User talk:Govvy/Archive10

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

Your thread has been archived

Teahouse logo

Hi Govvy! You created a thread called British or English on lead? at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Gerard and The Sun

You're absolutely right, the fallacious edit summaries should stop, but apparently they never will sadly. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 23:07, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: It's annoying right! I am not even sure if I would have enough support to say something, I still think he needs a topic ban. Govvy (talk) 15:59, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

WP:BURDEN. Why should *I* have to "get a source" for it? Aren't people capable of doing things themselves anymore? Mattythewhite (talk) 17:34, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Matty, sources are for information that can be challenged, why would you want to challenge a statement like that? It's clear he returned from injury because he is playing for Spurs again! I can't see anyone challenging that! Govvy (talk) 17:39, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Positions by Round

Hi I have removed the positions by round tables on all other European league seasons and have had 5 (and counting) of them reverted and on one of them it was called "vandalism". what do I do? REDMAN 2019 (talk) 18:41, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Shilow Tracey

Nope, only me if you check the history properly. PS you're still misspelling the name... GiantSnowman 20:05, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: Actually, Tottenham original mis-spelt the name. Govvy (talk) 20:06, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
OK - but that's now been corrected by them and other sources, and I'm not sure why you're still writing 'Shalow'. GiantSnowman 20:08, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
@GiantSnowman: I think that's the dam autocorrect doing that. Govvy (talk) 20:09, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Any excuse ;) GiantSnowman 20:19, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
@GiantSnowman: Lol, I touch type with a slight accent!! :D Govvy (talk) 20:22, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

The image was removed because it is not fair use of a copyrighted logo. Each use has to be justified and this usually means use for one or two articles. The fair use applies to the infobox version. Others can probably explain this better than me, although hopefully my explanation is better than "not minimal use".  — Jts1882 | talk  13:20, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

@Jts1882: Okay, I was sent the logo direct from Digital Operations Executive from Tottenham, who gave permission to use it on the wikipedia page. Govvy (talk) 13:45, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
If specific permission has been given for that version of the image, then I believe that information should be incorporated into the licensing section of the image page. Currently it is a simple fair use argument, which is interpreted fairly strictly by Wikipedia. Jonteemil will know more about this. —  Jts1882 | talk  14:33, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for thinking that highly of me. In reality I actully don't know that much. Pinging @JJMC89: who ought to know though.Jonteemil (talk) 14:38, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Permission for use on Wikipedia basically means nothing. Using the logo once in the infobox is acceptable (WP:NFCI#2). Repeating the same logo multiple times is not minimal (WP:NFCC#3); uses after the first don't increase the reader's understanding (#8); and there isn't a rational for the additional use (#10c). — JJMC89(T·C) 04:16, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
@JJMC89: According to the email I got from Tottenham, the logo is to represent the football teams, removing the logo from the reserves and academy page really doesn't help. In fact you've just done the opposite asked from Joteemil, where the logo is represented twice on one page. The logo is a single instance on the page you removed it from. I also don't understand your logic for it's removal the way you have done it, as on the whole project, every other academy and reserves page use the logo again of the football club. So why on earth did you just target the Tottenham one and break long standing MoS? Also, you have just violated the request given from Tottenham Hotspur regardless of wikipedia policy. Govvy (talk) 08:24, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
I think the point JJMC89 is making is that each use needs a separate rationale on the image page. My understanding is that if you have a letter/email from Spurs allowing use on every team page this needs to be logged in some way to make it official. I think there is a committee or group of admins who handle this procedure, but have no idea where to find it. —  Jts1882 | talk  09:32, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

I did not target Tottenham specifically. If you have found any other instances of non-free media being used twice in the same page please remove the least informative one, or ask someone for help.Jonteemil (talk) 16:03, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

@Jonteemil: You don't need to use {{re}} templates on peoples talk pages btw. I know a bit on copyright and trademark laws, but haven't read through all of wikipedia policies and there are a lot of what I call wiki-policies that have no bearing on real world law. I know for sure I never violated anything, however I am still confused why wikipedia sees fit to introduce it's own rules which have no bearing on the trademark of the image use for the Tottenham crest. Govvy (talk) 16:45, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
Oops, old habit of using {{re}} when answering users. About Wikipedia's rules I have nothing to say. I didn't write them. I just enforce them. See this as an opportunity to change the policies if you suspect they're wrong :).Jonteemil (talk) 18:38, 21 February 2020 (UTC)


Reg. [1]: The reason was because I'm quite sure you can't use the same non-free media twice in the same article. It's against WP:Non-free media on minimal use.Jonteemil (talk) 14:08, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

@Jonteemil: The first instance is in the info box, the second instance is to the show and course the history of the Tottenham crest. I really don't see a problem know, I did find your earlier removal comments a bit cryptic before know! Govvy (talk) 14:35, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Why have you opposed the PROD over something completely unrelated? Articles can be PRODded even if they have a million references; that is not the issue here. If you think my actual reason for deleting the article is faulty, address that, but don't remove a PROD and force an article to go to AfD when it's totally not needed. – PeeJay 14:13, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

@PeeJay2K3: I don't disagree with your reasoning, I disagree with the use of a PROD for such an article. That article is over four years old, it's clear and precise, full of external links which verify what it is. It should of gone to AfD and not be prodded. Govvy (talk) 17:09, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
PROD can be used for any article for which the deletion is uncontroversial. If you agree with my reasoning, then how can this be controversial? Yes, articles can be clear and precise and still be worthy of deletion. Equally, being well sourced is not a measure of whether an article should be deleted. An article can have all the sources in the world, but if it's too niche for the encyclopaedia, it fails WP:CRUFT. – PeeJay 21:34, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

About page of Neonfly band

Hi Govvy! Thanks for your mark. I tried! I'd like to ask you to point me the weak sources, if it does not bother you. Also I have long list of links, but it is in other languages. I'd like to write a decent article. --Yulia Markhutova (talk) 22:23, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

@Yulia Markhutova: I actually saw them live in London years ago, didn't know about the article till I saw it in the AfD list. I think you have done more than a good enough job on it. Easily should pass WP:GNG. Cheers. Govvy (talk) 00:09, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

I congratulate all of us on the victory! Thanks for your help and support!--Yulia Markhutova (talk) 23:28, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for bothering you, but...

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg
New Page Patrol needs experienced volunteers
  • New Page Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles. We could use a few extra hands on deck if you think you can help.
  • Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; Wikipedia needs experienced users to perform this task and there are precious few with the appropriate skills. Even a couple reviews a day can make a huge difference.
  • If you would like to join the project and help out, please see the granting conditions and review our instructions page. You can apply for the user-right HERE. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 20:55, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Mill Hill

Please explain. "Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals"... There was no "mass systematic removal". This was a bot notice updated six months later, which subsequent notice remains. There are no "peoples comments" related to the stale notice deleted. 17:36, 2 March 2020 (UTC) Manannan67 (talk) 17:38, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

@Manannan67: It's still a log report from the bot, it's helpful to editors like myself who will get around to review old notices, look to fix links. You really shouldn't remove them, it's not helpful to anyone. Also, we prefer to keep and archive talk pages. Govvy (talk) 19:36, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

WP teahouse logo 3.png
Hello, Govvy/Archive10. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by David Biddulph (talk) 17:39, 2 March 2020 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Your thread has been archived

Teahouse logo

Hi Govvy! You created a thread called Question on images at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Cameron Carter-Vickers

Thanks, I've warned those involved. Let me know if it continues. GiantSnowman 09:11, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hi Govvy. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:

  • Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
  • If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. signed, Rosguill talk 21:05, 13 March 2020 (UTC)


At least I have found good news about a certain editor on the day sport has been put into lockdown. See User talk:Iggy the Swan as to how I feel when you see this message from Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 23:20, 13 March 2020 (UTC).

