User talk:Creativewill

Welcome!

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

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

Hoping you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

thanks for all your work on this topic, wondering if you have any info the NASL's 1983 Grand Prix of Indoor soccer tournament? Smith03 (talk) 18:59, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the info and the good work on the grand prix page Smith03 (talk) 17:44, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're absolutely right, nice catch. I suppose my philosophy at the time was that most points was to be the premiership, an accomplishment decided independently of the league championship, but when the league championship was no longer mutually exclusive from the premiership, the virtue of 'best record' had changed. I think the right course of action would be simply to remove Atlanta's premiership, but that raises the question of what to label Kansas City's accomplishment. It was the league championship, but it was earned by achieving the most points. My preference is to leave it as Kansas City's championship, say there was no premiership because it was a singular accomplishment (decreasing Atlanta's major honors total by 1), and provide a notation about the 1969 championship underneath the major honors table. Thoughts? -- Fifty7 (talk) 19:32, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's an understandable sentiment, but in the end what matters in both soccer and hockey is points, not victories. The truth is I shouldn't have made a distinction between Kansas City and Atlanta, because Kansas City bested them according to the rules the teams agreed to before the season started. Though I can see a 'Most Wins' notation being made in a 'superlatives section' of sorts for NASL season articles, I personally don't think they merit a mention in infoboxes for this reason. -- Fifty7 (talk) 20:19, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The conclusion I came to was that the only relevant information was that the 1969 season featured no playoffs, and that 'most points' regardless of win/loss record was always paramount (which has been the case for both soccer and hockey, as far as that tangent we discussed goes). I decided to note the absence of playoffs in Note 4 and award KC only the championship, as those were the rules the teams agreed to before the season started. Cheers. -- Fifty7 (talk) 02:38, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

wondering if you need of or had a list of the home arena the nasl teams used during the indoor seasons. I know the Minnesota Kicks used Met Center Smith03 (talk) 16:33, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When you go to the page North American Soccer League (1968–84) and scroll to Section 4: Teams of NASL 1968–84, it can be confusing to locate teams on the list that were not the last incarnation of the franchise, unless you already know what to look for. I'm wondering how you'd feel if I replaced that section with the table bellow? To me it just seems both clearer and visually easier to look at than that list, that doesn't seem to even follow its own standards. Compare the two and post your comments bellow. If you know of others who'd might want to weigh in, please encourage them to comment as well. I'll leave it up here for a week before I decide what to do with it based on feedback.

1. It includes every franchise name ever used in the NASL alphabetically.
2. It includes the years that that particular "full name" existed in the NASL.
3. It includes all of the transformations any team went through during their NASL years, be it name or city.
4. It clearly distinguishes the two different incarnations of both Chiefs and Diplomats.
5. It includes other leagues that that team played in before or after the NASL (not newer franchises that now use the same name).

Over half of the 67 teams that played in the NASL over the course of its 17 seasons were relocations of existing franchises,
while a handful were merely name changes of existing teams like the Apollos, Cosmos and Earthquakes.

  - existed before 1968 NASL formation.   - continued after 1984 NASL demise.   - existed before 1968 and after 1984.

