User talk:Nelidarocca

Welcome!

Hello, Nelidarocca, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Conservatorio Superior de Música de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires "Astor Piazzolla", may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Tea House, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Muhammad Ittal ● ✉ 06:58, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Conservatorio Superior de Música de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires "Astor Piazzolla"

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 Conservatorio Superior de Música de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires "Astor Piazzolla", requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 "Click here to 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Muhammad Ittal ● ✉ 06:58, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Conservatorio Superior de Música de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires "Astor Piazzolla"

Hi, thanks for message. [Thank you for your reply as well.] ~~You can sign your comments automatically using four tildes ~~~~. Please add your messages to the bottom of the talk page, or they may be overlooked.~~ [I did that already. Didn't I? Please, let me know.] I deleted your article because

it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. [My/our article was a stub and you didn't give me time to finish it. Next time, consider this fact in advance before deleting a text.]
it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: higher level... continuous training, specialized research... educational offer... professional artistic journey... Superior faculty... Superior technical programs... it contributes to the development and growth of Buenos Aires culture.— it's just promoting your courses. [Your claims are false and shameful. The words you quote were taken and translated from the institution's official site ([1]). It's not my/our fault if you only speak English.] There is little else about the school. How many students and staff? History? How is it funded? [We were going to describe that and convert the stub into a full-text article, but you deleted it.]
You have an obvious conflict of interest when it comes to editing articles about this subject. Thank you for declaring your interest. If, after reading the information about notability linked above, you still believe that your organisation is notable enough for a Wikipedia article (and that there is significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources), you could, if you wish, post a request at Wikipedia:Requested articles for the article to be created. See also Wikipedia:Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest. [Again, your claims are false and shameful: what you consider "obvious" exists only in your imagination and I/we never declared anything.]

My apologies. When you wrote you deleted our article about the official higher music education institution, I assumed that you worked for the organisation or you were editing on behalf of it. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:53, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments on my talk page

Mr/Mrs. "Jimfbleak", just "Jim" will do [Jimfbleak is a nickname and, therefore, we will address you properly as "Mr/Ms. Jimfbleak".]
further measures should be taken in order to ensure transparent and non discriminatory actions— Not sure what you mean by "transparent", all actions on Wikipedia are visible. In what way are you claiming to be discriminated against? I know nothing about you or your organisation other than what was in the article. [Your ignorance about international official institutions is not our fault, but yours. Further discrimination will be denounced and prosecuted.]
Conservatorio_Nacional_de_Música_(Argentina)— it's not very good, I've removed a couple of spammy bits and added a tag for referencing. However, it does have some proper content, so not deleted [Your ignorance in that field is not of our business.]

If you recreate, format your external link like this [url description] to describe what you are linking to, eg "Official site". Add in-line references by putting <ref>[url description]</ref> at the appropriate places in the text and create a "References" heading followed by {{reflist}} which will create the list. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:52, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[I/we would like to recreate and consider your deletion as a misunderstanding, given the ignorance in the field in question you have shown. Next time, please avoid to edit and/or delete articles which are outside of your area of expertise.]

Nélida; I noticed you made the following comments here and at Jim's talk page:

"Note, also, that further measures should be taken in order to ensure transparent and non discriminatory actions like the above described."
"Your ignorance about international official institutions is not our fault, but yours. Further discrimination will be denounced and prosecuted."

You are not making legal threats against Wikipedia or a Wikipedia administrator are you? Please do not, as that will lead to an immediate block of your account as indicated in the linked page in this sentence. [Abstain from ironic statements that may be used against you during the corresponding process. The right to recourse to justice is not a threat, but a human right. On the contrary, are you are threatening me by referring to a unfounded "inmediate block"? All your threats and false accusations may be properly denounced to the corresponding authorities.] I also noticed that your tone does not conform to Wikipedia's way of conducting business. [Your evident and already mentioned lack of competence linked to the field in question makes your statement an unfounded opinion. Avoid further commentaries of the same kind]. I can understand that you may be upset about an editor requesting a deletion of an article, or an administrator's decision. [I deny having committed the actions you mentioned. Your accusations are again false and shameless.] Regardless of the decision being correct or not, you have the right to appeal by contesting the deletion, by asking the nominator and/or the admin in question about it, or taking it to Deletion Review if you must. You do not have the right to attack editors and make threats. So please let's calm down and follow procedure. Thank you for your attention and let's build a better encyclopaedia. -- Alexf^(talk) 18:06, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for pointing out that your article was a copyright violation of this page. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. Translations of copyright text are still copyright. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient. [Your claims are false and shameless again: there was not such copyright violation, since you deleted the article before it was finished. Your irony fails again and may be properly denounced.]
please take note of Alex's comments above. Legal threats result in an indefinite block. Please also read this
note that machine translations of foreign-language text are not very successful [Again, the article was a Stub, which required further editing and proper English revision. But you deleted it before that was possible.]
My knowledge of Spanish or of your institution is immaterial. When you edit English Wikipedia, you have to write neutral encyclopaedic text in your own words. [Again, you deleted the article before I was able to edit it. Next time, act properly.]

