the deletion template. The team plays only in the sixth devision. It would also be deleted in German wikipedia, because it isn't notable. --Yoda1893 18:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to being an [[3]]. I am also not real big on short timelines for deleting stuff and note that other editors who may be interested have not yet responded. I've made a few edits to move the thing along and left a message for the fellow most likely to be able to help the article.
The club is undergoing some change and has made some recent progress. The article contains more than a lot of stubs for clubs from other countries. I don't see any harm in letting it be for a while and prefer that to seeing the thing disappear entirely. Wiggy! 19:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo Wiggy! I wrote some information for you about the FSG Südkreis on my talk-page. StefanW-en 13:00, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

James Milner Career section[edit]

Not really asking for full feedback on this article (although I wouldn’t mind it). I’d just like to know what you feel the best way the divide up the Career section is, by Club, by season, not at all or some other way. Please leave your reply under the section in my talk page named “Milner Career section”. Buc 16:29, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dynamo[edit]

Hallo, ich habe erst mal erreicht, was ich erreichen wollte. Die Erinnerung an die tolle SV Dynamo, die selbst hier in Deutschland in Vergessenheit geriet. So wie du das gemacht hattest fand ich das gut. Ich habe festgestellt, dass ich ein "wikiholic" wurde und muss langsam mal loslassen und mich auf mein Abitur konzentrieren. Mein Übersetzungsprogramm tat mir mitteilen, dass Vereinigung Unification heißt und Association heißt auch Vereinigung mit Verband. Ich habe das deshalb genommen, da ich das so im Wörterbuch stehen hatte. Ich habe das nicht gewusst. Die Meisterschaften sind im Schwimmen so gut wie vollständig, aber auch bei dem Schießen gibt es noch militärgewehre, die ich nicht gemacht habe. Sonst müssten dann alle Meisterschaften vollstädnig sein. Am aufwendigsten ist dann auch die EM und WM, da dort nur Länder und keine Vereine stehen. Da muss Name und Verein bei google gesucht werden und dauert für eine person dann auch gleich ca. min. 10 min.. --Kay Körner 20.12.1983 13:41, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ja, die Übersetzungen können schwierig sein. Dabei kann man üben. Es gibt keine Notwendigkeit den Namen der Mannschaft für den Gebrauch auf Wikipedia zu übersetzen. Andere Hinweise von der Mannschaft findest Du nicht in englischer Version des Namens; nirgends im Internet.

Viel Spaß und Erfolg mit (D/d)einem Studium!Wiggy! 14:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Danke! (Kay Körner)

Cool. Thank you. Wiggy! 21:49, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kannst ja mal denie rassistischen und imperialistischen Äußerungen abschmacken. Das sind nur sinnlose Phrasen! Höre auf gefälligst auf Dynamo zu randalieren, wenn du wieder von nichts Ahnung hast; du billiger Agent! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.95.143.150 (talk) 12:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi, I think the logo of my flag (I'm the owner of the only one flag of the SCDB) is the true logo. But yours is a former defective copy from the GDR-Time. --141.76.176.242 <<Image:SC Dynamo Berlin.png|right|180px>> 15:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kay, SC Dynamo Berlin came out of SG Dynamo Berlin on 1 October 1954. Prior to that (1949-1954) the club played as a Volkspolizei side. SC became BFC Dynamo Berlin in 1966. After German unification BFC played briefly as FC Berlin from 1990 to 1999 when they resumed the name BFC Dynamo. That's straight out of Grünes's Vereinslexikon.

There is nothing "defective" or incorrect about any of the logos on the BFC page that cover the history as I have outlined it above. The logo you have is correct for the period from 1954-66 and a much cleaner, better quality version of that logo is displayed on the page alongside the BFC and FC logos. The Volkspolizei logo is missing and should perhaps be added. East German clubs used generic logos depending on what sector of the economy/government they were associated with. What you have posted on the SC page is a poor quality image variant of the Dynamo (security forces) logo. There are cleaner versions of that available on the web, too. And while you may own the actual logo-bearing flag, that has nothing to do with the separate copyright issues.

I don't understand your point of your comment. We have been through this and other business before and I'm not interested in re-opening an old debate over a POV approach to article/image editing. Wiggy! 17:53, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's not true, like every time!!--141.76.176.148 16:43, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kay, don't start up. I gave you the facts and identified the source. It is not clear to me if your previous ban has been lifted and now you look like you are ready to begin again with the approach that got you banned in the first place. Be civil, get your facts correct, and don't spam the rest of us here. Wiggy! 18:55, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SV 1919 Bernbach[edit]

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article SV 1919 Bernbach, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Cruftbane 19:23, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User_talk:Kay_Körner_20.12.1983#Category[edit]

I responded to your comments to Kay here. - Che Nuevara 17:45, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To which I further responded. Thanks and all, but be wary of this fellow and his conduct. You might want to look at User:Fox53 and follow the concentric circles from there. Wiggy! 18:02, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I added yet another comment to this discussion, because a) his edits do not make sense to me, and b) I wished to point out the pointlessness of using German on the English-language wikipedia. Have my doubts as to the helpfulness of the efforts, but someone's gotta try, no? Madcynic 03:08, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, thanks for bringing it back to my notice. I had let it slip from my attention because Kay's new category was at least in English, wasn't overtly POV, and wasn't being inappropriately spammed all over creation. Thanks also for taking the time to comment. Wiggy! 12:24, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While it's a little awkward to have to sort out the German language discussion, I have to give you some credit, Che, for at least being able to draw Kay out into some sort of discussion. Just be mindful of feeding the troll.

I think you can get some sense from Kay's remarks that he is, at best, disdainful of accepted editing practise on Wikipedia. He's got a long history of POV editing here that includes building long lists of spam links, assembling large collections of poor quality, unlicensed images, and poorly translated POV edits regularly placed out of context which he goes to great lengths to defend against all reason. It would be one thing if this was limited to just a couple of articles, but he'll spam dozens of articles based on his POV. He didn't get blocked here and at de:Wikipedia because he's nice guy - it was because of the persistently disruptive and often offensive nature of his edits, his disregard for established Wikipedia policy, and attacks on other editors (no, not just me). Continue to tread carefully in dealing with this fellow. Wiggy! 12:46, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I apologize if you found it off-putting that I was conversing with Kay in German. I actually initially posted to him in English, but he responded in his native German. As a native English speaker who has lived abroad, I know how frustrating it can be to have to conduct even the simplest tasks in a language not your own, no matter how high a level of proficiency you have. I would like to assure you that I did this for no reason other than to make him feel comfortable in an attempt to draw him into reasonable discussion. I would have gladly translated the conversation into English for you if you had asked -- I have nothing to hide.
In that sense, I disagree with Madcynic that speaking German on English WP is pointless -- I was hoping that, by making this user more comfortable, I would be able to open his mind up a little bit to the realities of Wikipedia.
I'm not sure I would call him disdainful. He may in fact be aware of the full reality of WP policy and practice and simply ignoring them, but I think it's also possible that he doesn't (yet) fully grasp what he's been doing wrong. And I don't mean the language issue, obviously, since he's been active on de.wiki. There are plenty of native English speakers on en.wiki who are honestly confused or misled, unfortunately. In any case, I was hoping that I could lead him by the hand to get him to be a better Wikipedian. Perhaps I've gotten through to him; perhaps not. But at the least I can say that I tried.
Like I said, I apologize if you found my approach off-putting, as I meant absolutely no disrespect to you. I understand your frustration with Kay and do not begrudge it you.
Thanks again for your concern. - Che Nuevara 16:34, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm not particularly fussed over the language thing - I've been trying to learn some German and there's nothing like real life to help things along. And I don't ascribe any bad intent to the whole thing on your part at all, and I don't think you have to consider yourself as having to apologize in any way. Thanks, in fact, for your effort.
It's simply that, in various forms, Kay has been conducting himself in a disruptive manner for months. You're new to this guy, so you're legitimately assuming good faith on his part. It just isn't there and he's demonstrated that repeatedly. In this case, when the sport unification (=sportvereinigung) thing initially came up, I provided him with an explanation and offered some alternatives. He ignored that and went ahead and did his own thing - which was wrong simply as a translation before anything else - and started tagging all kinds of stuff with an ill-conceived, incorrectly translated category and other spam. From where I sit it was just the start of another round of the behaviour that got him blocked previously. The short bit he fed you is just a mild dose of his view of things. He's tiresome and frustrating, and isn't showing any real interest in learning otherwise. I think he's full aware of the unacceptable character of his conduct as he's heard about repeatedly both here and at de:Wikipedia in both English and German. He just doesn't care. He'll just carry on until he has to slip on a new identity or edit out of some Dresden-based IP.
I suspect Madcynic is aware of Kay's conduct over time, as we frequent some of the same areas of interest, and he's likely seen Kay and I going back and forth at it. As I imagine have a number of other editors (a little to my embarassment). I appreciate his notice in this instance and if there's anyone who thinks he can straighten Kay away some, that would be a good thing. In the meantime I'm not inclined to just watch him do his POV thing and inflict poor English on articles as he sees fit. Wiggy! 17:21, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Che, given your fluency in German you might want to look at these two links by way of example:
http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Benutzer_Diskussion:Kay_K%C3%B6rner_20.12.1983&action=history
http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sportvereinigung_Dynamo&action=history
Yes, I indeed am aware of the edits - and I think I should clarify my statement insofar, as I do not object to using a foreign (i.e. other than English) language on the EL-wikipedia per se. I just believe that especially in cases such as this, where there is a lot of potential for conflict, sticking to English is more helpful in terms of allowing third persons to understand what is going on. I do realize what you were trying to do, Che, but as Wiggy! has pointed out before, I doubt it will have any success. Nevertheless, you go ahead and try. Madcynic 21:10, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's my two cents on Kay ... and maybe I'm wrong, I don't know. I think he's actually very confused. It's possible that he's fully aware that what he's doing is problematic, but if he is, he's putting in an awful lot of effort to keep up an act. I think that de.wiki demonstrates this. Kay_Körner_20.12.1983 wasn't actually his original username. He was originally registered as Kay_Körner_(Dresden). Now, they're a little less forgiving over at de.wiki than were are here in en, and Kay was indefblocked about three hours after his first edit [4] [5], not for blatant vandalism, but because "no will for encyclopedic cooperation [was] evident". Granted, he was being contentious and perhaps even trollish, but I've never seen someone here be indefblocked on their first day for anything but threats of violence and vandalism (and even then usually they're a recreation of a past vandal).

I'm pretty sure Kay is Jewish. [6] He is also from the former East Germany. [7] He apparently believes he is being discriminated against for one or both of these reasons.

[8] A list of actions taken by other editors he finds unfair, followed by "right, Christians!"
[9] "TheK and Polaris constantly erase my work. They don't read what I do here, because they don't like seeing the success of Germans."
[10] (After Polaris defends his deletions and says that he too is German) "You have to read what I write! And besides you haven't added anything, you federal citizen!" (This refers exclusively to West or reunited Germany -- an East German would not have been a "Bundesbürger".)
[11] "At the federal Wikipedia" (again the East-West thing) "I am immediately locked out without warning" (that's actually true -- he didn't receive a single talk warning before being indefblocked) " [...] People muck around here and delete things immediately, but they get upset about the Stasi. I feel I am being handled in a racist manner."

Now, I'm not defending him -- he's contentious and acting very problematically, and something needs to be done. But I honestly think he is immensely confused. Which is unfortunate, because he's going to wind up getting himself indefblocked here too. I'm not sure I know what to do about him, though. - Che Nuevara 18:44, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So that he can't say he didn't get fair warning, here is the translation of what I posted to him:
Kay: You need to stop. I know you feel hurt. But if you continue to act as you have acted until now, you will surely be blocked. No one is allowed to insult another person here on Wikipedia -- not you, not me, not anyone else.
I can guarantee to you: if you fight, attack, and disparage further, you will be blocked. That is not a threat -- that is simply how it is here on Wikipedia.
If you wish to work more at Wikipedia, you have to speak with others civilly, socially,`and reasonably. You must also hold yourself to the rules. I would recommend that you read them. If you don't understand a rule, I will gladly clarify it for you. And when you don't agree with something, you are allowed to explain your opinion calmly and without attack.
I hope you take this warning seriously. It would serve your best interests to do so.
I think that's about as clear as it gets. And he already apparently finds me sympathetic, so maybe there's a chance he'll take me seriously. If not, I wouldn't expect to see him around for too much longer -- he's bound to get himself in trouble more this way. - Che Nuevara 19:16, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

Please don't remove {{sources}} or related tags without adding sources. Thanks, Cruftbane 21:21, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Club song[edit]

Hello again! I need your help on my club's song Im Herzen von Europa. I translated the lyrics from German to English but I guess there are some little mistakes or not plain translations in it.Feel free to change it.Thanks in advance! -Lemmy- 20:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a run at it (even though I'm not any kind of poet). Sounds like fun. :) Wiggy! 20:15, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
More poet than I am ;-) Thanks for your work! -Lemmy- 10:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bad simple:Wikipedia user[edit]

Thank you for letting me know about simple:User:Kay Körner. Regards, huji—TALK 18:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Captain Future[edit]

[12]

I was afraid of that.

Do we know this for a fact? Should we request a CheckUser? If it is the same person, then he's evading a block (which he may not actually know he's not supposed to do -- I'm still struggling to figure out just how much this guy understands -- although that is, of course, not an excuse), but I would hate to report this guy only to have it be a misunderstanding. - Revolving Bugbear (formerly Che Nuevara) 13:07, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, its him. Exactly the same edit pattern and style, posting the same pics &etc. that go back months and months. If he follows pattern he'll start out all apologetic, beg for some help, go easy for a bit, but then be back to his old aggressive editing practises within a couple of weeks. He understands fully what he's doing. Wiggy! 13:33, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[13]

I thought you might be interested in seeing that. In the spirit of WP:BEANS, I'm wrestling with what to say to him about it. - Revolving Bugbear (formerly Che Nuevara) 20:55, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thx. More of the same. He's persistent if nothing else. It wouldn't bother me to see him do his thing at SV but he always goes off from there to slip POV crap or nonsensical cruft into articles he thinks are even remotely related to his pet club. Unfortunately, some of our interests overlap. So I'm an edit monster. And I eat kittens. Whatever.
Dunno what you might say that could help as Kay has made it clear as a bell that he's happy to ignore everyone here, unless he's doing the {{helpme}} thing, which always manages to draw in a couple of innocent folks, but good luck in any case. Thx again for the heads up. Keep well. Wiggy! 23:14, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oberligen u.s.w.[edit]

Thanks for the praise! Unfortunately most of my books on football are still in Germany, I wish I had them here, it would make writing about Oberligas and Verbandsligas a lot easier! Also, having just started, getting to know wiki's style means lot's of studying of other pages. Anyway, I'm getting there with the southern German leagues, just questioning who cares about the Bezirksoberliga Schwaben anyway? But I do hope the Leafs win a Stanley Cup in your life time again, can anybody remember 1967? I wasn't born then!

Well you deserve some sort of pat on the back. You've added significant amounts of German football material. Great to see somebody get into it (and with a decent writing style, too). Bezirksoberliga Schwaben? It'll be somebody's pet league. There is still quite a ways to go before before getting down to the level of league info available in the English nad Italian sections. As for the Leafs and the Stanely Cup, I'm afraid it'll be some time yet by the look of things. If suffering builds character then Leaf fans will be among the most upright, noble people you can find. The teams last good run was in '93 when they got to the semi-finals. That was fun and I was really looking forward to a monster sized party. However ...
And yes, it is no fun to be separated from one's books, but good work nonetheless. Keep well. Wiggy! (talk) 15:26, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Creating new Dynamo article...[edit]

Yeah I suppose a disambiguation page isn't the best place for that complex history of the electric dynamo. The whole dynamo issue is annoying because people do not realize it was originally much more than an electrical generator, and really it was the source of many different rotating electrical devices. I've decided to take over the old Dynamo redirect and see about fleshing it out into a full article to discuss these ambiguities.. DMahalko (talk) 07:23, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably best. You added some interesting stuff that'll stand well on its own. Wiggy! (talk) 18:20, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is probably the last thing you want to hear ....[edit]

... but [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:March_27#Vandalism_and_racist_discriminating_by_User:_Wiggy.21.

I will try to keep an eye on this situation. Please let me know if you decide to do anything in particular about this, as I will be happy to comment. - Revolving Bugbear 19:36, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kay floats a helpme about once every two months or so. He's blocked under several identities and is only occasionally re-appearing to do a little sock IP editing. Thank you for the notice and your offer of assistance. My guess/hope is that this will fade away without too much fuss. Keep well. Wiggy! (talk) 21:23, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I've had the SVD page on watch since our last meeting, so I've noticed his antics. He does seem to be calming down, but hasn't quite given it up yet. Cheers, and happy wiki'ing. - Revolving Bugbear 21:49, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a heads-up, I've 3RR warned Kay, but both of you have 3 reverts on the page. As much as I agree you're in the right here, be careful regarding 3RR -- I'd hate to see you get blocked, even for a short time, over this silliness. - Revolving Bugbear 23:26, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and thanks. I've been to the same edge with this fellow once before, but you're right, time to head off and do something productive. Be good. Wiggy! (talk) 23:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Question[edit]

Hey Wiggy,

just a quick question: I modified an image (Image:Deutschland_Lage_von_Nordrhein-Westfalen.svg, creating Image:Deutschland_Lage_von_Westdeutschland.png) to highlight the area of the Regionalliga West but i'm not sure about the whole copyright thing. Will it be deleted, is it ok? It would be good if you could give me your opinion on it, Wiggy! Thanks,EA210269 (talk) 15:27, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The original file is from Commons, which makes it a license free image (as long as the license info attached there is valid). That should allow you to take the image, modify it, and then make use of it under the same type of free license. I would simply create a license tag for the new image by identifying yourself as the creator, crediting the fellow who created the original image, identifying Commons as the source that the new image is based on, and tagging it as GDFL. You could probably post it to Commons for everyone to use and reference in the article it from there. That would allow you to copy and paste most of the existing license info from the original Commons file. I hope that helps. If you'd like me to add the necessary tag, I can do that and you can treat it as a model for future images.
By the way, I keep seeing you all over German football here at en:Wikipedia, and I have to say (once again) very nice work. You're making substantial contributions. Well done. Wiggy! (talk) 16:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you could create a sample for me by tagging this one, that would be great, Wiggy. Frankly, I find this copyright thing a little confusing at times. If I had a sample I could do simular images for the other Oberligas and Regionalligas, where needed. Thanks again for the praise, Wiggy, but I'm greatly enjoying writing about German football, especially about the leagues below the two Bundesligas, where information in English is hard to come by. I'm hoping to finish the Oberligas soon. Thanks also for tidying some of my club articles, especially the images, I couldn't get the SpVgg Lindau one sorted out, looks much better now!EA210269 (talk) 02:09, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Regarding user Betacommand[edit]

Hey Wiggy, sorry to bother you with another question but you are a bit of an authority so maybe you now the answer. On quite a few occasitions, user betacommand added reflist to articles, thinking it will improve them, however, it messes them up as it does not remove ols references and they therefore appear twice. I made him aware of this but redeived no reply. I noted now that he continous to do so, still causing the same problem. Is there anything that can be done to stop him? He propably means well but doesn't seem to know what he is doing. Regards, EA210269 (talk) 00:38, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point me to an example or two?
Stop him? Probably not. BC is convinced of the Righteousness of his Cause which makes him tough to deal with. My guess is that'll take some persistence in bringing the issue to his attention. Mind you it looks like there's finally a group of folks backing the bot up by looking at complaints/concerns as they are put forward and trying to make some sort of reply (which is where things should have started from). Once I look at some examples I'll be happy to express myself and we'll see if anybody else is having similar issues.
Catch you later. Wiggy! (talk) 02:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've got two current examples which I havn't bothered fixing up, they are Bezirksoberliga Schwaben and Bezirksliga Schwaben-Nord, have a look when you got time. I repaired the other ones a couple of days ago. I had a look at his contributions and he seems to do this "fix" on a large scale. I also left him another message. To be fair, the way I originally did those reference lists on those articles is propably not of the highest quality but to my escuse I say didn't know any better. Anyway, have a look, let me know and I fix up the two articles after that again. Talk to you soon, EA210269 (talk) 03:48, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. On our previous discussion, I'm working up what I hope will be a suitable fair use rationale/license for your league maps and have attached the first version to the image in the Regionalliga West article. I'll tweak it a bit over the next little while and we'll see what reaction it draws. Its based on the criteria set out at Commons. Up to you to write the description that you think works best. Wiggy! (talk) 03:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Wiggy!, looks just fine, this will help me a lot in making simular maps for other German leagues. Danke Schön!, EA210269 (talk) 04:18, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maps of Germany[edit]

I have finally managed to create the maps you've made me a sample for. Have a look and many thanks for your help,EA210269 (talk) 02:10, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Know this website?[edit]

Hey wiggy!,

writing the Landesliga Thüringen article, I stumbled over this website, seems to be quite usefull, especially to somebody that likes writing German football club articles, have you used it before? Nordostfussball. I only had a brief look but seems ok.EA210269 (talk) 01:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New to me. I'll go root around there some. Thanks for the tip! Wiggy! (talk) 18:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion about the Regionalliga[edit]

Hi, perhaps you know something that should be mentioned in the discussionWikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Regionalliga? Thanks, Punkmorten (talk) 16:31, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dynamo article[edit]

Hey wiggy!,

just happened to read the Dynamo article (or tried to), somebody really doesn't like you there! The english of the article is a shocker in places, and that sure must mean something, coming from me, a German! Anyway, what I really wanted to ask, do you know User: 194.95.142.179? He has made a heap of edits there and just resently edited the Regionalliga Nord article with some nonsens, have to clean it up now. Take care, all the best,EA210269 (talk) 00:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't like me?! <laugh out loud> I'm afraid that particular editor and I have a long and unfriendly history. What you see on that particular page is pretty much the standard of work he applies to just about anything he puts his hand to. Our emnity goes back to his attempts to turn the Dynamo Berlin article into a team tribute page that was rather heavy on hooligan/communist/Stasi oriented spam. The glories of East Germany and all that. Go back a have a look at the history of the thing if you want to get a feel for this guys approach. The edits to the Regionalliga Nord article are just a small sample - you are now on his turf (anything to do with the old DDR) with that article.
So, that said I'd be careful about wading in on SV Dynamo, as that's his pet. I mostly ignore him these days unless he starts to wander around and do dumb things. Like linking Dynamo to the article on oak trees because there's an oak laurel in the team crest or otherwise spamming/hacking at similarly remotely related articles. So heads up. He's at User:Fox53, blocked here and at de:Wiki under a pile of different names, and is limiting himself to using IP's out of Dresden these days. He goes to school there.
I'd be happier and it would be better for us all if he could do the kind of work you do - good solid contribs and you're easy to work with. All the best to you, too, and keep up the good work. I'm always delighted to see what you have to add. Thanks for the note. Wiggy! (talk) 01:15, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the warning, Wiggy!, I can see, he could be a difficult "customer". I guess it is very hard to bar somebody when they constantly change their IP address, he is obviously very determined. I just wrote an article on the DDR-Liga yesterday and edited the DDR-Oberliga one a little bit so I guess I can expect a visit soon! Thanks for the praise, Wiggy!, I will try to keep the standard up! Always a pleasure, EA210269 (talk) 01:40, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That looks like evidence to me that CF is creating articles for the anonymous IPs to be able to edit. Unfortunately he has no talk space edits and as good as no edit summaries, but those plus the grammar specifics should be enough to pin him to these troublesome IPs, and from there it's only a baby step to Kay.