Team	NASL Seasons	NASL Evolution of Franchise	Other Leagues
Atlanta Apollos	1973	Chiefs→Apollos	–
Atlanta Chiefs	1968-1972	Chiefs→Apollos	NPSL
Atlanta Chiefs (1979)	1979-1981	Caribous→Chiefs (1979)	–
Baltimore Bays	1968-1969	–	NPSL
Baltimore Comets	1974-1975	Comets→Jaws→Quicksilvers→Sockers	–
Boston Beacons	1968	–	USA
Boston Minutemen	1974-1976	–	–
California Surf	1978-1981	Stars→Surf	–
Calgary Boomers	1981	Rogues→Boomers	–
Caribous of Colorado	1978	Caribous→Chiefs (1979)	–
Chicago Mustangs	1968	–	USA
Chicago Sting	1975-1984	–	MISL
Cleveland Stokers	1968	–	USA
Connecticut Bicentennials	1977	Bicentennials→Connecticut→Stompers→Drillers	–
Cosmos	1977-1978	New York→Cosmos→New York	–
Dallas Tornado	1968-1981	–	USA
Denver Dynamos	1974-1975	Dynamos→Kicks	–
Detroit Cougars	1968	–	USA
Detroit Express	1978-1981	Express→Diplomats (1981)	–
Edmonton Drillers	1979-1982	Bicentennials→Connecticut→Stompers→Drillers	–
Fort Lauderdale Strikers	1977-1983	Darts→Gatos→Toros→Strikers→Minnesota	–
Golden Bay Earthquakes	1983-1984	San Jose Earthquakes→Golden Bay	MISL, WSA
Hartford Bicentennials	1975-1976	Bicentennials→Connecticut→Stompers→Drillers	–
Houston Hurricane	1978-1980	–	–
Houston Stars	1968	–	USA
Jacksonville Tea Men	1980-1982	Tea Men→Jacksonville	ASL, USL
Kansas City Spurs	1968-1970	–	NPSL
Las Vegas Quicksilvers	1977	Comets→Jaws→Quicksilvers→Sockers	–
Los Angeles Aztecs	1974-1981	–	–
Los Angeles Wolves	1968	–	USA
Memphis Rogues	1978-1980	Rogues→Boomers	–
Miami Gatos	1972	Darts→Gatos→Toros→Strikers→Minnesota	–
Miami Toros	1973-1976	Darts→Gatos→Toros→Strikers→Minnesota	–
Minnesota Kicks	1976-1981	Dynamos→Kicks	–
Minnesota Strikers	1984	Darts→Gatos→Toros→Strikers→Minnesota	MISL
Montreal Olympique	1971-1973	–	–
Montreal Manic	1981-1983	Fury→Manic	–
New England Tea Men	1978-1980	Tea Men→Jacksonville	–
New York Cosmos	1971-76, 1979-84	New York→Cosmos→New York	MISL
New York Generals	1968	–	NPSL
Oakland Clippers	1968	–	NPSL
Oakland Stompers	1978	Bicentennials→Connecticut→Stompers→Drillers	–
Philadelphia Atoms	1973-1976	–	–
Philadelphia Fury	1978-1980	Fury→Manic	–
Portland Timbers	1975-1982	–	–
Rochester Lancers	1970-1980	–	ASL
San Antonio Thunder	1975-1976	Thunder→Team Hawaii→Roughnecks	–
San Diego Jaws	1976	Comets→Jaws→Quicksilvers→Sockers	–
San Diego Sockers	1978-1984	Comets→Jaws→Quicksilvers→Sockers	MISL, CISL
San Diego Toros	1968	–	NPSL
San Jose Earthquakes	1974-1982	Earthquakes→Golden Bay	–
Saint Louis Stars	1968-1977	Stars→Surf	NPSL
Seattle Sounders	1974–1983	–	–
Tampa Bay Rowdies	1975-1984	–	AISA, ASL, APSL
Team America	1983	–	–
Team Hawaii	1977	Thunder→Team Hawaii→Roughnecks	–
Toronto Falcons	1968	–	NPSL
Toronto Blizzard	1978-1984	Metros→Metros-Croati→Blizzard	–
Toronto Metros	1971-1974	Metros→Metros-Croatia→Blizzard	–
Toronto Metros-Croatia*	1975-1978	Metros→Metros-Croatia→Blizzard	NSL, CISL, CSL
Tulsa Roughnecks	1978-1984	Thunder→Team Hawaii→Roughnecks	–
Vancouver Royals	1968	–	USA
Vancouver Whitecaps	1974-1984	–	–
Washington Darts	1970-1971	Darts→Gatos→Toros→Strikers→Minnesota	ASL
Washington Diplomats	1974-1980	–	–
Washington Diplomats (1981)	1981	Express→Diplomats (1981)	–
Washington Whips	1968	–	USA

*Operated as Toronto Croatia from 1956 until they bought-in to the NASL in 1975, and then again after they sold-out of the NASL in 1979.

thanks for your opinions,
Creativewill (talk) 16:11, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I like it the only suggestion is for the "other league" section the year(s) in the other league Smith03 (talk) 22:00, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Love the table, only thing I'd be careful about is accidentally omitting teams. For example, the Sounders aren't listed there. -- Fifty7 (talk) 22:40, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is a great idea, the table is much clearer than the existing list. And the colors add the rest. Go ahead. ;) Fma12 (talk) 23:23, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone. Good catch on Seattle, I also missed everybody's favorite, the Cosmos of 1977-1978 (sans New York)

