User talk:Aldebaran69

A proud Wikipedian since 9 June 2006....for any comment
(good or bad) please added here, don't be shy!!!!

Some things about me...

This user has been on Wikipedia for 17 years, 11 months and 3 days. This user comes from Peru. This user comes from Lima enThis user is a native speaker of the English language. esEste usuario tiene el español como lengua materna. fr-1Cet utilisateur peut contribuer avec un niveau élémentaire de français. de-1Dieser Benutzer hat grundlegende Deutschkenntnisse. pl-1Ten użytkownik posługuje się językiem polskim na poziomie podstawowym. This user is interested in history. ^_^This user watches anime. This user is a Pokémon fan. This user is a participant in WikiProject Women's History. 43YThis Wikipedian was born on 25 January 1981 and is 43 years, 3 months, and 18 days old. This user is an Aquarius. This user has created 525 articles on Wikipedia. 3972This user is ranked 3972 on the list of Wikipedians by number of edits.

Today's motto... → I go out to work on Monday morning. Tuesday, I go off to honeymoon. I'll be back again before it's time for sunny down. I'll be lazing on a Sunday afternoon. Bicycling on every Wednesday evening! Thursday, I go waltzing to the zoo. I come from a London town, I'm just an ordinary guy. Fridays, I go painting in the louvre. I'm bound to be proposing on a Saturday night, I'll be lazing on a Sunday afternoon! Nominate one today!

A personal advice : Please don't smoke

Reliable sources

In a posting you your page user:Kansas Bear asked:

Geneall.net is not a reliable source. Therefore, nothing should be taken from an unreliable source and added to Wikipedia articles. AND, why do you think Die Durchläuchtige Welt, Oder: Kurtzgefaßte Genealogische published in 1739 is a reliable source? --Kansas Bear (talk) 06:08, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Kansas Bear http://Geneall.net is not a reliable sources and you ought to take any sources you are not sure about to WP:RSN as was agreed previously.

However I think that a book published in 1793 can be a reliable source. If however more recent scholarship can be found that contradicts it then the more recent scholarship ought to be used.

In both cases if you disagree with the opinions of another editor, then discuss it at WP:RSN in the hope of building a consensus over whether the source is or is not a Wikipedia reliable one. -- PBS (talk) 22:48, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

"Re: Harassment to my account"

I am not sure why you archived the discussion we were having on this page without waiting a least a week after the last posting the the section. You certainly did not leave long enough for me to consider my reply to you and post it.

You wrote to the talk page of user:Callanecc

"Hi Callanecc, I have a questions: who are the steps to made a complain about some users who believed that translation from featured articles from other language Wikipedia articles to English Wikipedia was always wrong?? " (diff at 02:33, 2 November 2016)

However referring to the exchange on your talk page that you have deleted, and the ANI to which it refers, you made 24 edits to Margaret Theresa of Spain between 28th and 31st of October 2016‎ history without one comment yet you had promised in the recent ANI to do so.

It is only because of the questions ask of you on your talk page that it is public knowledge among those who read your talk page that you copied the text from another wikipedia language. This is a breach of copyright see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia more specifically the sections: "Attribution is required for copyright", "Proper attribution" and "Translating from other language Wikimedia projects" also see Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content

1. Fix your copyright violation as soon as you can (if having read the guidance this is not clear then ask at Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems for clarification and/or help).
2. Have you ever copied any information from another Wiki without providing proper attribution?
3. Do not make any more article edits before you fix the copyright violation(s) you have created.

If you do not fix you copyright violation or answer the question in point 2. I will take administrative action.

-- PBS (talk) 21:40, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

I didn't known that the translation from another wikipedia article to English needs an atribution: I made for the last 8 years without any complain until now (for example, from Polish to English wikipedia); concerning about your thread to take administrative action don't worry, i won't translated any other article for the sake of copyright violation -- you can be in peace now. Thanks Aldebaran69 (talk) 00:27, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Copying from a foreign language Wikiepdia does not necessarily meet the content requirements of English Wikipedia

From the edit you left on the talk page of User :Kansas Bear (diff) at 02:19, 2 November 2016 ) .I also see that Maria Anna of Spain is a copy from the Russian Wikipeida for which you did not give a"Proper attribution". To answer you question different language Wikipedia use different criteria for what is a good article and featured articles. For example the German Wikipedia gave the article de:Battle of Ligny featured article status although it had no inline citations at all (it now carries just one which is one that I added!). In contrast the English article carries one of more citations for just about every paragraph. Which article the German or English comes closer to meeting the English Wikipedia content policies? Specifically WP:NOR and WP:V? -- PBS (talk) 22:37, 2 November 2016 (UTC)