@Iggy the Swan: O the news! My heart sank back when Poch got sacked and Spurs hired Moan-niho! I been unwell this week, don't know if it's the coronavirus, don't really want to know!! I just want to survive! Least I got my playstation to cheer me up! Govvy (talk) 23:56, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
I accept the section that you've done. With me, I will be looking forward to Spy in the Snow and some BBC game shows while both Spurs teams (Premier League and WSL and the rest of the British clubs have their table positions fixed until April 2020 or when Mike Matthews17 gets unblocked. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 00:04, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
There seem to be very few shows on TV I truly enjoy, I tried watching BBC's The War of the Worlds, but I think that was rubbish, half way into the second episode I just gave up. I still got all of season two Westworld to watch know! Govvy (talk) 00:10, 14 March 2020 (UTC)


As an FYI, you may want to see the 1500 plus entries in Category:Redirects to Wiktionary. They are all soft redirects which are appropriate to include here. Please be mindful before rushing to add speedy deletion notices.Tinton5 (talk) 23:42, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Don't deleting of page ?

Please respect to don't deleting or don't removing and redirected article of page Sri Sumarni was created by me

Regard Angelina Irena 3 (talk) 08:45, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Sheikh Russel KC season page

Hi Friend how can I save my Sheikh Russel KC season page of 2019-20 that is on the way of deleting by the wikipedia authority?— Preceding unsigned comment added by SR Alamgir Khan (talkcontribs) 11:38, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Feeding the trolls

One or two people have appeared to feed the troll (a welcome message and this warning message) since your edit about not feeding trolls (might not be aware of it). If that troll thinks it has cheered people up after postponements, it has not. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 14:05, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

@Iggy the Swan: As Yoda might say "Too old to begin the training!" Is also another way of "Too old to learn new things", there are people who are stuck in their old ways, :/ Govvy (talk) 15:03, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Indeed. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 19:03, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hi Govvy. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:

  • Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
  • If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. signed, Rosguill talk 23:45, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Revive the article


The List of ATK players has duplicated the actual content published at List of ATK (football club) players and has not done anythin' before that of. As the article is supposed to merge with it in order to avoid duplication. The authors simply pasted the materials and devoid the initial article List of ATK (football club) players usin' redirection and devastin' the actual published content.The appeal is urge deletion of this article and profound sustain of List of ATK (football club) players as it also include the article List of ATK (football club) Overseas players by the same author whereas List of ATK players is just a mere stub that doesn't enlist even more tham 3 players of the first season before the appeal of merger that one can access using the contributions and editin' history. List of ATK players is profound (upto 99.9%) duplication of the content of List of ATK (football club) players. Anyhow the author of List of ATK (football club) players managed to revive the article. The user is usin' his might immorally.

I would love if you will furnish the views at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of ATK (football club) players


SHISHIR DUA (talk) 11:57, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

@SHISHIR DUA: A duplicate is a duplicate! What you wrote above seems convoluted! You should work with articles we already have instead of creating new ones that are not needed. Govvy (talk) 13:05, 28 March 2020 (UTC)


Regarding this (which SHISHIR DUA has removed from their talk page) - raise against SHISHIR DUA at ANI or similar. GiantSnowman 08:25, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

2019–20 Notts County F.C. season

I don't see any issues with the redirect tbh. GiantSnowman 18:13, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

The image is not the same. they are similar because they were taken in the same place but they are not exactly the same image. --I Mertex I (talk) 10:31, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

And why would we want two very similar photos of a person at the same event in the article? So people can see she still looked just the same minutes apart? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:50, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
Sarcastic.gif Govvy (talk) 13:55, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

A year ago ...
Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg
Sports football
... you were recipient
no. 2185 of Precious,
a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:47, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Cig cards

Yep thanks I'll try to get to that later this evening. Crowsus (talk) 13:54, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hey Govvy, this is a little late but I just wanted to give a quick thank you for your comments on the Emilia Clarke GA nom. It's always nice to have more editors help out with a common goal in mind. Thank you again! -- LuK3 (Talk) 13:46, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

@LuK3: Felt good to get that to GA, I wanted to get Matt Bomer to GA, but kinda failed there, so the Emilia Clarke article felt like a made up for the last one! heh. Govvy (talk) 14:08, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Battle of Vikramgad

Hi Govvy, this is charvak157, I have completed my article on battle of Vikramgad. You can read it. Thanks for your support, cheers. Charvak157 (talk) 14:12, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks mate! Charvak157 (talk) 17:18, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

User talk:Ronhjones

Seen this page above, shame this and the bot will no longer be able to use Wikipedia again. I wasn't sure what happened at various points between 7 April 2019 and today but now Wikipedia knows. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 23:20, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

{{Football squad player}} redesign discussion

Hi, it would be greatly appreciated if you gave your input in the redesign discussion, maybe highlighting how MOS:FLAG doesn't apply here. Thanks, Nehme1499 (talk) 21:46, 17 May 2020 (UTC)


Hi Govvy. I want to sincerely apologise personally for my silly comment at AN/I. I frequently come across your work here and I greatly appreciate it. Happy editing, (talk) 10:55, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Charlie's Angels (2019 film) RfC votestacking

Hey there, Govvy. I wanted to thank you again for your kind message on my talk page. I'm now even more convinced that votestacking is at play, so much so that I'm thinking about opening another SPI to look into a possible connection between Armegon and NoMagicSpells. Thoughts? KyleJoantalk 07:43, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

@KyleJoan: Up to you, I raised my concerns at ANI but no one seemed interested, I still feel there are probably issues there. You want to review where the overall contributions are from those editors and note that. Often when you know it's the same person there are a majority and similar editing pattern. Govvy (talk) 08:40, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

I opened the SPI and requested Checkuser. Here's hoping some clarity comes of it. Thanks again for all of your help! KyleJoantalk 10:17, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Statue of Edward Colston

It went into the water a fair distance outside of the area known as The Centre, didn't it? --Lord Belbury (talk) 19:31, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

@Lord Belbury: Technically, the point where it went in the water, is in fact near to ground zero of centre of the city. You have to remember the city is built around Bristol Harbour, like the River Thames is at the centre of London, it's the same with Bristol, the statue is most likely more central than where it was! Govvy (talk) 19:43, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Admittedly I'm not a local, but I understood "The Centre" to be the name of a specific public plaza (as described in The Centre, Bristol article) rather than a general term for "central Bristol". --Lord Belbury (talk) 19:47, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
@Lord Belbury: I've been to the city. I live in London myself, but the bottom part of the now traditional centre of Bristol is the harbour. The second photo on the gallery at the bottom File:Bristol City Centre (Old Image).jpg, have a look at the old image, you should be able to see, that's the exact same location where the statue was dropped in. Govvy (talk) 19:54, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Great picture. That's the junction of Broad Quay and Baldwin Street, though, the statue was dragged much further south before being dunked, per this map from the article. --Lord Belbury (talk) 09:02, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
@Lord Belbury: Don't you just love google earth, [2], that map seems pretty accurate, I was wondering if Za Za Bazaar or Pitcher Piano bar should be noted, as the statue went into the water, right next to those buildings. Govvy (talk) 10:54, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
A better landmark for context might be Pero's Bridge, visible in the background there. --Lord Belbury (talk) 12:11, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Your ANI thread

I wrote this in reply to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#List of public statues of individuals linked to the Atlantic slave_trade but decided to post it here since it's mostly personal advice. A few points.

1) You initiated the complaint. Your followup was the first time you said anything 3RR. Complaining that people missed something which you didn't mention is a little silly. It's no wonder your complaints keep failing (as you claim) if every time you complain you bring up silly stuff and expect people to find the actual problems for you. (Although I'd note that simple 3RR violations should generally be reported to WP:AN/EW anyway.

2) What do you mean by 3RR was ignored? No one has broken 3RR here AFAICT. Egghead06 made 4 reverts but one of those, of someone else's change, was over 24 hours before they reverted you. They reverted you 3 times which is not a bright line violation. It may still be edit warring, but you also made 2 reverts. It's generally fairly lame to be complaining about someone else edit warring when you're not really any better. I mean sure we could block both of you, but coming to ANI to ask to be blocked for edit warring is a little silly. Just stop edit warring. If someone else decided to take up the charge and Egghead06 has continued that will be on the both of them, not you.