Thanks for the recognition to the work I'm actually doing with the NASL teams. About the Express kits, I used as reference the last colors worn by the team for updating the infobox; I usually follow this procedure in all the past football clubs I work on. That's the reason because I put black instead navy blue, so the last color picture visible on "NASL jerseys' website" is the #20 worn by my compatriot Pato Margetic. But....... when I took a deeper look to the picture (specially at this) I realized that the collar color was in fact navy blue, not black.

Therefore I'm actually correcting this mistake and then I'll be updating the missing logos. Thanks again for your support I hope we will continue working together! Best regards, - Fma12 (talk) 21:55, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

feel free to change the date, it occurred to me when I saw the date that the media guide could be wrong, media guides can be wrong hope they are right about the attendance. Smith03 (talk) 19:54, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• i try to source my dates from NPs first, but it gets tricky when 2 or 3 sources have 3 versions of a particular game. the older soccer articles in Sports Illustrated for example have lots of what seem to be subtle errors when compared to local NPs. The NPs often devoted a reporter to follow the local team so I tend to trust them a bit more.
  Creativewill (talk) 22:37, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your major improvements and corrections to this article. Have a great week. Candleabracadabra (talk) 13:51, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Will, thanks for helping out with the wording on the recent edits I did to the Soccer Bowl page. Good teamwork man! NYCWikiKid (talk) 16:27, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Eusébio
• So would you also refer to Pelé by Edson Arantes do Nascimento had he scored, rather than Pele? Eusébio is well known to the footballing world as Eusébio not by his full name. Just some food for thought. The same is true of many other players that are much better known by diminutives and nicknames than they are their birth names.

Regarding the other changes, I'm glad to help. I've been kind of wanting to do that very thing for a while now, but I wanted to complete more info on the NASL season recaps first. So thank you for all of your hard work on the Soccer Bowl page. It looks great. I would suggest creating a redirect from "NASL Championship", "North American Soccer League Championship", "NASL Final" and "North American Soccer League Final" as well. -Cheers Creativewill (talk) 18:52, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Actually the Pelé name is a common debate. I totally know and understand your point about the names you are referring to and how they are at times regarded as. In Latin America, or the Iberian influenced countries like in the case of Eusébio, Manny, and Pato, the diminutives or simply the first names are common place. That is why throughout Brazil you often hear the affectionate names of the players like Ronaldinho or first names only like Ronaldo. In Pelé's case it's a matter of his name not being either a nickname any longer as it originally was when he first began, nor a diminutive like Manny or Pato. It's a new name. And it's in fact his professional name. But certainly to be fair to both our efforts, I'll add his full name in parenthesis to create a common ground. Always looking to collaborate with a new friend.

And yeah, there is definitely A LOT of work to be done on the NASL pages (both classic and new). I see you have done some good work thus far. I'll help you out there wherever I can. I have already created a redirect NASL Championship link to the Soccer Bowl. I'll do the rest you've mention. Nice working with you. NYCWikiKid (talk) 19:25, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I understand your position as well, but I think that it places you on a slippery slope. Will every "Mike" (e.g. former NASL mvp Mike Flanagan) you come across now be changed to "Michael", "Bob" to "Robert" and "Tom" to "Thomas"? What about wiki-pages involving people like Raphael, Bill Gates or Ivan the Terrible? Would those need editing as well? That's a lot of revisions my friend. In the many NASL histories that I have read, I rarely see Eusébio's full name ever used and I NEVER see it in the box scores or recaps. Given the fact that none of us "owns" a particular page (no matter if we created it or how much we might have improved it), you might want to brace for lots of reverts... especially with Eusébio. To me, that's a lot of needless work and a battle not worth fighting. Moreover, given that last column on the Soccer Bowl wiki-table is for notes, not full recaps, I really think last names that link to the players' wiki-page are plenty of info for the format (w/the exception of Eusébio of course). To that end, the important notes for the 1974 Final for example really should be about the circumstance (i.e. PK shoot-out), not the players. Some day each NASL final will have its own page like Soccer Bowl '78, where those who are curious can get full match details.