Three new articles this week. I think it may be time to move to WP:SSP, and I'll be happy to be slammed as a "Bundesbürger" in my Wessi haven of Frankfurt. What do you think? - Revolving Bugbear 18:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, probably a good suggestion. It's quite clearly Kay/CF given the style and focus. Note that User:Fhsssssss is probably also Kay.
Mostly nuisance edits, but tagging stuff as "featured" (or "good" as Kay has done in the past) is just not right for stuff that is so poorly written and POV. Stepping into the main stream with those kinds of edits is just asking for the wrong kind of attention. The article on Lyric poetry of the Sports Club Dynamo is just plain bizarre. I note that it appears Kay/CF may have got some help with his last edit on the Dynamo talk page. The English is far better than he generally is able to deliver, but it all still boils down to a pointless rant that clearly demonstrates a failed understanding of the nature of the Wikipedia community.
Thanks for your help. Greetings from Peterborough, Ontario Canada. Wiggy! (talk) 18:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have created a section in the article titled "Controversies surrounding the Sport Club Dynamo", lets see wether he will let it stand! I wonder if he is tolerant enough to accept a well referenced section contrary to his world believe. I've researched a lot of sources, the amount of information regarding DDR-doping is overwhelming! Only used the most reliable sources, like BBC, The Guardian, etc. I also added a Dynamo section to the Doping (Sport).EA210269 (talk) 03:42, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nope. Wiped out in short order. Not a surprise. Going to be a lot of work ... Wiggy! (talk) 12:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


SpVgg Au/Iller[edit]

Thanks for the article, Wiggy, it was on my to-do-list, for quite a while! Unfortunatly I didn't find the clubs website to informativ. I find club articles a lot harder to write then leagues!EA210269 (talk) 05:20, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. You're right about the club's website, but I'm working from a copy of Vereinslexikon, - which helps hugely - and the German language Wikipedia articles. I wandered around through the league articles last night and updated a few of the templates to link to existing club articles. I'm blown away by how much league stuff you've assembled - you've clearly got some good source material there at least! Wiggy! (talk) 12:25, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kay / AN[edit]

WP:AN#SV Dynamo and multi-indef-blocked User:Kay Körner. - Revolving Bugbear 20:28, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. Wiggy! (talk) 20:39, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar[edit]

Football (soccer) barnstar
For the fact that new articles about German football clubs are poping up from Babelsberg to Kaufbeuren, I award you this Barnstar. Keep them coming, Wiggy!EA210269 (talk) 23:12, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will wear it with pride[edit]

Thanks Wiggy, looks really nice on my talk page, this barnstar! And many thanks for your last couple of articles. I do like seeing new articles about football clubs in Schwaben! Well, and happy birthday to you! On the (wikipedia-)work front I'm going through old articles of mine, cleaning them up a bit, the older ones I did can use a bit of polish. In the East German football league system article, I have tried to give a bit of background on the club names and affiliations in the old DDR, a thing we spoke about a while ago, I think. The other thing, I've added a little poem I found to the BFC Dynamo article. Translation is difficult when it comes to poems and I'm not sure it even really should be in the article but after Lyric poetry of the Sports Club Dynamo I figured some counter balance (and sanity?) was needed. Have fun, great having you around on wikipedia,EA210269 (talk) 23:45, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

March 2008 edition of the WikiProject Germany newsletter[edit]

The Germany WikiProject Newsletter
Issue II - March 2008
From the editor

This is the second issue of WikiProject Germany's newsletter. The newsletter is intended to help all members of the project to keep up with new developments and coordinate new collaborative efforts. If you think anything should be featured in the next issue, please leave a note at the Newsdesk

Other areas where you can help
  • Assessment requests: Some open Requests for assessment need to be answered. To see new assessment requests as they come in, you can watchlist the assessment page.
  • More task forces and subprojects: As this WikiProject covers a very large topic area, it is helpful to add more task forces that focus on specific aspects of Germany. Currently, we have a Mainz task force, a Munich subproject and some joint task forces with other WikiProjects. Any project member is invited to start a new task force. Suggestions for possible topics:
    • Transportation in Germany
    • German politics (the political system of Germany and the biographies of its politicians)
    • German Democratic Republic

Be creative! If you have an idea, just suggest it on the project talk page (don't forget to watchlist it).

  • Categorization: Uncategorized Germany stubs need to be categorized
Project news
  • Cities and municipalities task force

The task force dedicated to creating and improving articles on all German cities and municipalities is happy to announce that there are now (at least) stub articles for all municipalities of Germany. Now the task force is looking for help in fleshing these out a little bit. The current phase of activity for the task force is to copy in infoboxes from the articles in German Wikipedia. If you want to help, even just for a few articles, look at the instructions and links here

  • Article Assessment:

There are now way over 26.000 articles tagged as part of our Wikiproject and many still need either an importance or a quality assessment. Also there are many more out there that do need to be tagged like approx 8000 municipalities. If you would like to help take a browse through Articles needing Importance assessment or Articles needing a basic quality assessment.

- Newsletter Bot Talk 15:48, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This newsletter is delivered by a bot to all members of WikiProject Germany. If you do not want to receive this newsletter in the future, please leave a note at the talk page of the Outreach department so we can come up with a better spamlist solution. Thank you, - Newsletter Bot Talk 15:48, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AFD[edit]

I think you might know something about this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SV Nord Lerchenau. Punkmorten (talk) 20:18, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I appreciate the heads up. I came across this earlier and was going to check into the club's history. At this point I'm working primarily at defending articles for those clubs who have played at fourth level and above if an issue arises. That causes some significant spill over down into the fifth division which makes it worth sticking up for that stuff, too, especially now that there are articles in place for all the teams currently playing at or above the Oberliga (IV) level. The introduction of the 3. Liga will probably stir things up some next season. I'll look into where Lerchenau is at (or was) and see if they are in any way significant or if there is a chance to expand the article. Thanks again. Wiggy! (talk) 20:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BC Augsburg[edit]

Hey Wiggy, first of all, sorry to see the Leafs miss out on the play-offs, you might have to wait another year. I actually went to see some ice hockey (in Australia!), in Newcastle, Australia versus Spain, it was real good! I hadn't seen a game for years. Anyway, I saw your new BCA article and I'm not sure a separate article is needed. Most people in Augsburg actully feel that the FCA is a direct continuation of BCA, not a separate entity. The TSV Schwaben supporters never felt the FCA represented this club too. The main reason for this is that the traditional home of BCA in the north of Augsburg became the base for the new club and the Schwaben side of the club in the south of the city was ignored. There actually is a new BC Augsburg-Oberhausen which claims the name of the old BCA and seems to be doing alright in the Kreisliga Schwaben-Augsburg, leading the league and looking for promotion to the Bezirksliga. I can't find a logo so I don't know how close the conection is. But the suburb Oberhausen is were the old BCA once started. Anyway, two separate articles won't do any harm, I moved a few little things across to the new page which belong to the old club. Have fun,EA210269 (talk) 03:17, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as the saying goes in this neck of the woods, "Winter must be over - the Leafs are out!". Not something I get too wound up over because they've been so bad for so long. Hockey in Australia ... hmm. A bit of an odd mental image for me alongside the notion of Spain and Australia having ice hockey teams. Especially as we are just emerging from such a snowy, icy winter this year. The snow is only melting away now and the ice is just coming off the lake where I am.
I wasn't too sure about how to approach BC Augsburg. There was clearly a lot of information that needed to go somewhere. Its something that's come up for other teams, too. I've used both approaches (new article vs. add to old). I think that ultimately I may lean to sticking with the approach used in the Vereinslexikon where there are articles for separate teams that are sufficiently notable. Got to chew on the idea. Interesting tidbit about the "new" BC. I'll have to look into that somehow.
Nice to hear from you, thanks for your comments. Keep well. Wiggy! (talk) 17:22, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
World championship, here we come! Australia just won promotion, for the first time, Wiggy! A bit of a miracle. To tell you the truth, I don't think many of the Australian players were born here, I think most of them hold the same passport as you! I actually work with a Canadian who plays hockey in Perth! Anyway, up we go, its going to be a tough challange next year.
BCA - FCA can be seen either way, two clubs or just one but I keep an eye on the "new" BCA-Oberhausen, its actually been around for many years. I'm quite curious wether it claims the old logo or not, that would be a deciding factor in my opinion. Enjoy spring and the melting snow, greetings,EA210269 (talk) 00:38, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New template[edit]

Hy, Wiggy! I've created a new template to make it easier to move between German Oberliga articles, Template:German Amateur Oberliga (football). I want to do the same for the Regionalligas and Verbandsligas but the later might be a bit large, have to see. Have a look, maybe you can see any necessary improvements. Anyway, FC Augsburg sacked their coach yesterday (again), a new one is supposed to be announced on the weekend. Who will it be and how long will he last?EA210269 (talk) 03:50, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, the following templates have been created and tied to the relevant articles. This should make navigation a bit easier:

Have fun, EA210269 (talk) 08:13, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another fine bit of work. I love to see all these additions. Wiggy! (talk) 16:35, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TSV 1860 Rosenheim[edit]

Hi Wiggy, its me again, asking a favor. When you get time, can you look at TSV 1860 Rosenheim and see if you can fix the logo? No rush, but I know you are much better then me at this. You fixed SpVgg Lindau and so on. Doesn't look all that great right now, I have to say. Thanks, EA210269 (talk) 14:54, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No trouble. Will do. Wiggy! (talk) 16:32, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Finally! Wiggy! (talk) 12:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keeping a low profile[edit]

It's been pretty quite lately from you, are you suffering from wikipedia-disilusion, Wiggy? It happens, I guess. Or are you just taking a breather before the end-of-the season rush comes on? In any case, hope you are all good, have fun, EA210269 (talk) 01:02, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, just kinda busy. Getting ready to re-open my park, taking some training courses, busy clearing trees from a hydro line - all kinds of stuff to do now that the weather is shaping up. Not in any way disillusioned with Wikipedia and still enjoying small amounts of Wiki time, keeping track of the odd bit here and there. Just too much to do right now. Haven't even had time to hang out with my Wappen buddies. Should drop them a line and let them know I'm still among the living. Thanks for asking. Wiggy! (talk) 01:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SV Dynamo[edit]

Hi, I nominated Template:Kinds of sport and sport associations of the SV Dynamo for deletion. You can probably guess who created this template. Your input on the deletion discussion would be appreciated. Novidmarana (talk) 20:06, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Football icons[edit]

Please stop adding archaic football icons to wikipedia in violation of wp:nfc, if you continue to do so you will be blocked from editing Fasach Nua (talk)

No, I don't think so. You've taken a very pointy approach to dealing with other editors and in pushing your narrow view of the use of logos. You've defied established policy and guidelines with respect to logo use, as well as ignored the consensus of the community. To choose now to stalk me with pointy editing rather than properly defending your position on a talk page is a completely classless act. But then that is consistent with the approach the emerges in an examination of the history of your talk page.
So, to help you along, the use of non-free media on Wikipedia is permitted within certain bounds. That's policy. The use of logos is specifically mentioned there and there is a related guideline. In addition there is a community consensus that the use of logos is appropriate. That's all there in black and white for your examination if you bother to look. Your edits are inappropriate and being carried out in an unnecessarily pointy manner. It ironic that your chosen approach to improving Wikipedia involves beating on other editors in a manner that is outside the rules.
As I said before, if this is your burning mission, go get it properly sorted out in a broader sense instead of irritating other contributors with such an poinhty, aggressive editing style. You should be proud of what shows up on your talk page instead of having to bury it all the time. Wiggy! (talk) 16:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

your continued disruption[edit]

Edit warring[edit]

As much as I think the above bunch of warnings are pointy indeed (a content dispute is certainly not vandalism), please stop edit warring over these logos. You are coming close to 3RR in some cases, which is of course a limit, not an entitlement. Oldelpaso (talk) 09:04, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I hear your point and I'm sorry to see you dragged into this, but I'm not prepared to be bullied by this user. A review of his talk page history will show a similar pattern of disdain for other contributors. The only reason these particular logos have been tagged is because they have my user name attached to them. They meet policy and guideline and are supported by concensus in their application. Its not any differnt from the display of historical logos in the articles of many NBA, NFL, and MLB teams. My arguments are being ignored by a self proclaimed policy-warrior.
My difficulty is in how this is being approached. A number of football logos were put up for review by this user. That review wasn't going his way and so now he's decided to headhunt me - unless you can think of another reason for those particular logos to be targeted in the midst of this debate or you are a believer in fantastic conincidences. He's decided to flip off other editors by paying only lip service to the review process, choose what parts of policy and which guidelines suit him (non-free content is allowed and in the policy rationale is identified as being able to contribute to the building of a quality encyclopedia), and then ignore the established process for actually deleting images which requires notice and specifies timeframes. But then that would be playing by the rules ...
I'm not impressed with being wikilawyered by a narrow interpretation of policy. He's taken it on himself to define what is significant under nfc #8 despite the fact that that particular criteria is clearly marked as being under review and despite the fact that the use of logos is acceptable within defined guidelines. His repeatedly stated objective is to see an encyclopedia bereft of non-free content and he's refusing to listen to argument or even respect the existing rules and consensus. Wiggy! (talk) 22:27, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
An idea which would reinforce the fair use rationales: Generally, the football team articles which have become featured have a "Colours and crest" section, in which the evolution of a club's badge is discussed. Adding such a section to some of the relevant articles would provide the most rock-solid basis possible for including the logos. Oldelpaso (talk) 08:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I follow that and have given it some consideration. However, in many cases, especially for German clubs, there is necessarily evolution of the team crest per se. The most common practice in the country is for one club to simply absorb another. In some cases the logo is updated. In most cases the logo of the predcessor side, which is specifically named in the article and identified by its own logo, is abandoned. It becomes a historical artifact but is still part of the tradition of the club, which is a big deal in Germany, where being able to call yourself a traditional side comes with bragging rights of a sort - regardless of how good or bad a club you might be! :)
But even then, there's a problem with this editor. The article on Dynamo Berlin explicity discusses the logo in some detail, its variants, the ownership issues attached to it in Germany, etc. and shows the various logo forms involved in that dispute. All that ignored and nuked by an overzealous editor, completely ignoring the context of the article, simply for the sake of policy warfare. That's not responsible editing, that's just hacking at the other guy and clearly reflects the unreasoning approach of this editor who likes to spout policy but is bent on ignoring policy, guidelines and concensus to serve his narrowly defined mission. Wiggy! (talk) 12:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you are acting in good faith, however your edit waring must stop, I have nominated these decorative images for deletion at Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion, please feel free to comment on them Fasach Nua (talk) 13:05, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I regret that I cannot say I hold the same belief about your edits and for me to say otherwise would be dishonest. Your editing style has been attacking and unnecessarily pointy. The use of logos is clearly acceptable under policy. There are guidelines in place for their use, and that use is broadly supported by concensus. You continue to ignore that and the clear weight of opinion opposing your position and approach that has emerged on the review page.
It is quite clear that you have targeted my work. Logos have been unilaterally deleted without providing edit comments and without following policy with respect to required notice and timelines. You only do so now after I have brought this to notice in other discussion.
A lack of good faith is clearly demonstrated not just by choosing to target my work in the middle of a review discussion, but the unthinking nature of some of the edits. The logos in the Dynamo Berlin article are the topic of specific discussion within the article and clearly relevant there, but they were blindly deleted despite that. Posting this series of logos for review is in this context just another aspect of assaultive editing - good to form finally - but still little more than an attack.
Characterizing the editing warring as "mine"? C'mon. I'm hard talking, but I didn't start this. Take some ownership. And stop being so condesending to me and others in your remarks. I am appalled at the bullying approach being used and the unwavering narrow mindedness displayed. I understand this is a harsh statement, but I feel you're way out of line on this, failing both in the approach employed and in the interpretation of policy and guideline. Wiggy! (talk) 13:29, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New season - new clubs[edit]

Hey Wiggy, sorry to hear you got some trouble with a "non-free-content-crusader". Just to let you know, I came up with an idea on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject German football and would like to know what you think. Take care, stay calm, EA210269 (talk) 23:21, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I just love zealots. But I hate bullies. Thanks for the advice. I'll wander over to the project and check out your notion. Looking forward to all the changes that'll be happening next season! Wiggy! (talk) 12:54, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lot's of end-of-season work coming up. The new 3rd Liga will make it even more, with the shift in the tiers below it! Well, hopefully you will have a nice, long list of club articles for you to create! I think, you won't get bored in a rush! Regarding the whole image thing, I think it will make people, including myself, very reluctant to upload anything. Pictures and images add a lot to wikipedia, it will be a shame.EA210269 (talk) 01:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely looking forward to the new stuff. With respect to the images, don't be giving up. There's nothing wrong with the use of logos and it would be a shame to be put off of contributing by one bad editor. I've had my rant over on the football project discussion page and we'll see what comes of it. I'm not impressed with the whole thing, but I'm not prepared to be bullied either. Wiggy! (talk) 03:29, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New club articles[edit]

I only just put VfB Königsberg on the list and you have already created it, pretty quick! Regarding clubs like the VfB and Vorwärts-Rasensport Gleiwitz, I think, there should be a sub-category for clubs from the former German terretories but I can't think of a title that's not to long, Catergory:Defunct football clubs from former German terretories seems a bit long. Any ideas? Secondly, when you create an article like VfB should we instantly remove it from the request page (I think not) or put the date of its creation and, maybe the creator (usually you) behind the name? I favor the later option. Anyway, the VfB Königsberg article was long overdue, in hindsight, great to have it now! EA210269 (talk) 00:26, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The list is handy to have. Like I said, it provides some focus. And I'm overdue to be writing some new stuff - too idle too long. Thanks for the spark. Interesting to learn about the old clubs. I've got the Kurmark Sportwappen cigarette card album full of club logos from the 1930s. Lots of old eastern and Baltic clubs there.
As to the category I can't see shortening it up any. Says what it needs to without being wordy.
I also think you're right on the process for removal. Gives folks a chance to see its been dealt with instead of just simply having disappeared. Keep well and see you around. Wiggy! (talk) 00:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done, five articles in Category:Defunct football clubs from former German terretories so far. And the VfB article is dated.
Well, the 1930's logos should have one advantage, I don't think they are copyrighted anymore. I'm going back to Germany for a few weeks in August, I got a fair bit of stuff on football there still, I can't wait to get hold of it, heaps of information in it. There is also a DSFS Gauliga brochure, I'm hoping to be able then, to create artricles for them too. So far, 1945 has been the cut-off point for information on German leagues, hope to push that back to at least 1933. Anyway, take care, EA210269 (talk) 02:09, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category fix[edit]