3) Clearly you believe there are issues with the article. Egghead06 didn't agree that your change improved the article. This is a normal part of editing here and should be resolved via good faith discussion rather than bad faith assuming the editor just wants to revert you. Unless you have some actual reason for such a bad faith assumption which requires evidence, then you should indeed be assuming they are reverting you because they felt your changes did not improve the article, you obviously don't agree with them, that's why there should be discussion. And also remembering that you made massive changes (new 12k removed content) with a very limited edit summary "revamp" and then some comment on the talk page. User:Surtsicna also made fairly massive changes but in smaller chunks which enabled an edit summary for each change which is likely a better course of action. To be clear I make no comment on any of the changes themselves, simply pointing out the norms of editing which I still find weird since you've been here for long enough that you should know all this.

4) I'll be a little rude and have to say I don't know why you're posting on ANI either if you're going to bring rants or content disputes which for some reason you refuse to resolve via discussion; rather than issues that actually required administrative attention. I understand you may be frustrated over the loss of your work from an edit conflict but they happen. I mean even if Egghead06 hadn't reverted you, they or someone else could have made some changed which would have resulted in an edit conflict. So as I said in my first post, you need to find some way to fix that on your side.

5) Frankly if I'm blunt, your behaviour has been worse in that whole dispute. As I said, I'll put aside the content issue since it's not something for ANI anyway, and 2 reverts after making a massive change vs 3 reverts is always a bit of a wash with both of you at fault for edit warring. But at least Egghead06 hasn't accused you of not trying to improve Wikipedia. They've just said they don't feel your changes do improve the article at least based on your explanation given. Whereas both your comments at ANI seem to be accusing Egghead06 of not trying to improve the article/just edit warring for the sake of it, effectively a personal attack since you've provided zero evidence for that claim.

Nil Einne (talk) 09:49, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nil Einne: I've just got home from a horrible day of work, where I had to open up a flat for the police to retrieve a dead body. So I really am not caring for this, cheers. Govvy (talk) 16:46, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter June 2020

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hello Govvy,

Your help can make a difference

NPP Sorting can be a great way to find pages needing new page patrolling that match your strengths and interests. Using ORES, it divides articles into topics such as Literature or Chemistry and on Geography. Take a look and see if you can find time to patrol a couple pages a day. With over 10,000 pages in the queue, the highest it's been since ACPERM, your help could really make a difference.

Google Adds New Languages to Google Translate

In late February, Google added 5 new languages to Google Translate: Kinyarwanda, Odia (Oriya), Tatar, Turkmen and Uyghur. This expands our ability to find and evaluate sources in those languages.

Discussions and Resources
  • A discussion on handling new article creation by paid editors is ongoing at the Village Pump.
  • Also at the Village Pump is a discussion about limiting participation at Articles for Deletion discussion.
  • A proposed new speedy deletion criteria for certain kinds of redirects ended with no consensus.
  • Also ending with no change was a proposal to change how we handle certain kinds of vector images.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 10271 Low – 4991 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tom Morris (footballer, died 1942), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Southern League (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:17, 25 June 2020 (UTC)


I'm really not sure why you were doing so, but removing a copyright violation speedy deletion template repeatedly, without rectifying the issue or even explaining why you have done so on the article talk page is disruptive and highly problematic. I've blocked you for 24 hours and would particularly like an explanation for your editing behaviour. Nick (talk) 11:55, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nick: I don't understand, I am allowed to contest a speedy, I removed the notice and edited the article, trying to adding all the citations I was finding, but for some reason, you deleted the article and blocked me? Why block me for trying to improve an article? You are way out of line. Govvy (talk) 12:03, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
Tell me what you understand about copyright violations, because at the moment, I'm not at all convinced you have the necessary understanding to be editing at all. How many other articles have you removed G12 speedy deletion from, leaving significant copyright violations in the article history ? Nick (talk) 12:12, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
@Nick: What are you talking about? I saw a speedy delete request on a games article and when I did a google search I thought I saw enough to think it didn't need to be deleted. So I reviewed the speedy, then started to try and clean up the article. That's all I know, and you, in my view abused your own powers to block me from doing any editing. Govvy (talk) 12:16, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
That is not a satisfactory answer. I'm getting rather pissed off with your accusations of abuse. You removed a speedy deletion request for copyright material that had to be deleted, and you have still not explained why you did so. From what you've said, I'm now enormously concerned that you do not understand there are different reasons for speedy deletion, some of which are unconnected with notability. Nick (talk) 12:21, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
Hi Govvy, in my experience your work here has been very good. But you have to understand that copyright violations are a serious issue and not to be confused with notability. (talk) 12:27, 25 June 2020 (UTC) I still don't understand, why I am blocked, all I know I was trying to improve an article, there was no warning, or anything before hand. It's a straight up ban. As far as I am concerned a lot of admins lack the etiquette these days. It's just laziness in my opinion. Govvy (talk) 12:58, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
An explanation was given above: "[…] removing a copyright violation speedy deletion template repeatedly, without rectifying the issue or even explaining why you have done so on the article talk page is disruptive and highly problematic. […]" The way I understand that you were instantly blocked because of the severity of the problem. But you're not banned, only blocked for 24 hours so you don't have to wait long to return to editing; see WP:BLOCKBANDIFF. :-) (talk) 13:12, 25 June 2020 (UTC) ?? repeatedly? As far as I am aware I thought I removed it once, it was still there when I edited the article. I am totally confused how I could remove it repeatedly, that makes no sense what so ever to me. I was the only one editing that article as far as I am aware till Nick decided to wipe it and ban me. :/ Govvy (talk) 13:35, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
We're talking about Seal of Evil, right? I don't think it's possible for non-admins to inspect the edit history of deleted articles so no idea. @Nick:, would you mind explaining? Govvy probably made an honest mistake. (talk) 13:53, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

So you don't want me to improve wikipedia? Thanks, It's too hot here to go outside, my playstation is broken and I have nothing else to do. Govvy (talk) 12:18, 25 June 2020 (UTC) at 2020-06-25T11:40:52 with the edit summary Contesting this speedy. Enough in a google search suggests this game might pass GNG., and again at 2020-06-25T11:48:49 with the edit summary thought I removed this speedy.. @Govvy: I'm similarly concerned that you don't appear to recognise there are multiple reasons for deletion, and I'm also concerned that you choose to resort to accusations of abuse without evidence. I don't particularly care about what you have available to do at home, I care about protecting Wikipedia, and this last comment has absolutely no bearing on your block. stwalkerster (talk) 14:08, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. (talk) 14:10, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
I am still confused, I really don't understand and have no clue and really not caring anymore. If admins want to treat me like this, maybe I shouldn't bother editing wikipedia. Govvy (talk) 14:24, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
I noticed you were blocked in my watchlist (I've got the add on which crosses out blocked users) and I was really surprised here, but you made a mistake here. A copyright speedy deletion has nothing to do with notability. It means that we have to delete the article because it's a flagrant copyright violation. If you see this again, but you think the article is notable, you must clean up the copyright violation. We have the Earwig copyvio tool, you can always punch in the article there and see exactly which text has been copied and remove all of that if you're trying to save an article. A copyvio deletion doesn't mean the article's non-notable and that you can't recreate it using original text, but it does mean there's a very serious reason for deletion. It was an honest but serious mistake on your part. I do hope you come back and keep editing and understand what steps to take if you find yourself in this situation again (you can always ping me if you're still unsure.) SportingFlyer T·C 17:44, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
Hi Govvy, please let me try to explain it to you. You removed the speedy, which you shouldn't have because the article was a copyright violation (GNG, or even SIGNIF, is irrelevant). The tag was reinstated, with an edit summary explaining that it was still full of copyvios. You then removed the tag again, still without addressing the copyvios. That was why you were blocked - you were edit warring to preserve a copyvio. If the subject is notable, then write it up in your own words after your block expires - nobody has said it's not a notable subject or that we shouldn't have an article about it, we just can't host copyvios - surely you already know that? GirthSummit (blether) 17:51, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Unblock me.