As a side note: if you google an image of the base of new NASL trophy you'll find that the words "SOCCER BOWL" are etched in all-caps, exactly as I listed in my description, not U&lc as you've revised it. No matter what you decide to do, I'm always happy to discuss these types of matters in a polite civil way. I've witnessed too many knock-down-drag-outs over wikis, and decided long ago I wouldn't be that guy. I look forward to seeing more of your work. Kind regards, -Creativewill

(talk) 06:11, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Good conversation. I'll start by saying that I enjoy talking with educated and civilized people who can exchange thoughts and consider other people's opinion with respect and appreciation. So we can always speak on a friendly level with good will. Feel free to send any constructive topics that we can share and analyze.

In reference to your points, this is something that many people contemplate in documenting history. The truth is, names have to do with how they represent people. In Pelé's case, as I mentioned before, it's his official professional name. While the others are diminutives, or first names. You mentioned Raphael, an artist whose entire career has been identified by that spelling. From previous studies, I recall that he signed documents with variations of his name including surname. Still, his first name, with ph rather than ff was the one heavily recognized as his professional name. Throughout the past 500 years, historians have given even more weight that the name only represents one person. When we hear the name Raphael, who do we think of? But then we have the case of Raphael, the singer, who has an interesting argument. This Raphael actually never had that name by birth. He uses it as his stage name - its a new name like Pelé, or Sting, or Prince. Raphael represents a different medium. The first in art, the second in music. And then you have Raphael the archangel, in religion.

Let's take David Bowie, for instance. His first name is David, but last name is not Bowie. Both this and Ziggy Stardust are part of his stage names and we identify this person by them. However, David Bowie is the one used in the larger part of his career. So David Bowie is the artistic name of the musician whose alter ego is Ziggy Stardust. Then we have Madonna whose first name really is Madonna. Why is her case different? Why not use her entire name? Because she legally uses that name as her stage name. In other words it is a representation of the music performer. Then you have to wonder, well what about certain nicknames in sports. It depends. Did the nickname replace the first? Is the nickname the embodiment of this person? Does this person legally use this name? Let's take a few. Karl Malone "the mailman". Do we look up the mailman or do we mainly look up Karl Malone? Do we say the mailman scored or Karl Malone? In passing conversation the mailman is fine, but more likely Karl Malone would be right. Do we then register his name as the mailman or do we say that he is Karl Malone, as that was his first name and professional name, and he was referred to on the court as "the mailman"? Then you have Dr. J. This case is special because he actually goes by this name. However, he primarily goes by his first name Julius Erving. He was called Dr. J on the court, but also later associated that name professionally, in other areas outside the court. He is known professionally as both Julius Erving and Dr. J. Then what about Magic Johnson? Known professionally as Earvin Johnson, Earvin Magic Johnson, and Magic Johnson. The latter name has been used as his main form of recognition, not just as a professional basketball player, but also a superstar or basketball ambassador. Then you have Patrick Ewing who was called on the court at times as the "Madison Square Guardian". He never used that name as a professional name to represent him outside the court. Should we also tally points with the "Madison Square Guardian made 23 points tonight"? Or would we have used Patrick Ewing, his full name? In boxing, both Sugar Ray Robinson and Sugar Ray Leonard used Sugar not only as a description, but an actual name. They were both referred to as Sugar, or Sugar Ray, born as Ray Robinson and Ray Leonard, but known professionally as aforementioned. You bring up Bill Gates. Yes, his name is William, but he also professionally uses Bill. Ivan the terrible is a historical label like Alexander the Great, or John the baptist that describes the person. So that's a non-issue. Now what about El Che? Born Ernesto Guevarra. Historically accurate we call him Ernesto Guevarra, El Che; or Ernesto "Che" Guevarra; Ernesto "El Che" Guevarra; Che Guevarra; or simply El Che. Which one do we use? All five would be correct by association, though the first preferred. The name El Che, a new name like Pelé, became symbolic. It represents this political figure. That is why he is known by both Ernesto Guevarra as well as El Che, or as I mentioned, Ernesto Guevarra, El Che. These examples are evidence that there is reasoning behind how names and people should be identified. I'm not trying to invent the wheel here. There are several studies on how names are placed in history.

