This is an archive of past discussions with SounderBruce. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
< Archive 30 | Archive 31 | Archive 32 > |
All Pages: | 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - 20 - 21 - 22 - 23 - 24 - 25 - 26 - 27 - 28 - 29 - 30 - 31 - 32 - 33 - 34 - 35 - 36 - 37 - 38 - 39 - 40 - 41 - 42 - 43 - 44 - ... (up to 100) |
Hello, SounderBruce, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Here are some pages which are a little more fun:
We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g ( talk) 12:32, 28 April 2019 (UTC) |
Note: Having a username change after you start using STiki will reset your classification count. Please let us know about such changes on the
talk page page to avoid confusion in issuing milestone awards. You can also request for your previous STiki contributions to be reassigned to your new account name.
In reference to some recent reverts on Anchorage, Alaska and elsewhere, as near as I can tell, the preferred precipitation color in weatherboxes is green. They're not saying the precipitation is green, but the background in the box is green. Happy editing! Jacona ( talk) 14:06, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
I have looked at your history and you are quite combative. Please be reasonable. Do not edit war, particularly to support wrong information. Aerostar3 ( talk) 05:18, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
The subject, which you edited Paine Field about, has been discussed at great length in the Wikiproject Airports. /info/en/?search=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Airports/Archive_17#Potential_Major_Change_to_WP:Airports:_Removing_Regional_Carrier_Listings_from_Airport_Articles
The consensus decision was that the regional carrier is to be listed, for example United Express, not United. With the same reasoning, "Alaska Airlines" is not to be used because, as of 2019, the flights are operated by Horizon Air, not Alaska. Thank you, Bruce. Aerostar3 ( talk) 05:44, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
( edit conflict) @ Aerostar3: I'm drawing a conclusion from the talk page discussion you linked; there was no explicit consensus either way, so we fall back upon established, site-wide policy. Seeing as there have been no edit wars over articles that have Alaska by Horizon service (e.g. Sea-Tac Airport, Boise, Portland), there is no reason to be warring over this. If you want to desperately see this change happen, propose a formal RfC and get both project and non-aviation editors to agree to a consensus. Now please stop pinging me every few minutes. Sounder Bruce 06:13, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
The second round of the 2019 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to scored 32 points to advance into round 3. Our top four scorers in round 2 all scored over 400 points and were:
Other notable performances were put in by Barkeep49 with six GAs, Ceranthor, Lee Vilenski, and Canada Hky, each with seven GARs, and MPJ-DK with a seven item GT.
So far contestants have achieved nine featured articles between them and a splendid 80 good articles. Commendably, 227 GARs have been completed during the course of the 2019 WikiCup, so the backlog of articles awaiting GA review has been reduced as a result of contestants' activities. The judges are pleased with the thorough GARs that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 ( talk), Sturmvogel 66 ( talk), Vanamonde ( talk) and Cwmhiraeth ( talk) MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 17:46, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
On 4 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article MLS Cup 1996, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the inaugural MLS Cup was played in heavy rain in the aftermath of Hurricane Lili? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/MLS Cup 1996. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, MLS Cup 1996), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile ( talk) 00:02, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi, what would be your suggestions for improvement on Harris & Frank? Keizers ( talk) 23:38, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
So I thought about co-helping with you to try and help the United States men's national soccer team page into a Good Article as you properly want to see your national team be a good article. Also with you still in the shot for the WikiCup title, it could be a easy way to get a good bonus for a page which has over 50+ different Wikipedia versions. Matt294069 ( talk) 03:50, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your input on this. The GA reviewer suggests that it may be a Featured Article Candidate so it is helpful to identify first any obstacles to that. Some of your tags I understand, but others not, so would you clarify please?
and late Industrial Revolution settlements such as the railway towns of Wolverton (with its railway works) and Bletchley (at the junction of the London and North Western Railway with the Oxford–Cambridge Varsity Line).
What do you think needs to be cited here? That this junction actually exists? -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 22:56, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
This local irritation might be a candidate for deletion but...
In contrast, the later districts planned by English Partnerships have departed from this model, without a road hierarchy but with conventional junctions with traffic lights and at grade pedestrian crossings.
... I am unclear what you think should be cited? If I can find a citation that Civic interest groups have complained about it, would that hit the spot? -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 22:56, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Again, I am inclined delete the footnote lest it give the invalid impression that the citation supports it [footnote shown here in italics for our mutual convenience {{quote|"They divided the Ouzel Valley into 'strings, beads and settings'. The 'strings' are well-maintained routes, be they for walking, bicycling or riding; the 'beads' are sports centres, lakeside cafes and other activity areas; the 'settings' are self-managed land-uses such as woods, riding paddocks, a golf course (which did not happen at this site) and a farm". How can I prove a negative? Or are you objecting to OpEd inside a quote? (Guilty as charged, I shall delete it). -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 22:56, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Yes, even American football :-)
Most other sports are represented at amateur level.