@Nick: Way out of order, unblock me, please don't abuse your admin powers. Govvy (talk) 11:56, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

I was cleaning up that article, there are some good citations, I was adding them, and the few reviews. Govvy (talk) 11:57, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
This does not address the issue of you removing the speedy deletion notice, nor alter the fact that the article, as deleted, was copied in its entirety from [ this site]. What I do see, looking at the article history, is you removing the speedy deletion template with the argument that the article may meet the General Notability Guidelines. Do you believe that copyright violating content that may meet any of our notability criteria doesn't need to be deleted, that it's acceptable to retain such material ? Nick (talk) 12:13, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Please take a look at the entry Ante Žaja, it has been expanded with the necessary references. AndreaD'orrio (talk) 16:20, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@AndreaD'orrio: I am just going through the new pages list, that's a general tag applied by the software I am using, a good amount of citations/sources would be five or more before removing one of those tags asking for sources. Cheers. Govvy (talk) 16:25, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Tagging of Uyghurization

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Uyghurization. I do not think that Uyghurization fits any of the speedy deletion criteria  because a soft redir is not patent nonsense. If you wish, you may try using the simple proposed deletion (PROD) process, or the full articles for deletion (AfD) process, instead. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:53, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel: I'll leave it for now, but I couldn't work it out, I just thought it was just some weird gibberish :/ Govvy (talk) 17:58, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Uyghurization is Uyghur+ization, that is the process of making something or someone into a Uyghur styler, just as "Americanization" is making something into an American style. It may be a neologism or not notable, but it is not nonsense. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:02, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Tziarra King

Not sure if you made an honest mistake but Tziarra King clearly meets WP:NFOOTY. Seany91 (talk) 19:15, 30 June 2020 (UTC)


Do not accuse users of having lost the plot.Slatersteven (talk) 10:16, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

@Slatersteven: LOL, if I feel some people have lost the plot, then I will say so! I didn't say who had lost the plot and it wasn't a direct accusation, so chill. Govvy (talk) 11:29, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Irrelevant, it is language that will. just antagonise people. I haver asked you not to do it, that is my last word here other than to say reads wp:npa. Next time I will redact any PA's.Slatersteven (talk) 11:32, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
@Slatersteven: Really, you're so worked up over a little comment, the plot has been lost on Colston's article talk page, you guys are over-complicating the topic, forgetting the basic facts and convoluting the subject. That is in all technical terms, loosing the plot. So don't go all high and mighty on me, I've had enough of some admins with their over-the-top style of admin and not using common-sense. Govvy (talk) 11:41, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

The CSD tag

Hello, you left a CSD tag of an article I never created but moved to draft, I suggest putting the tag on the draft and not on the redirect which I already tagged for R2. Thanks Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 13:07, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

@Synoman Barris: Umm, it might be helpful if you told me the article! Govvy (talk) 13:09, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Govvy, Sayyed Tomb  Fixed Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 13:10, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
@Synoman Barris: And I already thought we had an article for that of Sayyed Bahram Mausoleum. Govvy (talk) 13:12, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Govvy, Oops, never realised that, then the draft should be deleted. Mind removing the CSD tag from my talk page it’s kinda messy since it was never mine. Cheers Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 13:14, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Deletion archive

Sorry, I misread the time and though you had removed without archiving, I stand corrected and apologise. GiantSnowman 15:47, 3 July 2020 (UTC)


I am merging
"Organisation for the Combined Operations of Railways" into
"Organization for the Cooperation of Railways"
and propose to convert the former into a "#REDIRECT" to the latter. ----MountVic127 (talk) 01:16, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

@MountVic127: Sounds good to me! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:17, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Goodge Place Market redirect to Camden Market

Hello Govvy

I see that you changed the Goodge Place Market into a redirect to Camden Market. Goodge Place is not in Camden and has no connexion to the Camden Market. I am guessing that you created the redirect as notability is in doubt? NorthSentinel (talk) 12:46, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

@NorthSentinel: I thought it was in the vicinity, but upon looking at the map, appears it's not. Strange one, as it's linked into Camden Market urls. Also I do feel there are notability issues with Goodge Place Market. Maybe a redirect to either Goodge Street or Fitzrovia might be better served. Govvy (talk) 13:14, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
I agree that it is questionable but the market has existed, in some form, since 1853. I have a couple of London Guides on route that might help me to expand the article. Unfortunately, there is a paucity of sources on London street markets—even the long established large ones like Leather Lane NorthSentinel (talk) 13:52, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
@NorthSentinel: I've reverted back to how Goodge Place Market was before the redirect, if you can add another four or more citations, that should help. I've been around Leather Lane a fair few times. Being that I live in North London I should know Camden better! Govvy (talk) 14:12, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, I’ve added a stub template to the bottom. I’ll see what I can add in. NorthSentinel (talk) 14:24, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion


This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:36, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Paris Saint-Germain Féminine

I don't do many merge discussions, but looks good to me! GiantSnowman 10:24, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Recentism-related improvements

Hello, Govvy! Thanks for checking out the article that I wrote on Cancel rent. I also understand why you tagged it with recentism; thanks for pointing that out. While the current movement is new, there is a history of calling for housing as a public utility and/or human right. For this reason, I have created a History section of the article, which aims to address some of this background and context. I would love if you could check it out and let me know if the article no longer suffers from recentism (or, if it still does, how I can further improve it). Thank you! Treetopz (talk) 20:02, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Just FYI we can use more nuanced WikiProject tags, see [3]. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:23, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

@Piotrus: Please don't remove other project templates, that's rather counter productive. Govvy (talk) 07:00, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
I think WP:ARCHAELOLGY superceeds the semi-active WP:HISTORY. WP:HISTORY should be used only when no more specific project is applicable. Same logic as with WP:OVERCAT.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:45, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
@Piotrus: Projects don't supersede each other, you can have projects within a project, WP:History is a parent project, you still should keep that on a page regardless of the sub-structure. Govvy (talk) 10:15, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya

Sorry for deleting earlier, I got confused about who the page creator was and didn't want to cause more problems! I see you've requested the histmerge, thanks! I'm putting the histmerge template onto my page as the destination and am doing the copy/paste merge of the content now.

Thank you so much <3 <3 Arianna the First (talk) 10:28, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

no problem, might help to keep the conversation in one place, heh. Hopefully it won't take too long, sometimes admins say just cut and paste, but this time I thought it better for a hist-merge. Govvy (talk) 10:33, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Brenden Margieson article

Hi @Govvy, Thank you for your help with Brenden Margieson article. Sorry for bothering you, but could you please edited the title again and add the N in the end of his name, maybe it was accidentally deleted with the nickname. I'm not quite sure how to it myself. Thank you so much (Araucaria Angustifolia (talk) 23:09, 22 July 2020 (UTC))

@Araucaria Angustifolia: The name looks fine to me, I don't see any issues. Govvy (talk) 11:16, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks mate, someone fixed it yesterday! Araucaria Angustifolia (talk) 22:21, 23 July 2020 (UTC)


I assume you accidentally removed reference to FWA award.

