Beginning to enter information you might be interested in regarding-1910-20 mens singles — Preceding unsigned comment added by Racingmanager (talk • contribs) 21:52, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, very good, very interesting. --Florentyna (talk) 05:28, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me about getting free photos of Sports. Sgxi (talk) 11:35, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is one of the biggest problems on wikipedia - to find free photos for articles. On the English wikipedia it is a little bit more easy, there you can upload small versions of nearly every picture under the fair use license to illustrate an article. Most images what I found are from flickr. For instance [1] has an adequate license for wikimedia commons (click on the page there on LICENSE) Probably all images from this photographer you can use for the commons. This image [2] for instance you can't use for the commons, because the license says: Noncommercial and No Derivative Works, but it must be both allowed. What is also allowed is to upload old pictures (author more than 70 years dead or pictures older than 70 years from unknown authors). If you have more questions feel free to ask. --Florentyna (talk) 12:22, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

• The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code you were emailed. If you did not receive a code, email wikiocaasi@yahoo.com your Wikipedia username.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
• If you need assistance, email or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 15:28, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email!

1. Go to https://www.questia.com/specialoffer
2. Input your unique Offer ID and Promotional code. Click Continue. (Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive).
3. Create your account by entering the requested information. (This is private and no one from Wikipedia will see it).
4. You'll then see the welcome page with your Login ID. (The account is now active for 1 year).

If you need help, please first ask Ocaasi at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com and, second, email QuestiaHelp@cengage.com along with your Offer ID and Promotional Code (subject: Wikipedia).

• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Questia article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Questia pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Questia/Citations.
• Questia would love to hear feedback at WP:Questia/Experiences
• Show off your Questia access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/Questia_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi EdwardsBot (talk) 05:05, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please make sure to include an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{WrestleMania XXVIII} _{The Undertaker 20–0} 18:16, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't tell me such phrases but exactly what you mean. Florentyna (talk) 18:27, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, i making some changes to your created template, hope you fine! --Aleenf1 12:05, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. --Florentyna (talk) 12:49, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have a few old ones (1967, 1969, 1970, 1971). First I have to locate them since I'm not very orderly and haven't used them in a while, and then my son (who lives 15 miles away) would have to help me with the rest since I'm terrible with computers. Please be patient and I'll see what I can do. Regards from one badminton lover to another. Badmintonhist (talk) 20:43, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've found three of the four books. One is coverless. I'll see if I can find the fourth one over the weekend. If you give me a mailing address I'll send you either the three or the four books within a few days. Don't worry about mailing costs, you'll pay your share when you send them back. Badmintonhist (talk) 05:16, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Florentyna. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

I've declined your AIV request on User:Mvgcrown for two reasons. First you never warned, or in any way tried to discuss the matter with the user. Since WP:BLPCAT is a very technical rule, it's very likely that a new user wouldn't understand it. And we almost never block a user without explaining what they've done wrong, even in cases of blatant, aggressive vandalism. Furthermore, those edits are definitely not vandalism; the exact definition can be found in WP:VANDAL, but the basic idea is that vandalism only refers to edits designed to make Wikipedia worse, which clearly these are not. You may wish to review the vandal definitions on that page. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:47, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this is a little bit more tricky case, but also not good for the Wikipedia project. --Florentyna (talk) 11:20, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And I agree with your sentiment as well. Since the user has continued, I've upgraded my informative statement to a warning. If the user persists, feel free to leave me a note on my talk page (I may not remember to check Mvgcrown's contributions) and I'll block. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:32, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Florentyna. I see you have added a badminton project tag to the sports club Østerbros Boldklub talk page, and wonder if you have a reference for Østerbros Boldklub having had badminton in its program?

I can see that an Østerbro BK is listed at the List of Danish National Badminton champions, but I think you have Østerbros Boldklub (Østerbros BK) confused with Østerbro Badmintonklub (Østerbro BK) - which in all honesty is a most understandable mix-up, as I made Østerbro BK a redirection article instead of just fixing the (commonly misspelled) link to Østerbros Boldklub at IFK Göteborg. Poulsen (talk) 21:05, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I must have a closer look on this, in the German WP it links to two badminton pages, but it can be assigned in a wrong way [3]. --Florentyna (talk) 21:20, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, in highlight section, that is heavily unsourced, please do not remove the templates. --Aleenf1 15:33, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that User:The tampan used a new format for the 2013 All-England Super Series Premier, but has gone further to using his new format for the 2013 Korea Open Super Series Premier and is in the process of changing the formatting for the 2013 Malaysia Super Series. I've been away for a while, have these changes been discussed, it's one thing to use a new format for a new competition, but to go back and change formats for completed events seems drastic. What are your thoughts?--MorrisIV (talk) 04:14, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The tampan is still re-editing articles without providing an explanation for why he wants the new format. Personally, I think The tampan's edits have reached the point of wrecklessness. What options do we have to address this issue? I went to the Wikipedia:Wikiproject Badminton page, but there is no comprehensive list of users so that a consensus could be reached. What do you think should be the next move?--MorrisIV (talk) 15:01, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is getting out-of-control, and frankly unacceptable. I think The tampan is claiming Wikipedia:Ownership of articles and is not responding to the discussion I attempted to begin on his/her talk page (which I find particularly egregious). I think we should go to User:Qwyrxian or someone else to resolve this issue.--MorrisIV (talk) 04:11, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since you are a listed member at Wikipedia:WikiProject Badminton I am inviting you to reach a consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Badminton regarding the format of brackets for tournaments, particularly the Super Series competitions.--MorrisIV (talk) 15:40, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We just hae a debate on User talk:Drmies about the flag issues. Will the flag we practice currently object to the WP:MOSFLAG?