Would it be sufficient to wlink that sentence to Sport in Milton Keynes or do you really suggest that a citation is needed for every sport? -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 22:56, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
I'm unclear what is being sought here?
Data on the economy, demography and politics of Milton Keynes are collected at the Borough level and are detailed at Economy of the Borough and Demographics of the Borough.
Do you suggest that I repeat the citations in those two articles? [Footnote: at the time that sentence was written, it was impossible to extract the Census data for just the city. That is no longer completely true as the demographic data has since become available. But the main question still stands.] I really am unclear what you have in mind. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 22:56, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
You ask for a citation for "Milton Keynes has six railway stations". But the rest of the paragraph goes on to list those six stations, so again I don't understand the issue. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 22:56, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
On Woburn Sands, the text reads
Woburn Sands railway station, also on the Marston Vale line, is in the small town of Woburn Sands just inside the urban area.
Are you asking for evidence that Woburn Sands is in the urban area? I can certainly do that using the Census 2011 citation used elsewhere but I suspect that I may be missing the point? -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 22:56, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Do you really want citations for the routes taken by the roads through the city? -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 22:56, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
I hesitated to cite these services as they are very subject to change, have multiple operators, and in general per NOTGUIDE but can do so if you really think it appropriate. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 22:56, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
I realise that some editors deprecate Google Maps as a source for distances. Is there an acceptable alternative? -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 22:56, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Yes, I can cite this one! -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 22:56, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Is the source citation I did not a reliable source because I first believed that the information I got what you just reverted had the information in it unless if its unconstructive. Right? NicholasHui ( talk) 00:03, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Based on the information I saw on your edits, I did not know they could be disruptive. I am trying to learn how to properly edit those stuff correctly. But thank you for your patience NicholasHui ( talk) 04:16, 7 May 2019 (UTC) 24.84.228.210 ( talk) 04:16, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
I smell stinky socks. John from Idegon ( talk) 05:34, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
BBC primary domain is .co.uk not .com Govvy ( talk) 07:42, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
On 10 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pete Fewing, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that collegiate soccer coach Pete Fewing has also officiated at the weddings of two of his former players? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pete Fewing. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Pete Fewing), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile ( talk) 00:03, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
On 12 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Nels Bruseth, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that forest ranger Nels Bruseth turned down an offer to become mayor of Darrington, Washington, due to his ineligibility as a federal employee? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Nels Bruseth. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Nels Bruseth), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:03, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks so much for putting all in order. I am not skillful on Wikipedia. :) Kind regards. -- -- LLcentury ( talk) 21:18, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
On what basis did you revert my edits to "Century 21 Exposition"? I am most concerned about the "1962 Seattle" one, because it has a lot of links that surely give people a lot more information about the Expo. My World's Fair page has been praised by bona fide World's Fair historians. There's nothing commercial about it. It doesn't seek donations. Its aim is to inform and give visitors a chance to experience the Fairs, purely. I'm serving the public and giving them an opportunity to learn and enjoy more than the Wikipedia article provides. They read the Wikipedia article, and my page is just as deserving as the other external links, because it gives Wikipedia visitors more. On what basis did you kill it? PaulSank ( talk) 03:14, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
PaulSank ( talk) 18:08, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
"Spammer", no way, I have nothing commercial to offer. As for the rest of what you say here, somehow it clarifies the issue better, so yes, I'll now go to the ELN. Thank you. PaulSank ( talk) 03:09, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for all your hard work - the article was in dire need of improvement. I've stopped working on the article since you've been improving it so much - anything in particular you could use a hand with? SportingFlyer T· C 06:57, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
The Marta Award | ||
As a recipient of the Marta Award, we'd like to thank you for scoring Marta-like goals related to WP:WOSO. Thank you for your talents and dedication! |
Bring back Daz Sampson ( talk) 20:52, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 1999 FIFA Women's World Cup you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kosack -- Kosack ( talk) 10:20, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
The article 1999 FIFA Women's World Cup you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:1999 FIFA Women's World Cup for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kosack -- Kosack ( talk) 19:20, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
The article 1999 FIFA Women's World Cup you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:1999 FIFA Women's World Cup for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kosack -- Kosack ( talk) 09:22, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
The Teamwork Barnstar | |
Amazon HQ2 made it to Good Article status! Here’s a barn star for creating the article and for diligent, diplomatic editing throughout the page’s history. Trillfendi ( talk) 22:53, 16 May 2019 (UTC) |
Thank you for your suggestion. I will take that information of how I will cite it down the next time I edit those details. NicholasHui ( talk) 02:05, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
On 20 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Washington State Route 142, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Washington State Route 142 once included the largest prestressed concrete bridges in the state? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Washington State Route 142. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Washington State Route 142), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:02, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
What was the reason you reverted my edit in the Campeones Cup page? I just added a reference from a sports media where it is stated that is a just friendly tournament and not endorsed by Concacaf. Did I something wrong? I just want to know. -- ZeiramXR ( talk) 07:48, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2003 FIFA Women's World Cup Final, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Martina Müller ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 12:04, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Im Eun-ju at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah ( talk) 20:46, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Howdy, I linked to the new URL since the old URL ends up at a page not found error. —Cliffb ( talk) 06:43, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Err.. Never mind.. I see what you did now.. That works well —Cliffb ( talk) 06:44, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
On 28 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Washington State Route 99, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Washington State Route 99 passes under downtown Seattle in a tunnel that was excavated by the world's largest tunnel boring machine? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Washington State Route 99. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Washington State Route 99), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:02, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Bruce.
