User talk:GhostInTheMachine

It is 8:05 PM where this user lives.

This user knows that it can be a challenge to keep AGF in mind.

This user is new to Wikipedia. Please assume good faith, remain civil, and be calm, patient, helpful, and polite while they become accustomed to Wikipedia and its intricacies.

Hello! I want your opinion on SDs for 1957 in Canadian football (and related pages). I was going down the List of CFL seasons adding SDs and then I ran into 1957 in Canadian football, which is very different than 1958 CFL season. Adding an SD of "Canadian Football season" doesn't seem to make sense so I used "none". Do you think "none" fits there or is there something better? Looking at 1957 in sports, for example, the SD seems to repeat the article's title, which isn't right either. Masterhatch (talk) 14:50, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All articles before 1958 – 9999 in Canadian football – are generic year‡sport articles and so a SD of Overview of the events of 9999 in Canadian football does not add anything. They should be fine with a SD of "none".

After 1958 – a SD of Canadian Football League season is probably OK as the CFL in the artcile title has no specific meaning for most of the planet.

Of course, I must ask if the article really should instead be renamed to 1958 Canadian Football League season ...? — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 15:18, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't expand CFL in article titles as it would be inconsistant with the other sports league seasons. Masterhatch (talk) 15:29, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe all such sports articles should be renamed to include the league name in full ? — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 15:57, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I personally don't care either way but I betcha somewhere deep in the sports archives that was discussed. Masterhatch (talk) 16:06, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Probably true. Being serious – an article title has a duty to be unique rather than logical. The SD exists to some degree as a bridge for that gap. So, if an article uses a TLA that is not widely known, then the SD should generally expand it — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 16:12, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pleae read wp:npa and wp:brd (As well as wp:editwar), not agreeing with you is not wp:vandalism. Slatersteven (talk) 13:28, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

see Talk:David Icke

I am aware of it, but not agreeing with it does not make it vandalism. Slatersteven (talk) 14:48, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note as well that an edit made at 11:01 can't be a violation of consensus, based upon a talk page discussion stated at 11:17, thus is a content dispute, not vandalism. Slatersteven (talk) 14:56, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]