On runners-up, can you please point me to the consensus that these be included? If there is one, can I invite you to please correct the vast majority of Wikipedia articles on players and managers that do not have runners-up? To take an easy example due to multiple wins, can I ask when you'll be updating the Alex Ferguson or Lionel Messi pages to take account of their runners-up? Or are you only focused on making a few articles out of step with the rest? I just cannot understand where these claims of a 'consensus' have come from, and if one exists, why you aren't applying it equally? Vaze50 (talk) 10:36, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Stop WP:FORUMSHOPing, and goto WT:FOOTBALL and have a browse. Govvy (talk) 09:38, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
I have looked at WT:FOOTBALL including the section on style for player articles. There is absolutely nothing about runners-up, they are entirely omitted. Can I please ask on what basis you are therefore claiming consensus on this? Vaze50 (talk) 10:41, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
To clarify, nowhere in the WikiProject Football/Players section is there reference to runners-up. Vaze50 (talk) 10:44, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Consensus - further point

Hi - I think we can say clearly from the discussion that has taken place on WT:FOOTBALL#Runners up honours, given the comments of other users and the 5v5/3v3 deadlock that occurred in the WP Football/Players discussion of March 2020 and the WT Football discussion of July 2020 respectively, any claim that the removal of a runner-up honour(s) on any player or manager page is "completely against consensus" is absolutely and wholly without basis. Rather, this is an issue on which common sense and personal taste are relied upon, and you clearly have a very strong preference on the latter. Whilst that's reasonable, claiming that a consensus exist where one manifestly does not is certainly unreasonable. I do not intend to edit war with you on this point, but please can I ask that you refrain in future from citing that a change is "completely against consensus" in the future when it has been so clearly demonstrated to you that no such consensus exists? By all means say that you think aesthetically or for your own personal reasons a runner-up honour(s) should remain, but to invoke a consensus where one does not exist cannot possibly be in the wider interests of this website. Given the lack of consensus, and the recommendation by users on WT:FOOTBALL#Runners up honours to use common sense and personal judgement, I shall continue to edit appropriately as I see fit. Have a good day. Vaze50 (talk) 12:20, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Teahouse logo

Hi Govvy! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Do bots scan user talk-pages?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.

The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Keanan Bennetts

 Done GiantSnowman 14:19, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: heh, wasn't sure it was worth doing that or not, cheers know. Govvy (talk) 14:36, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Yid Spurs identity

Hi. I noticed you reverted me here[4]. The term is not offensive as it features on official merchandise sold in the club shop such as on scarves, badges and supporter tops. --The Peacocks Are Back (talk) 08:51, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

@The Peacocks Are Back: Nothing to do with being offensive, nicknames for fans is not a nickname for a club. Govvy (talk) 08:54, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
I know it's been a few years but in just a matter of days it wil be a reality again that Leeds play Premiership football. When we ourselves chant "Yiddos! Yiddos!", we do so at the Tottenham team and not the fans, although to all intents and purposes we sing at them as well, songs like "He's only a poor little Yiddo, his face is all tattered and torn, he makes me feel sick, so I hit him with a brick, and now he can't sing any more, he's only a poor little Yiddo Yiddo Yiddo". We do it to the tune of "Only a poor little sparrow". You should see it, it has the whole of Elland Road in stitches and the Spurs fans chanting "We hate Leeds We hate Leeds" back at us. --The Peacocks Are Back (talk) 09:09, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
@The Peacocks Are Back: That's interesting and sad at the same time. I have some idea that when Leslie Silver (as he is Jewish) owned the club, might be when Leeds had some Jewish identity and there could be some relationship between chanting and the relationship with the then chairman. There are some more deeper roots with the club and the Jewish culture in Leeds, but I bet hardly few Leeds fans will know about it. Govvy (talk) 10:21, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, although when I struck out my comment that was meant to retract the actual remark. No point deleting it after it is already there and visible in history so I opted for strike-out. IMHO there is nothing more Jewish about Tottenham than any club as Judaism is merely a way of life and identification. What you need to realise is that it is a reputation which sticks to teams and football supporter mentality is characterised by banter. I sure don't hate the Spurs and will happily support them in Europe and against the actual teams we at the Leeds hate. I love the fact that Liverpool won the league because I hate both the Manchester teams, United goes without saying but City too because they "bought" their newfound success since the start of the new millennium. But you know the drill. When Liverpool and to a lesser extent Everton are the opponents, we sing "Does the Social know you're here?" and so so and so forth! :) I mean I remember the days of aggro when Leeds boys would chant, "You're going home in a Yorkshire ambulance! *clap clap clap*" and one day the lines to "You'll never walk alone" were amended by the Leeds boys to "You'll never walk AGAIN" but apart from the Scousers being locked in the gorund for about 10 mins after the match, there wasn't one bit of trouble. So for the record, I may verbalise those stereotypes but I swear I am not anti-Tottenham and not anti-Jewish and none of the boys I know are any of this! :))))))) --The Peacocks Are Back (talk) 07:04, 6 August 2020 (UTC)


Please do not post to a closed discussion. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 08:34, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@331dot: What are you talking about? Govvy (talk) 08:40, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
This edit you made to ANI(and initially removed by someone else) was to a discussion that was closed. 331dot (talk) 08:43, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
@331dot: 1, It was a discussion I started and have every right to post under it if it's closed, 2, I've seen multiple times people post under closed discussions, so I don't know what rule you're on about. 3, it shouldn't of been removed by the other guy, as that's clearly a COI when he removed it. Govvy (talk) 08:50, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
It is disruptive to post to a closed discussion and it is also disruptive to revert to keep the post there. Please drop the stick. 331dot (talk) 08:53, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
@331dot: drop the stick? I was effectively called a dick (twice) and I got no help from anyone, I found that really offensive and out of order on wikipedia. How an editor can get away with that is beyond me. Then that SchroCat who has been around on wikipedia for years is behaving oddly. I am just pissed off now and it's really sad that ANI missed the key points I pointed out. Don't let it go down hill and I thought admins should know the rules as much as anyway, but I am often shown that's false. Govvy (talk) 09:09, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

August 2020

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  331dot (talk) 09:22, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure why after what seems to be a long and productive Wikipedia career you have decided to go off the rails and make personal attacks, but such attacks will not be tolerated. 331dot (talk) 09:22, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