I agree with what you are saying that notes are quick recaps. But I believe that names should be properly identified as to avoid confusion, especially if no link or page for the person exists, which often happens (e.g. Lopez? Lopez who?). Regarding the 1974 final, I originally put the words "Straight Kick" in parenthesis after the term Penalty SO (or Penalty shoot-out). I did this because prior to the Soccer Bowl era, the traditional form was used, and I wanted to clarify that for any reader. I also placed in 1981 the description "35 yard" under Penalty SO. You had edited out the first and left the second. So I thought you were noting that the latter was already making the distinction. Though I still think the lesser may need proper detail. Some sites on the net distinguish these games (1974 and 1981) as "PK" or "SO". However, "PK" is inaccurate as it is not a penalty kick, though we understand intent. And "SO" alone doesn't really say which shoot-out. Yes, I know that the term "the shoot-out" was overly used in the original NASL as an associative title for the 35 yard version. Nevertheless, we use the term penalty shoot-out as an umbrella to categorize the usual after extra time penalty contest in soccer. This is something I think can be discussed by a group that can vote on a specific identity. It's a good debate that can lead to refinement. Also in the 1974 game I had put AET (after extra time) for one reason only, because it is used to distinguish between penalty kicks and penalty shoot-outs, as the latter often happens after extra time. I do agree with you here that it may also confuse people into thinking that actual extra time, aside stoppage, was used. This too is something that can be discussed in more detail with a group.

As for the Soccer Bowl title on the new NASL trophy, I've seen it many times through my research. The entire engraving is written as NORTH AMERICAN SOCCER LEAGUE SOCCER BOWL with Soccer Bowl in a larger sized font, all in upper case. I wrote it North American Soccer League Soccer Bowl, all in lower case (with first letters in upper case) on the page because you wrote North American Soccer League SOCCER BOWL, with one part lower case and the other upper case. To create consistency I wrote it in one format as it still clearly states the title, and does not change the significance. Also, the individual championship pages are necessary, so we are both on the same wave length. As you may have noticed, in the Soccer Bowl years I placed a link to the season, and left the year to the actual game like "Soccer Bowl '78" in tact. We both know that the NASL pages need to properly grow. We may not be able to finish it, but we can certainly continue where others have started and expand it further.

I hope this clarifies a few things from my end. And again, in good nature, feel free to send a word over. We can always talk and see how together we can improve a page. Cheers NYCWikiKid (talk) 15:29, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Hey Will! Hope you had a good weekend break. It's nice to hear other perspectives on how to treat a certain material with arrangements that may be of universal preference for ease of interpretation. In the field of documenting history, we can try to reach a consensus with a group of individuals who can agree on how to place a topic, but we can never fully please every person, as that is part of life. Everyone has a point of view. Right? Nonetheless, what counts is that something is written to keep record, versus it being forgotten, as long as it is done in good style and with as much accuracy as possible, maintaining fact and dismissing irrelevant opinion. I know you have the best interest in writing sound information. So I commend you for that. My pursuit has been similar. I am only interested in leaving a reference point so others can be aware of the information and can possibly continue developing it.

