User talk:Angelo De La Paz
- 1 Welcome
- 2 August 2013
- 3 Transferred
- 4 Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
- 5 Disambiguation link notification for August 18
- 6 A kitten for you!
- 7 A cupcake for you!
- 8 Some baklava for you!
- 9 Explanation
- 10 Evidence...
- 11 Just a heads up
- 12 List organization
- 13 Disambiguation link notification for August 25
- 14 Edit warring on Claims to be the fastest growing religion
- 15 ANI-notice
- 16 mankialab
- 17 Russians
- 18 Table at "growth of religion"
- 19 Finally...
- 20 September 2013
- 21 Graphic Wonder
- 22 March 2014
- 23 April 2014
- 24 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Multiverse (2nd nomination)
- 25 Using warning templates
- 26 ArbCom elections are now open!
- 27 September 2018
- 28 ArbCom 2018 election voter message
- 29 ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of Buddhist temples may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- [[File:GandanTemple.jpg|thumb|Golden Temple at Gandan Monastery in [[Ulan Bator]].]]]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Indians in Vietnam may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- Today, the majority of Indians in Vietnam practice a religious syncretism of [[Hinduism]] ([[Brahminism]] with [[Mahayana Buddhism]]. And Hindu temples are also serving for both Hindus and
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Claims to be the fastest-growing religion may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- “The Crusades and the Christian World of the East.” University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007.)</ref>
Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Angelo_De_La_Paz reported by User:Deadbeef (Result: ). Thank you. 07:33, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Buddhist temples, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bago, Golden Rock and Nanshan Temple (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
A kitten for you!
A cupcake for you!
|from pablo Pablo iscobar (talk) 12:12, 19 August 2013 (UTC)|
Some baklava for you!
|please my message on you talk page Pablo iscobar (talk) 12:36, 19 August 2013 (UTC)|
Well, apology if i hurt you anytime, and if there's any figure related argument again, we can solve it easily, that's it. I saw your contributions, i give you a huge thanks for protecting those religion related articles from horrible editors. Bladesmulti (talk) 15:58, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your understanding, as a Sino-Vietnamese and Filipino descent editor, I just want to protect our culture of not China but also the whole Asia. But I don't like any kind of religious extremism or bias because our Chinese were raised in harmony religious environment, we know to respect other religions. I just finish update article of Buddhism in Africa and List of Buddhist temples to make them look better. About the number of Buddhist, 1.2 to 1.5 billion are sometimes reasonable.
But if 91% of China's population are Buddhist/Taoist/Folk are so ridiculous and unbelievable. Just thinking for a while, if we have 91% Buddhist, so where is place for 4-5% Christian, 1.5-2% Muslim, 10-14% Atheist (don't mistake with Non-religious because we all know that most of them are still practicing some forms of Buddhism, Taoism, Folk Religions, going to pagodas or temples few times a year, etc and like many people in Europe, Australia and the Americas; Christianity is still remaining as a cultural traditions rather than a religion). So the number of 50% of China's population is between Buddhist/Taoist was enough to secure Buddhism as the 3rd largest religion with over total 1 billion people. Finally we have about 50% Buddhist/Taoist (neutral estimates) and gave the highest estimates to other religious adherents as 14% Atheist, 5% Christian, 2% Muslim, leaving 29% included Unaffiliated (confused which religion belong to between Buddhism, Taoism, and Folk Religious) and new religions. Thank you. Angelo De La Paz (talk) 16:28, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
- 1.5 billion is reasonable, we must never forget that buddhism is oppressed in china a lot. Every religion is oppressed in China, otherwise my wild estimate for taoism would be 400 million. Buddhism was largest religion in 1951, 2nd was hinduism i think. After that we all know what happened. Bladesmulti (talk) 11:26, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- So we can agree at 1.5 billion?, , This one details good, but i don't know if reliable. Bladesmulti (talk) 12:16, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
- I see, haha.. Anyways, edited 2 page, one Major religious groups, two Buddhism by country. You keep have a eye on those pages, because i found there's some vandalism for sure in the page, people edits the religion stats. And if the page has been locked, it won't remove any false stats, for example "800"(million) for hinduism, which sounded to be a stat from 1995, and also the "1,650"(million) for Islam, which is obviously false too. Bladesmulti (talk) 04:48, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
- Saw your edits at Islam in the United States, i pretty much thinks that the standard of the page is just unique(in negative sense), as you see, the pages like Judaism in the United States, you would see only 16(4x4) photos and names of the people in infobox, but with inside this page "islam in United states" you would see 24(6x4) images, i think we must remove at least 8 pictures/names from there. What you think. Bladesmulti (talk) 05:21, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
- I don't care about that, they even can added images of all the Muslims in the US if they can. Angelo De La Paz (talk) 05:27, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
What evidence do you have that User:Mumtaz muhammed is Rajputbhatti? It has to be good clear evidence, not just wishful thinking. If we put any names on the check user request without first being sure and providing evidence they will cancel the request. I cannot see any evidence that Mumtaz muhammed is a sock - except that he likes Islam related articles, but that is not enough. I suggest you remove Mumtaz muhammed from the checkuser request. Also, please don't use the check user page to discuss the actual edits or bias of an editor. As I said already twice, that page is solely for determining whether an editor is using more than one account. regards --Merbabu (talk) 22:36, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Just a heads up
