User talk:Ejrrjs

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Minor Edits and AfD[edit]

Regarding your edits at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Enciclopedia Libre, two quick points. Firstly, I'm of the firm belief that any edit which changes how a page looks (such as putting in a subheading) isn't a minor edit - minor edits are things like fixing up typos and so forth. Secondly and more importantly, putting a subheading into an AfD listing throws the entire page out of whack. There's no need to put a heading marked "comments", since that's what the listing is there to achieve - comments on the proposal that the article be deleted. I'd previously removed the same heading for much the same reason, so if I sound a bit short-tempered please accept my apologies. BigHaz 23:07, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

See [link] where the subheading "Comments" appeared? Not only did it appear like that in the AfD discussion for "Enciclopedia Libre", it appeared like that for all of the AfD log page, since each discussion comes up as a subheading on the page for that day. Thus, the page was thrown out of whack. I'd also contend that it's superfluous to make a subheading entitled "Comments" anyway since, as I said above, that's what the listing is there for. BigHaz 23:31, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Alfonsín and the Juicio a las Juntas[edit]

About that... The choice of words didn't seem right. It sounded as if the whole thing was to be thanked personally to Alfonsín, and as if nothing would have been done without Alfonsín (the former is POV, the latter is also speculation). If you have a source that neutrally explains what Alfonsín did to promote the trials, by all means add it to the article. In fact, the context should be explained better (in case the readers might ask themselves why Alfonsín first sent these guys to trial, and then got the rest to benefit from the impunity laws). --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 10:28, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi about your post[edit]

Its not even that the article states that is that some people are foolish to except the truth that the articles research had flaws (XGustaX 04:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC))

Hippolyte de Bouchard[edit]

Pirate Buchar[edit]

I'd love to know if your sources do consistently refer to Bouchard as Buchar (which sounds like the spanish-ization of the French surname, anyway). At least in Argentina, I've never heard something like that. Thanks in advance, User:Ejrrjs says What? 22:39, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Jones' work is the only one to mention the nickname "Pirate Buchar"; tonight when I'm home I'll look to see if he cites his source on this. The most common descriptor is simply "pirate."--Lord Kinbote 23:00, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Sophia & Sophos[edit]

Can you help supply the latter, in Greek characters:

Yours truly, --Ludvikus 01:10, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


In the Sophia article - forgot to add (disambig. may be required). --Ludvikus 01:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

On a different spirit...[edit]

Just wanted to point you to es:Primer revista Martín Fierro that might interest you. Best, User:Ejrrjs says What? 21:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Now this is what I still want to be doing. Translated. - Jmabel | Talk 20:51, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


I think those first 2 places would need sourcing for any connection to the "Falklands" but I have restored the comment to cover the others, SqueakBox 17:03, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


Please, translate my comments to english, thanks in advance. Pérez 18:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

it means[edit]

God!, can we speak our own language? Pérez 19:22, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Your translation is a good job, thanks. Pérez 19:41, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

RE: Enciclopedia Libre[edit]

You've tagged this article as if it needed sources. It already has them; look at the end of the article. User:Ejrrjs says What? 16:18, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Those should be inlined, using Citation templates . Specially the "Possibility of a merger" section. --Abu badali (talk) 16:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
"The use of Citation templates is not required by WP:CITE and is neither encouraged nor discouraged by any other Wikipedia citation guidelines."
However, I wouldn't mind if you want to go ahead and do it. Best, User:Ejrrjs says What? 19:02, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I don't see that as a policy violation. Just as room for improvement. --Abu badali (talk) 19:18, 25 April 2007 (UTC)



Just a reminder referencing to Mariquita Sánchez de Thompson:

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

Edit summary text box

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers.--Ohmpandya (talk) 00:58, 24 December 2007 (UTC)


Hello Ejrrs, When creating an archive, please also put : {{archive}} at the top of the page. I have done this for you. --Ohmpandya (talk) 18:57, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Tommaso Onofri[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Tommaso Onofri, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Troikoalogo (talk) 21:38, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs[edit]

Information.svg Hello Ejrrjs! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current 2,903 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

  1. Pacho O'Donnell - Find sources: "Pacho O'Donnell" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 07:24, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference[edit]

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being minor in the usual way.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. With the script in place, you can continue with this functionality indefinitely (its use is governed by WP:MINOR). If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 19:06, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 12:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)