Talk:2002 Men's Hockey World Cup

The recently editing by user Darius Dhlomo for this revision [1] was revert to this revision [2] because it is standard style to perform a sport matches or report article. Of course, some latest editing is shown right, however, i may fix soon. Of course the note already leave to Darius [3], but he simply want to make his style. But this is totally unacceptable. Sorry for this --Aleen f1 16:11, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry guys, I just added some essential info, like the umpires and so on, and now I'm getting blamed of creating my own style. I simply can and will not understand why this info is deleted. Some new policy? Darius Dhlomo

I can tell you why:

First, this is the standard that set in Wikipedia. You divide the matches into date (heading), which this is not needed, and curious why you do so because i'm see the other article, mainly football, no this type of style, they just put date and time, no divide at all.
Second, you put the match number info, this is totally not needed at all, the reader is view about match result and scorer, such as when it occur also, not view about the match number, you just put useless information and expand the kb of an article. Remember, what Wikipedia is not: WP:NOT
Third, halftime score, yes is right, but i have to say no to this halftime bracket score. Why? When reader read about scorer, they will also view time scored, also they view about fulltime results and not halftime result.
Fourth, you do the caps wording to the national teams, this i think is totally your style. I browsed the wiki for long time. No one put All the caps to the national team, include some other sports as well.

This four thing capitalised what you do in the past, which is right but not needed, i can say you just expand article size. One thing i can sure that is right is umpires information. Remember, not all you do is correct, Darius Dhlomo. Thank you --Aleen f1 16:27, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The master has spoken, I guess. Who decides what's needed and what not? You? You deleted half time-scores and referees, for instance. But I guess all you do is right... Darius Dhlomo 06:55, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can see what the other article perform, the standard format if does not satisfied with my respond to you WHY. I just do my job. Sorry. --Aleen f1 08:09, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Usually, at least in the United States as far as I know, what you call 'hockey' is usually referred to as 'field hockey'. When you say 'hockey' I think of ice hockey by default. It might be good to change the wording.

Fair use rationale for Image:2002worldcuplogo.jpg[edit]

Image:2002worldcuplogo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:46, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]