I must admit, I'm a bit perturbed right now.
I live in Seattle. It is COMMON KNOWLEDGE that there is NO BUS TUNNEL IN SEATTLE, hasn't been for years and now, there are no busses in the TRAIN TUNNEL.
And the Seattle Post Intelligencer, my source, is a Seattle-based online newspaper that's been a news authority here for more than 1.5 centuries. Do you even live in Seattle?!
Wikipedia should be accurate. Whenever I seek to help ensure that, some anonymous know-it-all wants to smack that down. BTW, there are, literally dozens of common-knowledge assertions in that article that are uncited. Because I'm not part of the right click or org, I get singled out?
Stop wasting my precious time, please!
Thanks,
Xtian — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.221.2.118 ( talk) 05:00, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Enumclaw, Washington, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yakima Valley ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 14:48, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2019 AFC Asian Cup Final you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of HawkAussie -- HawkAussie ( talk) 01:41, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
On 31 May 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Sinking of Hableány, which you nominated and updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.
Step hen 02:02, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello there. You left a note on my talk page. My practice is not to involve myself in edit wars. Making two reversions is not an edit war. Please think carefully before making similar comments. Springnuts ( talk) 22:11, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
There was a carefully worded edit summary of the second and final revert. You were heavy-handed. Springnuts ( talk) 06:19, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
… Another time why not leave a friendly note on a fellow editor’s talk page instead of the full “you are in an edit war” message? With all respect, Springnuts ( talk) 06:22, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Well, since you ask, generally to collide with something implies that there is some movement towards the thing collided with. So, a parked car cannot collide with anything. But I’ve parked car can be involved in a collision. In this case it is far from clear that the smaller vessel was moving towards the larger one. So being “in collision with” makes no assumptions about the positions, speed or possible fault of either vessel. Collision here is a verb, not a noun, however “in a collision with” would also be grammatically correct. But it is not a biggie, which is why, after to revert, I left the issue alone. Regards, Springnuts ( talk) 08:02, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
(Apologies for double post. And typos, I’m dictating into the phone) Springnuts ( talk) 08:03, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
I notice that you, or another editor, has now changed the article in the way we discussed above. If it was you, then well done. Springnuts ( talk) 23:04, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I currently have Fred Keenor at peer review with an eye to taking a run at FA. This is the second peer review I have listed but neither have garnered any responses yet. I was wondering if you would be able to have a look if you have the time. Feel free to skim and make it as light as you like, I'm happy to iron out any real issues at FA but it would be nice to know I'm not missing anything stupidly obvious. Cheers. Kosack ( talk) 06:52, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi Bruce - Sorry I meant to get back to you re the peer review and to thank you for the podcast link. A v. interesting series (Anson Dorrance has a great voice - I could listen to him all day). I have a vague memory that a joint male/female World Cup was mooted at one stage – but that the 99ers torpedoed it. I can't find where I might have read it though - probably in one of Jean Williams' offerings. If I can source it in a way that's directly relevant to '99 I might try to add it later. I also wondered if you thought the draw/World X1 fixture would be worthy of a stand alone article? As you'd have a better idea of the coverage I'd be interested if you thought we'd have a reasonable prospect of defending an AfD? Bring back Daz Sampson ( talk) 07:59, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Any clue what happened to the Washington Eastern Railroad page? When I type it in it redirects me to the Eastern Washington Gateway Railroad. They are two completely different railroads that existed at two separate times owned by two different company’s. Did it get deleted or what. I managed to see that the last edit was by you so I figured you’d know. Eìre 1916 ( talk) 15:11, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
On 4 June 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2019 UEFA Champions League Final, which you nominated and updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.
