User talk:Stevie fae Scotland

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

Your GA nomination of 2022 Angus Council election[edit]

The article 2022 Angus Council election you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2022 Angus Council election for comments about the article, and Talk:2022 Angus Council election/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 17:24, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article 2022 Clackmannanshire Council election you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2022 Clackmannanshire Council election for comments about the article, and Talk:2022 Clackmannanshire Council election/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ganesha811 -- Ganesha811 (talk) 21:44, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article 2022 Argyll and Bute Council election you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2022 Argyll and Bute Council election for comments about the article, and Talk:2022 Argyll and Bute Council election/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ganesha811 -- Ganesha811 (talk) 21:45, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article 2022 Aberdeenshire Council election you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2022 Aberdeenshire Council election for comments about the article, and Talk:2022 Aberdeenshire Council election/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of The C of E -- The C of E (talk) 12:06, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2022 Glasgow City Council election you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of DimensionalFusion -- DimensionalFusion (talk) 10:21, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article 2022 Glasgow City Council election you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2022 Glasgow City Council election for comments about the article, and Talk:2022 Glasgow City Council election/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of DimensionalFusion -- DimensionalFusion (talk) 08:23, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 2022 Glasgow City Council election[edit]

On 14 April 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2022 Glasgow City Council election, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 2024 Hillhead by-election was the first by-election won by the Scottish Green Party? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2022 Glasgow City Council election. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2022 Glasgow City Council election), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Z1720 (talk) 12:03, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Argentina vs Brazil football rivalry[edit]

Hello! I´am tottaly agree with you about the unreliability of the source of Elo Ratings, as you said here [1]. Bless you that you said!!! Please, tell this to the user Svartner that it seems it has more value than (for example) a FIFA source or an AFA (Argentine Football Association) for him... Look, there is a dispute with this user in the article Argentina-Brazil football rivalry and all the related articles because of the count of the official matches of the rivalry. There are 6 controversial games that many sources count them as official games, many others do not count as official, and many others count some of them and do not count others. These are those controversial games:

• 1920 (Oct.6): Argentina 3 Brazil 1: many sources say it was not a “Class A match”. It was played with 8 players each [2] [3]

• 1922 (Oct.22): Brazil 2 Argentina 1: many sources say it was not a “Class A match". Brazil played with their B team, because the A team played the same day the 1922 Copa America final vs. Paraguay) [4] FIFA Source. To see the complete list of matches, please click in "Advanced search" and then in "Show all matches". AFA´s source El Gráfico magazine´s source. None of them includes this match.

• 1923 (Dec.2): Argentina 0 Brazil 2 (Copa Confraternidad): many sources say it was not a “Class A match”. Argentina didn´t play with its “A” team because they played in the same day the decisive game against Uruguay in the 1923 Copa America. [5] FIFA Source. To see the complete list of matches, please click in "Advanced search" and then in "Show all matches". AFA´s source El Gráfico magazine´s source. None of them includes this match.

• 1956 (Dec.5): Brazil 1 Argentina 2 (Copa Colombo). Many sources say it was not a “Class A match”. Brazil didn´t play with its first team. It was a Guanabara´s Selection. [6] [7] [8] But... The same sources that Svartner uses to say there would be a few matches apparently official that won Brazil, this sources (THE SAME: rsssf.com, 11v11, Elo ratings) ALSO say there are a few matches won by Argentina that would be official too, but HE doesn´t count those matches (won by Argentina) only because he wants; simple...Those disputed games won by Brazil, yes, they are right for him, but when THE SAME sources he uses for those games say that the disputed games won by Argentina are official he says "nooooo, unofficial"... Double standard... Look [9] (figures the 1920 and 1956 match) [10] (figures the 1920 and 1956 match) [11] (figures the 1956 match), [12] (figures the 1920 and 1956 match)... The SAME sources he uses for one thing, he doesn´t use for another... Again: double standard...

• 1968 (August 7): Brazil 4 Argentina 1. Many sources say it was not a “Class A match”. Brazil presented a Guanabara´s State Selection (a provincial team of Rio de Janeiro). [13] [14] [15]

• 1968 (August 11): Brazil 3 Argentina 2. Many sources say it was not a “Class A match”. Brazil presented a Minas Gerais Selection.[16] [17] [18]

The naked truth is that those 6 matches (4 won by BRA and 2 won by ARG) are unofficial according to FIFA. This user disrespects the FIFA´s source I gave with the complete list of official matches and I do not see these 6 matches in the FIFA´s source with the complete list of games; no 1920, no 1922, no 1923, no 1956, no 1968 (the two games)!!! There is notihing in football more official than FIFA, and this source and many others says clarely that 1920, 1922, 1923, 1956, and the two matches of 1968 were unofficial!!! Look, the source from FIFA: FIFA official´s page (archive). Argentina vs. Brazil head to head. February 2013. This FIFA´s source is from Feb. 2013. After that date, they played 10 times, with 4 wins for Argentina, 4 wins for Brazil and 2 ties. To see the complete list of matches according to this FIFA´s source, please click in "Advanced search", and then in "Show all matches". Moreover, yesterday he had the nerve to accuse me to be "disruptive" and to try to impose WP:POV [19]. So I´am the "disruptive" and want to impose WP:POV?

The only sources he accepts are those that "beneficiates" Brazil! I tried to discuss lot of times and he refused [20] [21]. I also took this issue to the Football Wikiproyect but nobody came to participate. [22]. I can´t do anything else... I think the most important and official source in football that we can have is FIFA... No other site or association can be above FIFA, and the only source of FIFA that have the complete list of matches is the one I put above

Please, see the articles Argentina national football team results (1920–1939) (there are more unofficial matches according to FIFA, Oct. 1922 and Dec. 1923 matches against Brazil), Argentina national football team results (1940–1959) (there is one unofficial match according to FIFA, Dec. 1956 match against Brazil), Argentina national football team results (1960–1979) (there are 2 unofficial matches according to FIFA, Aug. 7 and 11 1968 against Brazil)... Also here, in Argentina national football team results (unofficial matches), we have to add the unofficial matches of 1920, 1922, and 1923... Here, in Brazil national football team results (unofficial matches) we have to add the 1920, 1922, 1923 and 1956 matches... Here, in Brazil national football team records and statistics we should have to correct the numbers, according to FIFA´s source (I think).

So I ask you "almost on my knees": can you participate in the discussion of this 6 matches in the talk page of Argentina-Brazil football rivalry here [23], please???.

Sorry for the length of this, but it´s a very difficult situation. Regards, Raúl Quintana Tarufetti (talk) 22:12, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]