User talk:Sfs90

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

Second round for Haitian Senate[edit]

Hi Since 1/3 of the Senate will be elected in October for the first round and the second round will take place in January 2017, I propose is renaming "Haitian parliamentary election, 2015-16" in "Haitian parliamentary election, 2015-17" or to create an article on the two rounds of the Senate vote. --Panam2014 (talk) 10:59, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

It's done. --Panam2014 (talk) 18
57, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Telenorte, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Calama and Julio Martínez (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:59, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 13[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Christian Democratic Team of the Spanish State, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Democratic Left (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:31, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited National Democratic Agreement, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Thayer (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:40, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Valdivia's Deutsche Zeitung[edit]

Please read WP:PROD. Anybody (including IPs and article creators themselves) can remove a PROD and it should then not be placed back. Doing so repeatedly is disruptive. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 14:50, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited National Democratic Party (Chile), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 1973 coup d'etat (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:11, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 13[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Liberal Progressive Party (Spain), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Independent Liberal Party (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:05, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

changes made on cds peoples party[edit]

Good afternoon about a week ago you made changes on the cds people's party page. I had noticed a mistake and decided to correct it. You changed this information back to what it previously was which was information back from 2004 that did not have much to do with the topic. Thank you for your understanding — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deportivo2016 (talkcontribs) 03:37, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

PDECAT/PDECat and PDPC/PDC[edit]

On the PDECAT issue, ok, I won't engage on endless edit warring on this. PDECAT may surely lead to confusion (because "P", "D" and "E" stand for their own words, whereas "CAT" doesn't). PDECAT and PDECat have been used interchangeably, and here in Wikipedia we're not required to strictly abide for a party's registered name in a template (the UK's Conservative Party registered name is Conservative and Unionist Party, but its template uses just "Conservative"). However, the party is new and still in the process of forming itself, with the name itself being a rather rushed one after their previous one was cancelled, and with it now seeking a logo (which may or not may change how the acronym is spelled). Since there are no new elections expected anytime soon, we can still wait for seeing what the most-commonly used form of the name is.

For PDPC/PDC I don't agree. There are options for both of them, but you currently can't claim what the Ministry of the Interior says because the coalition is not registered anymore. Both are valid, but PDC is more consistent with how the coalition was spelled ("Pacte Democratic per Catalunya", not "Pacte Democratic Per Catalunya").[1]. It's also more consistent with its successor's spelling, CDC. Impru20 (talk) 18:36, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

More: In Google, for Book searching pdc "pacte democratic per catalunya" gives you 36 results, whereas pdpc "pacte democratic per catalunya" gives you only 2 results. On a normal Google search, pdc pacte democratic per catalunya gives you 3,290 results, whereas pdpc pacte democratic per catalunya gives you only 152. It's pretty obvious which one is more common and widely used. Impru20 (talk) 18:41, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
So, of course, I'm not saying that "PDPC" is wrong, but that "PDC" is more correct in this case. I'd have chosen "PDPC" if finally the original name for PDECAT had remained, to prevent confusion, but it's no longer the case now and the coalition was obviously much more widely known and shown in sources as "PDC" than "PDPC". ;) Impru20 (talk) 18:45, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Sfs90. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

2015 Illapel earthquake[edit]

I noticed that you moved the page 2015 Illapel earthquake to 2015 Coquimbo earthquake by copying and pasting material. Per Wikipedia:Moving a page, this is not the proper way to move a page. At the top of every page is a "Move" button which should be used instead. That will work in cases where there is either no redirect at the new title or where the redirect has no edits. This will not work in this situation, however, because neither of those conditions are met. That aside, why did you move the page? What is your rationale? At this point, you must initiate a move request if you think the current title is problematic for whatever reason. Thanks. Dustin (talk) 05:38, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

24 horas al día[edit]

Good evening!, I can understand all you said me, and i value all your effort, but that is not the proper way to move a page, and your argument is not valid, Why?, belive me they aren't the same show, they can share a main brand, but they are totally different, as example ITN (a british news company) as 24 horas in Chile, they do 5 News (of Channel 5), Channel 4 News (of Channel 4) and ITV News (from ITV), that is amazing because only BBC One has an independient news programme, maybe they had the same production, but at end they are different. Other example is BBC News (A cable channel, and too a producer of news programmes of BBC), for example they produce BBC News at Six, BBC News at Five, BBC News at Ten and all have different pages. I hope that you understood what I wanted to say, it is better have all separated that all tangled, and disagreements are resolved through consensus-based discussion, not by tightly sticking to rules and procedures. We are all brothers, ¿Why we fight?, better don't destroy others work, and help me to create nice contents. Have happy holidays! If u have a problem or a concern, say me, I'm here always. Finally a big thank, for take care of Chilean based contents! I appreciate you ChocolateCherryNight (talk) 23:36, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

If u want to make a big change as u want, u should make a proposal into Talk page, not here, and resolve it by consensus-based discussion, sorry that's all, you and i, we aren't Wikipedia God's, there are others users, talk there. --ChocolateCherryNight (talk) 23:46, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

24 horas al día[edit]

Please, can you stop to censorship Wikipedia. Please don't make that type of editions. At this point go to Wikipedia:Guide to deletion. Remember: The purpose of the discussion page is to achieve consensus upon a course of action. Individuals will express strong opinions and may even "vote". To the extent that voting occurs, the votes are merely a means to gauge the degree of consensus reached so far. Manuel.21 (talk) 23:57, 10 December 2016 (UTC)