I've been keeping an eye on your edits on Claims to be the fastest-growing religion. Some of the sources you're using are unreliable like Bat Ye'or - who's a well known conspiracy theorist. Also "Short, Walter. “The Jizyah Tax: Equality And Dignity Under Islamic Law?" seems like a very unreliable source given the website it's on. You need to balance the section too. Try using some of the work from John L. Esposito - he's an authority on Islam and it's history. Also some of the words are a bit ambiguous like "heavy tax". From my understanding of it it was basically the same as the Zakat charity tax, which is 2.5% I think. What is a heavy tax? The same as a tribute tax? Make the section more specific to avoid POV. Also countries like Indonesia never experienced an invading Arab army, and neither did Malaysia or China yet the numbers are quite high there. There was also a Guinness World reference there not too long ago, why did you take it out? It deserves at a mention at least since it's not entirely clear from the Pew Forum either (they didn't explore the data and are basing it on much smaller studies). NarSakSasLee (talk) 03:39, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- NarSakSasLee, if china never experienced arabian invasion, then what was Battle of Talas? And as for Indonesia, why Demak Sultanate was waging wars? Bladesmulti (talk) 11:32, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hello Angelo De La Paz,
- The Islam section is indeed bigger than any other section in Claims to be the fastest-growing religion. I suggest you to add Template:Undue-section. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 19:59, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
I have undid your edit at List of beauty contests. Wikipedia articles are based (or should be) based on third party reliable published sources. The list must always be organized in alphabetical order in Wikipedia except when the items call for chronological format like the (List of Belarusian Prime Ministers). Refer to MOS:LIST for more information. In addition, the list of major pageants indicated reliable sources which did not mention Miss Supranational pageant as you have added in the list of major pageants. Take note this is an online encyclopedia and not Global Beauties. The principle of Neutral Point of View requires that we describe competing views without endorsing any one in particular. Wikipedia:No original research applies equally to a list of like things as it does for the content article on each individual thing listed. The verifiability policy states that material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable published source. Inclusion of material on a list should be based on what reliable sources say, not on what the editor interprets the source to be saying. You are requested to participate in the List of beauty contests talk page.--Arielle Leira (talk) 23:23, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- List of Buddhist temples (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Enlightenment
Edit warring on Claims to be the fastest growing religion
Your recent editing history at Claims to be the fastest growing religion shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Thomas.W talk to me 19:39, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thomas, no one is edit warring. This user is not edit warring with me nor am I with him. I'm reviewing his content and making corrections where necessary. He has never undone my edits and nor I his. NarSakSasLee (talk) 19:43, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Thomas.W talk to me 19:48, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, it's clearly a sock. I don't have time to post a request yet, but it's not urgent as it's so clear, so just keep reverting. But in your edit summary, make sure you say something like "reverting clear sock of blocked User:Rajputbhatti per WP:DUCK and WP:EVADE" with those links. If we just roll back, someone will question it. cheers --Merbabu (talk) 02:29, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
Table at "growth of religion"
Hey, I am totally against the table, because it has been estimated on the "rise" not "decrease" and it's stats for Sikh(28m for real), Hindu, buddhism are really false too. What you think about the table though? Bladesmulti (talk) 07:36, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
... I have really earned that barnstar you gave me!
- Miss Multiverse.... gone
- Miss Multiverse Belgium .... gone
- Miss Multiverse Netherlands.... gone
Seems that the fact that mrs. Linda Gausachs Grandia is identical to every organisation involved, was too much for the Administrator On Duty.19:33, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Catholic Church by country. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please try to reach a consensus on the talk page.
If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 02:27, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Buddhism by country, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Dl2000 (talk) 19:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Angelo De La Paz! I found you at the list member of WikiProject VietNam and since I new to wiki. I have a problem hope you can solve. I'm now editing content for VNG page in Vietnamese and when I tend to edit it in English. I can't search it under the name "VNG" itself. Even thought it was the same company. So i wonder if you or someone else in chart may change it back to "VNG" only. Many thanks Nataliethaile (talk) 02:52, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Using warning templates
Please be cautious and do not add inappropriate warning templates as you did here. Take it to the talk page, try to achieve consensus and consider dispute resolution if needed. Best regards JimRenge (talk) 18:03, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
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) 17:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
When editing an article on Wikipedia, you will see a small field labeled "Edit summary" shown under the main edit box. It looks like this:
Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)
Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.
Edit summary content is visible in:
Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Also please don't mark edits as minor unless they are minor. Kendall-K1 (talk) 21:45, 4 September 2018 (UTC)