See, the guy bullies me and you block me, that's clearly abuse of admins. This is pathetic, 331dot abusing his power and SchroCat wiki-hounding (cyber-bullying) to get me to react to ban me. There my emotions are always close to the surface, but this just proves how pathetic wikipedia is. No fucking respect. Govvy (talk) 09:46, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
Respect is earned, not bestowed. If you think fighting fire with fire will earn you respect, you are mistaken. Only you can control your behavior; others cannot bait you if you don't take the bait. You are free to make an unblock request to be reviewed by someone else, but statements like this will not help. 331dot (talk) 09:52, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@331dot: recommend that ya lift the block. It's best that Wikipedia avoid a cancel culture environment. The lad didn't breach 3RR at ANI & is just upset for the moment. GoodDay (talk) 13:15, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@331dot: while I can't see the edit summary that prompted this block, two weeks seems excessive for an editor with only one other block since 2007. This is especially true when you consider the full context. The editor that Govvy lashed out at, SchroCat, also clashed with me at the ANI thread in question and responded with unwarranted nastiness to my factual analysis of the full situation. In a separate thread that was opened after the first ANI thread was closed and had nothing to do with me, SchroCat called me a waste of space and nobody even warned them. That's the same editor who is arguing that being called 'weird' was a mental health slur. The way personal attacks are handled on this site is clearly very inconsistent, but it seems a crying shame that one editor is blocked for two weeks despite having no blocks for incivility since 2007 while another editor gets off scot-free for an egregious personal attack and is even allowed to bait the first editor into blocked. Please reconsider this block. It was bad enough that Govvy wasn't allowed to post a single comment under a closed ANI thread expressing his dismay that his concerns were overlooked. That post was harming nothing and could have been ignored; indeed, it was ignored until SchroCat turned up to unnecessarily twist the knife. This block is just adding insult to injury. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 13:55, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure what your interest here is but in my opinion the vulgarities in the edit summary warranted the block. I have a low tolerance for such attacks in this civil, public forum. I would be happy to remove the block if they concede that their actions were inappropriate (I don't seek an apology, just an acknowledgement) and agree to better control themselves in the future. They are also free to make an unblock request for someone else to review this. 331dot (talk) 15:28, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
That doesn't explain why you issued a two week block to an editor who hadn't been blocked for more than 24 hours since 2007. As I've already noted, I was the target of a severe personal attack by SchroCat in a thread that didn't have anything to do with me. I'd call it an attack in a civil, public forum. It was also SchroCat who goaded Govvy on this page just before you issued your block. You had already advised Govvy not to post to a closed discussion. There was no need for SchroCat to turn up and accuse Govvy of being petulant. He baited Govvy, Govvy took the bait, and you immediately blocked Govvy without saying a word to SchroCat. I'm just trying to point out the full context here. You've issued a two week block to Govvy for writing a rude edit summary in response to blatant baiting, yet neither you nor any other admin has said anything to the editor who attacked me and baited Govvy. You say that you have a low tolerance for personal attacks. Well so do I, especially when they are directed at me. I particularly dislike being attacked in threads that have nothing to do with me. I'm going to guess that Govvy didn't appreciate being baited, either. And that's without mentioning the edit war at Nick Wilton that precipitated this entire situation. In my opinion, SchroCat's actions are far worse than Govvy's. Instead of blocking the bully, you blocked the person who lashed out at the bully after being repeatedly antagonized. Please reconsider. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 15:51, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
I would still like an acknowledgement from this user(as I said, not an apology) that they acted inappropriately. I'm skeptical of "I was baited" since one only needs to not take the bait to avoid being baited. However, I'm still willing to remove this block with just an acknowledgement of inappropriate behavior. 331dot (talk) 16:53, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
I was antagonised and annoyed, everyone has the right to be annoyed. This illusion that wikipedia has that people are not allowed to be annoyed is stupid. Govvy (talk) 17:01, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
I still don't understand why you blocked for two weeks, nor do I understand why you don't have anything to say about SchroCat's behavior. In any dispute, it's important to consider the full context. You didn't resolve the situation by merely blocking one editor for one edit. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 17:02, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
Govvy, I did not say that you could not be annoyed, I've only asked you to acknowledge that you have acted inappropriately. Your profanity laden edit summary would seem to reflect more than mere annoyance. My offer stands should you change your mind, or you may make an unblock request. 331dot (talk) 19:13, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
I have cut the block in half to a week. 331dot (talk) 07:00, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


Hi Govvy - hope you don't mind me dropping by, just wanted to try to pour a little oil on the troubled waters. Looking over the history of the interactions that led here, there was a less-than-entirely-collegiate discussion taking place over the infoboxes, but it was you who levelled the first PA - yes, commenting on someone else being weird is a PA. Stuff like that always tends to escalate - you'll no doubt remember the discussion we had about that on my talk page in March (it's in my Archive 6 if you want to review it). Basically, if you make a mild PA, people aren't going to be surprised if they respond with another PA, even if it's arguably a worse one. My advice - don't make PAs of any kind. If you think someone else behaves imperfectly, don't stoop to their level, and definitely don't escalate it - it won't end well. I'm sure that you could be unblocked if you accept that your actions weren't ideal, and commit to do better, or you could just wait out the block, but just keep away from commenting on other people in future and stuff like this won't happen. GirthSummit (blether) 11:18, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Girth Summit: Telling someone to f'off and leave me alone for wiki-hounding my talk page, pfft, wikipedia is showing it's weakness in my opinion, I ask for help, get bullied and get banned. Calling someone weird is nothing, calling someone a dick is far worse. Wiki-hounding and bullying, that's just sick. Banning someone from editing because they can F-bomb, that's also not fixing the problem, in fact that makes things far worse and damages that relationship of the editor with wikipedia. Loads of admins don't consider their actions, they don't think about the outcome of said actions, there are so many issues with how guidance works and yet people say wikipedia doesn't do guidance counselling. It really saddens me, over the years of my editing, I done a fair bit of wikipedia, put my own person time into try and improve where I can. I hardly think people acknowledge that, "respect is earned" bah, saying that at me discounts the what ever edits I've done over the years, that's not how to talk to people. You need to be strong at times, and show compassion at others. In my experience, there are too many robots and not enough humans. Govvy (talk) 12:02, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
Govvy, I can't agree that calling someone weird is nothing - it personalises a disagreement. It's exactly what I told you in March, when you called someone else a jerk - just because it's not an obscenity doesn't mean it's OK. If you refrain entirely from commenting on other people, and someone insults you, I expect that people would want to help you. However, if you are the one who starts the insults, and then look for help when someone escalates it somewhat, people aren't going to be so quick to defend you. I am sure that's hard to accept at the moment, but please reflect on it. GirthSummit (blether) 12:10, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
Girth Summit, it doesn't always play out like that. SchroCat, the same editor that Govvy was blocked for attacking, referred to me as a waste of space in a discussion that had nothing to do with me. I pointed it out here as a form of mild protest, but nobody said or did anything about it. I'd had a disagreement with SchroCat on the ANI thread that led to Govvy's block, but I said nothing that would qualify as starting the insults. Mind you, this is the same SchroCat who thinks being called 'weird' is a mental health slur. If he thinks being called 'weird' is a big deal, then surely he intended to be very insulting by calling me a 'waste of space'. At the time, I was willing to let it go, but that was before SchroCat successfully baited Govvy into getting blocked. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 14:22, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
Lepricavark, I hear what you're saying, but without wanting to get into details of a past dispute on Govvy's talk, I remain convinced that avoiding personal commentary of all sorts is good advice. GirthSummit (blether) 18:02, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
Girth Summit, that may be so, but it appears that there are only consequences for some people. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 18:07, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Feel free to call me "weird", whenever ya like. Been on this project since 2005 & been called "Facsist", "Xenophobe", "Obsessive compulsive", "Unionist", "Mysogonist", etc etc. GoodDay (talk) 13:21, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

  • A few months ago, Cass said I was Wikipedia's most drama loving editor, happy as a pig in muck to be taken to ANI. Cass was blocked and then unblocked by consensus in an unblock request filed by SchroCat. Nobody, not one person, complained about third part block appeals, or required Cass to make an unblock request before he was unblocked, within a few hours. And he was only blocked for three days not two weeks. Very different treatment than Govvy here. The consequences for PAs are completely different depending on which the editor is making the PA. It's sad and it's true. It's the community's biggest problem. Lev!vich 15:47, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
    Levivich, the only hope that the incivility of Cassianto/SchroCat will ever be addressed is to take them to ArbCom. At some point, someone's going to have to bite the bullet and file a case. The problem is that nobody wants to put that target on their own back because they know the experience will be extremely unpleasant. There's a reason why those two have gotten away with it for so long. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 17:52, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
    Yup, as MJL proved last year. Lev!vich 18:10, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Block review request. Thank you. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 18:03, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Twinkle screwed up the notification. You can find the thread here. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 18:16, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Just wanna say we have your back

Hey, Govvy! Just wanna say that we Wikipedians are a family and we will always have your back no matter what the issue is unless you're on the good side. I am not a long time user with experience or such. Just a guy trying to be nice. If there is somehow a way in which I/we could help you with anything such as a petition or something then please don't hesitate to ask us. Your Friend, Kartsriv

Call me Karthik 😉🤞 (talkcontribs)

My sandbox pages

Why can't I edit my own sandbox? Isn't that exempt from the block? Govvy (talk) 11:51, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

No. Not exempt. The only page which you can edit is this. David Biddulph (talk) 11:53, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
Rather strange that you can't edit your own pages in your user space. Govvy (talk) 11:55, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
While one is blocked, they only have access to their user talk page in order to request unblock. Allowing them to edit other pages or use them for other purposes would defeat the purpose of the block. You are still welcome to proceed as already noted above. 331dot (talk) 11:57, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
311dot, I am not going to apologies to someone who is an antagonistic-bully. Govvy (talk) 11:58, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
I did not ask you to apologize, or to not be annoyed, only to acknowledge that you behaved inappropriately. 331dot (talk) 11:59, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
Maybe I didn't need to swear, I rarely swear, but I felt bullied and antagonised by two guys who got away off-scot, that what sends me over the edge. Govvy (talk) 12:02, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
God-damn, that's a big thread on WP:AN over me... Govvy (talk) 12:04, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
I have lifted the block. I would gently suggest that you consider carefully what you will say before you say it. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 12:05, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
@331dot: o wow, cheers you unbanned me, sorry was reading through the stuff at WP:AN. thanks. Govvy (talk) 12:20, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Maximus Tainio

