User talk:Valenciano

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

Anti-vandalism barnstar[edit]

Hello! I saw your anti-vandalism edit on the Woodstock North High School page today. I really appreciated your work in getting rid of this vandalism and wanted to give you a barnstar for it! :) Snowsky Mountain (talk) 22:18, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Barnstar of Reversion Hires.png The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
message Snowsky Mountain (talk) 22:18, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Open Episcopal Church[edit]

Hi, I think you have tried to help in bringing what you have termed an 'edit war' to an end on the Open Episcopal Church entry. I did not know about the rules to which you refer, so it has been helpful to discover this. However, Gorilla has posted their false entry again. Given what you have written, I think you have indicated, I must not remove it again, but what else can I do to stop this malicious editor continuing to vandalise the page please? Integrity4488hope (talk) 22:02, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Despite attempts by Integrity4488 to redact factual information that has been added, no more attempts will be made by Gorilla1978 to reverse Integrity4488's erroneous and inaccurate redactions and additions as the subsequent edit warring is not helpful to Wikipedia. But be aware that the redactions and additions by Integrity4488 that Gorilla1978 has objected to are misleading and inaccurate. This means that the page is compromised as a resource if Integrity4488's editing is restored. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorilla1978 (talkcontribs) 09:30, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Attempts have been made to add information that is factually verifiable and true and Integrity4488 has been redacting it continuously. There is evidence to support all of the information that has been added regarding the 2014 events which led to lots of people leaving the OEC. If this information needs to be verified by an audit trail of emails then it can be. And indeed other evidence too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorilla1978 (talkcontribs) 22:46, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
@Gorilla1978: the problem I had with your edits were additions like this: "However, his literary tour de force must be his 2017 blog "How to Cope with Hot Nights", which stresses the importance of nudity in the bedroom on those sticky summer evenings. This blog article will doubtless have saved many from the misery of sweaty armpits and crotches."
Does that sound to you like the type of information that should be in a serious encyclopedia? Not to me, it sounds like the type of commentary I'd expect to find in an opinion piece in "popular"/"yellow" press or on a blog.
You're totally right that you haven't been the only one doing this, looking through the edits of you and Integrity4488hope I find additions of the following commentary....
"The fissiparous nature of a smaller jurisdiction, lacking the stability that stipends and in service benefits offer, have seen various individuals and groups exodus the church."
"The church has maintained a stable and growing core of committed clerics"
"The fissiparous nature of a smaller jurisdiction, lacking the proper accountable leadership of many mainstream churches offer ....makes the church vulnerable to archbishops who have little self-awareness or self-discipline."
All of that is pure POV and editorialising. When making additions you both need to stick to what reliable sources say and report what they say in a neutral, dispassionate tone, backing up what you say by linking to those sources. Most important, though, is that you both stop edit warring, as that could lead to you both being blocked under the WP:3RR rule. Follow the steps at Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution: if someone reverts you, go to the article talk page, in this case Talk:Open_Episcopal_Church and try and find a compromise. If that doesn't work, you can ask for a third opinion and then the next stage would be Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard. If you're stuck, you're both welcome to ask me, I hadn't heard of the Open Episcopal Church before yesterday, so I don't have any horse in that race so to speak. Valenciano (talk) 16:31, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks. Gorilla1978 accepts that the edit you cite above is judged by you as an editor to be of editorial tone and so Gorilla1978 accepts its withdrawal. However the important edit made by Gorilla1978 was the original one that contained important details about people leaving the church in 2014. This text was based on fact and had no subjective commentary in it at all. Integrity4488hope falsely claimed this text was subjective and then redacted it without legitimate reason. Gorilla1978 does not consoder dialogue with Integrity4488hope to be of any value due to the latter's user's inability to distinguish subjective from objective text, or indeed to understand the very nature of historicity or how to substantiate arguments. So Gorilla1978 will refrain from making any more edits but states on record that the edits in question made by the holder of username Integrity4488hope are inaccurate or misleading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorilla1978 (talkcontribs) 17:31, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Question[edit]