Regarding the Soccer Bowl page, all that matters is that we keep expanding it with good intentions, along with other NASL related areas. I truly have no free time available to speak with adamant individuals who are not interested in collaborating, but only wishing to write their own ideas. A blog or personal page is more suitable for that, while Wikipedia is for everyone. I am sure we can figure out common ground on several points. I appreciate your experience and alert. Hopefully, what is left from any of our contributions is a balanced and good representation of a subject being studied. Take care. NYCWikiKid (talk) 03:23, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New York Cosmos (2010) call themselves a rebirth of the older New York Cosmos and that is how it is stated on their wikipedia page. Sporting KC was just rebranded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elisfkc (talk • contribs) 16:06, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, you might find using WP:HOTCAT easier... GiantSnowman 18:02, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Will! Glad to hear from you bud. I was actually thinking about our last conversation - that we needed some of these pages up. So I went ahead and got them started so others can hopefully continue to expand. I am nearly done, but made a pause because there was something I needed to improve before continuing and it was the Template:Infobox football match. Now there is a "series" option and other information are available. I will hopefully complete all of the events today. Just putting the final touches on each. Then from there you definitely have the green light to go in and tweak away and add as much information as possible my friend. Like we both agreed on, the NASL pages have a lot of work ahead to be done, but every input is a step in the right direction. Enjoy. NYCWikiKid (talk) 17:46, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi CW! I am done with the initial part of the pages from 1967-2013 (Category:Soccer Bowl (NASL Championship)). You have more than my support to go ahead and do what you do best!
  • Excellent! Thanks for helping out. NYCWikiKid (talk) 22:09, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hey CW. Soccer Bowl '72 is looking great. In terms of the collar, I would have to look into it. I'll do so today. But, check out the Colorado Caribous and see their jerseys. I think you may be able to get some more ideas about the collars from there. NYCWikiKid (talk) 17:43, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Hey! So I have been reading and researching for sometime the information about the kits. It is actually the first time I have ever worked on them, so I wanted to find out as much as I could. Apparently, the main template does not have a collar (this is the center of the shirt or body) [see Template:Football kit ]. The parameters are made to only detail the arms, the body, shorts, and socks. The collar and shoulders are actually retained as part of the body (torso) and not separate. The only way for a collar to appear would be by either using one of the existing images (a, b, or c) or making one. However, there is no red stripes with a white collar that I see thus far, though there may be one out there somewhere. The easiest thing seems to make a new body with red stripes and the white collar. Then simply add it in here.
      • However, there should be a way to layer. Maybe you can go to the talk page (a or b) and request that a second version of the parameters be made, in addition to the first, where in the second each body part can be layered. Possibly up to three or four layers per area can be made (for whatever reason someone might desire to do so). It can look something similar to this:

Parameter	Description
|alt=	alternative text for screen readers; see Wikipedia:Alternative text for images
|pattern_la1=	pattern modifier for left arm
|pattern_la2=	pattern modifier for left arm
|pattern_la3=	pattern modifier for left arm
|pattern_la4=	pattern modifier for left arm
|pattern_b1=	pattern modifier for body
|pattern_b2=	pattern modifier for body
|pattern_b3=	pattern modifier for body
|pattern_b4=	pattern modifier for body
|pattern_ra1=	pattern modifier for right arm
|pattern_ra2=	pattern modifier for right arm
|pattern_ra3=	pattern modifier for right arm
|pattern_ra4=	pattern modifier for right arm
|pattern_sh1=	pattern modifier for shorts
|pattern_sh2=	pattern modifier for shorts
|pattern_sh3=	pattern modifier for shorts
|pattern_sh4=	pattern modifier for shorts
|pattern_so1=	pattern modifier for socks
|pattern_so2=	pattern modifier for socks
|pattern_so3=	pattern modifier for socks
|pattern_so4=	pattern modifier for socks
|leftarm=	color modifier for left arm
|body=	color modifier for body
|rightarm=	color modifier for right arm
|shorts=	color modifier for shorts
|socks=	color modifier for socks
|title=	title that appears under the template as rendered