It didn't quite look right but I just couldn't see it. Thanks a lot!EA210269 (talk) 11:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles on historic football clubs[edit]

Good stuff, Wiggy, all this club articles. Reading them brings back a, saddly, almost forgotten part of Germany football history, even if not always a proud one. Anyway, keep them coming, I think they really add something to wikipedia, historically. Take care, EA210269 (talk) 05:43, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thx. I find the whole thing quite interesting and there is always some poigniancy attached to writing about any kind of lost sports club. Yes, a rather sad bit of German and European history, but I agree - quite worth having as it does add some dimension. I see that User:Latouffedisco has also provided a list of lost or transformed clubs, in this case from France. And I found a record of a German club that actually survived the war's end to become a Polish or Russian side (can't remember which), so I'm looking forward to exploring that. Lots more fun stuff to puddle around in. Thanks again for the push. Wiggy! (talk) 21:24, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have to say, this Vereinslexikon sounds like a good book, I might have to buy it. If you can add anything on the pre-war names of those French clubs, Wiggy, it would be real good. Most would propably have reverted to teir old names after the war and how they went from there is really beyond the scope of this article, I guess.
I think, the database we are creating right now for the pre-1945 clubs and leagues is quite good. Its a time I didn't know all that much about beforehand. Lot's of exciting facts to learn! I think, the DYK talk page is an excellent way to put up interessting facts about articles regarding German football and I've made three sugestions so far, one of them in connection to Yorck Boyen Insterburg (see here) . I think, if we could get a fact from the Wikipedia:WikiProject German football on the main page once in a while, it would lift the profile of this Project considerably. Well, have fun and keep those club articles coming, I enjoy reading them! EA210269 (talk) 03:12, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not a good book, a great book. Well worth buying. I got mine off eBay and it cost me a fair bit to ship from Germany to Canada, but its been worth every pfennig. I'm sure you'd enjoy it. I have another of Hardy Gruene's books covering the period from the late 19th century to the end of WWII. Just as good. They're what I build my articles around before I go looking for other material. Quite handy.
I'll have to try my hand at the DYK stuff. Good idea for building profile as you suggested. Wiggy! (talk) 00:08, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SV 06 Schlettstadt[edit]

Thanks! EA210269 (talk) 00:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the article you createt about the club now, it appears, the club is still active. It may have to be moved to its French name, if we are shure it is the same club, which seems likely. I added what I could find about it from a link User:Latouffedisco left me. I'm not quite certain what league level the club is on now, it appears, the Promotion A is the third level of the Ligue d' Alsace but I don't know where this league rates in the French league system. I don't speak French at all, that makes things a bit tricky. Anyway, I added what I could but that leaves us with the dilema of the club still being "alive". Greetings, EA210269 (talk) 04:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I ws wondering about that. I found a few hints but nothing specific, and what I have come across so far is more about handball than football. We'll see. Wiggy! (talk) 11:08, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi guys and sorry to interrupt you and thanks Wiggy for creating this article. As far as I know, SC Selestat is an omnisport club (the handball section plays in first division, which is good for a small town like Séléstat). The football section is still active. The link you put on the article suggests it [16] as FFF only lists active clubs. Moreover, this link [17] which is a very recent article about the team indicates that Séléstat is close to relegation. That's right they play in Promotion A, Group D, of the Ligue d' Alsace - Bas Rhin which is the ninth level of French football: Ligue 1, ligue 2, national, CFA, CFA2, DH, excellence A, promotion excellence A, promotion A. No, that is not complicated! And as the club is still active, maybe you should move the article to the club current name, no? Regards.--Latouffedisco (talk) 19:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've not been able to find out much about the club post-war (except for its noteable role as a handball club) so there is a big gap ost 1945. I probably will move it over to SC Sélestat with a redirect from SV 06 Schlettstadt in a bit, along the lines of the Strassburg/Strasbourg clubs. Thanks for the note! Wiggy! (talk) 20:09, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome! It's true that informations for amateur clubs are very hard to find in France, we have to deal with that!--Latouffedisco (talk) 12:57, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you guys did a good job rooting stuff out. I pretty much struck out. I've run into the same problem from time to time trying to pin down lower level German clubs, which can be kind of frustrating if they're traditional sides with some interesting history. Thx again. Keep well and happy editing. Wiggy! (talk) 16:24, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting German plural[edit]

Thanks for the revert in the Oberliga article. I just didn't have the nerve yesterday. Madcynic (talk) 12:18, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I wasn't entirely sure it was the right thing to do, but the German plurals wouldn't necessarily be clear to an English speaker with out somesort of explanation somewhere. That and the opening line about the DDR-Oberliga was already covered in the body of the text, so I just wikilinked it. I hope it all helps to keep the thing readable. Keep well. Be nervy! Wiggy! (talk) 14:43, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Being a native speaker of German, I can tell you it was exactly the right thing to do - for exactly the reason you mentioned. And I usually am nervy. But not at 11 pm. ;) Madcynic (talk) 01:16, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hy Wiggy, I just had User:NiTeChiLLeR lecturing me on the fact that it is Ligen, not Ligas, propably a naitive German speaker, too. Is there any standard on what to use? I usually go with Ligas nowadays, for the reason mentioned by you above. EA210269 (talk) 22:28, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Whenever I see xyz-ligas I turn it into xyz-ligen as well. When we write in German we should stay be right or translate in English. But how? Oberliga = major league?, upper league? Oberligen and Regionalligen wouldn't do harm when we link Oberligen to Oberliga. -Lemmy- (talk) 10:56, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose I should break down and do what I should have done from the word go - go look for some direction in the Manual of Style. I've always been a bit unsure at the approach to use, leaning towards Oberligas instead of Oberligen. I'm pretty sure in a couple of place I wrote something like Oberliga (plural: Oberligen) in a couple of articles so I was free to use the German plural without any confusion in the rest of the article. I'll go have a look at the MoS and maybe see what practise is used by some other leagues. Sorry if I've caused an unnecessary stir. Wiggy! (talk) 16:09, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, here is the relevant reference as near as I can figure. Its at the bottom of the section, just below note 6. With apologies for looking like a rule banger ... it's just the way I'm familiar with writing this sort of thing. English_plurals#Irregular_plurals_from_other_languages Wiggy! (talk) 16:40, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems, for once, there isn't a rule on wikipedia for something! From a German point of view, Ligas sounds a bit wrong, but as we are on the English wikipedia, I guess we should stick with what it recommends rather then our personal feelings. Regarding what Lemmy says, I think, names of leagues should not be translated, Oberliga is fine to use in my opinion. You certainly get no useful hits when googling Upper League Bavaria! EA210269 (talk) 23:27, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, even if you are a native speaker of German - this is not a German-language project. Hence I would use plural markers that are used by the English language, in this case, adding the suffix -s to the original noun. Anything else only leads to confusion, IMHO. Madcynic (talk) 09:04, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
in my opinion it doesn't matter if en.wikipedia is an english project or not - the problem is that there is no standard for plural-forms in english. an example is the german Fachhochschule: as you can see the plural-form is Fachhochschulen (with an 'n') ALSO on en.wikipedia! NOBODY will use the word Fachhochschules - not in germany and not at any partner-universities in kanada, usa, france, vietnam or china! the reason is the international spelling of some german, french, spanish.. words, which cannot be transfered to english-grammar - but there is the same problem with english words in the german language (called anglicism ;-), where is no general standard. so, in my opinion also the english project of wikipedia should keep in mind that on the one hand there is the english-grammar-problem, on the other hand we should keep many international forms of other languages.. (would be very embarrassing speaking german words with english grammar to german people :-)) in fact: use ligen and not ligas. --NiTeChiLLeR (talk) 13:58, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There actually is a rule as I pointed out in the link above which is "Nouns from languages other than the above generally form plurals as if they were native English words". That said, rather than have a -s camp and an -en camp and an unnecessary dispute of the trivial sort, maybe we could adopt the Oberliga (plural: Oberligen), Regionalliga (plural: Regionalligen), Verbandsliga (plural: Verbandsligen) approach? The problem seems to only really crop up in the articles written about the ligas/ligen themselves and if its explained away early in the context of the article that should let us teach English speakers a thing or two, while keeping good form in German. It should be possible to write around the problem in nay other article that it might raise its <ugly> head just by re-working a sentence or two. Does that sound like a fair approach to keep both the -s and the -en advocates happy? Peace and serenity in the pursuit of knowledge and all that. :) Wiggy! (talk) 22:22, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in mind, that the word Liga is not exclusevly owned by the German language but in fact used in many, mostly Eastern European countrys (see Liga). I think, Wiggys idea of an early explanation in the article seems fine. Where this is missing however, we should stick with Ligas. EA210269 (talk) 00:13, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

HSV Barmbeck-Uhlenhorst[edit]

Hi there, do you think you got the name right ? Today Barmbek is written without the ck and your external link, the Official team site states by HSV Barmbek-Uhlenhorst e.V..

Greetings Sebastian scha. (talk) 01:33, 26 May 2008 (UTC) (plz answer here i'll watch this page a week or two) (nice article by the way :-)[reply]

You're right! Thanks. I'll fix it right away. Good eye. Wiggy! (talk) 01:36, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, I'd like to help. More important: now I have a sports link, when/if I start the quarter pages. ;-) Sebastian scha. (talk) 01:44, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Halle, Jena, Erfurt[edit]

Hy Wiggy, I just added three more clubs to the Articles on historic football clubs list. Currently, all three pages are redirects only, created by me today because the clubs they redirect to have some historical information on the original, pre-1945, versions. I'm just wondering what you think. Should these three clubs have their own article or do you consider the current arangement sufficient? Have fun, EA210269 (talk) 02:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have my Vereinslexikon handy, so I can't say how much info there is available on the club. I'll have to check in a day or so. I ran into a similar thing at HSV Barmbek-Uhlenhorst just the other day. Both that club and KSG Alsterdorf have their own Vereinslexikon entries as first division sides historically. Alsterdorf was a wartime side made up of several other clubs (including BU) and really hadn't done enough to merit its own article, so I set it up as a redirect like you have done with these other sides. The only real difference is I have bolded the name of the KSG side in the style used for the main topic of the article. I've seen that approach used here on the English wiki and over on de:. That may be the way to go if there is not sufficient material? It can always be updated if we come across fresh info. Wiggy! (talk) 10:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
True, an article can always be written once more is known about a club. Regarding those East German clubs, I feel, the association between the pre-1945 and past-1945 clubs seems sometimes sketchy. The communists tried hard to wipe out any connections after all. I don't think, for example, the current DSC has any real connection to the old Dresdner SC, and so on. To much time had passed! Anyway, I guess I "pile enough work" on you, "demanding" all this club articles. Problem is, I write one Gauliga article and come past three or four teams that were quite prominent in this league, a ratio that disfavors you, Wiggy! Much easier for me there! I've decided I will only list Gauliga champions to keep the number resonable. Anyway, its fun, bringing those leagues and clubs "back to live". All the best from rainy Perth, EA210269 (talk) 10:51, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You're right on the East German stuff and the communist attempts to re-make the game in the country. I've noticed that some clubs make the effort on their home pages to reclaim or hang on to the historical link, while others clearly just walk away from it. I generally use Vereinslexikon (again!) to identify where there are valid historical links.
Demanding club articles?! No, I don't think so. I'm quite enjoying myself and as I've said, it's useful to have the focus. The articles are pretty straight forward to put together from the club template and sources I'm using. I just have to get caught up on fleshing out the bare bones with checks of the de:wiki articles, the team sites, adding logos, etc. And here I was thinking it was easier for me when I look at all the league and Gauliga articles you have assembled. Overall, I'm really delighted with how the German football section is growing. I still have in the back of my head emulating the de:wiki and their goal of having articles for each of the clubs listed in the Vereinslexikon. Also have to set sights one day on working up a featured club article. And yes it is fun to bring these clubs "back to life".
Rainy Perth, eh? Here in my corner of Canada (Toronto-Brampton-Peterborough is where I'm circulating) it has been unseasonably cold. We had a long snowy winter (second greatest amount of snow ever recorded, about a dozen cm shy of that record) and I'm not entirely convinced summer is on its way. But that's okay, the weather is the weather, and we'll get through it all.
An interesting turn here with our football club Toronto FC. They were a completely sad sack expansion team last season. So far this year they are competitive and nine games in have a winning record. That could turn, of course, but in the meantime its fun to watch. But what I'm really looking foward to Euro 2008 this summer! Wiggy! (talk) 11:15, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a featured article would be nice, but also hard to archive. I think, a target would have to be carefully choosen for such a project. Well, I hope Toronto FC does what no Canadian ice hockey, baseball or basketball team seems to be able to do right now, win a major title. I've got a good feeling about Germany this year, I think they will go all the way at the European championships. Snow? Whats that? Havn't seen any for longer then I can remember! Take care, its not raining today and I've got to walk my dog! EA210269 (talk) 00:29, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:wikistalking[edit]

I am very flattered that you have choosen wikistalk me, however it may not be the most productive use of your time, and your outbursts do not reflect well on you as an editor Fasach Nua (talk) 16:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be flattered. I am opposed in principle to your drive-by image deletes that are in too many cases on shaky grounds and your utter disregard for the contributions and sensibilities of other editors. There are mechanisms and processes in place to do that sort of thing and you are ignoring them. You are not the sole arbiter of what serves others here under nfc #8 (which is curently under review, by the way). You ignore repeated invitations to discuss what you're doing from affected editors (in multiple contexts) and simply parrot back your narrow view of policy and mission. Other editors opinions also count for something and you should heed legitimate protests being voiced.
You might try applying some of the mission to your own work and see what taste that leaves you with. Take Ireland national football team (1882–1950) for example. The infobox is intended to display a logo, not some indescript map that doesn't really provide the user with any useful information, which is a violation of nfc #8. The image of Billy Gillespie needs to go because its redundant - he already appears in the team shot, so that's a violation of nfc #3. The very nice photo of the blue plaque honouring Joe Bambrick should only really appear on his page (nfc #3 again!) and it could really be replaced with something like "Bambricks former home is marked by a blue plaque historical marker honouring his six-goal performance aginst Wales in 1930". That would be nfc #8 again, or maybe nfc #1 where text adequately conveys the information, so that no image is required at all (mission). The Ireland-Linfield Mural is also used excessively and appears in more articles than it needs to be (nfc #3). The Linfield connection is touched on but not explained in the article so its out of context in that sense (#8, not significant). And while the images of the three footballers and two logos is nice, it doesn't really belong in a notable players section (which is inherently POV and original research, but that's another story) because its only function is decorative, which I'm sure you're aware is yet another violation of what, #1 or #8? Or should we just stay with the shotgun approach and nail it with everything without explanation? So are you prepared to live by your own standards or just inflict them on everybody else wherever you go?
As to wikistalking, I remain unimpressed by your targeted attack on my image work in the midst of an on-going discussion about football club logos. You are not in any position deliver me that lecture. And despite everything we went through in that business, you choose to attempt to delete another logo image without real cause and without the courtesy of a meaningful explanation. Am I not supposed to notice that type of behaviour? I'm aware that this does reflect well on me as an editor. I'd rather be off puttering about at my own thing. But the principle is worth sticking up for and it doesn't burn me to on occasion give a leg up to other editors who are being blindsided or bullied by a persistently POV editor who can't see clear to abide by his own standards. Wiggy! (talk) 17:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is good for you to actually address the issue, your analysis of the Ireland article is quite good,and I would encourage you to use the same analysis with other articles, the minimal usages issue with Gillespie is a particularly astute observence, and the sort of thing that is not applied enough. The one issue you missed was that all the images used in this article are free, and therefore they can be used in any way we choose. I actually think the Ireland article is a good example of how an article can be written entirely without non-free content, which is very much part of the WP goal of this project. I share your concerns about the logo, Ireland is fortunate to have a recognisable shape, that can be used in lieu of a logo, which is why I raised the issuse at the WP:FUR, it was unfortunate that you view discussion of issues as "way off base", I think there is a lot to be said for discussion and the sharing of ideas, rather than your bulldozing approach, I have been having reasonably sensible discussion with peejay and others befor you barged in ranting, and perhaps, you may consider engaging in the process, and you might get somewhere. Fasach Nua (talk) 17:39, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
On an aside you may want to look at this peer review, can you spot the big issue needed to get this up to GA class? Fasach Nua (talk) 17:42, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eimsbütteler TV[edit]

After writting the Gauliga Nordmark article, I came across this: Eimsbütteler TV. I will try to find out some more about the club but we may need your "magic book"! EA210269 (talk) 03:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I managed to expand the article from one sentence, its a bit better now. EA210269 (talk) 06:27, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good to see you back![edit]

Missed your contributions, good to see you back! EA210269 (talk) 03:08, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, thought I could stand the diversion. Added VfL Köln 99 if you'd be inclined to tune it up some. Thanks. See you around. Wiggy! (talk) 01:09, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Had a quick look, put in some league links. Have to do some "real work" now! Have fun, EA210269 (talk) 01:30, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Karlsruher FV[edit]

A piece of good news: the Karlsruher FV has returned to league football, I just found out! Nice to see such a historic club of German football return. Took it out of the Defunct category straight away. EA210269 (talk) 04:56, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is interesting. What level will they be playing at to begin with? It would be quite the sight to see the club return and eventually make a mark. Wiggy! (talk) 05:01, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oops. My bad. Neglected to check your addition. Gotta go check their website. Thanks. Wiggy! (talk) 05:11, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very little on their website yet, but still useing the old logo. EA210269 (talk) 06:25, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

I try and I try... Madcynic (talk) 21:35, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heider FC[edit]

Just a quick question about this article, Wiggy. Is the club defunct or has it merged into the MTV Heide again? I can't find anything on the HFC in current tables but the MTV was playing here last season. Should it be added to the article? EA210269 (talk) 23:14, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure to be honest. I'll have to sniff around to see if I can find a current reference. Wiggy! (talk) 00:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Betacommand[edit]

You're baiting him now. He's blocked, so please just drop it. If you post to his talk page again I'm going to block you. Ryan Postlethwaite 03:24, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The guy is a bully. Sure he's blocked, but it hasn't changed his behavior one lick. You know as well as I do that as soon as the block is done he'll be right back at it. So yeah, dropped for now. But it'll be more of the same from him down the road. I can't fathom why people rush to the guy's defense all the time when his conduct is so thuggish and its been made clear to him over and over again that he can choose to do otherwise. Wiggy! (talk) 03:34, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Yo Wiggy! I was just wondering if you supported Dynamo Dresden, and just wanted to say that i am very appreciative of the work you did on FV Dresden 06' would you try and give me a hand on the current squad of FV Dresden 06 as well. Thanks ever so much dawg! —Preceding unsigned comment added by SGD-LFC (talk • contribs) 14:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My interest is German football in general, although DD is a fascinating club in its own right. No trouble with the FV stuff. I write/patch basic club articles all the time. I don't generally do rosters, just club histories and profiles. Thanks for the offer though. Have tons of fun. Wiggy! (talk) 19:02, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Stahl Brandenburg[edit]

No problem, thanks to you that you create tons of german football club's pages :-) ! --87.8.174.37 (talk) 20:57, 22 July 2008 (UTC) aka Animaccianera (talk)[reply]

Logo for FV Dresden 06[edit]

Hi again I just wanted to ask if you could tell how I can upload the logo for FV Dresden i have tried it already and it won't work. Please check! Thanks--SGD-LFC (talk) 12:02, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I simplified the name and I'm guessing that if you tried to upload the file from de:wiki it was a .gif rather than a .png, so that may have caused it to bomb out. It's all properly tagged and ready to go. Wiggy! (talk) 03:07, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Croatia national football team - Supporters[edit]

Hi, ive noticed that you keep making edits to the supporters section of the Croatian team. I personally wrote that section and there was no problem with you making a major re-wording edit to it. However, please attempt to reach a verdict before you keep updating it so rapidly. Most notably, you keep taking out the section about the fans at the Wembley Stadium game and the pro guidance for the fans after Euro 2008. I think this is very much relevant information to be included, and your basic wording of the section is seen as going overboard in terms of a "non-biased view". Youve turned it into slightly pro-biased to completely anti-biased in the opposite direction. You sound like you are writing the article in utter disgust and no care for the national team.