Hi! It's been a while. Could you tell me the :en:wiki procedure to remove a-not-very-argumented template:NPOV tag? Regards.--Asqueladd (talk) 22:01, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello Asqueladd. Generally, follow the guidance here: Template:POV#When_to_remove. If you give me the article in question, I can have a look. Valenciano (talk) 08:44, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi, thanks! If you want to take a look, it's Hispanidad.--Asqueladd (talk) 10:09, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

English or WP?[edit]

Yes, you're correct - and your new change is a great solution. - Snori (talk) 20:06, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Plural of "ABS" is the same as the plural of "ATM" ("ATMs"), etc.[edit]

I started a discussion about pluralizing "ABS" as "ABSs"--that is, "anti-lock braking systemS" the same way as we pluralize "ATM" as "ATMs," etc. Will you please show this other editor why that's correct with me?

Thanks if so, 174.23.105.242 (talk) 22:31, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Loans[edit]

But doesn't that header imply that the players have left permanently? – PeeJay 22:48, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

PeeJay2K3 Maybe, but in the context of a season, it hardly matters, since the player won't feature again. However, for clarity, probably could just say "out on loan." I think leaving him there is also problematic as it implies he's still a squad member. I'll leave it to you. Valenciano (talk) 23:00, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

1rr report[edit]

Just to point out you'll be lucky to get action on the IP for 1rr violation unless you give them the specific warning template for it and then they violate it again. A simple letting them know of it without the template no longer counts apparently. Mabuska (talk) 21:46, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. In this case, they were blocked. I wouldn't be surprised if they are a new guise of a previously blocked user. They know their way around here too well to be otherwise. Valenciano (talk) 16:00, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
They got blocked as an open proxy of someone previously blocked so that probably helped. Mabuska (talk) 17:50, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, Valenciano. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Precious four years[edit]

Precious
Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg
Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:12, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas !!![edit]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message
Thank you CAPTAIN RAJU. I hope you have great holidays and a happy 2018. Valenciano (talk) 08:58, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Reviewed But forgot to Patroll[edit]

Dear Valenciano, Want to thank you for taking your time to edit https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babasola_Ogunwa article

Notice it wasn't patrol after your edit, will like to request you use your good office to patrol the article to be live on google.

Looking forward to a positive response/ patrol of the article.

Thanks. Prince Kekeocha (talk) 10:32, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Billy Bremner[edit]

You're being overly pedantic. It's obvious what "summer" refers to when you're talking about someone who played their whole career in the northern hemisphere. For example, all of the transfer list articles (e.g. List of English football transfers summer 2017 or List of English football transfers winter 2017–18) refer to the transfer period at that time of year (May to August being the "summer" window, and January the "winter" window). We don't use List of English football transfers from May to August 2017 or List of English football transfers in the middle of 2017 just because somebody in the southern hemisphere may be (irrationally) confused. That's why WP:ENGVAR applies. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 19:05, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Jmorrison230582 To you, summer is obvious, yes. But if you stumbled across an article about say, a Colombian player who transferred "in the summer" (or "dry season") would you know, without looking it up, which dates that applies to? Why force readers to do that? What does the wording of "summer 1978" achieve that "the middle of 1978" or "June 1978" doesn't? The latter is clear per MOS:SEASON. ("Avoid the use of seasons to refer to a particular time of year (winter 1995) as such uses are ambiguous: the seasons are six months apart in the northern and southern hemispheres, and areas near the equator have only wet and dry seasons.") The former is not. You've mentioned WP:ENGVAR for the second time, so I'll ask you, for the second time, what part of it you think supports such ambiguous phrasing? This: "Prefer vocabulary common to all varieties of English. Insisting on a single term or a single usage as the only correct option does not serve the purposes of an international encyclopedia. " seems perfectly clear to me. Valenciano (talk) 19:20, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Last time I checked, Billy Bremner was not Colombian. So that's completely irrelevant. As I said before, you're being overly pedantic. People don't say "I moved in the middle of 1978", they say "I moved in the summer of 1978". WP:ENGVAR applies because that is the phraseology that should be used about a Scottish subject. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 19:42, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