I definitely know what you mean about St. Louis' collar and that you want the kits to appear as close to the original as possible. Whatever way I can help, I will do so. NYCWikiKid (talk) 22:39, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, so just wanted to share something I recently did. I spent the whole day working on one team - the Ft. Lauderdale Strikers. I pretty much did a revamp of their categories, templates, and connection in several of their articles. Did some major spring (fall) cleaning. Before it was a real mess, in that everything was scattered and there was a lack of coherency. Now everything is well organized. It's pretty much a newly-defined catalog. Check it out - Category:Fort Lauderdale Strikers; Template:Fort Lauderdale Strikers. I did an enormous amount of work on creating subcategories and doing proper arranging. This was a handful. I will eventually work on the content of some of the articles. I know you are a Floridian and a soccer fan, so I hope you like the work. I am planning on working on the Rowdies next and work around several NASL clubs that need some serious finesse. Cheers NYCWikiKid (talk) 05:02, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Btw, I believe that the new Strikers format I organized can serve as a general mold for many of the clubs that have had several phases over the decades. It can give them all more relevance and create a clearer understanding of their history. This can hold true for many NASL clubs as well as MLS teams that have NASL lineage. Let's see how each can be improved. NYCWikiKid (talk) 05:17, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Will, just to bring to light, I did know that the '94 World Cup matches had more. I was referring to league championships. I was actually looking to correct it, but thought that everyone understood since we are talking about league competition. But glad you made it more specific. NYCWikiKid (talk) 17:43, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Yeah, creating or finding kits is a task onto itself. Don't get to hung over it if you see that it is too much. Do whatever you can. Remember, it's about having fun. So thanks again for the contributions. NYCWikiKid (talk) 17:53, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man, the pages are really coming together with the kits. It's giving me goosebumps. Where did you get that USA 1967 look? Awesome! haha I am currently wrapping up this massive, and I do mean massive, work of the Fort Lauderdale Strikers. (Dude I am exhausted with so much research - what a long history). Still, I recently did this: Template:Chicago Sting. As you work on the kits, I will work on the navboxes during my breaks for the specific teams in the championship games and add them up. That's what I call teamwork. NYCWikiKid (talk) 00:28, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Yeah man, that match was wild. It really was a great match to watch. I had originally placed a link to the youtube video on the page. It is part of the external links. I tried to find as many videos as possible in relation to each event. Not all, but many articles have a video reference. NYCWikiKid (talk) 04:05, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As I've always respected your opinion, I'm curious as to your take on a discussion taking place here: Talk:Fort Lauderdale–Tampa Bay rivalry regarding original research, and existence of a continued rivalry, etc. You should know going in that I didn't create this page. I stumbled across it last summer and tried to improve it after finding numerous errors and exclusions (in the match data especially). As I said in its talk-page discussion, I really see little difference between Fort Lauderdale–Tampa Bay rivalry and Portland Timbers–Seattle Sounders rivalry other than one takes place in the "MLS of today" so naturally as a bigger fish in a bigger pond it receives more coverage. To me, the fact that FtL-TB has spanned so many teams, leagues and years, and yet continues to be written about, only supports the notion of an organic rivalry's existence, as opposed to a league-manufactured derby like the SuperClasico in Los Angeles. Even if you support the opposing opinion, please express any views on the Ftl-TB talkpage. Regards -Creativewill (talk) 17:25, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Saw you make some edits to a couple of jockey/jockey-related articles. If you want to get serious about major improvements to any (god knows most need it) feel free to ping me; I took the Rosie Napravnik article to GA a little while back, and I'm kind of hunting for collaborators for some GA work for the wikicup. I had some good help with doing the infoboxes in a better format and have a few other tricks up my sleeve that may prove useful. Montanabw^(talk) 22:58, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the offer, but to be honest my edit history will show that my major interests lie elsewhere (West Central FL topics & 1970s US soccer). Most of my jockey related edits kind of spun outward from a few pages that I knew to have oversights or glaring errors. After editing them, I'd come across discrepancies on their links and fix them, and so on, and so on. Really don't know that I'm up for the task, and I wouldn't feel right committing to a project only to make the other guy to do most of the work. Especially given that you are clearly much more passion about and well versed on the subject than I. All the best -Creativewill (talk) 18:25, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No sweat; I'm usually in search of people with eyes that aren't soon to be in need of cataract surgery (as mine are) and who are familiar with WP editing in general. I can handle the horse expertise side. If you run across a quirky personality or something of interest, feel free to ping me for help or comments! Montanabw^(talk) 21:37, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I replayed at my talk page, Let's discuss this issue.Footwiks (talk) 03:31, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I didn't block him, @TParis: did. GiantSnowman 08:38, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My goodness you're right. Sorry about that. -Creativewill (talk) 21:38, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested in WP:HOTCAT, might make things easier for you? GiantSnowman 17:30, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Philadelphia Fury (1978–80), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.worldheritage.org/articles/Philadelphia_Fury.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 05:15, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually http://www.worldheritage.org/articles/Philadelphia_Fury took their information from a prior version of the Wikipedia page. I was basically recreating the old Fury page so readers would not confuse the original Philadelphia Fury (1978–80) of the North American Soccer League (1968–84) with the new Philadelphia Fury team founded in 2014 and playing in the American Soccer League (2014).