Since your a Canadian, I'm going to assume the possibility that your also an English fan. If you have a problem with the Wembley victory being mentioned in the supporters section then too bad. Its relevant information backed up by appropriate references! Its not biased either, especially in the final version I re-worded it in. Sorry mate, but you cant just go and edit wiki pages to your own liking. Football is a game of emotions, toughen up! Of course, if your not an English fan then you can forget this entire paragraph :)

Please help us reach a verdict on this section instead of making constant edits and turning it into an edit war! Domiy (talk) 07:55, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page was nominated as a featured article candidate, but it won't get there if the heavy handed pro-Croat POV isn't tempered.
The Supporters section was more than "slightly pro-biased". It originally read like an apology for the conduct of the fans and seemed to imply some sort of approval or sympathy for their conduct in the world's media. That's not how it is - they got busted more than once for grossly improper conduct and have caused the national federation to be repeatedly fined or threatened with sanctions. Those are the basic facts and I don't see how you can put a positive spin on that. If my edits come across as "anti-biased" that's more a reflection on the actions of the fans than my writing.
In its current state the article in general reads poorly. The opening paragraph of the supporters section is close to incoherent. There are far too many superlatives and peacock terms used throughout the article. The Croats are fielding exciting teams. I'm a Germany supporter, not England (a quick look at my user page or edit history will confirm that). The Croats scare me when they're up against the Germans and that makes for interesting matches. However, the writing style being used to describe the Croation team is way over the top. I think you need to go read some of the other articles being written about national sides, get a feel for how they are being approached, and then re-consider whether or not your are writing with a obvious bias. If you truly want to get the article to FAC status - or just have it read in an evenhanded, factual and encyclopedic manner - you need to take that into account. Football is indeed a game of emotions. However an encyclopedia is not an arena for those emotions. Take some of your own advice and toughen up.
Yes, I can go and edit pages to my own liking. So can you. That's how it is here. At some point a proper article will come out of the process. We're not in any kind of edit war, so don't be characterizing this episode as such. I'm an able writer, proficient in English (where the article also needs considerable help), and have a long list of contributions here. I try real hard to be straight up in what I write and avoid overly favourable or negative language. You want help with the verdict? This is some of that help. It might be a little bitter, but look hard at the article, compare it to others of the same type, and work hard at managing what is, to folks who are not so passionate about the Croation national team, way too much spin. Wiggy! (talk) 14:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for opinion[edit]

Hey Wiggy! How is things? Just a quick question for you: Some of the German states (Bavaria, Hesse, Württemberg) have already sub-categories for the football clubs but I want to add more, eventually have them all sub-categorised by state. I think, it will make editing a bit easier. Anyway, here is the question. What sounds better?

These are the two regions I would like to do next, if you could pass on your opinion, it would be great! Have fun, EA210269 (talk) 13:02, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Things are good. We've had an insanely rainy month here in Ontario, but have finally been able to enjoy 3-4 days in a row without any significant rain. Its nice to be dry! Hope you're also keeping well. I see you and a couple of other guys are continuing to prolific in making/tuning up German football articles. Good to see so much action.
Yes, I think the category idea is overdue, especially given the existence of some of these already, so good for you for the effort. I would tend toward Saarland, Palatinate, etc. That matches the usage of state names in the articles, and also follows the practise being used in naming national football teams i.e. Germany national football team and France national football team vs. German national football team, French national football team, Italy/Italian, Zambia/Zambian, etc. That's my two bits, thanks for asking. Anybody else weigh in on the question? Wiggy! (talk) 15:49, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agrre on nouns instead of adjectives. Also English names, not the German ones. --Madcynic (talk) 17:07, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks MC, much appreciated. Wiggy! (talk) 00:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks guys, much appreciated. I think, I prefer nouns, too. Saarlandian sounds a bit funny! Regarding the rain, Wiggy, I know how you feel, it always seems to rain in my six days off while its beautiful sunshine on the eight I have to work! EA210269 (talk) 00:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that sort of weather convinces me that there is at least some sort of order to the universe - just not the order I might prefer. It's raining again now ... <sigh> ... and, yes, it is my day off. Wiggy! (talk) 00:56, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I hope, you don't hate me when I say, we are actually having a beautiful day! Anyway, just updated the Saar clubs for 2008, have a read of SV Saar 05 Saarbrücken, sounds like a bad TV show what went on there! EA210269 (talk) 03:34, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SV Mettlach[edit]

I thought, how did I miss this one this morning, I thought I done them all! Easy answer, you just created it! EA210269 (talk) 13:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just got started on it. I'm away from my reference books for a couple days and there's no de: article to take from, so I had to do this one the old-fashioned way by digging around for information. Its coming together slowly. Had to break off part way through to get some sleep. Good to see your category tagging project moving along so swiftly. Wiggy! (talk) 13:20, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, heaps of work, but by breaking it up into states its so much easier to tackle. Southern Germany is almost done, I might let somebody else worry about the north, at least for now. EA210269 (talk) 13:25, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Croatia national football team ready for another FA attempt?[edit]

Hi I wanted to get your opinion on the article now. In addition to the outside edits lately, I went through a few times and did a very thorough check of the article as I fixed up a lot of grammar issues and wording. On top of that, I included a substantial amount of references to include more verifiable info. The page is sounding and looking much better now, and I was considering re-entering it as a nomination for a Featured Article. I wanted to get your opinion first though. Do you think its ready? What more could I check/fix up?

I would appreciate some advice ASAP, thanks! Domiy (talk) 09:52, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, D, but I'm thinking it still reads more like a fan page than an encyclopedia article. It needs a more neutral tone and still needs a lot of help with English. Maybe go read a handful of the existing national team articles to get a feel for the general approach and get hooked up with an English speaking editor. If you go back and look at the archives of the previous FAC's, you will see those two points coming up repeatedly. Wiggy! (talk) 11:20, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FC Büsingen[edit]

I found this article, FC Büsingen, pretty abandoned, like a stray dog. I put in all I could find, does your "bible" have anything on it? If we manage to expand it 5-fold its an excellent canidad for DYK! EA210269 (talk) 12:30, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, it is an interesting little tidbit. My "bible" only includes clubs that have played 4th tier or better, or that have some sort of major appearance to their credit (national playoff or cup), so Buesingen isn't there.
I have uploaded the club logo and will see what else I can find and copy edit over the next day or so. Thanks for bringing it to my attention! Wiggy! (talk) 11:23, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use of copyrighted material without a Fair Use rationale[edit]

Please observe the restrictions on using copyrighted material, such as the NATO flag. You have re-added this image twice after it was removed from International reaction to the 2008 South Ossetia war. Do observe that the fact that there is a download page for this image on NATO's website has no bearing on our ability to utilize the image. What matters is its licence, and it has an un-free licence meaning it can only be used accompanied by a Non-free image rationale. If you believe you can make a case for its inclusion in the article in question, feel free to supply this rationale and add it to the image page. If not, please refrain from adding it again to the article. __meco (talk) 07:28, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fasach Nua[edit]

I've ameneded the request for comment about the user Fasach Nua concerning his editing of 'National Football Team' articles.

I'd invite you to comment as you were involved in this issue.

Aaron carass (talk) 02:39, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Created a new 'request for comment' specifically about 'National Football Team' articles for the user Fasach Nua.
Aaron carass (talk) 18:54, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Croatia national team FA candidate[edit]

Thanks for your help on the page in past times. It is finally up for another FA candidate which I think meets the criteria now that the article has been largely fixed up. Please voice any of your opposing or supporting issues at the page nomination at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates. Thanks! Domiy (talk) 22:47, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Croatia national team copyedit[edit]

I appreciate and enjoy the work you have done on the national team page. Despite any previous issues surrounding the FAC, I have added a significant amount of additional information in the 'History' section. Reading through it, I realise and admit it is somewhat badly worded. Could you please take another skim at it now and word it properly? THANKS! Domiy (talk) 09:15, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:FC Bayer Uerdingen old.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:FC Bayer Uerdingen old.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 02:29, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:FV Germania Koenigshuette.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:FV Germania Koenigshuette.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 04:53, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Logos[edit]

Hey Wiggy!

Thanks for the encouragement. Regarding the logos. I really liked them, but since I have seen that there is a problem with the use of logos, I don't use them any more. I have not removed any from old article I created, though.

Regards, OdinFK (talk) 13:22, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Mariendorfer SV.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Mariendorfer SV.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 03:28, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved. Wiggy! (talk) 17:07, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bluster by FN[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If your vandalism continues, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If your vandalism continues, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

References[edit]

You said: "(cur) (last) 23:27, 21 September 2008 Wiggy! (Talk | contribs | block) (2,737 bytes) (I'll get one, thx.) (rollback | undo)"

Please get one as soon as possible. Hopefully a WP:RS will appear within five days. WhisperToMe (talk) 00:10, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for adding the sources! I added some more articles to the Frankfurt WikiProject. :) WhisperToMe (talk) 02:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Croatia football national team...[edit]

Go read the thing. Sources need to be of good quality and credible. This ref is hardly that. Croats did not invent football and the allusion is out of place in this article.

Croats really DID NOT invent football, but this is fact:

...FIFA accepted and attempted to expand a theory which claims that the sport was first played in Dalmacija by tribe warriors during the 1st century...

or from Rueters:

"....In the Sinjska krajina area, Trilj, (today Dalmatia, a region in Croatia) long ago in the 1st ct BC, young Illyrian Delmata tribe warriors, ancient residents of those areas, bided their time by passing each other a ball made from leather or bull hair.

This is the way it was until, unfortunate for them, conquering Romans came into the Cetina River area. The natives have courageously been fighting them off for a long time. The Delmatas could still not fight back against the powerful military forces, but on the other hand, the military forces could not resist kicking a leather ball with their feet.

Sinj-based amateur archaeologist Josip Bepo Britvic dedicated his entire life to proving and providing evidence for this theory. Taking a walk in 1947, in hometown Sinj, he saw a rooted relief on a façade, showing a young man holding… a “football”.

- Dear! – Bepo probably thought. With later research Josip Bepo Britvic realised this was a monument from the 1st ct BC which was found and dug up from the Gardun hill near Trilj in mid-19th ct.

Cautious by nature, he did not want to jump the gun with the theory, because he was afraid how others might react. But, Bepo was hard-working, persistently gathered evidence and when he was sure his theory was irrefutable in 1970, he introduced the world public to the story. The carved character on the relief was Gaius Liberius, who lived and, it seems, played football in the vicinity of Trilj.

- I`m just claiming that football was played in Dalmatia 2,000 years – Bepo explained.

He did not claim the Croats invented football, because this is neither historically nor methodologically accurate as 2,000 years ago, there were no Croats, believe it or not.

Britvic offered material evidence, and others offer legends. His revelation was great and soon the world recognised it, seeing how many in the world concluded that a sensation was in question.

FIFA, the International Football Association dedicated a cover of its magazine in 1969 to the archaeological discovery and work of Bepo Britvic, even officially confirming the credibility of his discovery, offering him help in further research. Such an accolade is rarely seen by professional archaeologists. But over 30 years have passed since, therefore it would not hurt to remember this great man and honour him.

Dalmatia is the cradle of football, therefore it should be no wonder that the Croatian footballers are the best in the word. We won`t exaggerate, in the entire universe. Let`s add that Vedran Runje, the goalkeeper who knocked out several balls from Poland, Slaven Zambata and Jozo Gaspar, the legendary Dinamo players, just like Gayus Liberius, are also from Sinj....."

Jure Grm (talk) 11:50, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Look you guys, I'm glad you got your country back and you're proud and all that, but there is no place for flag waving and overblown nationalism here. I already read the source article you're quoting me here and seeing it again doesn't change anything. Tagging it as something from Reuters is meaningless, because all they did was pick up the original article for re-distribution.
You are completely missing my point about the need for references to be credible. The source in question hardly reads seriously. Searching any of the key terms in the original reference doesn't provide any other supporting reference, the search always circles back on itself to the Javno article. An extraordinary claim (i.e. Croats were playing football before the English) requires exceptional sources.
The modern game of football has a well established history. That includes an awareness of a number of other games played by other peoples in earlier times. In the context of an article on the Croatian national side, the reference to the Delmatas' game is silly and out of place. The Wikipedia article should be encyclopedic, it is not supposed to be some sort of fan page. The article has been through a couple of FAC's now, and although it has been improved hugely, one of the key problems with the thing has been the use of peacock langauage and a clearly nationalistic POV. Get over yourselves and write something that anyone, including a non-Croat, can take seriously. Wiggy! (talk) 12:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd just like to say I agree completely. User Domy started upgrading the article on the national team some time ago, and - although considerable improvements have been made to it, he just keeps adding nonsensical and POV information to the article. I stopped editing the article when i realised the flood of nonsense is unlikely to stop (what bothers me mostly is the pretty distorted way the Yugoslavian period and the WW2 are depicted, but i decided it just wasn't worth it wasting time endlessly reverting and discussing it). As for the "Croats invented football" article, let me just say this: I'm Croatian, born and raised in Zagreb, a football fan and I work at Reuters as an intern. Javno.com is NOT a reliable source, it is rarely, if ever, used as a source in other Croatian media; the article itself is based on a Croatian historian's unpublished book (meaning the claims from the book are unconfirmed and never went through any peer review process), which also puts a considerable dent in javno.com's credibility as a media outlet; lastly - the article was never carried by Reuters and Reuters has got nothing to do with it - Reuters only provided the accompanying photo of a Croatia fan that editors at javno.com used to illustrate the article. Best regards :-) Timbouctou (talk) 14:33, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm just hopeful that everybody comes to their senses and realizes that those sort of claims do not add anything positive. You can lead the parade of sane people. You still living in Croatia? Wiggy! (talk) 14:59, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto FC aside[edit]

Yeah, still living in Zagreb, finishing my studies, catching games at Maksimir every now and then and working part-time. How's Toronto FC doing? :-) Timbouctou (talk) 15:21, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Toronto FC got off to a great start this season, but has since completely tanked it. They are in last place, six points out of a playoff sport with five games to go. However, they are still fun to watch, and they are much improved over last season. Fan support for the club is quite strong and it can be hard to get a ticket for a match. But, for the most part, I'm still satisfying my football appetite by watching Bundesliga matches on satellite TV on the weekend. Hockey season is about to start and it looks like the Leafs are going to be awful and miss the playoffs again. Good luck with your studies, catch you later. Wiggy! (talk) 10:38, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just out of curiosity - what would you say is the average attendance at Toronto F.C. games? Timbouctou (talk) 11:56, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weltfussball.de claims around 20,000 in the 13 matches of 2008 here. Madcynic (talk) 13:56, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, its a tough ticket to get hold of here in Toronto. Pretty much impossible in their debut season and the enthusiasm has been maintained in their sophomore campaign. The stadium was purpose-built for football and has an official capacity of about 20,500, so most games have been sellouts. I think the league has a rule that requires a football only facility if they are going to grant a city a franchise. The stadium gets good reviews locally and better suits the game than having to play in the Rogers Centre (Skydome) which is home of the Toronto Blue Jays (baseball) and the Toronto Argonauts (Canadian football) and has a capacity of ~50,000, although neither of those clubs currently draws numbers like that.

When I was a young guy the local club was Toronto Metros/Toronto Blizzard. They made a couple final appearances in the old NASL. At one time they merged with the local Croatian side and played as Toronto Metros-Croatia. The only international I ever got to see here was a match against Mexico, back in '72 I think? Kind of a football desert, but things looks to be slowly improving at the club level at least. Buzz around here is that there is a possibility of new Canadian franchises in Montreal and Vancouver. We'll see. Wiggy! (talk) 19:17, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:RW Leudenscheid.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:RW Leudenscheid.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 04:38, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Augsburg.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Augsburg.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:21, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:DSC Wanne-Eickel.gif)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:DSC Wanne-Eickel.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 08:38, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:AS Strasbourg.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:AS Strasbourg.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 10:13, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Blauweiss.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Blauweiss.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:46, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Know anything about this club?[edit]

Hey Wiggy!, sorry to have been so quiet lately, but my holidays and then work kept me busy. I'm just wondering whether you got any information on this club in your amazing book: BSC Erlangen (formerly: SpVgg Büchenbach). I can't find anything from before 1957. Even a foundation year would already make quite a difference! Thanks, all the best, EA210269 (talk) 06:30, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I noted your absence and recalled that you had mentioned a vacation back to Germany. Hope you enjoyed yourself, glad to see you back.
The entry in the Vereinslexikon for SpVgg points immediately to the entry for BSC without providing any other information. The entry for BSC does not indicate a founding date for SpVgg, but identifies the establishment of Erlangen as coming in 1981. No other information in that regard, I'm afraid.
It refers to the book's appendix for the period 1957-63 when the club played in the Amateurliga Nordbayern (18th, 8th, 9th, 5th, 1st, 7th). They took part in the amateur national championship in 1962, going out in a qualification match against SC Tegel 2:4. After the 1963-64 season they became part of the Amateurliga Bayern where they finished as a lower tier side more often than not. They were sent down in 1979 and the book has no other information on the club from that point on except for mentioning a preliminary round DFB-Pokal appearance in 1989 which they lost 0:5 to Bayer Leverkusen.
There is a similarly named club named SpVgg 04 Erlangen that is identified only in the appendix as playing in the AL Nordbayern from 1955-61. There is no indication of any connection between the two sides. Present day SpVgg Büchenbach indicates a founding date of 1968, and again indicates not connection.
That's all there is and it looks like you've already captured most of it! Good job, sorry I couldn't provide anything else. Wiggy! (talk) 08:03, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh well, seems the past of this club will remain a mistery, at least for the time. SpVgg Erlangen is not related to SpVgg Büchenbach to my knowledge and the current SpVgg Büchenbach from 1968 is actually spelled SpVgg Buchenbach and based in the Black Forrest. Took me a bit to figure then one out, no relation there either. Regarding the holiday, it was great but went all to fast. Have fun, enjoy yourself, EA210269 (talk) 08:19, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Picture For Rico Kuhne[edit]

Hey Wiggy. I was hoping maybe if you could upload an image of Rico Kuhne. Bitte und danke! —Preceding unsigned comment added by SGD-LFC (talk • contribs) 19:59, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Tasmania00.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Tasmania00.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:26, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Preussen Munster.png)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Preussen Munster.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:11, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Ulm.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Ulm.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 02:24, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:VfB Leipzig.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:VfB Leipzig.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 07:57, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for the logo guru[edit]

Hey Wiggy, I know you have made yourself a bit rare lately, but if you could spare a little time, could you help me out? I'm trying to find a logo for ASV Herzogenaurach but havn't got much luck. The clubs website got it but I'm not skilled enough to retrieve it. I tried a few other of my usual sources but failed, too. Any idea where I could get one? Have fun, hope to see you back in action soon, so many club articles still to write, going to sleep now, EA210269 (talk) 15:19, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Life sometimes gets in the way of one's fun. <sigh> I'll be back at it soon enough as I'm headed into my quiet season at work. The requested logo has been rendered and posted! Thanks for the ask. Wiggy! (talk) 19:59, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks, a logo makes so much difference to an article! EA210269 (talk) 23:18, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits at Wt:NFC[edit]

Hi Wiggy, your recent edits at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content are crossing the line of our "comment on the content, not the contributor" guidelines. Your edits here and here are directed at Betacommand as a person, not to the substance of Beta's arguments - which are by and large quite correct. Your perceived bad treatment, and the uncivil comments Beta made (and was blocked for), do not give you license to indulge in the same behaviour. If you are correct, you can make your points in a civil fashion and you will find support developing from other editors. As it happens, you did not find that support, except from an editor unfamiliar with policy.

Please moderate your tone in future. For your reference, the relevant policies/guidelines are civility, no personal attacks and dispute resolution. Calm discussion helps the encyclopedia. Heated discussion that strays from the point very often does not. Regards! Franamax (talk) 01:07, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Logos[edit]

Nice work on all the logos! EA210269 (talk) 04:03, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thx. Just a little catching up. Wiggy! (talk) 04:04, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Fortuna Babelsberg.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Fortuna Babelsberg.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 13:56, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

fair use image reduction[edit]

Wiggy, I saw with a number of your edits that you removed {{Non-free reduce}} tags from fair use images. As an example, this is one of your edits. The problem here is the image as uploaded is 1,500 × 452 pixels. In its use in the one article it is in, it is 300 x 90 pixels. The maximum size we need is therefore 300 x 90 pixels in this case. Note that the tag I mentioned above says "A high-resolution non-free image is considered a copyright violation and may be deleted." This is therefore a blatant copyright violation, which is why the tag was placed on the image. I am undoing your edits in this vein as appropriate to re-add the tags to reduce the images. Please do not remove these tags without conducting the image size reductions as appropriate to the maximum size used in any articles they are used in. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 20:21, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Zealots"[edit]

Wiggy, regardless of what you think of those of us advocating removing the logos, it is inappropriate to refer to us as "zealots" as you did here. Please observe Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Commenting on editors is inappropriate. Please comment on content, not on editors. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 18:02, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just calling it how it is. Send me along to AN/I if you like and stomp your feet some more. Otherwise just let it slide and confine your comments to the debate instead of poking at other editors in an officious manner. It just puts a chill on things when people begin to feel they can't speak their minds. Wiggy! (talk) 18:06, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • So if I feel that you're a <expletive> <expletive> <expletive> <expletive> <expletive> it's ok to tell you that because that's how it is? It's ok to do that because I'm just speaking my mind? I sincerely hope you don't truly believe that. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:17, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You can lay off such a lame and argumentative approach. I'm not granting you license to do any of that stuff, nor have any of the other editors who have challenged you to your dislike granted you any sort of license to be uncivil. The tantrum at the recently refused AN/I was childish and this looks to be little more than an extension of that behaviour. Just take what I said at face value without extrapolating it to serve some other purpose - I don't need or appreciate anyone trying to put words in my mouth. You're welcome to go back and look at any of my posts and count all the expletives. You should find, oh ... just about none. I may speak strongly from time to time, but I don't curse folks out, throw hissy fits, or head hunt them. I genuinely believe that there is a small group of anti-image editors who are extreme in their interpretation and application of policy (overzealous maybe?) who should be challenged when they push too hard. Wiggy! (talk) 18:30, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • You are welcome to your beliefs. Nobody is suggesting you should give them up. That said, nobody deserves to be called a zealot, or a tantrum thrower, or anything else. WP:NPA exists for a reason, and it isn't to allow you to insult your fellow editors when you feel that is "how it is" or when you feel not insulting them would cause you to not "speak [your] mind". I'm not taking you to task over your stance with respect to fair use images. All I'm asking is for you to tone down the rhetoric you are aiming at other editors themselves, rather than their opinions or commentary. That is not an unreasonable request. Simply refraining from using profanity is not a measure of civility. Shakespeare, for example, and all manner of insulting phrases in his works without using profanity. In fact, a more learned person is quite capable of thoroughly insulting someone without ever using a single profanity. Further, using insults against someone does nothing to enhance your argument. I'm sure you can find more reasonable ways of debating a topic than having to descend to mud-slinging in some misguided attempt to prove your point. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:43, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry dude, but after the display at AN/I and in other places I just can't take the above remonstration too seriously. You may wish to try leading by example instead of haranguing other folks - I'm just not interested. And let's be clear - I have not used profanity anywhere, so I don't need that lecture. Don't obfuscate. Wiggy! (talk) 19:01, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heated dispute[edit]

Hammersoft, Wiggy!, and Rtr10,

I'm leaving this on all three talk pages, and hoping it does more good than harm. Hammersoft and I have been discussing civility a little, and I wanted to chime in. This probably applies to everyone involved in the logo fair use discussion, but I'm just leaving it on your talk pages because you three are directly involved with what Hamersoft and I have been discussing.

