User talk:JMGM

Inter languge links

Hi there and welcome to Wikipedia. You don't need to add inter-wiki links to other languages - this is taken care of by our sister project Wikidata. Cheers, Philg88 ^♦talk 06:12, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Predefinição:Convert//Km2 sqmi

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Predefinição:Convert//Km2 sqmi, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Hot Pork Pie 14:32, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017

Hello, I'm ThePlatypusofDoom. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Sairecabur— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ThePlatypusofDoom (talk) 23:38, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sources and edit summaries

Please provide proper sources and add edit summaries. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 00:29, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rui Gabriel Correia This to prove that there are Districts of Zimbabwe, Provinces of Zimbabwe, Wards of Zimbabwe

I have already put two sources that talk about wards in Zimbabwe to prove they exist

Zimbabwe in Transition: A View from Within pag 15

New Perspectives in Forestry Education pag 420 JMGM (talk) 00:39, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Where on the link that you published as a source is the information? Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 00:59, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's two books and I put the page number JMGM (talk) 01:12, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am really confused. To whom do you want or need to "to prove they [wards] exist"? Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 01:16, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For those who keep saying they do not exist and removing refs placed for that purpose. JMGM (talk) 01:22, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The page is called "List of wards of Zimbabwe", what is the need to prove that wards exist? Who is saying that wards don't exist? Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 01:37, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've been translating lists of wards into Portuguese and are mistranslating wards as districts or neighborhoods. I have been trying for years to show that the word wards exists even in Brazil as a differentiated land that has special status of city and not district or neighborhood. I agree that lists do not need references, but in Portuguese they are demanding do not know why, never needed. JMGM (talk) 01:59, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For remember [1] JMGM (talk) 02:03, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[2] see iw JMGM (talk) 02:28, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1.Very simple: "ward" is an English word, therefore you find "wards" in countries that are English-speaking or have English as a working language; "arrondissement" is a French word, therefore you find "arrondissements" in countries that are French-speaking or have French as a working language; "Stadtbezirk" is German word, therefore you find "Stadtbezirke" in countries that are German-speaking or have German as a working language. Get it? Japan is NOT an English-speaking country, nor does it have English as a working language, therefore Japan has "wards" in the English Wikipedia, it has "arrondissements" in the French Wikipedia etc. How can that be so difficult to understand? As for the word "wards" in Brazil, I would really like to see examples.
2.What is the point of adding references here in the English Wikipedia to prove your point in the Portuguese Wikipedia?

Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 02:43, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because of this In Brazil [3] use Ward statistic method. JMGM (talk) 03:14, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The confusion started when I started translating this template [4] JMGM (talk) 03:24, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1. Lists of items do not need references, unless there is additional information relating to any of the items, as you can see here and here. So, yes, there is no need for references on this page, so I have removed the tag.
2. What do you understand by "Ward statistic method"? Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 04:13, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ward statistic method is a grouping of localities, cities, towns, villages, for any statistical purposes. JMGM (talk) 16:25, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And so you found that in ONE document in Portuguese and now you want to prove your point that the word exists/ is used in Portuguese? Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 18:20, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Forget, Ward statistic method. I will not translate any more. Thanks for the chat. Until another day. JMGM (talk) 19:15, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mind-boggling! It has NOTHING to do wards in the sense of a division, as you have been trying to shoe-horn in the Portuguese Wikipedia; it has to do with Ward's Method, named after Joe H. Ward. It is the name of a person, so it is NOT possible that "word wards exists even in Brazil". In fact when you say that you "have been trying for years to show that the word wards exists even in Brazil as a differentiated land that has special status of city and not district or neighborhood" it demonstrates that your understanding of English is far worse that you try to make come across or you are malking a deliberate attempt to confuse the issue so you can have your way. Yes, until next time. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 10:26, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Warning - spelling changes

Please do not drag your personal biases in the Portuguese Wikipedia over to the English Wikipedia or any other project. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 20:34, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-wiki abuse

Dear JMGM Please note that I have brought the practice of involving the enwiki in your disputes in the ptwiki to the attention of administrators here and here. Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 15:33, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I corrected an absurd mistake made here, the word ocó means (man) in popular language in afro brazilian religions [5] JMGM (talk) 23:00, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Warning - spelling changes 2

If you are not happy with the outcome of the previous episode, open a discussion on this page. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 22:52, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Text by JMGM deleted from wrong section and moved to correct place:

1-O link em vermelho para Oosa Ogiyan deve ser Orisa-Ogiyan citado neste artigo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ejigbo_Palace_Organization#Orisa-Ogiyan

2-Só para esclarecer, a palavra (ocó significa homem e não é yorubá) e o significado de Oko é este [6].

