User talk:Wolbo: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 23:26, 13 October 2020

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by when more than 10 sections are present.

Welcome!

Hello, Wolbo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! --Dark Falls ^talk 01:06, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

turned pro

In regard to the 'turned pro' field on the tennis biog infobox, perhaps it would be better if changed to something like 'career began'? That way, we can add some useful, relevant and factually correct info for tonnes of players pre-1940s/1950s. Or perhaps a new 'career began' field could be added for these cases, coexisting alongside the 'turned pro' field, i.e. Rod Laver would have separate entries for both. Thoughts? Asmazif (talk) 19:26 9 September 2012 (GMT)

Tennis profiles

It's not "crystal balling", all the information is taken from the live-tennis.eu website, a site updated daily with live rankings. It's also an official source for both the ATP World Tour Finals and the WTA Finals. So there is no predictions or guesswork. And now you just caused extra work because the ATP is too damn stupid to have heard of live updates and live-tennis is doing all the hard work for them. No surprise considering how horrid the ATP's writing staff is with multiple errors and typos every single week.

List of the busiest airports in Europe

As agreed from the beginning, European airports are defined as those that are within the airspace of the member and candidate states of The Council of Europe. (See discussion). Therefore, please don't delete any Canarian, Cypriot and Russian airports. Thank you.

World Number One Male Tennis Players

Wolbo, I not who you think you are. I did a massive amount of research in late 2017 and early 2018 to improve the article so that it was consistent for each yaer. The original author had a lot of detail but was inconsistent. NO ONE has objected to the text I added for over year. The editor Funk was in agreement with my work/writing. Please leave this article along. If you do not like it create your own article.

I do not know what is wrong with you. You are destroying hundreds of hours of research and writing I did. Much of the info repeats what the original authors had typed in and the information is not obtainable anywhere else anywhere in the world. You cannot find the year-end rankings of certain tennis authorities and experts from the 60s or 70s anywhere now...When I started my periodic re-writing of the article in late 2017 (one year by one year over 4 or 5 months) you never said anything and Funck the other main editor of this page was in agreement. What I prepared is a fascinating summary of the men's years in tennis - how the top 4 or so players did; what they won; who won all the major events and the year-end finals; how those top players did in the big 9 tournaments; in the 70s how they each did on the competing circuits; their records for the year including head to heads; why number 2 is ranked ahead of number 3 and number 3 above number 4. Many years the number 2 ranking was disputed or very close; and then the number 3 ranking might have been close to the number 4; in the 70s the top 1 to 4 were especially close most years. No one has made any deletions in over a year meaning virtally everyone who went to the page liked the information. Hope you are happy.

I came VERY close to reverted that massive delete the day after it was done. I thought it was getting rid of an enormous amount of solid information. I finally decided not to since the delete seemed made by a WP editor, plus, since the detail in same wasn't greatly backed up, with at least one reference. Actually, that person deleted the WRONG heading if one was to be deleted. The heading "Number of times ranked no. one", must be FIFTY TIMES LESS IMPORTANT. Jim Percy (talk) 16:46, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem with bold edits as long as they are sensible. Gutting the core of an article is clearly a step too far. The article is interesting (it is an obvious labor of love) but it also has many issues and from an encyclopedic point of view may be one of the worst articles within the tennis project. It is subjective / opinionated, contains original research as well as out-of-scope content and is poorly defined and poorly sourced. I am all in favor of a drastic overhaul to improve it but this edit threw out the baby with the bathwater. --Wolbo (talk) 19:20, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tennis players killed in World War I has been nominated for merging

Category:Tennis players killed in World War I has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. User:Namiba 12:18, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don't copy-paste move!

You've been around long enough to know that you shouldn't move pages by cut-and-paste like you did at ITF Berlin Open → European Indoor Championships. See WP:Moving a page. Ask for help from an administrator (WP:RM). Thanks, wbm1058 (talk) 12:22, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:43, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New ITF player identification

Hi Wolbo,

Please accept my invitation to react on this proposal. Perhaps you know other tennis editors on en-wiki, who could react too? It is high time that this issue gets resolved; it is now nine months old.

Cordial greetings, Pommée (talk) 11:46, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ITF website

Hi Wolbo,

further good news regarding the ITF website: not only did they re-instate the players' redirects, now they also feature tournament edition redirects! To try it, click this old-style link:

http://www.itftennis.com/procircuit/tournaments/women's-tournament/info.aspx?tournamentid=1100042035

and you will get the new tournament edition page. Pommée (talk) 21:04, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pommée, that's good news, saves a whole lot of update work. Do you know if this was per our (wiki) request? --Wolbo (talk) 11:08, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't the foggiest... Sounds very much like it. If it was by wiki request, it most probably came from an American wikipedian I guess, who knows a friend of a friend at ITF's. Cheers, Pommée (talk) 15:58, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pommée, can you give me an update on the ITF player ID 2020 data item? You mentioned the ITF re-instated the players' redirects so do we still need to update player articles and if so, which ones? --Wolbo (talk) 13:12, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I am aware, en-wiki like nl-wiki uses a template to address the ITF link through wikidata. Your Template:ITF profile uses both the old and the new property, giving precedence to the latter if it exists. As a fortunate (albeit intentionally designed) consequence, player articles need no update.