 Done GiantSnowman 15:26, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman:, thank you, much appreciated. Govvy (talk) 16:02, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Joe Hart

Hello, could you please resist guessing a player's squad number - Joe Hart in this instance, until it's officially confirmed by the club. Thank you. JMHamo (talk) 13:23, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

The club have announced it on twitter and on the website. —  Jts1882 | talk  13:28, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
@Jts1882: I know that but it wasn't official yesterday when a guess at the No. 13 shirt was made here by Govvy. JMHamo (talk) 13:39, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
The club were going to issue 13, but didn't know he was superstitious and the release was changed to 12. Govvy (talk) 13:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
You made me laugh there, you are borderline disruptive at times, please be aware. JMHamo (talk) 14:03, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
:/ Leave me alone and stop antagonising, kinda stupid and rude you posted this to my page in the first place. Govvy (talk) 14:34, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
Oh, I understand now. That wasn't clear. It seems a bit strange that you raise this now, after the change is confirmed, rather than challenge an unsourced addition at the time. —  Jts1882 | talk  14:38, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
I was giving the benefit of the doubt but now I realise it was incompetent editing; this is an encyclopedia, so adding deliberate inaccurate information is not allowed. JMHamo (talk) 14:43, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
@331dot: Can you tell JMHamo to leave me alone, I've got another one trying to be rude and antagonise me. Govvy (talk) 14:54, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Your edits in relation to Joe Hart's number were disruptive, an acknowledgement would have been fine but you tried to fob it off. Please don't edit if you can't stick to the basic principles of Wikipedia. JMHamo (talk) 15:03, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Teahouse logo

Hi Govvy! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, work titles, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.

The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:03, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Transfer fees for Lo Celso & Eriksen

Why are transfer fees for Eriksen & Lo Celso sourced from BBC and other reputable media sources inaccurate? Gearosin81 (talk) 16:21, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Gearosin81: Because no matter how reliable a source can be there will always be mistakes, and I know first hand that the values are incorrect. Govvy (talk) 17:34, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

AFC Bournemouth

We have argued over this but locally few care. The expression though, just FYI, is "to all intents and purposes", not "intense purposes". Britmax (talk) 20:10, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Britmax: I am not sure where you are coming from or if I understand what you are posting. Govvy (talk) 21:16, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
I am pointing out your incorrect use of an expression. Britmax (talk) 15:44, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I've taken care of the concerns you pointed out. Is there anything else that needs fixing in the article? Nehme1499 (talk) 14:09, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nehme1499: It's good enough for me, it's just a little thing I noticed, but is there no ISBN for the second book in the bibliography? Govvy (talk) 21:41, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi, unfortunately I can't find the ISBN of the book. I've found "990025421340205171" at The National Library of Israel, but the code is too long for it to be the ISBN; I'm guessing it's just the specific code for that library. If you feel the article is good enough, can you write on the nomination that you support its promotion to FA? Thanks. Nehme1499 (talk) 01:47, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Barnstar search rescue.png The Article Rescue Barnstar
For correcting an oversight at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winchmore Hill Football Club which led to consensus shifting to 'keep' from 'delete', it gives me great pleasure to award you this article rescue barnstar. Keep up the great work! Eddie891 Talk Work 11:26, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
@Eddie891: cheers, thank you. Govvy (talk) 11:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Howzzthat

Hi! Govvy

I came across this page on wikipedia "" and tried to create a similar page. I had a query and wanted to know what is the difference between both the pages, as one is valid and the other is marked for deletion. Thank you in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hannah.mathews (talkcontribs) 09:14, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying Govvy, I have checked the page "" again but it has not been marked for deletion as of yet. Can you please advise. Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hannah.mathews (talkcontribs) 07:58, 18 September 2020 (UTC)


This is Generouswriter. I am still learning how to use Wikipedia properly, so apologies in advance if this is replied to incorrectly! I am not a paid editor. I am transparent in my affiliation to the company, Existing Conditions. But I am striving to be as objective and professional as possible. I am still working on the article, but of course will reach out for further objective feedback as the project progresses.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Generouswriter (talkcontribs) 21:34, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

You labelled this A7 ; the article at the time you tagged this contained the sourced statement that she is "the John Humphrey Plummer Professor of Machine Learning, AI, and Medicine at the University of Cambridge "

Being a professor at Cambridge University is a clear indication of probably importance. What is more, , according to the relevant criterion WP:PROF, holding a named or honorary chair at a major university is proof of notability . The WP:PROF criterion is completely independent of the GNG, but even under the GNG, this would not be an A7. DGG ( talk ) 01:52, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

It has since been deleted as a copyvio, which I and you both missed, but I'm rewriting it. DGG ( talk ) 23:42, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
@DGG: The headmaster of the school I went to was a Professor at Cambridge, he doesn't have an article. :/ I also feel that WP:PROF shows a lot of weakness and too easily passes notability when not much is there. "Professor of Machine Learning, AI, and Medicine" What a mouthful, and not really that notable. Really, WP:PROF needs to be streamlined at the moment, its wack, and asks some of the wrong things. Govvy (talk) 11:29, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of 1997–98 Kent Football League for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 1997–98 Kent Football League is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1997–98 Kent Football League until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Spiderone 21:18, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Place of birth cannot define the subject's main nationality or the English-language dialect will be used in the article. The subject is a dual British-American citizen whose profession is association football (soccer) and he has decided to represent worldwide the United States over England, having already played for the Stars and Stripes. Therefore, he should be set (primarily) as an American soccer player (and to use all the US standards instead of the British ones), then as an English footballer.--MonFrontieres (talk) 17:03, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

@MonFrontieres: Incorrect, the article consistency was already set and should be stuck to, what you did actually violates some policy, but I've forgotten which one it was. Govvy (talk) 17:05, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Well, he is not cap-tied to the United States yet (all his senior international appearances were in friendly matches),[5] but neither has he requested the one-time change of association (from the United States to England).--MonFrontieres (talk) 17:16, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
You don't need to ping someone on their talk page! Also it's been discussed at WT:FOOTBALL a couple of times, [6] Govvy (talk) 17:20, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

This article must be merged

The article west block blues must be merged into Bengaluru FC support section.I have some valid reasons to say so. 1.Like WBB Manjappada is also a fan club that have more coverage than west block blues. Still there is no article for them and it is protected from recreating. please see the DRV Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2020 September 25 2.If this is the case so according to WP:Othe Stuff exists, if West Block Blues can have a article, Manjappada can surely have. I have been saying this to lot of admins but nobody is taking action. The article WBB still overcane 2 deletion discussions (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/West Block Blues (2nd nomination)) )which I dont know how. You were in favour of deleting it. So sir please take necessary action by opening a DRV. Shahoodu (talk) 06:52, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

@Shahoodu: I am not an admin, you can start another merge request on the article and make all your points, just follow the instructions at WP:MERGE. Govvy (talk) 10:49, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Would you mind pointing out where it's sourced? Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 15:49, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Mattythewhite: Doesn't matter, I removed it, as it was added by one IP and then there was this back and forth bit of edit-warring! And I got distracted by the amount of disruptive edits on Danny Welbeck. Govvy (talk) 15:52, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
@Mattythewhite: Erm, the sources for being one of the best goal keepers in the world!? Try having a look at the individual honours he has!! heh. :/ Govvy (talk) 15:55, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
Oh dear. Mattythewhite (talk) 19:29, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Rangers International F.C.