Hi. Thanks for working to improve the site with your edit to List of suicides, as we really appreciate your participation. However, the edit had to be reverted, because as you know, Wikipedia cannot accept material not supported by citations. I viewed the citation you supplied for your addition, but it made no mention of suicide, or any other aspect of Bonvallet's death. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 00:34, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How's La Prensa for a reference? http://laprensa.peru.com/deportes/noticia-eduardo-bonvallet-muerte-chile-51470 Creativewill (talk) 15:43, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey dude, just wanted to say thanks for picking up my slack on the Rowdies 2016 & 2017 pages, I really appreciate it. Go Rowdies! American Money (talk) 17:37, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I just happened to notice that 2017 wasn't getting updates. Then I started trying to find match reports that wouldn't get archived so quickly. Btw, I don't pay much attention to the day-to-day roster moves, so don't ever assume I've stayed up on that stuff. Cheers -Creativewill (talk) 17:50, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the extent of resource material you have at your disposal. However, I have in storage a collection of the weekly issues of Soccer America from 1978 until the early 1990s. One of the things I've been meaning to do is to look up historical items either as new content for Wikipedia or to check existing content. I'm afraid it will still be some time until I can get around to doing that. But if you have any specific needs, I'd be happy to retrieve specific issues to look up relevant information. Having said that, I will be away from home several times over the next few months, so I won't have unlimited availability. If it would be of help, I'd be happy to do it. Also, thanks for clearing up the indoor seasons business. That is exactly what I would have asked for in response to your question. Jeff in CA (talk) 16:37, 16 June 2017 (UTC) Jeff in CA (talk) 16:37, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff, Thanks for the offer. Whenever I hit dead ends on my projects I'll definitely keep you in mind. I've mostly relied on newspaper articles as resources for the older info, and always preferred the local-angle whenever possible when it comes to sports reporting. (e.g. found some great info on the 1986–87 AISA season in the Louisville papers). Can I ask, how early in 1978 is your oldest issue of SA? And did they offer indoor coverage back then? Regards, -Creativewill (talk) 18:14, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it is around April or May, 1978. Yes, they certainly did cover the indoor game. Jeff in CA (talk) 19:01, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Material you included in the above article appears to have been copied from the copyright web page here or elsewhere online. Copying text directly from a source is a copyright violation. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions or if you think I made a mistake. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:50, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Creativewill. I noticed you've done some constructive editing recently. Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. Thanks. User:Insertcleverphrasehere (talk) 07:07, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I just like having the narrative aspect of the post-game write-ups handy. I'll see about going back and getting rid of the dead links from past seasons though. I hadn't even thought about it really, thanks for bringing it up. American Money (talk) 11:48, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Refik Kozić, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. GiantSnowman 07:54, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Paul Roe.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process.

Please add more independent reliable sources.

To reply, leave a comment here and ping me.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Lopifalko (talk) 06:10, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Peter Bonetti, you may be blocked from editing. Mattythewhite (talk) 22:53, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Right, it was fake news. Try reading any American newspaper sportspage from about August 20, 1975. Or better yet, trying learning to write less adversarial comments on other people's talk pages. A simple "your edit was reverted b/c of unsourced or poorly sourced content" would accomplish the EXACT same thing. Cheers -Creativewill (talk) 02:14, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you're feeling better after getting that off your chest! I'm sure you'll remember to cite your sources in the first instance from now on. Mattythewhite (talk) 14:18, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Golly gee. thanks, dad. Your response was completely unnecessary. Instead try brushing your teeth once in a while. Your condescending breath is stinking up my talk page. -Creativewill (talk) 14:47, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! 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) 02:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please use the clippings tool provided by Newspapers.com to generate proper links, as unregistered users cannot view articles without them. If you don't have a Newspapers.com account, you can request one through The Wikipedia Library.

I would, however, recommend against using Newspapers.com links to AP blurbs in articles like Portland Timbers–Seattle Sounders rivalry unless they are from the primary newspapers of the team's home markets. The blurbs do not have full statistics (e.g. the lineups, attendance) that are required to be useful. SounderBruce 22:31, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1993–94 National Professional Soccer League season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Doyle.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:30, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]