3-Em Cuba que também é América Latina o nome dele é ORISHÁ OKO

If in Cuba it is "oko", by all means add that information with a source, as is the norm. The norm is not to remove the sourced information that you don’t like, as you have done twice, which besides being blatant vandalism, makes it clear that you are WP:NOTHERE and are intent on pushing WP:POV. It is not for you to decide which one is the correct version. Rather than turning the lede into a Christmas tree for the sake of one single POV user, I'll include on the talk page that the spelling "oco" can be found in Cuba here, here, here, here, and plenty other sources. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 15:27, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please show where the information is in the source

You added a source to where it says that "Bees are considered the messengers Oko". Please indicate where on the page that you are using as a reference does it say that. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 23:10, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rui Gabriel Correia O texto do livro diz: Orixá Okô é a própria energia cultivadora, que sabe como fazer nascer e crescer as coisas na natureza, e que ensina como cultivar novas vidas na terra. É auxiliado pelos insetos e pelos pássaros, que carregam novas vidas em suas patas..., pelo que sei abelhas são insetos, ou não? Bees are flying insects closely related to wasps...JMGM (talk) 04:09, 5 January 2020 (UTC) ~~:1-O link em vermelho para Oosa Ogiyan deve ser Orisa-Ogiyan citado neste artigo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ejigbo_Palace_Organization#Orisa-Ogiyan~~ [reply]

~~2-Só para esclarecer, a palavra (ocó significa homem e não é yorubá) e o significado de Oko é este [7].~~

~~3-Em Cuba que também é América Latina o nome dele é ORISHÁ OKO~~

Feliz 2020 JMGM (talk) 04:57, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is the English Wikipedia, this is a public space for all users, so please stick to English, so other users can follow and participate.

You quoted from the book what anyone can go and read, which I did, and which does not say anywhere that "Bees are considered the messengers of Oko". For that matter, by your logic, it could have said that ostriches are messengers; or vultures are messengers. The text is about plant life and how birds and insects aid in pollination (by carrying life [pollen] on their feet). You can't go around inferring things, as that is misleading the reader and defeating the whole purpose of an encyclopaedia. It is called Falsication of sources. I would strongly suggest that you read it.

Reply in the correct place

Please do not mix up discussions. The discussions above are distinct and separate – one is about you changing spelling removing sources with any explanation, which is vandalism, WP:NOTHERE intent on pushing WP:POV; the other about a query about Source Falsification. A Happy 2020 to you too. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 15:27, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't do vandalism, Mr. Rui, please stop denigrating my image that I've been trying to maintain for almost 72 years.

Who writes the articles in Portuguese are people from different states of Brazil, each with the regionality of speaking and oral culture of religions in the majority. A Pernambuco writer will never write a book with the same words as a carioca or gaucho. I have been a part of Afro-Brazilian religions for over 50 years and for 16 years on Wikipedia without to make vandalism that I am being accused, I only make corrections according to my knowledge and sources. I have never confused the names of the orishas, specifying that in southeastern Brazil it is accented for having the sound closed, while in some other state it may be wrongly for having quite different meanings than the yoruba.

While Okô or Oko has the meaning of agriculture in Yoruba, [ocó] means man or bofe in [gay dialect] widely used in gay communities, in the streets, and in these religions, being a joke for anyone who knows a little about the subject.

The writer who wrote a book in Portuguese and changed the name of the orixá to ocó has no idea of the absurdity he made. That's why I dropped the word at the beginning of the article, there's no need to say in the article the wrong ways some writers use it. The name Orixá Oko is unique, worshiped in many diaspora countries, no matter the pronunciation, the written form should be the same for everyone. But if you want to leave it as you are now saying that in Latin America he is a man or a bofe, I will not change anymore, until someone corrects it. JMGM (talk) 22:34, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ferramenta moved to draftspace; copying requires attribution

An article you recently created, Ferramenta, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.

Furthermore, it appears that you copied or moved text from pt:Ferramenta into that page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 07:41, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DanCherek Sorry, my mistake. Please delete. Thanks JMGM (talk) 09:19, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, Categorização

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Categorização. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Categorization. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Categorization. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. —C.Fred (talk) 00:02, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]