Shifting the discussion now to the wikidata item: the new property certainly needs to be specified for relatively new players who don't have an old id (or we don't know the old id). For existing players the old link currently works again, but we cannot be sure ITF supports the redirects forever. It seems wise that we gradually specify the new id also for older players. I did the women's top 370 until now, and I will slowly carry on. I noticed other tennis wikipedians like Edoderoo and Openbk (and possibly others) working on it too. If more colleagues chip in, we will get the job done, in the end. With this query (thanks to Edoderoo) one can find players yet in need of the new id. My preference is that the old id-property be not removed from the tennis players' wikidata items. It can be very useful to find an older version of the ITF profile page at Internet Archive, because the versions before say 2019 contain more information than nowadays (e.g. date of birth). Pommée (talk) 15:45, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the process is fully determined:

Select any wikidata item with P599 but without P8618
Click on the P599 value link
Pick up the URL of the web page where you landed and select the 'middle' part from it with name/number/country
Go back to the wikidata item selected in step 1
Give it a P8618 property with the value determined in step 3

That's all. If anyone would know a programming language containing the necessary primitives to do these operations, the program would be pretty straightforward.

Anyone of the readers of this page? Or anyone who knows someone? Pommée (talk) 19:52, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draw links in season templates

Hi, I saw that you just removed [1] the draw links in Template:1995 WTA Tour, which I added yesterday. I've been going through all the years and adding them, because they aid navigation and also make it obvious which draws still need to be added. I did notice that for a couple of years you recently removed the links from a couple of articles [2], but also that you had created several templates with the links [3] (at least for the grand slams). I just created a template which removes the mess of piped wikilinks and tags needed before, e.g. {{Draw links|1980 French Open|WS=1|WD=1|X=1}}, which I will go back and add to all the templates I've already changed if you agree, or do you not want them at all? Thanks, Somnifuguist (talk) 16:45, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Somnifuguist, lately I have indeed removed links to the draws from various ATP and WTA year templates. In my view they make the navigation templates convoluted and too busy. I much prefer the cleaner look of just listing the tournaments without the draw links. Also, although we have no statistics on this, I really doubt that many readers would click on the letters (S, D) to go directly to a tournament draw instead of just navigating to the tournament article. Missing draw links can easily be seen on the ATP and WTA year articles. Of course views on this may differ so if you want you can solicit more views on the Tennis project page.--Wolbo (talk) 13:04, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input, I'll post there shortly. I'll also finish swapping in the template, so that if consensus is against the links, they can all be removed easily with a regex substitution using AWB. Somnifuguist (talk) 14:41, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Somnifuguist, please remove your summary of my opinion from your statement on the tennis talk page. I am perfectly capable of giving my opinion. Please stick to your own view or opinion and do not speak for me. --Wolbo (talk) 17:14, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sorry. Somnifuguist (talk) 17:51, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, thanks. --Wolbo (talk) 18:19, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

You're about to violate the 3RR rule.

The fact the references affirm that Wimbledon is more prestigious does not prevent clarifying that it is not a more important tournament than the other grand slam. Anyway, try the topic in Talk, please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavideNotta (talk • contribs) 21:40, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 107: / Line 107: @@
 The fact the references affirm that Wimbledon is more prestigious does not prevent clarifying that it is not a more important tournament than the other grand slam. Anyway, try the topic in Talk, please.  <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:DavideNotta|DavideNotta]] ([[User talk:DavideNotta#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/DavideNotta|contribs]]) 21:40, 11 October 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
-== October 2020 ==
-[[File:Ambox warning pn.svg|30px|link=]] You currently appear to be engaged in an [[WP:Edit warring|edit war]]&#32; according to the reverts you have made on [[:Duolingo]]; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to [[Wikipedia:Consensus#In talk pages|collaborate]] with others, to avoid editing [[WP:Disruptive editing|disruptively]], and to [[WP:Consensus|try to reach a consensus]], rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
-Points to note:
-# '''Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;'''
-# '''Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.'''
-If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's [[Help:Talk pages|talk page]] to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an [[WP:Noticeboards|appropriate noticeboard]] or seek [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]]. In some cases, it may be appropriate to [[WP:Requests for page protection|request temporary page protection]]. If you engage in an edit war, you '''may be [[WP:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing.''' <!-- Template:uw-ew --> [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 23:24, 13 October 2020 (UTC)