Please, all three of you, consider altering your approach to talking to/about each other in the college logo discussion, and your interpretations of civility. You have very different opinions on what is best for Wikipedia, but I assure you, they are just that: opinions on what is best for Wikipedia. None of the three of you is here to damage Wikipedia, and it's beneath all of you to say so. Denigrating and vilifying someone you disagree with, particularly questioning their motives for being here, creates a toxic environment for the rest of us. "Warning" someone who you feel has denigrated or vilified you, rather than talking politely human to human, also creates a toxic environment, and is unlikely to have the effect you desire.

Please consider rebooting your interactions with each other, and approaching this as you would dealing with other adults in your office or somewhere else in real life; it's too easy to be rude on the internet, in a way you would never consider doing to a coworker. You're welcome to criticize each other's opinions on what should or should not be done. You're welcome to state your opinion that other people's approach is damaging to the encyclopedia. To do so is not incivil, but is part of the give and take of discussions that you feel strongly about, and you have to have a thick skin if you're going to participate in heated discussions. But please, all three of you, resolve to respect the motives of everyone involved, bend over backwards to avoid being insulting, and bend over backwards to avoid taking the bait if you think someone else has insulted you.

I'm becoming seriously disenchanted with "civility warnings", templated comments, talk of blocking, indeed talk of "civility policy" at all. "Don't be a dick" pretty much covers everything. I'm just hoping that a plea for everyone involved to treat everyone else involved as an adult that you happen to disagree with is enough to smooth things over.

I'm not online a lot, but I do have all three talk pages watched now, so if you reply, feel free to do it here, or on my talk page, and I'll reply when I get a chance. --barneca (talk) 17:20, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm good for that and appreciate your input. However, I am well and truly annoyed that the Hammer thinks he needs to hector everyone else and hold himself up as the affronted party when he is not. I honestly am content to go around and quietly do my own thing. But, if he needs to talk about me and spin things his way he can reasonably expect to be rebutted. I don't need a lecture on civility, and I don't appreciate someone who thinks they need to flag my contributions when we're in the middle of a debate just because I made a (civil and legitimate) point early on within the context of a debate (which is what ignited this whole thing from my side). My experience is that this unfortunately seems to be too common trait held by many (not all) of the anti-image guys. I am not interested in anyone throwing rocks at my head without cause or in seeing them beat down other editors in the name of their narrow view of the mission. The end does not justify the means.
The irony for me in all this is that if you look at my edit record, I'm right down the middle on the use of logos and images. I've removed logos from the annual German Cup summaries and advised a member of our project to avoid that type of use because we don't need the grief. I've let tons of stuff that I posted early on slide because it no longer complied with updated policies. But it is pushing things too far when folks suggest that we take pictures of logos and use those instead of logos, or drop logos in place of national flags, or let sloppy, ill-conceived bots run loose to blindly tag everything at 300px and above. All in the name of a narrowly defined view of mission. There is a group who conduct themselves like they are engaged in some sort of war of attrition in the pursuit of a belief that the place needs to be totally bereft of all non-free material regardless of whether or not its use has legitimacy under policy. That doesn't work for me and I'm tired of having to repeatedly defend the legitimate use of logos against that sort of POV editing. Wiggy! (talk) 19:06, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Wiggy!,
I understand completely why you're annoyed with Hammersoft. I understand completely why he is annoyed with you and Rtr10. I tried to word that as neutrally as I could, but rest assured I didn't intend any slight on your contributions or attitude. I'm just trying to nip something in the bud that seemed to be spiraling a little worse with every post. I think all three of you were contributing to the spiral. I suspect the four of us all have different opinions on who is most to blame for the spiral, but my intent was to just ask everyone to start fresh, without bothering to assign blame at all. --barneca (talk) 17:15, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merry christmas and a happy new year![edit]

Same to you, Wiggy. Did you have a white christmas? I heared, Canada did rather well in that regard. EA210269 (talk) 00:10, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a white Christmas from coast to coast for the first time in decades! Spent too much time shovelling snow this week. It has since warmed up and we're getting some rain and fog here in the Toronto area with temperatures around 10°C. No more snow for the next few days I hear. That suits me fine. Wiggy! (talk) 01:23, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't want to rub it in but its going to be 36°C here on new years eve, not that it will help me much, I m flying back to work then and out bush it will propably be well over 40 then, a little to hot! EA210269 (talk) 02:56, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unused football kit[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:19, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposals to create new articles[edit]

These are former German clubs:

LUCPOL (talk) 13:09, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Some of these I knew about others I did not. I will add more over time. Thank you for the references also. Wiggy! (talk) 13:46, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:Ahlen.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Ahlen.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 16:07, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved. Wiggy! (talk) 15:40, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:Alemannia Aachen.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Alemannia Aachen.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 16:47, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved. Wiggy! (talk) 15:40, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

German football champions[edit]

Have you seen this? Madcynic (talk) 18:24, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have now. Thank you. Wiggy! (talk) 18:27, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New straw poll[edit]

You are a user who responded to RFC: Use of logos on sports team pages. As someone interested in the discussion a new straw poll has been laid out to see where we currently stand with regards to building a consensus. For the sake of clarity, please indicate your support or opposition (or neutrality) to each section, but leave discussion to the end of each section. — BQZip01 — talk 23:08, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chemie Leipzig[edit]

Hello Wiggy. There is a question regarding the logo of the new Chemie Leipzig. Is it the same as the old logo from the DDR days? If you could check in your archives and let us know on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject German football#Chemie Leipzig, that would be great. Have fun, EA210269 (talk) 23:22, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deutscher FV 1878 Hannover[edit]

Hey Wiggy!, a little dilemma here: I've recently been doing some work on German rugby union articles and come to this article, Deutscher FV 1878 Hannover. Now, I've created a new one for the current club team DSV 78/08 Ricklingen, which is just an on-the-field union. The former DFV 78 has been renamed in 1929 to DSV 78, as you propably know, should we propose a move of the current article to DSV 78 Hannover (currently a redirect page)? You as the creater should have first say, I would think. EA210269 (talk) 00:45, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I would move it. The origin of the club as DFV and its role in the establishment of the DFB is still quite clear. I'd just turn the original article title into a redirect to the new name. If you add a German football club category tag on the redirect page (under the old team name) it'll still be possible to easily find it on the list of German clubs under its original name. There are a number of other club articles that have been treated in a similar manner. Each of the clubs listed on the category page in italics is just a redirect built that way.
I think it only really becomes a problem (in the context of the German Football Wikiproject) where the history or origin of a club as a German side gets too thoroughly masked or buried in the article of a current-day side which is no longer part of German competition. There are a couple of articles that have drifted off in that direction that I was thinking of deconstructing a bit in order to maintain their validity in context of German football. Wiggy! (talk) 03:56, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I will request a move, needs to be done by a admin, I think, as the new article name already exists. That way we preserve the histroy of the article. Once that is done I will categorise the redirect page, as you suggested. EA210269 (talk) 05:27, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently, the bug that prevented me from doing such a move in the past has now been fixed, its all done and the category has been added to the redirect. EA210269 (talk) 05:36, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Final version[edit]

As a contributor to the discussion regarding sports team logos, I am soliciting feedback as to the latest version of that guideline. Your support/opposition/feedback would be appreciated. — BQZip01 — talk 21:14, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:SpVgg Sulz.png)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:SpVgg Sulz.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:05, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Kolner BC.png)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Kolner BC.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:05, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for the birthday wishes. I've now somewhat recovered from the occsion and my birthday present, a parachutte jump with a rather hard landing. Enjoy yourself, EA210269 (talk) 06:06, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So called notable players[edit]

There is no more merit in having an article Notable former players of Somewhere Town F.C. than there is having a section on the Somewhere Town F.C. article of Notable former players: if a list is OR, it as just as OR as an article as it is as a section. Kevin McE (talk) 18:38, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're missing the point. The list approach is already established and supported in the context of English clubs. There's no reason not to extend the notion. Its just a judgement free collection of article links of players related to a given club, not a list of famous or notable players (whatever that means, right?). I'm trying to suggest a useful/neutral way out of the mindless cycle of edit wars over this subject. You might want to consider it as a more proactive approach. Wiggy! (talk) 18:48, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Somebody wisely suggested on the FOOTY talk page "Just mark 'em all up as having played with a particular club with a category tag and be done." Can't remember who ;@) I think that is a far better idea than creating List of XXX F.C. players unless there is a real commitment to making that list complete. Kevin McE (talk) 19:28, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That time of the year again[edit]

The Running Man Barnstar
Happy Birthday and keep a cool head! EA210269 (talk) 06:14, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

German football logos[edit]

Hey Wiggy, how are you? Just a quick question. When I went through the German club articles and tagged all the talk pages I noticed that there is quite a number of them without logos. If I made a list of them, would you be able to dig up some logos, over time? If I upload them, providing I can source them all, they usually are of low quality and soon some bot comes along and tells me there would be much better in xyz-format. EA210269 (talk) 00:33, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I can do that. I've been meaning to get back in the swing here for some time, so that would be a good project to undertake. I usually use the article names associated with the generic German football logo (nologo.png) appearing as a placeholder in new articles as a work list. I miss the odd one though.
I see you're being quite prodigious in your administrative updating of German football articles. Good stuff. Thanks for the birthday wishes and barnstar, too. As for a cool head, I am bloody annoyed at the re-appearance of FN to stir the pot again. Thought he might have got hit by a bus or something. I just don't think (blindly) down tearing other folks work is the way to build an encyclopedia, especially when their effort can be re-channeled with a little tweaking. There's problems with notable player sections, but that can be managed with lists or cats, and thats another way to build. Just need to work on setting an example or two. And the logo re-sizing stuff is just another angle being played by the same old anti-image crew pushing an NFCC rule that doesn't exist. Its fun here, but that kind of stuff is annoying.
The good weather is returning to this part of Canada (although we probably have a wee bit more winter ahead of us yet) and its a real exciting Bundesliga contest this year, so life is good. Keep well. Wiggy! (talk) 00:51, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I thought FN might have upset you a bit, thats why I said it. I was wondering too, what had become of him for a while when all was quiet. There is quite a bit of room for speculation as to where he spent his time, considerng his rather aggresive personality here on wikipedia. I have to say, I personally try to stay out of this arguments as much as I can, I don't enjoy confrontation all that much, especially here, where our work should be pleasure, not grieve.
Regarding the Bundesliga, it is exciting. Personally, being Bavarian, I support Bayern but the possibility of the title going to the German capital for the first time in almost 80 years holds a special appeal. It would be good for German and European football if an outsider can win one of the big leagues.
I start that list on the club logos and post it here for you, see how you go. EA210269 (talk) 01:19, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Logo table[edit]

I've searched a couple of German state categories and this is what I came up with:

Club
SG Bad Breisig
SV Mettlach
SG Betzdorf
SC Idar-Oberstein +1.FC
FVgg. Kastel 06
TuS Mechtersheim
SV Alemannia Waldalgesheim
VSK Osterholz-Scharmbeck
LSV Pütnitz
Bergisch Gladbach 09
Sportfreunde Köllerbach
Club
Union Böckingen
VfL Neckarau
Dresdner SC
TGM SV Jügesheim
VfB 1900 Offenbach
SV Wiesbaden
Heider FC
Greifswalder SV
Eintracht Duisburg 1848
VfL Köln 99
SV St. Ingbert 1945
Club
Heider SV
TuS Hoisdorf
BFC Meteor 06
Norden-Nordwest Berlin
SpVgg Potsdam
HSV Barmbek-Uhlenhorst
VfL Oldenburg
FSV Bentwisch
SC Wiedenbrück 2000
Sportbrüder Leipzig
Mittweidaer BC
FV Gera Süd

I will continue searching but it may become a rather large task, looking at it now! EA210269 (talk) 01:40, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Look here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nologo.png Wiggy! (talk) 11:54, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I did, after I finished the list! Don't rub it in! But, to make the effort worth while, there is a few not on the nologo list. I havn't included defunct or womens clubs. Long enough as it is! Enjoy! EA210269 (talk) 12:12, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FVgg. Kastel 06[edit]

Cheers the clear up on this page - better than my efforts! Dribblingscribe (talk) 13:35, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the other help too - genius that you are!Dribblingscribe (talk) 07:03, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Football clubs from former German territories[edit]

Hey Wiggy, I just created Category:Football clubs from former German territories since a number of clubs that were in the Category:Defunct football clubs from former German territories and Category:Defunct German football clubs didn't really fit that tag, especially clubs from Alsace. If you can think of any others that you have created the article for and would qualify, can you please add them? Thanks, EA210269 (talk) 11:35, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. Will do. Thanks for the note. Wiggy! (talk) 11:46, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TSV Amicitia Viernheim[edit]

Thanks, the logo looks much better now. You wouldn't have a logo for the two predessesor clubs by any chance? EA210269 (talk) 23:45, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thx. And thanks for doing all the addons to the articles I add. Good stuff.
Yes, I've got a logo for SpVgg that I will render maybe this weekend sometime. Not for TSV though. Although the logo on the handball page might be it http://www.handballinviernheim.de/.Wiggy! (talk) 01:51, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. Here we go http://fussball.rioweb.de/indexhptsv.htm. Wiggy! (talk) 01:58, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note[edit]

You may wish to comment at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Dispute over presentation of User talk:BetacommandBot. –xeno (talk) 23:01, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Wiggy!/naming conventions[edit]

You should make that an article or a list! I think, it would be quite useful EA210269 (talk) 01:11, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that is where I am headed with it. Just trying to flesh it out and see what it turns into. Feel free to make additions or provide comments as you see fit. Wiggy! (talk) 01:14, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, will do! What about an example for each in an extra column, like DFC = DFC Prag? Anyway, Happy Easter from WA, EA210269 (talk) 04:18, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think as the thing moves along I'll end up adding some text that gives examples and some historical context in order to make it readable and provide some proper explanation. I can also maybe see a couple of separate tables, one for East German acronyms because that whole business has its own story and one for commonly used team nicknames (Eintracht, Borussia, Britannia, Hertha, Germania, etc.). In the meantime, if I can figure out how to reduce the size of the display text I'll try and make a column to take up your idea. Wiggy! (talk) 12:49, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fidelitas Karlsruhe[edit]

Hey Wiggy, I'm looking for information on this club, Fidelitas Karlsruhe . Does your clever book say anything? It was one of the 8 founding members of the Southern German football association in 1898 (see here), but its not on your list of Founding Clubs of the DFB. Any idea who it merged into in the Karlsruhe-football-club-merger-mess? I'm only after creating a redirect and, maybe, some information in the related club article. Thanks, EA210269 (talk) 08:33, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, there is no entry for it either as a team that played 4th tier or better or as a predecessor of any of the other Karlsruhe or Mühlburg sides listed in the book. :( Wiggy! (talk) 10:45, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Bad luck. Well, not that importand, may just be another fact lost from that time, like so many. It will just have to stay a red-link for now. Thanks, EA210269 (talk) 10:48, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The German wikipedia says, the club is actually FC Frankonia Karlsruhe. That would make a lot more sense! By the way, I created Category:Luftwaffe football clubs as there is now four articles you have created that qualify. Keep them club articles coming! Have fun, EA210269 (talk) 01:36, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, then maybe congratulations will be in order when you follow up that Frankonia clue.
There's at least a dozen LSV sides yet to come, most of those just stubs though, as they were short-lived sides and only LSV Hamburg amounted to much as I recall, although there was a Stettin club that made several quarterfinal appearances. There's a small number of Wehrmacht and other military clubs as well. Wiggy! (talk) 02:00, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, eventually, we will have a Category:Wehrmacht football clubs, too. EA210269 (talk) 02:26, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Six years that we discussed this club and I have arrived at it once more. I have finally created Southern German Football Association and Fidelitas is still shrouded in mistery. There is still no article on the German Wikipedia on the club either. Have any of the more recent recent editions of Hardy Grüne's book shed more light on this? Do you know? Keep well, Calistemon (talk) 05:47, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Club request: Berliner BC 03[edit]

Hey Wiggy, I'm wondering whether you are taking club requests right now but if you do, could you dig up this one: Berliner BC 03. It won the Brandenburg football championship in 1914 and finished runners-up in 1913 and 1915. It took part in the German Championship in 1914, narrowly going out to Fürth in the semi-finals (4-3 aet). The German wikipedia has a little on it but all traces seem lost after the 1920's. Its the only Berlin champion we don't have an article on as yet, it would be great if you could fill that little gap when you find time. Thanks and all the best, EA210269 (talk) 02:58, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This club here I think? BBC 03 Berlin Just needs a page move to get it to the proper name plus what ever other info we can attach. Wiggy! (talk) 09:59, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't look under Defunct, only under Berlin football clubs! Geeting old, somebody get me my pipe and slippers, please, and, maybe, a set of glasses! I will create a redirect, no need for a move. Thanks for that. EA210269 (talk) 10:03, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:RFC Halley Concordia.png[edit]

Would you please explain this edit? It is important to have that tag so that administrators can delete past revisions which are too large to comply with the NFCC. — neuro(talk) 12:59, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just trying to point the bot operator to a relevant discussion. I'll put the tag back as on looking a liitle closer at the series of edits he's not up to anything outrageous. Thx. Wiggy! (talk) 15:01, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm the bot operator, and I was the one that initiated that discussion. :\ — neuro(talk) 17:38, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah! You're aware then! Sorry, I've just seen so many bots doing the same thing, many of them obviously without a clue. So, out of curiosity, what is your bot using for a rule? Wiggy! (talk) 20:17, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It resizes to the closest it can to 0.25 megapixels and replaces the tag. After resizing it compresses with advcomp and optipng. :) — neuro(talk) 20:42, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

History of 1. FC Magdeburg[edit]

If you have a look at my sandbox, you'll find this. For that template that I basically got from Chester City FC I still need an article on the history of the club - could you have a look at the de:1. FC Magdeburg article and tell me if you think that could be a basis for such an article? Thanks. Madcynic (talk) 10:31, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. That's a pretty neat article. Lots of information and would probably help drive the creation of a bunch of German football related articles to support the wikilinks it contains. I think you've easily got what's needed there. Wiggy! (talk) 10:52, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi, Wiggy! Love your contributions on German Football. I noticed you removed the link on the Wacker article to the vector version of the 1930s logo I produced, and blanked the image's page. I think I understand your rationale, that a vector version may not be eligible for fair use. I believe vector artwork is not automatically disqualified for fair use images, see, e.g., Image:Coca-Cola logo.svg, also in SVG. Does Wacker München use this logo any more? I don't know if it's copyrighted; the Germans seem to rely on trademark protection for most logos (no copyright symbol on the Coca-Cola logo, but you do see "schutzmark" on it). If it has been disused, it may no longer be a trademark. (Notice I did not provide a vector version of the current logo.) Accordingly, I have restored the links and unblanked the vector version's page. I assume you will want to discuss this further...and I will check back here. Cheers! Lovibond (talk) 07:36, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sorry, wasn't entirely sure how to handle this. My problem essentially is the running duels I've found myself embroiled in with various anti-image sorts. Over the course of a couple years the rules have crept towards limiting the use of all kinds of images (Okay. Fair enough.), but there are a couple of folks out there with extreme views in that regard.
I do recall at one time that the advice was to replace pngs and such with svgs, but I've not really seen that take off and it runs head on into the problem of anti-image editors who hold (and attempt to apply) their extreme interpretions of fair use. I don't remember if that advice is even still on the image/logo guideline page. Having to deal with all the related overt silliness sucks some of the joy out of this, but there's still lots of fun to be had.<end of rant>
So, I've pretty much settled on the use of pngs of .1-.12 megapixels as representing a defensible approach that I can consistently apply and that's why (although I appreciate the effort) I undid your edit. Sorry. Kind of a shame, because the vector stuff is better quality and more fun to work with. There are a couple of other minor issues, like catching up on FURS for some logos, but for the most part the German football logos as a category are managed uniformly, which - I hope - will help avoid any drama around them.
Wacker München does not use the logo anymore, its simply part of their historical tradition, and where I can I put up historical logos as a point of interest, to help convey a sense of the changing identity of a club, and to acknowledge those predecessor sides that would otherwise pretty much completely disappear. I too believe that the use of an svg does not automatically disqualify a logo a fair use, but I'm not gonna push that part of the envelope for the reasons I've outlined above.
As to the copyright status of the image, I'm not entirely sure how that works under German law for historical images of this sort. Where an entity no longer exists I would assume the rights would fall to the successor organization and have used that approach. Much of the historical stuff is sourced out of the Vereinslexikon or the Kurmark cigarette card collection. There are also a couple of online user communities whose interest is collecting these logos who also provide material.
So that's my side of the story. I hope it helps and that you can recognize I intended you and your effort no ill will. Just trying to apply a broad, safe approach - but I'm open to suggestion. Thanks for the note.
<aside>Hey wow! I see you're a beer guy! Cool. I hang out at www.beeradvocate.com (as TerryW) where I write complimentary/uncomplimentary things about the various beers I've tried. Now, that's no where near where you're at, but its really been a lot of fun learning how to drink beer. Tons of interesting styles and brews out there and that makes for an enjoyable "hobby". Even got my wife a little involved. Whenever we go somewhere I do a little research as to what's available to the neighbourhood so we can make a side trip and maybe have a tasty beer with lunch/dinner. She's learning. The beer scene here in Ontario, Canada isn't quite as interesting or diverse as it is in the States, but has started to take off in the last 10 years or so as we're seeing changes in Provincial regulation that are allowing the emergence (finally) of craft breweries. Wiggy! (talk) 13:46, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. I do like reading about the lesser-known teams, and appreciate the efforts of those who create and maintain these articles. I see the football articles are edited by a group of people that includes some rather zealous types, and I think I understand a little better your perspective. So perhaps it might not be best to push that part of the envelope, as you put it, right now. Thanks again! Glad the craft beer scene is improving in Ontario, btw. Cheers! Lovibond (talk) 21:38, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Formal Mediation for Sports Logos[edit]

As a contributor to Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/RFC_on_use_of_sports_team_logos, you have been included in a request for formal mediation regarding the subject at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Use of Sports Logos. With your input and agreement to work through mediation, it is hoped we can achieve a lasting solution. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Wiggy!. You have new messages at Rettetast's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Rettetast (talk) 17:38, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Barnstar[edit]

Hi Wiggy!