Thanks! GiantSnowman 11:05, 24 October 2020 (UTC)


Unfortunately Maxim has picked several fights over the last few weeks, some with Admin, and ended up with 4 edit wars in less than two weeks - he has been back from his last ban for less than a week, and immediately went and started the edit war again. Anyway, I have no issue with Credenza, and there is no doubt reasonable content that could be added to "culture" sections on various towns / cities (he has done some of this already and I have not reverted, although I did remove one of his poor sources on a few pages). It just needs to focus on the cultural aspect of the installation and not the company / piano as much. Koncorde (talk) 00:20, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Why hello there, Well Mr Koncorde, I feel I should stay away from the article really as Evelyn Rubin is my 3rd or 4th cousin! And I know a little bit about that company already from other family members. I don't know about the other stuff that Maxim has done, but have noticed a few issues in the past. Govvy (talk) 00:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
I think 3rd or 4th cousin is plenty far enough away to avoid a CoI to be fair. In any case if you put together a neutral statement / content and want me to look it over and add it to any article/s let me know. Koncorde (talk) 00:28, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
FWIW it looks like JZG did some purging after I tried to tidy up the additions at various venues. I haven't checked all venues to see if he's just swept all Maxims stuff.[7][8] Koncorde (talk) 00:31, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Anyway, anything I'd say or do, I feel it would delve into WP:OR! And my Hebrew is useless! Rather just leave for others! heh. cheers. Govvy (talk) 00:40, 28 October 2020 (UTC)


An isbn has two formats, 10-digit and 13-digit. 0-600-58706-1 and 978-0-600-58706-4 are exactly the same isbn. I changed it to the 13-digit format because that is the one already used in the article and I have seen reviewers insist upon consistency. Books sometimes show both formats in their frontispieces but it is usually one or the other – publisher's preference applies.

The best way to convert format is with this utility: It is used by many WP editors. No Great Shaker (talk) 15:59, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@No Great Shaker: 13? All I know is that I have the book here on my bookshelf and there is just one number under the bar code! :/ Govvy (talk) 16:01, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
Sorry if I haven't explained it fully. What is it that you don't understand? The point is that if the article goes to GAN as I intend, it is very likely that the reviewer will ask for all ISBNs to be in the same format. As the book in the bibliography uses the 13-digit format, the reviewer will want a 10-digit ISBN converted to 13-digit. It's always best to anticipate things like that and do the conversion upfront. As the utility will demonstrate, the two numbers above are the same ISBN. Thanks. No Great Shaker (talk) 16:20, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

I think the best thing to do with this is leave the 10-digit ISBN in place for Soar's book but, if and when this goes to GAC and a reviewer asks for format consistency, it will have to be converted. It will depend on the reviewer, of course. Lets hope we can get it to and through GA review. By the way, sources for Sheffield United are abysmal. It's almost as if their fans don't care about the club's history – for example, the article on here is a recentist thing – despite the glory years they had a century and more ago. All the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 18:44, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@No Great Shaker: Well, if you have any questions on Spurs history, you can always ask me, I can normally find sources 90% of the time. I also have the email address for the club historian who I've corresponded on occasion. Govvy (talk) 18:53, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Sinfamily SPI

Regarding your comments at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sinfamily, there's a couple of things worth noting. First, we're all volunteers here. Telling another volunteer to "please do the work" is unlikely to motivate them. The other thing is that CUs operate under a strict set of rules for when they're allowed to run checks. One of the rules is that there needs to be evidence which makes you suspect socking before violating a user's privacy by running a check. They get audited on stuff like this, and can have their checkuser rights revoked if they can't justify the checks they've run. So, when they push back on doing a check, it's not that they're lazy, it's that they don't think the evidence presented would stand up to an audit. -- RoySmith (talk) 12:41, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

@RoySmith: There was really no reason for you to post any of that, it doesn't matter who reports something, or who does the response. What matters is how admins present themselves, if I don't like something I will say it. Sadly I've seen what I feel is a lot of bad, lazy responses, you posting here, well, seems unnecessary, and I have nothing else to say. Govvy (talk) 21:54, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Nick Tsaroulla

He played for Crawley in the EFL Trophy this evening, and therefore now passes NFOOTY.[1] :) Microwave Anarchist (talk) 21:00, 10 November 2020 (UTC)


@Microwave Anarchist: Cheers, have moved the article into main-space. Govvy (talk) 21:30, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
I used that soccerway ref you posted, but it really needs switching over to a better ref if possible. Govvy (talk) 21:36, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

My sandboxes

Not at all, feel free to edit! GiantSnowman 12:31, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Scale of justice 2.svgHello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 01:21, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

speedy A7

Just want to remind you that speedy A7 applies to companies, but not to their products. DGG ( talk ) 13:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Techtro Swades united fc

Hello,I just saw that you nominated the article Techtro Swades United FC for deletion. Let me ask you one simple thing. If sunday league football clubs have articles on wikipedia,then why not a single 'Indian sunday club' can have an article?Falcon with appendix (talk) 15:54, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

@Falcon with appendix: Non-league articles for clubs are fine, but you're not suppose to have season pages for them, hence WP:NSEASONS. Govvy (talk) 15:56, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

New Page Patrol December Newsletter

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hello Govvy,

A chart of the 2020 New Page Patrol Queue

Year in review

It has been a productive year for New Page Patrol as we've roughly cut the size of the New Page Patrol queue in half this year. We have been fortunate to have a lot of great work done by Rosguill who was the reviewer of the most pages and redirects this past year. Thanks and credit go to JTtheOG and Onel5969 who join Rosguill in repeating in the top 10 from last year. Thanks to John B123, Hughesdarren, and Mccapra who all got the NPR permission this year and joined the top 10. Also new to the top ten is DannyS712 bot III, programmed by DannyS712 which has helped to dramatically reduce the number of redirects that have needed human patrolling by patrolling certain types of redirects (e.g. for differences in accents) and by also patrolling editors who are on on the redirect whitelist.

Rank Username Num reviews Log
1 DannyS712 bot III (talk) 67,552 Patrol Page Curation
2 Rosguill (talk) 63,821 Patrol Page Curation
3 John B123 (talk) 21,697 Patrol Page Curation
4 Onel5969 (talk) 19,879 Patrol Page Curation
5 JTtheOG (talk) 12,901 Patrol Page Curation
6 Mcampany (talk) 9,103 Patrol Page Curation
7 DragonflySixtyseven (talk) 6,401 Patrol Page Curation
8 Mccapra (talk) 4,918 Patrol Page Curation
9 Hughesdarren (talk) 4,520 Patrol Page Curation
10 Utopes (talk) 3,958 Patrol Page Curation
New page reviewer of the year cup.svg
NPP Technical Award.png
Reviewer of the Year

John B123 has been named reviewer of the year for 2020. John has held the permission for just over 6 months and in that time has helped cut into the queue by reviewing more than 18,000 articles. His talk page shows his efforts to communicate with users, upholding NPP's goal of nurturing new users and quality over quantity.

NPP Technical Achievement Award

As a special recognition and thank you DannyS712 has been awarded the first NPP Technical Achievement Award. His work programming the bot has helped us patrol redirects tremendously - more than 60,000 redirects this past year. This has been a large contribution to New Page Patrol and definitely is worthy of recognition.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 2262 Low – 2232 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

18:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Article up for deletion

Please check this out article Daisy the Great. It is up for deletion. Davidgoodheart (talk) 23:15, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Wikipedia Happy New Year.png Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!

Hello Govvy, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021.
Happy editing,

REDMAN 2019 (talk) 17:25, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Snow-man-1882635 1920.jpg Merry Christmas Govvy

Hi Govvy, just wishing you and your family a very Merry Christmas
and a happy New Year. Thanks for all your contributions to Wikipedia this year. Here's to 2021 being a bit brighter for all!
   –Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 19:18, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

@REDMAN 2019: @Iggy the Swan: , Thanks guys. Happy Holidays to you both. Govvy (talk) 19:47, 23 December 2020 (UTC)