Right now I read this debate. I'm against the removal of flags. Florentyna (talk) 16:23, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sincerely, I'm also not familiar with a list without flags, like misses a piece of information. --Aleenf1 16:29, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Florentyna, you should read MOS:FLAG first before you simply revert, without a word of explanation: it's disruptive. The burden is on editors wanting to use those icons, and "I'm against" sounds like a matter of taste, not an argument based on policy or guideline. MorrisIV has arguments: as long as you don't have any, please refrain from reverting. BTW, what on earth is gained by having a flag in every single bracket? You should read the discussion on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons for a variety of technical and other problems you probably never thought of, like how this works for the color blind or those without high-quality monitors. Drmies (talk) 16:34, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Florentyna, your edit is obviously based on a misreading of MOS:FLAG; as I suggested to you earlier, your line, "flags should indicate the sportsperson's representative nationality", does not reflect the MOS: there is nothing in the MOS that says that flags should be used. I'll accept your good faith, thinking that this is a language problem. I am going to revert you one more time, and urge you to actually partake in a discussion, for instance in your WikiProject. Drmies (talk) 18:58, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Florentyna; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 00:00, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message, --Florentyna (talk) 07:49, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Refer to this page, clearly it stated "A BWF Sanctioned Grand Prix Event", and this page clearly noted it was a Grand Prix status tournament. --Aleenf1 16:07, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There must be somewhere a mistake. No prize money and GP - this doesn't fit. Florentyna (talk) 16:40, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No reason to wipe even without prize money, that is the fact that BWF presented at the moment. In history, Asia Championships once time ago also is part of Grand Prix series, i remember. --Aleenf1 12:49, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Hello! [4] [5] [6] Before reverting my edits please read WP:EPON rule. In sports category tree all articles with eponymous categories also categorized in the broader categories. For example, 2010 FIFA World Cup included in Category:2010 in association football, Category:FIFA World Cup tournaments, Category:2009–10 in South African soccer, Category:2010 in association football and so on. The same categories as for Category:2010 FIFA World Cup Please read WP:EPON and revert your edits. NickSt (talk) 16:18, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:OVERLINK. Country names should not be linked for sporting events or sportspeople. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:27, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This thing you understood in a wrong way. There were already heavy discussions about this, but this concerned the respective countries of the starting sportsmen, probably I will find it in the discussions. People this time deleted all appearances of the sportsmen's countries in the result lists. It is not meant to delete any appearance of a country's name in a Wikipedia article. Overlinking on the other hand means, that China would be linked too often in one chapter of one and the same article. Here China is mentioned in the infobox and in the article's header, so no overlinking is there.--Florentyna (talk) 18:28, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, you understand it in the wrong way. Overlinking means linking "the names of major geographic features and locations". China is a major location. You are discussing WP:REPEATLINKs, which is "a link should appear only once in an article". If a sportsman represents their nation at a major international even, they may have the nation linked, but the even is never to have the nation linked, ever. I am removing it and expect you to comply with the guideline and discuss before reverting correct application of guidelines.

Also Peoples Republic of China redirects to China and so it's an unnecessary pipe. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:38, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that Qingdao is linked immediately before "China" makes it an even more clear OVERLINK. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:39, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense. Even worse it is, that you following my last edits (Sidek family) to apply your way of thinking. Florentyna (talk) 18:44, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll agree that you're speaking nonsense. Perhaps you can confirm my opinion is correct by looking at at high-profile sporting even, say 2010 FIFA World Cup.

As for following your edits, it's normal practice with inexperienced editors to help bring their articles into conformity. If you would rather do that yourself, that is apply WP:INFOBOXFLAG and WP:OVERLINK, I'd be glad to let you do it. Otherwise, I'll make some time to walk through more articles in the class later. And to clarify, it's not my way of thinking, it's two very, very clear guidelines.

Also, I'm not following the discussion here. I was just coming back to offer some additional proof that nations are not linked. If you expect me to respond, please leave a talkback template notice on my talk page. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:59, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, take a look at Srikanth Kidambi. You edited that one and when I went to confirm that it was indeed not overlinked, I noticed two other minor issues. Feel free to check its state before my edits if you doubt.

I would be more than glad for you to provide that discussion that indicates that countries are to by wikilinked, or to discuss your objections based on policy, but if your entire argument is "nonsense", then there's nothing to discuss. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:08, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]