Thanks a lot for the Barnstar, my first actually. (Yay!) Indeed I was not even aware that the Project has a Barnstar. Good thing is, now that I know, I can award one myself.

Thanks again, OdinFK (talk) 15:28, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Had a spare moment, so made a barnstar for the project. Hot off the press, so to speak. Enjoy! Wiggy! (talk) 16:04, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks from me too. :-) Madcynic (talk) 17:47, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My first Barnstar too, Thanks! Hubschrauber729 (talk) 18:11, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All you guys earned an honest pat on the back. Wiggy! (talk) 18:16, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Wiggy! Nice work, the Barnstar, looks real good! EA210269 (talk) 21:52, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also a thank you from my side! -Lemmy- (talk) 17:21, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:SSV Ulm 1846.png)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:SSV Ulm 1846.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:29, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New logo for BFC Dynamo[edit]

The club have decided to create a new (ugly) logo to be used from the next season onwards, as they have sold off the rights to use their current logo a few years ago and apparently are unwilling to pay licence fees. If you could be so kind as to incorporate that in due time... Here it is. Madcynic (talk) 13:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Too bad they couldn't work it out to hang onto the old. Thanks for the news. I'll add it in a bit. Wiggy! (talk) 14:52, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ST ○ provided a clean logo on the talk page. Cool. Wiggy! (talk) 15:20, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Altenkirchener SG[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Altenkirchener SG, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

"[S]ingle season appearances in third division" soccer - Is this sufficient to be notable?

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Pgallert (talk) 12:44, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the tag, under Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Notability it is noteable. EA210269 (talk) 13:44, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image sizes[edit]

Generally, I make sure that at least one dimension is 300-400px in size. Sometimes it needs to be smaller depending on the type of image (such as a logo, poster, or picture of a person). I look at each image differently since sometimes small text is included in an image which is part of the reason the image is being used. If I question whether the size is sufficient or not, I visit the article and see what impact the size makes. For many of the images being reduced, they're located in infoboxes are already half the size anyway. At WP:FILM we developed our guidelines to state that one of the image's dimensions should be 300px or smaller. This usually covers DVD covers, movie posters, and screenshots. For the most part, this size allows for viewing most of the details of the image (and readers can visit the source link to see a larger size if necessary). Let me know if this doesn't answer your question. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:04, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It helps. However you might want to have a read at the link I posted and the flow of the discussion there which included parameters based on megapixels (1-1.2) rather than a single 300px dimension. Its a more flexible approach that works for images that arent quite square. I have no trouble with most of what you have done but (fair warning given) will probably go back and resize some of the stuff that includes multiple images, typically where there are historical logos displayed. They don't have to be huge, but they don't need to be quite so small either. Wiggy! (talk) 03:16, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes there are definitely some that could be a little larger, and as long as you feel it's reasonable, then it likely won't be a problem. Many images have to be taken with a grain of salt, but for the vast majority of the 700 or so images I looked at today, most were consistent in the sizes. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:53, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, tanks for the reply. Happy editing to you, too. Wiggy! (talk) 11:30, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RB Leipzig[edit]

Good to see you back! Have you noted this article, RB Leipzig? Sounds interessting. Needs some more work, too. Hope you are having a great summer, EA210269 (talk) 03:31, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Busy time of year for me. I've been itching to get back at it here. Thanks for the pointer to the new club, it is interesting to see the Red Bull folks at it again. It'll make a good story given their stated objective.
Summer is late arriving here to my part of Canada! On May 31 I had to wear a touque all day while working outside and we had several episodes of ice pellets falling in the afternoon. The next day was shirtsleeve weather. Finally nice out now and we're up for some proper summer weather. Thanks for the note. Wiggy! (talk) 11:30, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You might not believe it, but its actually freezing here! 4 degrees C this morning at 6 am when I got to work.
I wonder, how far RB Leipzig will make it. East German football could use a competitive club, especially now that no club from there plays in the Bundesliga any more. I just wonder how well accepted the club will be in Leipzig, the supporters there are pretty fanatic about Lok and FC Sachsen, not much room for another club. But the possibility exists that this might be the begining of an article of a future Bundesliga club, given time. Worth watching, I think. EA210269 (talk) 00:04, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
East German football might need a competitive club, but not from this glass tube idiocy that is RBL. As you already pointed out, the city of Leipzig has a rich history in terms of football, and this is just not...right. Red Bull and their American style of producing events (no offense meant) instead of sports can go f themselves, if it was up to me. Unfortunately, it is not up to me and therefore you can expect RBL in Bundesliga 2 by 2014, unless something very very bad (from RBL pov) happens. Madcynic (talk) 00:53, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well this'll make it all double fun to watch then. Things don't always go as planned when you try to buy your way to the top and maybe they'll crash and burn. I'd tend to agree that the marketing hype around this type of approach sours stuff a bit - doesn't make the whole thing seem genuine somehow. But on the other hand maybe it'll set a fire under some of the eastern clubs. Its pretty embarassing the way things are right now. Time now to sit back and watch it all unfold ... Wiggy! (talk) 03:29, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If it does set a fire, I'm pretty sure a number of clubs will get burnt, if they try to compete with the cash... Madcynic (talk) 15:31, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added a Criticism section to the article but new club seems to be well received within the town, from what I can see. EA210269 (talk) 01:14, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Request for mediation not accepted[edit]

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Use of Sports Logos.
For the Mediation Committee, Ryan Postlethwaite 02:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Help with football squad template[edit]

I've got a problem with the SC Verl article, more specifically the squad template in use. How can I add two flags for players with dual nationality? I've got no idea where / whom to ask, so I "defaulted" to you, oh guru of soccer pages! :-) -- 145.228.61.4 (talk) 09:41, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Off the top of my head, I'm not sure you can. There has been repeated discussion over at the football project page about the use of flags and I have some sort of recollection that the use of two flags is frowned upon. I'll see if I can find a reference in the discussion archive - or you might ask the question there. Wiggy! (talk) 11:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, a quick search of the discussion archive using the terms nationality and flag provides several references. WikiProject_Football/Archive_27#Country_flags_for_players_of_dual_nationality looks to be relevant and includes related manual of style info. Hope that helps steer you in the right direction. Wiggy! (talk) 11:43, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, yes. Since I cannot find verification that Said was born in Lebanon at all, I'll leave the German flag in place. -- DevSolar (talk) 15:20, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

German Reich[edit]

Wiggy, how did you know I needed that? THANKS. I'll see if it will pass muster with the powers who are. :) --Auntieruth55 (talk) 13:28, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I keep half an eye on Project Germany stuff (and am concerned also about image bashers). Your original is a great map in comparison to the others and just needs/needed a few tweaks. My pleasure to help. Wiggy! (talk) 16:28, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BSK Gablonz[edit]

Hello Wiggy, just one of my usual requests. Does your book have anything on the above club? I'm looking for some information to add to the BSK Olympia Neugablonz article. You propably won't have anything on the later as it hasn't played above 4th tier but BSK Gablonz has had some local success before the war. Thanks for any information you can dig up, EA210269 (talk) 14:57, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The only Gablonz side identified in the Vereinslexikon is NSTG Gablonz. It was established in 1939 out of the merger of several local sides including BSK Gablonz (+SV Fortuna Gablonz, Deutscher SK Gablonz). NSTG played in the Gauliga Sudeten as shown below and was lost in 1945. Home field was Schuetzenhaus (cap. 6,500 in 1941). Uniform was a black and white jersey, black shorts.
No pre-war information is available in the book. Probably part of Czech competition?
1939-40 Gauliga Sudeten/Staffel 2, 1st, lost the division final 1:2 to NSTG Graslitz 6-1-1
1940-41 Gauliga Sudeten/Staffel 2, withdrew voluntarily end of March 1941, 1-0-3
1941-42 Gauliga Sudeten-Mitte, 5th, 2-1-7
1942-43 Gauliga Sudeten-Mitte, 5th, 0-0-8
1943-44 Gauliga Sudeten, 6th, 0-0-6
1944-45 no information
There you go. Wiggy! (talk) 19:55, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. Did find this: www.nemeckyfotbal.cz/kniha/75.pdf and this odznaky.wz.cz/katalog/nemecke/g/gablonz.htm (very cool). Wiggy! (talk) 20:07, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hey. Double bonus. If you use that first link and change the 75 to some other number you'll see another page of what I think is a book on the history of ethnic German football clubs in the Deutscher Fussball Verband (DFV) in pre-war Czechoslovakia (which costs $$$$ on eBay UK).
Could be tonight's project. Wiggy! (talk) 20:34, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the site index showing what pages of the Czech book are available. www.nemeckyfotbal.cz/obsah.html. I wasn't sure about this book, but now having a proper look at it I might have to break down and buy it. Have fun. Wiggy! (talk) 20:55, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Wiggy. Yeah, I noticed the book, too and added a link to it in the club article. If only I could read Czech. My aunt's Czech but she lives in Germany, so not much help there! But that book is quite interessting, it seems to talk about a German Cup competition in Czechoslovakia. Well, Nemecky is definetly the Czech word for German. It will take a bit of digging through. EA210269 (talk) 00:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What a wealth of information! Shame not all pages seem to be there. The club list starting from page 154 doesn't include G, must be on one of the pages that aren't online. EA210269 (talk) 00:40, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SC Verl, pt. 2[edit]

I see talk here about books on German wartime and pre-war soccer, but I didn't really follow who owns which books, what's in there, and how much bother it would be to look something up. So just ignore me if it's too much bother: I got the German article on SC Verl pretty well fleshed-out, with coaches going back to 1986, and end-of-season scores back to 1970 (when the club moved up to tier IV). Any chance you might have more? I'd take *any* information on the club, actually; as it seems, I'm somewhat like the "official inofficial internet historian" for the club. ;-) -- DevSolar (talk) 13:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if the impression is that its a bother to look something up. Its actually a fun to build articles like this with other editors. It can just be tough to find stuff on lesser clubs. For the record, I own copies of Vereinslexikon, which is a general encyclopedia of all German clubs playing 4th tier or above football, and Vom Kronprinz zur Bundesliga, which is a record of national/regional championship play. I have a couple other lesser books. After that sites like f-archiv.de and fussballdaten.de are very useful.
I'll update the article from whatever info I can get from the Vereinslexikon. After that I would suggest grazing through f-archiv.de to put together a seasonal table of results for the team. I'll post what I have to the team talk page or as hidden text in the article itself. I'll also let you know if I come across anything else. Good luck with your project! Wiggy! (talk) 18:05, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
f-archiv.de has been sucked dry a long time ago, but they didn't have results of 5th tier or below (pre-1970). Thanks for looking it up! -- DevSolar (talk) 06:37, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

need help with another image[edit]

Hi, I could use some help with another image. You did some work on a 19th century German map, and now I'm stymied with an old Latin one. Do you have time to help me?  :) Auntieruth55 (talk) 01:02, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Point me at it and say what you need to do and we'll go from there. Wiggy! (talk) 01:03, 14 July 2009 (UTC)\[reply]
File:Blaeu 1645 - Coloniensis Archiepiscopatus.jpg I need to change "some" of the text to English (I've done some of it, not happy with what I've done). Show some battles. Mark more clearly the boundaries of the old electorate of Cologne, which did not include the city of cologne, btw. And some other things. Auntieruth55 (talk) 01:23, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
oh, and if you can lay your hands on a better map, to illustrate the Cologne war (Truchsischer Krieg), then I'll take a look. Auntieruth55 (talk) 01:24, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So I gather that you are proposing a new map based on the image shown? HAve you got other material that shows the battles, etc. that you're referencing? Wiggy! (talk) 02:57, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
unfortunately, no. I can only tell you the locations and the year. They were mostly sieges. No troop movements. That map is also "wonky" in terms of north south..." we are used to seeing maps with north "up" and in this case north is in the middle right to lower right margin. Auntieruth55 (talk) 14:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, tell you what. Send along the locations and year info along with any other detail you think is important to the map and I'll start chipping away at it and see what comes up. With a base map derived from the original its not a big deal to reorient the thing. Sounds like an interesting project. Wiggy! (talk) 16:28, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
is there any way I can email you something -- I don't want to post the image I've worked on in case someone thinks its actually "done" and tries to use if for something else. ...? here's my email. I'll take it down when you send me a note. Or you can delete it. Auntieruth55 (talk) 17:33, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yup. I've enabled the user email over in the left hand menu. Wiggy! (talk) 01:26, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Eintracht Wetzlar.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Eintracht Wetzlar.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 03:50, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

support for FA on German Unification[edit]

Last month German Unification was not promoted to FA because, apparently, not enough people had taken the time to read and comment. If I nominate it again, will you read it (it's lengthy) and comment? Auntieruth55 (talk) 16:46, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Karl_sack.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Karl_sack.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Rettetast (talk) 17:32, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Logo for Vorwärts Dessau[edit]

I just created the Vorwärts Dessau site, but I'm somewhat inexperienced in this whole logo bullsiness, so maybe you can help with supplying the current logo of the club? The German wiki has it, but only as a svg which are not desirable here, as far as I understand it. Thanks in advance. (And thanks for the Delegierung tidbit, I shall go and seek a source some time in the future) Madcynic (talk) 19:25, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There you go. I think I may have a DDR era logo for SG as well and can add that once I find/clean it up. Wiggy! (talk) 21:15, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That would be great, thanks. And another red link less in User:Madcynic/Sandbox/1. FC Magdeburg names and figures. Dynamo Schwerin and ASG Vorwärts Neubrandenburg next. Madcynic (talk) 14:07, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent. Nice to see stuff for the former eastern clubs coming together. Wiggy! (talk) 20:52, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion[edit]

Please do not re-add a speedy deletion template after another user has removed it, as you did on File:SVO Germaringen.jpg. Speedy deletion is not the only method of seeking deletion of pages from Wikipedia, and in many cases another deletion process is more appropriate. In this particular case, the {{db-f1}} criterion is very specific, and it only applies where the redundant file is "in the same file format" as the nominated file, among other things. Your nomination simply does not meet the criteria, and repeating it will not change the situation. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 19:38, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well then, as someone who is clearly experienced in the area, how about applying or suggesting the correct template to use as the image is clearly redundant as it is no longer in use as part of any article? Thanks. Wiggy! (talk) 19:56, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Alas, your assumption is wrong. I sometimes go through the F1 deletion requests because the criterion is so simple and specific that it doesn't take a lot of specialized knowledge to apply, but I avoid pretty much all of the other F-series requests and let other admins deal with them. So I'm not sure what the correct process is for this file, but if all else fails, there is always WP:FFD. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 18:03, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

German football categories[edit]

OH, sorry. I will not delete or edit the football cats anymore, although I think it's overcat and not intended. Cheers. Sebastian scha. (talk) 12:49, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't mean to mess up your effert, but I'm trying to keep all the German clubs accessible from a single place. Ease of maintenance and simple access for the uninitiated. The category approach is a lot easier than trying to maintain a separate list page.
I had a look at WP:Categories because I had a similar concern about over categorization, but from the examples and discussion there this approach looks to be okay.
Happy editing! Keep well. Wiggy! (talk) 17:33, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FC Südstadt Karlsruhe[edit]

Hello Wiggy,

please look to the discussion-side of FC Südstadt Karlsruhe.