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:31, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm watching this page now, so if you wish to reply, you can do so here or on my talk page, whichever you prefer Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:00, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[Once more and finally, I/we would like to consider your deletion as a misunderstanding and look forward to a better mutual understanding.] Nelidarocca (talk) 19:17, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nélida. Your comments above (to me) seem to miss the point or at least misunderstand how Wikipedia works. To wit: "are you are threatening me by referring to a unfounded "inmediate block"? All your threats and false accusations may be properly denounced to the corresponding authorities". None of that is unfounded or a threat, merely a statement of Wikipedia Policy regarding this issue. I pointed you to the proper page in case you are not familiar with it. Any block of account is done following policy. Please do not take it as a threat which it is not. I do not know if you are familiar with Wikipedia Policy so I pointed it to you for your information (you do not seem to be when you refer to "proper authorities" -- whoever these may be). As per Jim's comments on copyvio, he is correct. Although not the reason used for the deletion, the article was a copyright violation of this page as it was translated word for word. I read both and they are an exact match. That is not allowed. So again, calm down and ask questions when you see an administrator take an action. -- Alexf^(talk) 19:40, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alexf: Thank you for your latest, clear and rational comments: I can see your point, but please understand that the article was deleted before a proper re-elaboration of the translated text was possible. I will recreate the article as soon as possible, in the way you suggested, but please let me know how can it be protected (by you or other serious administrators/users) from arbitrary and/or unfounded measures (including deletions). I wouldn't like to invest my time (and my team's time) in an article that may get unfairly deleted. Is there a way to do that?]

I suggest that you write a draft here initially, with proper independent references as described above, and ask Alexf to comment before posting as an article again. That avoids problems that may arise from direct recreation, and gives you time to address the issues above, assuming that you are prepared to see them as such. I also note that you are threatening Alexf as well as me; from above Abstain from ironic statements that may be used against you during the corresponding process. The right to recourse to justice is not a threat, but a human right. On the contrary, are you are threatening me by referring to a unfounded "inmediate block"? All your threats and false accusations may be properly denounced to the corresponding authorities.— He is trying to help you and he didn't delete the article, I did. This is your last warning about threatening other editors Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:59, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jim pointed you to write the article in a subpage. That is a good idea, instead of publishing directly to mainspace. Once ready, I would suggest you request a review at Articles for Creation as they have many volunteers that do reviews all the time, unlike Jim and I who are busy with policy application. I also see you keep referring to "my team". Please note that if you are affiliated to the organization you should declare it in your user page. In that case I would urge you to read the Plain and simple conflict of interest guide to understand the issues involved. Does Wikipedia have many rules? Yes it does, but as an open encyclopedia that anyone can edit, you would agree that rules are necessary to keep the level of quality we all desire. Have a good day and please stop referring to "authorities". Just read the policy pages pointed to you for information. -- Alexf^(talk) 20:06, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to WikiProject Countering systemic bias