Yogwi21 ( talk) 02:01, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Talk:List of national memorials of the United States#redlink: please do fix the situation!!! :) --03:45, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
The Marta Award | ||
As a recipient of the Marta Award, we'd like to thank you for scoring Marta-like goals related to WP:WOSO. Thank you for your talents and dedication! |
Hmlarson ( talk) 17:56, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
The article 2019 AFC Asian Cup Final you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:2019 AFC Asian Cup Final for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of HawkAussie -- HawkAussie ( talk) 10:21, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
The article 2019 AFC Asian Cup Final you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2019 AFC Asian Cup Final for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of HawkAussie -- HawkAussie ( talk) 00:02, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello:
The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article 1999 FIFA Women's World Cup has been completed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Best of luck with the FA process.
Regards,
Twofingered Typist ( talk) 13:26, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi why did you reverted in Lynnwood and Marysville? New number of population in 2018 Estimate from U.S. Census Bureau. 38,511 population in Lynnwood. 69,779 population in Marysville. Thank. -- Rossdegenstein ( talk) 21:53, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi. I'm DannyS712 ( talk), and I just wanted to remind you that you are a current participant in round 3 of this year's WikiCup! There are just over 2 weeks until the third round ends – if you haven't made you first submission for this round yet, there is still time to start; if you have already started, keep up the good work. See your submissions page: here. Good luck!
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) at 19:11, 12 June 2019 (UTC) on behalf of DannyS712 ( talk)
King Street Station | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Services | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hi Bruce, I've developed an {{ Adjacent stations}} module for Sound Transit which combines the existing three s-line template groups (Sounder, Link Light Rail, and ST Express) into a single module: Module:Adjacent stations/Sound Transit. I've added a couple sample usages so you can see how it would differ in presentation from the current templates. I'd appreciate any feedback that you might have. Best, Mackensen (talk) 16:41, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi Bruce,
I noticed that you have reverted the edit I made on the 2007 FIFA Women's World Cup page. I realize you were trying to help and, because of that, want to thank you for that. I just wanted to write this to explain my thinking in regards to the edit I made to help you understand my perspective. The first thing I want to bring up is that I've seen similar kinds of added detail in other lead sections of Wikipedia articles. For example, in the lead section of the men's 1982 FIFA World Cup, when bringing up the largest margin of victory achieved in tournament history in Hungary's 10-1 over El Salvador, the lead section brings up the other two margins of victory that matched it, the teams involved in each, the exact scores, and even the years they took place. Other examples of this type of added detail in lead sections can be found in the lead sections of articles like the 2007 UEFA Champions League final (discussing the last meeting in a final between AC Milan and Liverpool, including the scoreline and outcome of said previous final meeting), Lothar Matthaus (discussing Mexico's Rafael Marquez equaling his record of number of World Cups played in 2018, even mentioning the 2018 match that caused this to happen officially), among other examples. The other thing I wanted to bring up is that I felt that the sentence I edited felt incomplete given that it only ended with "until 2019" without any idea of what happened in 2019 to make this record no longer stand. As such, I felt the sentence would benefit from adding a bit more detail to let readers know a bit (not too much) more about what happened in 2019 to make the margin of victory record achieved in the 2007 World Cup no longer stand. I don't think that adding this detail detracts from the article or leading section in any way, but only enriches the article (even if in a small way) given the context it provides in terms of the record being broken.
With that said, out of respect for you, I will not do anything in regards to this specific edit of mine unless I have your permission. I will leave your reversion of my edit as is until then. As I said earlier, I just wanted to explain what I was thinking when I made my edit. I hope you can reconsider my edit, but if you still disagree with my edit, that's fine. I just wanted to get my viewpoint out there.
Thank you and have a wonderful day,
Wildboy7
-- Wildboy7 ( talk) 02:07, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
It is not *critical* that these dates be added, but there is no need to reject them outright. Each entry provides a quick summary of the individual, and their location in the historical timeline of the city immediately establishes whether they are a contemporary presence, historical figure, etc. This makes it useful, and is why I support the anon's entry. This is not an attempt to establish precedent, so just look at it in the context of this article. If the GAN committee can point to an actual policy or guideline discouraging such detail, they will point it out and it can be dealt with it then. You've been around long enough to know that this won't make or break the nomination. — Myasuda ( talk) 00:38, 17 June 2019 (UTC)