Best wishes, Wolfgang Müller-Lee, Dortmund, Germany —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.132.19.183 (talk) 09:27, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]


File copyright problem with File:Ahlener SV.png[edit]

File Copyright problem
File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Ahlener SV.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Skier Dude (talk) 02:37, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]


File copyright problem with File:SSV Westfalia Ahlen.png[edit]

File Copyright problem
File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:SSV Westfalia Ahlen.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Skier Dude (talk) 02:39, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:FC Wacker Meunchen.png[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:FC Wacker Meunchen.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. ZooFari 02:15, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar[edit]

Football (soccer) barnstar
For expanding Königsberger STV into a referenced stub. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 04:03, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thx! Wiggy! (talk) 15:57, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:FC Penzberg.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:FC Penzberg.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 03:54, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Vfl Wolfsburg.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Vfl Wolfsburg.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 05:25, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Fortunadusseldorf.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Fortunadusseldorf.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:32, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Duisburgzebra.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Duisburgzebra.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:32, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Geibeltbad Pirna[edit]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Geibeltbad Pirna. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geibeltbad Pirna. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:06, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs[edit]

Hello Wiggy!! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 987 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

  1. Willi Lippens - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 00:28, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Toronto_puck.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Toronto_puck.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Mosmof (talk) 17:45, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Steinbach-Hallenberg[edit]

It couldn't be true that there is not 1 single person living in Steinbach-Hallenberg. Kingjeff (talk) 17:30, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the birthday wishes[edit]

Thanks for the message, old boy. I'm well, don't worry. I left wikipedia for a while, got tired of 18 year old kids that watch premier league football and think they are the cradle of football knowledge make policy here by weight of numbers. I returned a little while later under a different user name and only edited Western Australian mining articles. Recently, I've done a bit on German rugby union, just for the ease and fun of writing sports articles. All subjects not to many people care or know anything about and you virtually never meet unpleasant people at, unlike on football articles. Can't see myself returning to football, to painful, I'm scheduled to become a father this Thursday, that will take up heaps of my time. Anyway, great to hear from you, Calistemon (talk) 07:43, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, by the way, happy birthday, too (just a little late)! Calistemon (talk) 09:18, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. So. How is your new son/daughter and mom? I hope everything went well! Wiggy! (talk) 15:15, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Mom and daughter are well, and Dad is suffering from a slight lack of sleep. Calistemon (talk) 06:18, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:DJK Germnaia Gladbecko.png listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:DJK Germnaia Gladbecko.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:13, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Guess who is back![edit]

Seen the SV Dynamo edits? I think, looking at the style, its pretty clear who User:Saruha is. I really can't be asked to deal with him nowadays, but if you need a hand, let me know, always happy to back you up. Calistemon (talk) 00:57, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I noticed. I had a little chuckle and then went and cleaned up a couple of the things he'd attached to some of the football articles. Certainly a single-minded fellow. Thanks for the offer. I do miss seeing your contribs on the football side as I constantly find myself referring back to the big collection of league articles you assembled. Hope to see you back at it some day.
We're enjoying delightfully pleasant (but unseasonable) weather here in this part of Canada, which is good for one's state of mind. How's the baby doing? Wiggy! (talk) 01:07, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Baby is fine, just needs to gain more wait, she is being fed every three hours now! She keeps us pretty busy right now, time on Wikipedia is limited but a good distraction from a busy day. Not sure about the football bit, there is a lot left to do on the pre-war leagues but my devotion is lacking right now. As old Kay goes, his current edits seem mostly harmless and his English seems improved, too, nothing much to worry about. Enjoy the beautiful spring while we're having quite a nice autumn this year. Calistemon (talk) 02:26, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

sv st. ingbert 1945[edit]

thats funny, you as a canadian put up an article about a club in my german home town in the english wiki - while there isn't any article about it in the german wiki. weird but cool! keep it up mate (sry, have no account on english wiki, so i'm just Mr. IP) 87.236.105.24 (talk) 09:39, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice and the encouragement! I'll stay hard at it. Everyone needs a hobby. Wiggy! (talk) 22:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Germania Frankfurt.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Germania Frankfurt.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:32, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Germania Frankfurt.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Germania Frankfurt.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:32, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer[edit]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 01:07, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1. FC Kaiserslautern Logo (en.wikipedia.org)[edit]

Not sure why you've changed the logo, it's wrong and in a poor quality. We need a logo on Commons, so it can be used international, that's the reason why I've moved the right one from the German Wikipedia. Redhair23 (talk) 10:46, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The quality is fine. Its not strictly necessary to have an svg. The placement of logos on Commons is not acceptable as the logo is the property of the club, so whatever image is used it needs to happen under a fair use license - the image cannot legitimately be placed on Commons. In addition category and other information was lost when the change was made. I see now that the club is using a historical logo, so yes, that's what should be there now, but not as a commons file. Wiggy! (talk) 11:02, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, the club changed his logo for the new season, for a more retro version (cf. here), I'm not sure it is only to be used on the shirts as the article currently suggests. Madcynic (talk) 11:31, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, I don't know which one is the official logo at the moment, but they will use the traditional logo on their shirts for at least one year, that's for sure, as seen on the official website [18]. We are on the safe side to use the "modern" logo because it cannot be the wrong one before the new season started. I'm not sure about differences regarding licenses on Wikipedia and Commons but main goal has to be the same and the right logo (in an acceptable quality) for every Wikipedia page about the 1. FC Kaiserslautern and not a different one for each language. Commons is the only possible way to realize it and SVG is the recommended format. Until there is an official statement about the logo question, the logo shouldn't be changed, it's still used on www.bundesliga.de and even on www.fck.de on some sections. Even if the club confirms the change of the official logo, the modern logo must not be deleted but added to the other historical logos instead. Redhair23 (talk) 19:44, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Tennis Borussia Berlin.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Tennis Borussia Berlin.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:21, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the above bot message, this logo was replaced by File:Tennis Borussia Berlin.jpg. See here for more information. Jared Preston (talk) 16:11, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:TSV Uetersen.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TSV Uetersen.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:43, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SC Viktoria Griesheim.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SC Viktoria Griesheim.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:42, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Kickers Offenbach.png[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Kickers Offenbach.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:20, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User created montages[edit]

Wiggy, I came across File:Vorwarts be ff.png, File:Dynamo Dresden historical.png and File:Greuther Feurth 0.png, which I believe are montages created by you of copyrighted logos. The sources you indicated on the image description pages do not point to a copyright holder created montage. As such, we need a non-free rationale for each logo for each use. Thus, in the first case for example we'd need three rationales for every single use of the image. We do not encourage user created montages, as such montages often fail WP:NFCC #8. I've tagged these images as missing rationales and having disputed fair use claim, making them subject to deletion. If you have questions, ask. Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 15:28, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Thank you. Wiggy! (talk) 17:25, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please, stop vandalism[edit]

1. FC Katowice is also polish club, not only German. LUCPOL (talk) 23:26, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I get that. See my note on the club article talk page. I'm not saying its not Polish. Store your POV please. Or start a separate article on the new club. Wiggy! (talk) 23:29, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
new club? This is not "new", this is reactivation. Two: 1. FC Katowice is also polish club, not only German, even if not counting now. See 1920's and 1930's. Three: "Store your POV please. " - where? Where is my Silesian POV. Where? Citation please. I do not write here POV. I deletes your German POV. I introduced a neutral intro (not polish, not German, not Silesian). LUCPOL (talk) 23:42, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've been contacted by LUCPOL on my talkpage; please see my comments there. I'm inclined to believe that a separate article is a good idea, assuming the Polish club meets the notability standard - Euro-football organization isn't my field. Acroterion (talk) 15:54, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SCB Viktoria Koln.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SCB Viktoria Koln.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 06:58, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrolled[edit]

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

  • This permission does not give you any special status or authority
  • Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
  • You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
  • If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 04:28, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BBC Südost Berlin[edit]

Just had a look and noticed you have been very busy creating Berlin football club articles, there is almost a hundred of them now! Just wondering, in regards to BBC Südost Berlin, should it not rather be BBC Südost? After all, written out full, the articles name would currently read Berliner Ballspiel-Club Südost Berlin. Calistemon (talk) 23:24, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I've been absent from article making until getting back at it just recently. I just grabbed my copy of the Vereinslexikon and picked up where I'd left off in the B's and have been working through the Berlin-based club. I've simply been using club names as they appear in the book and its fairly common there to see BBC ??? Berlin, BFC ??? Berlin, etc. But I'm not too fussed on how the names appear, I'm just happy to get the bones of the article in place so that they can be built on, and I'm expect that will get sorted out as things move along.
Greetings to you and your wife and daughter. You're safely away from the flooding on the west coast I gather. Keep well. Wiggy! (talk) 13:36, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed a few cases of BSC's and BFC's that also have Berlin in their name. I've also created a few redirects to your articles that eliminated redlinks in league articles.
Yes, we are safely away from the flooding. We will have a cyclone (in Perth!!!) pass south of us this afternoon, apparently the first since 1989, but otherwise things are fine. Calistemon (talk) 22:58, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1. CfR Pforzheim[edit]

Being away from the project for so long, I missed this one completly: the 1. FC Pforzheim and the VfR Pforzheim have merged to form the 1. CfR Pforzheim in last April. Calistemon (talk) 13:01, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:FC Erzgebirge Aue.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:FC Erzgebirge Aue.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:30, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Grün-Weiß Ingolstadt[edit]

Just updating the Bavarian club articles and came upon your article, Grün-Weiß Ingolstadt. Its really not overly notable and has, to my knowledge never achieved anything in Bavarian football. Have you got any special reason for creating it, Wiggy? If not, do you mind me nominating it for deletion? Its only a stub and not really worth updating and keeping in my view. But if you want to hang on to it, I won't nominate it. Cheers, Calistemon (talk) 12:27, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hmm. I have no idea why I even started the thing or where I heard of it from. It should probably go. Thanks. Wiggy! (talk) 21:27, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oop. Now I get it. GW was one of the clubs listed and linked at the Ingolstadt page. I came across the link when I was working on articles for the other clubs listed and did the bare minimum for GW rather than leave it as a red-link. That's my story and I'm sticking to it! Wiggy! (talk) 21:31, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
At least you remembered. There is a few articles I've created that I wouldn't bother about nowadays. Stay or go, what do you say? The only two articles linking there are Ingolstadt and Bajram Nebihi, an football player of questionable notability himself. Calistemon (talk) 23:04, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep up the good work[edit]

A Barnstar!
Football (soccer) barnstar
For your continued good work on football articles. Keep up the good work! Bryan Anderson (talk) 02:47, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SG Volkspolizei Dresden.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SG Volkspolizei Dresden.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 03:56, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:VFL Osnabrueck.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:VFL Osnabrueck.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:13, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Home alone[edit]

Wife and daughter are away on holidays in Germany, its a rare opportunity to do some work on Wikipedia. I should acctually be studying some course for work but I keep on procrastinating on, editing here instead. No doubt, it will bite me in the ass very soon. Hope you are keeping well and enjoying the summer, Calistemon (talk) 01:30, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:FC Kaiserslautern.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:FC Kaiserslautern.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:00, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Alemannia Aachen.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Alemannia Aachen.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:04, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:KSV Baunatal.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:KSV Baunatal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:40, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Thriller.png and File:Legalthriller.png[edit]

At Commons there's a discussion about deleting these images you uploaded to en.wikipedia that have also been uploaded to commons.wikimedia

Please notice that a commons.wikimedia deletion, due to copyright, will lead also to a en.wikipedia deletion. ZipoBibrok5x10^8 (talk) 19:03, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Thriller.png[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Thriller.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.   ■ MMXX  talk  20:55, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Legalthriller.png[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Legalthriller.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:43, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great to see you active again![edit]

Great to see you active again and tackeling the seemingly uncountable redlinks of German football club articles once more. Calistemon (talk) 00:36, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to be back at it. The high season is winding down, so I'm headed towards having some time on my hands (which I always enjoy). Having that list of redlinks is a handy way to get focused. Sorry you missed out on the Vereinslexikon. It was an awesome deal. I was surprised they went so fast. Wiggy! (talk) 23:35, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I thought, this might be the case. I guess, it adds something positive to winter. Its going to be somewhat opposite down here now. What time I have on here I'm spending on updating the Bavarian and B-W club articles, there are a bit out of date. By the way, I have nominated FV 09 Weinheim for DYK, its under Template:Did you know nominations/FV 09 Weinheim. The fact about the club defeating FC Bayern Munich in 1990 is historically quite significant, for both clubs and the DFB-Pokal. Calistemon (talk) 03:23, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for FV 09 Weinheim[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 12:22, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Award Presented to Wiggy![edit]

The Cheerful Wikipedian
This award is happily presented to Wiggy for being a cheerful Wikipedian, making it a happier place to visit, read articles, and edit. You should be proud! Pinkstrawberry02™ talk 01:43, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note to user receiving this message: Please respond on Pinkstrawberry02's talk page. If for some reason you cannot, then please leave a {{talkback}} on their talk page and reply on your own. Thank you for your understanding in this manner.

New Page Patrol survey[edit]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Wiggy!! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only. 
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:52, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

FT Starnberg 09[edit]

Hi Wiggy, I'm in search for some information for the FT Starnberg 09 article. I can't find any logos for FC Starnberg and SpVgg Starnberg and no information on the later either. Does your book have anything? Thanks, Calistemon (talk) 05:23, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is an entry for FC Starnberg. It was established in 1912 as SpVgg 1912 Starnberg which merged with the football department of Freien Turnerschaft Starnberg on 14 March 1992 to become FC Starnberg.
SpVgg played a single season in the AOL Bayern in 1989-90. FC played there in 1992-94 and then in the OL Bayern from 1994-01. Their best placing came as a third place result in 1995 and they were sent down on 2001 after finishing 19th.
There are a couple of logos, one for FC, the other for SPVgg and I'll try to upload them in a week or so. Wiggy! (talk) 11:30, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I'm still contemplating an independent article on the SpVgg as it isn't directly related to FT, unlike the FC. I'm curious on the logos, especially of FC. Hope you are not to busy and get a bit of editing time! Calistemon (talk) 11:45, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No trouble, although I wasn't able to add much beyond what you already had, I'm afraid. Things are finally winding down some for me (I think) so before long I'll be able to puddle around here some. There is some additional info in the updated version of the Vereinslexikon and I'll send that along when I have the opportunity. Maybe this weekend sometime. Wiggy! (talk) 15:16, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

German club season articles[edit]

Could you please help with 1986–87 1. FC Nuremberg season and 1991–92 SV Werder Bremen season? Please and thanks. Kingjeff (talk) 20:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited TSV Hirschaid, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Swimming and Athletics (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:07, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited FC Eintracht Norderstedt 03, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 2. Bundesliga (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:14, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All-Time DDR-Oberliga Table[edit]

Hey. I saw you adding some refs to this article after I PRODed it, so you might be interested in having an opinion on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/All-Time DDR-Oberliga Table. Best, Jenks24 (talk) 13:36, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 11[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Germania Bieber, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Offenbach and Bieber (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:26, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 19[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited SV Türkspor Bremen-Nord, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blumenthal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:07, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Hannoverscher FC 1896.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hannoverscher FC 1896.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 03:35, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Wismut Aue.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Wismut Aue.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Malpass93! (what I've been up to/drop me a ___) 01:27, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:BC Augsburg.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BC Augsburg.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Malpass93! (what I've been up to/drop me a ___) 01:27, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2012–13 SK Rapid Wien season[edit]

I've started the 2012–13 SK Rapid Wien season article. Feel free to join in. Kingjeff (talk) 17:28, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Club season articles[edit]

I have a ton of club season articles that need to be taken care of. I could use your help. Ony my user page is where you can find a lot of club season articles that you may want to edit. I noticed that you have edited SC Preußen Münster the most and you might be interested in helping with 2012–13 SC Preußen Münster season. Kingjeff (talk) 02:04, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Hannoverscher FC 1896.png)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Hannoverscher FC 1896.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:04, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Dynamo Dresden.png)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Dynamo Dresden.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:00, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A merger in Heilbronn[edit]

Hi Wiggy, as always you are pretty busy in summer but this may interest you: Union Böckingen and FC Heilbronn (both articles created by you) have merged recently to form a new club, the FC Union Heilbronn. Calistemon (talk) 03:49, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Founding Clubs of the DFB[edit]

That article has no reason to exist. Its content is completely unsourced, and even if it was sourced, it would do much better as a section of German Football Association. The German Football Association article is hardly long at the minute, so if you must, add the list of founding clubs there, but there is no reason for a separate article. – PeeJay 11:47, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How be you leave it long enough for me to bash it into shape. I will source it, etc. Placing the list into the middle of the DFB article would be unwieldy. At a minimum, you might want to discuss it with other folks before the article is nuked outright. Wiggy! (talk) 13:20, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Berlin Ankaraspor1.png)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Berlin Ankaraspor1.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:05, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sportfreunde 05 Saarbrücken[edit]

I know you are busy with ral live but when you got time could you have a quick look at your clever book and check Sportfreunde 05 Saarbrücken's early history. The German Wikipedia is confusing in regards to the name and name changes, I'm not sure when it officially started to be called Sportfreunde 05 Saarbrücken. I had the book on my Christmas wish list last year but I got undies instead! Keep well, Calistemon (talk) 03:39, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay in replying.
The club was established as the football department of TV 1876 Burbach in January 1905. It became independent of the gymnasts as Sportfreunde 05 Saarbrücken on 1 January 1924 in what the book calls a 'clean break' (reinliche Scheudung). On 29 March 1924, they were joined by Ballspieleclub Burbach which had been formed out the 1913 union of FC Bavaria Burbach (the football department of Burbacher Hütten-Vereins created in 1912) and FC Viktoria 07 Burbach. In 1938, all of the Burbacher sides were merged to form SG Saarbrücken, which was also referred to as TSG Burbach. The club was lost after the war and reformed later in 1945 as TuS Burbach. Sometime in 1946 (no specific date given) the club became Sportfreunde Burbach before readopting their historical identity as Sportfreunde 05 Saarbrücken sometime in 1947 (again, no specific date given). Hope that covers it.
Harsh choice between walking around without underwear and such a useful reference. Better luck this Christmas! Wiggy! (talk) 14:45, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Given that I now reside in a place that gets sub-zero temperatures (occasionally), underwear is a must and the book has to wait a little while longer. Thanks for the info, added it to the article. Keep well, Calistemon (talk) 12:40, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:1 FC Union Berlin.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:1 FC Union Berlin.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Malpass93! (what I've been up to/drop me a ___) 17:19, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PNGs replaced by SVGs[edit]

Today I replaced three PNGs you uploaded (File:Bonner SC.png, File:TSV Grossbardorf.png, File:Wormatia Worms.png) with SVGs. As someone who has improved many articles on German football, I'd rather not try to template a regular such as yourself. So here's a more personal message. Thanks so much for your input into the logos over the years, and keep up the good work! Malpass93! (what I've been up to/drop me a ___) 23:03, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I appreciate the courtesy (and your efforts!). Keep well. Wiggy! (talk) 00:15, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
An update: I have now replaced a PNG version of Bahlinger SC's logo with an SVG version. Also, three logos (File:FC St Pauli.png, File:1 FC Heidenheim.png, and File:Heidenheimer SB.png) originally uploaded by yourself that later had new versions uploaded over them, have been replaced by SVGs. Malpass93! (what I've been up to/drop me a ___) 00:15, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Another update for you: this PNG VfR Aalen logo has been replaced by this SVG, and I replaced this VfL Bochum logo with this SVG. Also, this SpVgg Greuther Fürth logo, originally uploaded by yourself but later had a new version uploaded over it, has been replaced by this SVG. Thank you. Malpass93! (what I've been up to/drop me a ___) 12:41, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again. Today, I replaced this SV Babelsberg 03 logo with this SVG version, and this logo of predecessor club BSG Motor Babelsberg was also replaced. Many thanks. Malpass93! (what I've been up to/drop me a ___) 20:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Me again! This time I've replaced File:OFB.png with File:Österreichischer Fußball-Bund logo.svg. Cheers! Malpass93! (what I've been up to/drop me a ___) 15:43, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:O Wilhemshaven.png)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:O Wilhemshaven.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:21, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Historical Borussia Dortmund logos[edit]

Hello. I was wondering if you know if the historical Borussia Dortmund logos on the German Borussia Dortmund Wikipedia article are correct along with the years of usage. Also, do you know of any other historical Borussia Dortmund logos. I want to put them on the English Borussia Dortmund Wikipedia artcle and make sure it is all correct. Danke. Hornymanatee (talk) 09:46, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They look to be fine. Same ones appear in the Vereinslexikon and are referenced at German Wappen (logo) sites like this one; http://www.dfs-wappen.de/uefa/ger/verein_6.html. Wiggy! (talk) 16:07, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wunderbar. Thank you. I just wanted to make sure that it was all correct. I have also noticed that you have done an extensive amount of editing for German football. Keep up the good editing. Hornymanatee (talk) 07:20, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Minerva Berlin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DFB (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:40, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:SuSV Beuthen.png)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:SuSV Beuthen.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:02, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:SpVgg Aidlingen.png)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:SpVgg Aidlingen.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:06, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Royal Bank of Canada, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CBC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:44, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:GermaniaHalberstadt.png)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:GermaniaHalberstadt.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:01, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Grün-Weiß Ingolstadt[edit]

The article Grün-Weiß Ingolstadt has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all constructive 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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Calistemon (talk) 12:34, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:GW Ingolstadt.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:GW Ingolstadt.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:08, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dresden English Football Club[edit]

Looking for more sources for this article, I came upon your userspace draft, so I thought you might like to know the article had been created by someone else and is now at AfD. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:31, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:BSG Motor Babelsberg.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BSG Motor Babelsberg.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:20, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:FV Germania Koenigshuette.png)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:FV Germania Koenigshuette.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 14:19, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Berliner AK 07 old.png)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Berliner AK 07 old.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 13:23, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Dynamo Dresden historical.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Dynamo Dresden historical.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:14, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sci-fi.png listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sci-fi.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly hi! 23:13, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Otonabee Region Conservation Authority, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Ouse River and Selwyn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Viktoria Forst.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Viktoria Forst.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:50, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:RB Leipzig.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:RB Leipzig.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:52, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FC Münchberg[edit]

I know you are not very active on here right now but just a quick request from my side. I can't find any definitive confirmation about the faith of FC Münchberg. The German Wikipedia says it merged with SC Eintracht Münchberg in 2000. Can your clever book confirm this? If you got a spare moment could you look it up for me? Hope all is well, Calistemon (talk) 01:07, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! I think that the German wiki page is probably correct. There are three different versions of that clever book and the only one I have immediate access to (the other two are at home) is the 3rd version, which includes brief historical summaries for most clubs at the expense on lesser known clubs even being mentioned. Once I lay my hands on versions 1 & 2 again I'll look to see what it says there.
If you haven't done so already you might want to look at the history page maintained by ATSV Münchberg-Schlegel http://www.atsv-muenchberg.de/index.php?id=54 which mentions a failed partnership with SC Eintracht in the late 1990s-2000. That suggests that SCE may have been on the hunt for a new partner and lends credence to the notion that they eventually linked up with FC. The timing is certainly right.
Hope you're keeping well and glad to see you're still so active. I just haven't had the time to keep my hand in, although I do visit from time to time to savour things a bit. The end of my work season is coming up, so maybe I'll have to get back in it. Wiggy! (talk) 14:55, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I had a look at the link provided to ATSV. Yes, looks like the club was looking for a partner to merge with, and eventually found one. I've noticed you created a few football articles once more. Good to see you back! Calistemon (talk) 03:05, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I mislaid my book and just found it (!) today. FCM was established 22.8.1910. It merged with SC Eintracht 1975 Muenchberg on 19.2.2000 to form FC Eintracht Muenchberg. Sorry for the delay. Wiggy! (talk) 18:39, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, added the dates to the article. Calistemon (talk) 21:12, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Budissa Bautzen.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Budissa Bautzen.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:07, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Viktoria89Berlin.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Viktoria89Berlin.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:15, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited DJK Abenberg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Athletics. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Corso Strelitz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Strelitz. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Brandenburg SC Sued.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Brandenburg SC Sued.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:07, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:FK Pirmasens.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:FK Pirmasens.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:26, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Heider SV.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Heider SV.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:37, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:RSV Gottingen 05.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:RSV Gottingen 05.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:21, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SSV Markranstaedt.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SSV Markranstaedt.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:27, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SV Arminia Hannover.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SV Arminia Hannover.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:28, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SV Henstedt-Rhen.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SV Henstedt-Rhen.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:28, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SV Lichtenberg.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SV Lichtenberg.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:28, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Swessen.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Swessen.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:46, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:TSV Altenholz.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TSV Altenholz.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:47, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:VfL Oldenburg.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:VfL Oldenburg.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:55, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:RB Leipzig historical.png listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:RB Leipzig historical.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 19:51, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RB Leipzig - Organization[edit]

Hello

I have started to work on the organization section. I have tried to explain how the club is organized and the latest requirements from the DFL. If there is anything you can add or correct, I would be happy if you helped be out! I would like to expand the information about the current organization, who elects who etc., but I find very little information, especially not on the official webpage of the club, which is mostly about marketing if you ask me... Tomorrow I will add information about the current board members and directors, and write a section about membership.