Hi, Nelidarocca, I'd like to let you know about Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias, a Wiki Project that exists to counter Wikipedia:Systemic bias, and invite you to join. If you read the description of the problem, it may seem familiar. If you look at the deletion histories of certain sysopped editors, you will note a consistent and longstanding pattern consistent with this. I would love to see some more project organization among concerned editors and you may have some ideas. Regards, Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 20:16, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Til, I welcome your invitation to her and to instruct her on your issue, but I must take exception at your comment as in this case there is no systemic bias, just application of policy. I can assure you there is no bias in my case as I come from the same place as her and speak the same language (assuming she is related to the organization she's writing about). I certainly do not match the "average user definition" in the page you pointed her to, and I am familiar with the country (Argentina) and the organization she writes about, having lived there for 27 years back in the day. That said, she is certainly welcome to read about it and join, just wanted to clarity that this is definitely not the case in this instance. -- Alexf^(talk) 20:27, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A translation of material into a different language is not legally protected by any copyright. It may be a technique for "copywriters", but it's certainly allowed. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 20:35, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think you will find that if you translate publications to which you do not own the copyright, the publishers might have something to say. We are trying to calm things down here. Your comments criticising two admins for trying to enforce policies in the face of gross incivility and threats of legal action are unhelpful to say the least. Please try to create a better encyclopaedia, not a battleground. If you encourage Nelidarocca in his/her aggressive behaviour, it is likely to lead to him/her being blocked. Whatever you think about me, you should note that the incivility and threats of legal action were just as virulent against Alexf, who has done nothing but try to help Nelidarocca, as they were against me. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:35, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the threat of legal action, Jimfbleak? Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 14:44, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the text above for threats. To me Further discrimination will be denounced and prosecuted. To Alexf All your threats and false accusations may be properly denounced to the corresponding authorities. I know your views from past dealings, and I'm sure you will consider that these statements are not threats, and the accusations of bad faith, ignorance and shamefulness are fair comment, just as you blame me and Alexf for this dispute and argue that it's fine to infringe copyright. I'm unlikely to reply to any further pot-stirring from you, I'm trying to get this issue resolved so that Nelidarocca can become a productive and civil editor and the page, from an area where we have too few articles, can get properly created. Your intervention does not seem designed to facilitate an amicable resolution. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:59, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

These are "legal threats" in your imagination, Jimfbleak, you cannot prove something that is in your imagination, but the threatening one here to the New users is clearly you, and this further undermines my confidence in your sysop abilities. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 15:03, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Til, this is not the place for this discussion. If you have any other issues about this, or Jim please take it to ANI. -- Alexf^(talk) 15:06, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I believe I have every right to participate here unless Nelidarocca asks me to leave, and I do not concede to you the authority you imagine you have to order me to leave. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 15:16, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Til Eulenspiegel, I thank you very, very much, for your participation here and for having let me know about the Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias. Thank you, also, for having pointed out that "A translation of material into a different language is not legally protected by any copyright" (besides, my article was deleted before I was even able to add the corresponding quotation marks and footnotes). Moreover, the main problem here is that, as we all know, the article was not deleted by Jimfbleak alleging a dubious (see again the above quoted statement by Til Eulenspiegel) copyright violation, but alleging—instead—unfounded accusations of G11 and A7, something that was not the case, as Alexf clearly proved when he stated: "the article was not a G11 and probably not even an A7". However, the responsible of all this situation, Jimfbleak, not only didn't apologize for his proven wrong and unfounded actions, but he persists on arguing instead of undeleting the article (so I can properly edit it) and trying to find an amicable solution, as Alexf suggested. And that is what worries me about future articles that might be written and then unfairly deleted by bizarre actions of some (not all) sysops. How can we be safe from them? I would like to thank you, once more, Alexf and especially Til Eulenspiegel for your understanding and support: you efforts make me again believe in Wikipedias' reliability and fairness. Nelidarocca (talk) 20:50, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The question is not "how are you safe from sysops", but rather "how do I follow rules and procedures" and "what to do if I have a disagreement" (sysop or not). All admins must follow the rules. We enforce them and try to keep the place clean (e.g. mop up). The rules and regulations are published and easily findable, and you can always ask. If you have a dispute you can go to Dispute Resolution. If you have a complaint against an admin, go to the Administration Noticeboard. -- Alexf^(talk) 21:46, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alexf Thank you for your answer, but you didn't quote me properly, since you took my sentence out of context. You should perfectly know that I was referring to the "bizarre actions of some (not all) sysops". You mentioned the rules and regulations of Wikipedia. So, again: how can we be safe from those sysops who acted against the rules, like Jimfbleak, deleting articles based on unfounded reasons (false A7 and false A11)? If some sysops don't respect the rules and regulations, how can you expect regular users to do it? I think that Til Eulenspiegel was right about his statements. Nelidarocca (talk) 13:46, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]