The seasons section of the WP:MOS says "Names of seasons may be used when there is a logical connection to the event they are describing ([e.g.] the autumn harvest)". The logical connection here is that in English football, each season runs from August to May and any transfer deals which happen in the close season (the period between seasons) are described as having happened in the "summer". That is what "summer" in this context is referring to. It's the British equivalent of baseball having it's "hot stove" (trades and signings that happen during its close season). Jmorrison230582 (talk) 19:52, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

You know exactly what I mean regarding Colombia. Do all international readers know, without looking it up, when the middle of 1978 is? Yes. Do they know when the summer of 1978 falls in specific countries without looking it up? No. WP:ENGVAR is to discourage switching from one national version of English to another (color to colour for example.)
The logical connection doesn't exist, since the transfer window system you refer to only started 15 years ago, long after the transfers we're speaking about. Can we get the exact dates of these transfers? That would greatly help for clarity purposes. Valenciano (talk) 20:00, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

ETA is a terriorist group, noty just separatist[edit]

Good afternoon Valenciano i have been reading a page wich you started, it makes very few mentions to the amount of people killed by ETA, it mentions them 99% of the time as a separatist group when they really are a terrorist group,

could you change this please? and perhaps add the data of the full amount of terror attacks which numbers over 2000 attacks?

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mankwank (talkcontribs) 23:52, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

I didn't start the page and the answer is I can't and I won't. The lead already states: "Between 1968 and 2010, it killed 829 people (including 340 civilians) and injured thousands more.[4][5][6][7] ETA is classified as a terrorist group by Spain, France,[8] the United Kingdom,[9] the United States,[10] Canada[11] and the European Union.[12] This convention is followed by a plurality of domestic and international media, which also refer to the group as "terrorists." " That's very clear regarding the organisation's status and meets WP:NPOV. Valenciano (talk) 07:19, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Third party opinion[edit]

Hi, Valenciano. Based on past talk page interaction and topic interests (politicians/elections), I ask you to become a third party opinion to shed light about a content dispute here. Are elected members to a regional parliament of a Spanish autonomous community (1st level subnational division) presumed to be generally notable? That is, do they comply with WP:POLITICIAN? Best regards.--Asqueladd (talk) 18:43, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Superfluous use of "different"[edit]

I had to laugh and should "comrade!" at your revert of the unnecessary use of 'different' this morning in the World Cup article. That has recently become one of my pet peeve errors; I see it constantly among my students, with very much the same comment you used in the edit summary. ----Dr.Margi 17:57, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

I also salute you! Misuse of "different" is ubiquitous. "Personally" is another one. "I personally think" / "My personal opinion is" etc. Keep fighting the struggle. Valenciano (talk) 08:02, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

MOS:NUM[edit]

I agree that the extended content is not needed, but MOS:NUMNOTES suggests that we should, "avoid beginning a sentence with a figure". Any ideas? Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:20, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Just saw that. One part of the MOS that doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but in that case we could have the wording "There were 79 teams from 54 of the 55 UEFA member associations participating." Valenciano (talk) 09:43, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Vicente Guaita[edit]

Hi there VALENCIANO, longtime no "see" from Portugal,

i know it's virtually impossible, but i'll ask anyway: you being a Valencia supporter, do you think you can retrieve this player's Tercera División stats with Valencia CF Mestalla? I tried and tried (and also asked other fellow users), to no avail :(

Thank you very much in advance for whatever you can provide, happy editing/holidays from Portugal! --Quite A Character (talk) 17:28, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello again, I hope you're doing well. I've had a look but unfortunately can't find those stats. Valenciano (talk) 09:04, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Deravica[edit]

Why you call Deravica the real name is Gjeravica and Kosovo is a state and not a part of Serbia since 2008. Ardi11 (talk) 08:36, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Because in English that seems to be the common name (see WP:COMMONNAME for more details. If you believe differently, then it is best to argue this on the article's talk page (Talk:Đeravica). Valenciano (talk) 08:40, 5 August 2018 (UTC)