Best regards

/Erik EriFr (talk) 22:14, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:DFC Prag.png[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:DFC Prag.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:19, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Neue Viktoria.png[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Neue Viktoria.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:22, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:TSV 1860 München.svg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:TSV 1860 München.svg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:22, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Logo FC Bayern München.svg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Logo FC Bayern München.svg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:23, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Hannover 96.png[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Hannover 96.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:24, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:HSV-Logo.svg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:HSV-Logo.svg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:40, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:VfR Aalen Wappen.svg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:VfR Aalen Wappen.svg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:40, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:DFC Prag.png[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:DFC Prag.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:41, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:1 FC Union Solingen.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:1 FC Union Solingen.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:18, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chemie Leipzig[edit]

I'm not sure I agree with some of the edits on BSG Chemie Leipzig, mostly the omission of FC Sachsen Leipzig and the new SG Leipzig Leutsch as a sub-heading, only because lots of redirects (from other articles too) were made to that specific sub-heading. Also the counterpart articles all point to FC Sachsen Leipzig, and seeing as they were a separate legal entity from Chemie, it should probably its own article? Then again the article could probably be split into about 20 different articles due to the amount of mergers and various name-changes. On German Wikipedia there's a nice diagram or merger history is there anyway to import it to here? Let me know what you think Abcmaxx (talk) 02:54, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, a couple of things.
I think the approach I'm working at is summed up in the opening paragraph. The club has really had three separate historical identities: as TuRa prior to the end of WWII, as Chemie/Lok during the Soviet occupation, and then as Sachsen following reunification. The newest stuff around the two latest incarnations of the club is still too fresh to give too much weight to and that section needs to be re-worked some (I bailed out at that point for a bit, so it's a bit messy). The article was becoming too fragmented and difficult to read, so I reorganized it along those lines (i.e three historical eras). I think those individual sections could stand additional material, but breaking it down into such small pieces makes it confusing for anyone coming cold to it.
I'm working from a copy of Hardy Gruen's Vereinslexikon and treat that as my template for wikipedia articles. It has separate articles for Sachsen (which was the identity of the club at the time the book was published) and for TuRa which was the most notable of the early sides. I'm planning on putting an article for TuRa in place at some point. I think that the Vereinslexikon might give a bit of the short shrift to Chemie/Lok and that there may be some merit in considering a separate, more detailed article on the club for the period 1945-1990. But then, the East German clubs as a whole are under-represented on en.wikipedia so far. There should be some detail, for example, on Chemie/Lok's FDGB Pokal appearances/successes. The guys over at de.wikipedia have a very well made index for German clubs based on Gruen's books (Who's Who in German Football, Vereinslexikon and the Big Book of German Football Clubs) that I am envious of. They've had good success in keeping the list current and so have been adding new IV clubs and Pokalists as they emerge.
My personal focus has been on working my way through clubs that have played at the highest level (regional first division leagues, Gauligen, Bundesliga) and on down. I think at this point most (not all) clubs that have played tier I-IV football in Germany are represented by articles. I have collaborated with a couple of other German fussball writers along those lines or who have more regional interests (their home cities/states for example) and in a couple of cases helped to rein in some guys who's mission was not to write an evenhanded encyclopedia article but fan pages for their teams. Like the overzealous BFC Dynamo fanboy or the Polish guy who tried to hijack the 1. FC Kattowitz article so he could build Greater Polish Silesia. <sigh>
I can appreciate your point about 20 different articles, but that would just make it an ordeal to really get a good grasp on the history and tradition of the club. I think by breaking down into 3 historical eras, anyone can come to the article, have a read through, and get a good understanding of the club and some sense of the historical context it existed in without being overwhelmed by detail. And honestly, the new SG Leipzig Leutsch club is so new that it is insignificant except when it is placed in historical context against the clubs that came before it. Sorry if you're a fan of the club, but from the point of view of an encyclopedia article that's a hard truth. It's still just a non-notable 6th or 7th tier club at this point.
On the diagram, I was thinking of doing one, but didn't realize there was one already and hadn't wandered over to the de.wikipedia article as yet. It's a great idea and should be easy enough to bring over.
I think it was premature to shuffle the article over to Chemie as the club has been Sachsen for the past two dozen years and is still only a fresh corpse if you will. What will actually happen between the two current sides and where it will all end up is unclear. And while I can appreciate the enthusiasm of club supporters, I hate getting caught up in that kind of breaking news.
So that's my thinking. Three historical eras and the article should be FC Sachsen Leipzig, not Chemie. TuRa needs a separate article, and Chemie should probably eventually have a separate article, but should just be a redirect to Sachsen at this point. East German football as a whole needs some serious attention at en.wikipedia. The two new clubs deserve some note, but they should not drive the shape of the overall article.
Your turn. :)


I just reviewed the de.wikipedia article. I note that it still is named for FC Sachsen and that mention of SG Leipzig Leutsch is pretty much limited to a single paragraph at the end of the article. The team diagram is great, but looks to be missing a link to predecessor Hertha 05 (Hohenzollern 05 until 1918). Wiggy! (talk) 05:30, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see where you're coming from, fully understand and support, I still have a few cents to add though if that's ok, mainly because it was me who initially tried to make sense of its complicated history initially (it was even more a confusing and very incomplete article beforehand), which is why I moved the page from FC Sachsen - the reason I did that is because there was barely any information on FC Sachsen itself anyway, 80% of the original article was about BSG Chemie, and because it was all new developments I wanted to include the successor clubs, and kind of make it a little easier to follow as opposed to just ommiting everything or being vague about it.

  • There was another SG Leipzig Leutsch before the 1st incarnation of BSG Chemie - and although SG Leipzig Leutsch only survived a few years as a FC Sachsen successor club, that bit is still significant in my opinion for two reasons: 1) SG Leipzig Leutsch is one of the historical names and it should be noted it was chosen alongside BSG Chemie for the new phoenix club 2) the argument over who gets to continue the lineage was quite significant on how the club lives on and 3) when SG Leipzig Leutsch's senior side folded, the agreement with the new BSG Chemie is likely to allow BSG Chemie continue it's climb back up the leagues. Nearly all the fans sided with the new BSG Chemie anyway. Maybe a separate article is too much but it definitely should have sub-heading or something like that maybe?
  • The city is divided among club lines around 50/50 and getting the Chemie/Lok merger worngly described would not be a great mistake to make. I realise that the mergers moves and name changes are very confusing and numerous, the standard in East Germany at the time, but from a supporter point of view the fans never lost track of VfB/Lok and Chemie/Sachsen divide (I think it's a north-south divide pretty much, but don't quote me on that - definitely a political divide though, Lok being slightly right wing and Chemie slightly left-wing). I'd be careful to call the club Chemie/Lok - get it wrong and the "overzealous BFC Dynamo fanboy or the Polish guy who tried to hijack the 1. FC Kattowitz article so he could build Greater Polish Silesia" will seem pretty minor seeing that both Leipzig clubs have significant larger fan-bases so getting that wrong may be a bad idea. Re-establishment of 1. FC Kattowitz was a purely political move and pretty unpopular one too, reigning in will be lot easier if anything like this happens here - if someone tried to do that with Ruch Chorzów for example whose fans have been known to spread pro-Silesian Autonomy moves then that would've been a much bigger issue. I think who the fans sided is quite significant in this case (and probably this case only) - it actually makes a little sense if you follow where the fans went after each merger/name-change/political intervention, because the ones which didn't have any fans folded pretty quickly or disappeared into insignificance.
  • The new recent BSG Chemie has been going pretty strong for a good few years now - given they started in a division that even I could even play in, they are still only starting to re-emerge in the wider public eye but as you can probably imagine with a reasonably numerous fan-base they've been breaking all-records in the local Sunday leagues, with hundreds of people turning up to watch essentially pub-team opposition. Sooner or later they will make their back to at least a more suitable division.
  • I like the idea of breaking up into 3 areas - it seems logical and easier to follow.Abcmaxx (talk) 18:06, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2015[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to FC Energie Cottbus 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:
  • [[1. FSV Mainz 05]] on goal differential. In season 2004–05 Energie struggled into both financial (reported debts of €4.5 million and sports problems: The season goal of promotion was missed by far –
  • {{DEFAULTSORT:Cottbus, Energie

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:41, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mittweidaer BC, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DFB. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Oestrich Iserlohn.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Oestrich Iserlohn.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:29, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:SV-Werder-Bremen-Logo.svg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:SV-Werder-Bremen-Logo.svg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:03, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Global account[edit]

Hi Wiggy!! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 23:50, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of SV Meddewade[edit]

The article SV Meddewade has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability of club. No indication it ever played above local Kreisliga level.

While all constructive 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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Hope you don't mind me proding this article but I really can't see how it is notable in any way. Calistemon (talk) 12:28, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated logo File:Alemannia Aachen.png[edit]

Hello Wiggy! I appreciate uploading File:Alemannia Aachen.png and of course keeping all those german football sites up-to-date.
Since season 2010/2011 Alemannia Aachen's former manager Erik Meijer has changed the logo of Alemannia Aachen to a more traditional one. [19] [20]
In my opinion as a fan and remebrance of the 'good old days' in UEFA cup, DFB cup, and the german Bundesliga they shouldn't have done that and better had tried to avoid insolvency and the resulting relegation of Alemannia Aachen. Nevertheless the old days are gone and therefore the new logo has to be changed in aspiration of better times. Could you please revise the old one?
Files are available at Alemannia's website and the german Wikimedia. Thank you very much!
88.153.7.184 16:47, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:ASV Bergedorf new.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ASV Bergedorf new.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:33, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SV Meddewade.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SV Meddewade.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:45, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SV Prussia Samland Koenigsberg.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SV Prussia Samland Koenigsberg.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:45, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SV Barnstorf.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SV Barnstorf.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:28, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SV Alsenborn 1919.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SV Alsenborn 1919.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 05:15, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi - are you sure this is an old logo of FC Viktoria Braunschweig? It looks quite similar to the logo of SC Victoria Braunschweig (and even reads SC Viktoria), a club that still exists and has no relation to the old club. Alexpostfacto (talk) 21:33, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Sccharlottenburg.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sccharlottenburg.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:30, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:KFC Uerdingen 05.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:KFC Uerdingen 05.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Beuthener SuSV 09.png[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Beuthener SuSV 09.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 11:59, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Eintracht Frankfurt Logo.svg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Eintracht Frankfurt Logo.svg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 22:04, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:FV Germania Königshütte.png[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:FV Germania Königshütte.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 22:10, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:VfB Stuttgart 1893 Logo.svg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:VfB Stuttgart 1893 Logo.svg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:14, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Rwalt.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Rwalt.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:57, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Logo 1 FC Kaiserslautern.svg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Logo 1 FC Kaiserslautern.svg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:09, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Ptboarms.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ptboarms.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:23, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:DFB 1911.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:DFB 1911.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Marchjuly (talk) 01:44, 16 February 2016 (UTC) -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:44, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:BTuFC Victoria Berlin.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BTuFC Victoria Berlin.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:28, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Joseph mueller.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Joseph mueller.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 09:49, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of SG Rommerz[edit]

The article SG Rommerz has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable association football club, only claim to fame is to have once played a pre-season game against Eintracht Frankfurt

While all constructive 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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Calistemon (talk) 03:53, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of RSV Weyer[edit]

The article RSV Weyer has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable association football club, only claim to fame is to have once played a pre-season game against Eintracht Frankfurt

While all constructive 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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Calistemon (talk) 03:54, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies[edit]

My apologies for proposing the two above articles for deletion but every end-of-season, when I update them, I look at the two and just can't see any notability in the two clubs at all. Hope you don't mind. Will you come back one day to edit some more? It doesn't seem likely now which leaves the German football project a place worse off I have to say. Calistemon (talk) 03:57, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of SC Borussia Lindenthal-Hohenlind[edit]

The article SC Borussia Lindenthal-Hohenlind has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability, no indication club has ever played above regional level of football.

While all constructive 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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Calistemon (talk) 23:24, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:ASCO Konigsberg.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:ASCO Konigsberg.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:09, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Viktoria Allenstein.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Viktoria Allenstein.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:05, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:1 FC Bad Kötzting.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:1 FC Bad Kötzting.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:25, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:1 FC Bad Kötzting.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:1 FC Bad Kötzting.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:04, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Invite to the African Destubathon[edit]

Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 53 African countries, so should be enjoyable! So it would be a good chance to win something for improving stubs on African sportspeople, including footballers, athletes, Olympians and Paralympians etc, particularly female ones, but also male. Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance (think Regions of countries etc). If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing a few expanded articles on African Paralympians, Olympians and committees etc, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. Thanks. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:13, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Sportfreunde Lotte.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sportfreunde Lotte.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:14, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite[edit]

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:08, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Wiggy!. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:FC Viktoria Braunschweig.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:FC Viktoria Braunschweig.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:30, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:VfR Luebeck.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:VfR Luebeck.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:48, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:FC Katowice.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:FC Katowice.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:21, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:VfL Oldenburg.png[edit]

The file File:VfL Oldenburg.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

File media is simple text, and a version exists on commons.

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:23, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:VfL Neustadt.png[edit]

The file File:VfL Neustadt.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

File media exists on Commons, this is a simple text logo, not a an F8 because the Commons file is 'free' license and this is tagged NFUR not needed.

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:24, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:VfB Fortuna Chemnitz.png[edit]

The file File:VfB Fortuna Chemnitz.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

File media exists on Commons c:File:VfB Fortuna Chemnitz.png, this is a simple text logo, not a an F8 because the Commons file is 'free' license and this is tagged NFUR not needed.

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:25, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:SpandauerSV.png[edit]

The file File:SpandauerSV.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Equivalent media under a free license at Wikimedia Commons. Not F8 owing to the different licenses.

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:04, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:SSV Jahn Regensburg.png[edit]

The file File:SSV Jahn Regensburg.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Equivalent media under a free license at Wikimedia Commons. Not F8 owing to the different licenses.

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:18, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:1 FC Schweinfurt.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:1 FC Schweinfurt.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:02, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:RSV Weyer.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:RSV Weyer.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:36, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SC Borussia LH.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SC Borussia LH.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:37, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SV RW Deuten.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SV RW Deuten.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:41, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SV Sandhausen.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SV Sandhausen.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:34, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:FC Carl Zeiss Jena Logo.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:FC Carl Zeiss Jena Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:06, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Holstein Kiel.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Holstein Kiel.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:06, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SC Fortuna Koln.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SC Fortuna Koln.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:05, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:FC Hansa Rostock.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:FC Hansa Rostock.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:06, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:1 FC Magdeburg.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:1 FC Magdeburg.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:10, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SV Alemannia Waldalgesheim.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SV Alemannia Waldalgesheim.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:15, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:1 FC Kleve.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:1 FC Kleve.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:23, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:1 FC Achternberg historical.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:1 FC Achternberg historical.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:51, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red World Contest[edit]

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Wiggy!. 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]

Orphaned non-free image File:SV Hindenburg Allenstein 2.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SV Hindenburg Allenstein 2.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:11, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SV Yorck Insterburg.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SV Yorck Insterburg.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:21, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Concordia Konigsberg.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Concordia Konigsberg.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:24, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File sourcing[edit]

Hey there, I was wondering if you would be able to provide a source for the Stanley Cup shot in this image : File:Leafscup.png. Thanks! Jon Kolbert (talk) 19:32, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Wiggy!. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Football star.png[edit]

Notice

The file File:Football star.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SD Croatia Berlin.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SD Croatia Berlin.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:44, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Mark Horowitz (director)[edit]

Notice

The article Mark Horowitz (director) has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days 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/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Liz Read! Talk! 02:51, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Admira Wacker Modling.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Admira Wacker Modling.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:22, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Victoria Koeln 1911.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Victoria Koeln 1911.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:51, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use of File:RFC Halley Concordia.png[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:RFC Halley Concordia.png. However, there is a concern that the use of the image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. Details of this problem, and which specific criteria that the image may not meet, can be obtained by going to the image description page. If you feel that this image does meet those criteria, please place a note on the image description or talk page explaining why. Do not remove the {{di-fails NFCC}} tag itself.

An administrator will review this file within a few days, and having considered the opinions placed on the image page, may delete it in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion or remove the tag entirely. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jonteemil (talk) 09:48, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use of File:Reinickendorfer Fuchse.png[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Reinickendorfer Fuchse.png. However, there is a concern that the use of the image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. Details of this problem, and which specific criteria that the image may not meet, can be obtained by going to the image description page. If you feel that this image does meet those criteria, please place a note on the image description or talk page explaining why. Do not remove the {{di-fails NFCC}} tag itself.

An administrator will review this file within a few days, and having considered the opinions placed on the image page, may delete it in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion or remove the tag entirely. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jonteemil (talk) 09:50, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use of File:SC Pfullendorf.png[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:SC Pfullendorf.png. However, there is a concern that the use of the image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. Details of this problem, and which specific criteria that the image may not meet, can be obtained by going to the image description page. If you feel that this image does meet those criteria, please place a note on the image description or talk page explaining why. Do not remove the {{di-fails NFCC}} tag itself.

An administrator will review this file within a few days, and having considered the opinions placed on the image page, may delete it in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion or remove the tag entirely. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jonteemil (talk) 10:02, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:3 Bayer Leverkusen.png[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:3 Bayer Leverkusen.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:DFC Prag2.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:DFC Prag2.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jonteemil (talk) 18:55, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SC Koln historical.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SC Koln historical.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:24, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:1FCFeuchtold.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:1FCFeuchtold.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:24, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:3 Wuppertal.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:3 Wuppertal.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:26, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Elberfeld historical.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Elberfeld historical.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:27, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Ahlener SG historical 1.png[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Ahlener SG historical 1.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Also:

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Kolner BC.png[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Kolner BC.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Also:

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eintracht Frankfurt historial.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Eintracht Frankfurt historial.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

Also:

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:03, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:MSV Duisburg historical.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:MSV Duisburg historical.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

Also:

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:FV Bad Vilbel.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:FV Bad Vilbel.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:47, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Teutonia Ottensen.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Teutonia Ottensen.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:41, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GFDL with disclaimers[edit]

Hi! Long time ago you uploaded some files like File:Danish football.png. They are licensed {{GFDL-self-with-disclaimers}}. Perhaps you would be willing to remove the disclaimers? See Wikipedia:GFDL standardization for further information. If you would like to remove the disclaimers you can click this link and search for you name (22 files). --MGA73 (talk) 20:15, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:FC Mulhouse.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:FC Mulhouse.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:MSV Duisburg historical.png[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:MSV Duisburg historical.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Pbrks (talk) 23:48, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:MSV Duisburg historical.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:MSV Duisburg historical.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. — Pbrks (talk) 23:46, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:SC Apolda VfL.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:SC Apolda VfL.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 03:38, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Wurtzburger FV.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Wurtzburger FV.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:45, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Wurtzburger FV.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Wurtzburger FV.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:40, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Freiburger FC.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Freiburger FC.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:18, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:FC Stahl Brandenburg.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:FC Stahl Brandenburg.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 02:56, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:BFC Meteor.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BFC Meteor.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:05, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Bergisch Gladbach 09.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Bergisch Gladbach 09.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:06, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SC Gottingen 05.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SC Gottingen 05.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:33, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SC Bad Neuenahr.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SC Bad Neuenahr.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:35, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:TuS Makkabi Berlin.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TuS Makkabi Berlin.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:28, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eintracht Frankfurt historial.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Eintracht Frankfurt historial.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:19, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1. FC Saarbrücken, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oberliga Südwest. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SGV Freiberg.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SGV Freiberg.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:21, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ascherslebener SC 1898 moved to draftspace[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Ascherslebener SC 1898. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 20:49, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 15[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited FC Eintracht Altona, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DFB.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:06, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Berliner SC Favorit.jpg[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Berliner SC Favorit.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:09, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wiggy!&oldid=1208732778"