User talk:Mamalujo

what does Cornwell say on p.193 of pope in winter - why would he 'debunk' his own work. I don't understand. The sentence 'Much praise of Cornwell centered around his disputed claim that he was a practising catholic who had attempted to absolve Pius with his work' - i can't understand that , and the ref to 'Sanchez, 2002' is not helpful. which book is that? Looks like drivel, oh no!!!!Sayerslle (talk) 14:44, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lionelt has given you a McDonald's Filet-O-Fish sandwich! Filet-O-Fish sandwiches are very popular during Lent and promote WikiLove. Hopefully, this one has added flavor to your day! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Filet-O-Fish sandwich, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of Filet-O-Fish sandwiches by adding {{subst:Filet-O-Fish}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Hey Mamalujo! :) I've been looking to improve Philosophy and saw that there was a mention of "'golden age' of the twelfth, thirteenth and fourteenth centuries in the Latin West" you made on May 21, 2010. Do you know where I'll be able to find a source for that golden age? I also noticed that there's a mention of a similar golden age by Paulatim on Medieval Philosophy. Is this the same golden age you were referring to? Would you be able to leave a short message on the talk page with any helpful information? :) Keep up the good work! Thanks, Matt (talk) 07:09, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So, the most ardent proponent of removal of the quote shows up a month and a half after the RFC. Better late than never, lol.– Lionel ^(talk) 01:09, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, It looks like you were one of the main contributors to the John Bosco page. Anyway, FYI some of the unsourced items there are likely to be deleted soon, so I thought you should know, in case you want to touch them up with references. I do not really know enough about Bosco to jump into that page, so you may want to do that if you feel like it. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 15:12, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Per the policies on the usage of non-free images on Wikipedia, non-free images are not allowed on pages outside of the article namespace, including userpages. The Faberge egg image on your user page are copyrighted and unlicensed, so I had to remove it. I'm sorry if you are upset by my editing your page without your permission, but this is a rule where Wikipedia allows no exceptions. I want to make sure you know that this isn't personal. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions, or to seek another editor's opinion at the WP:MCQ discussion board. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 16:40, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On 23 June 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cristiada (film), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the persecution of the Catholic Church in Mexico as depicted in the 2012 film Cristiada has been compared to the Obama administration's birth control mandate? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cristiada (film). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thank you from the DYK team at Wikipedia Graeme Bartlett (talk) 18:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have clearly been edit warring against multiple editors on William Morgan (anti-Mason), both under this account and as User:66.74.166.103. Further reverts will likely result in a block. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:07, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you've been warring across a variety of articles to ensure that Category:People assasinated by Freemasons contains entries. Unless you can point to a discussion somewhere where you got support from other editors for this, the closing admin at WP:AN3 may take a dim view of this activity. It also appears that you may have been using an IP to assist you in the war. If you will agree to stop pushing this category until others support you, this report might be closed. EdJohnston (talk) 22:19, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mamalujo has stated his intent to move on and his contribs substantiate this. I think we're good here.– Lionel ^(talk) 23:16, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can see what Sarek is up to. Stay strong. JASpencer (talk) 18:34, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page that you created was tagged as a test page and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Ubelowme _U ^Me 22:22, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that these two articles cover more or less identical subject matter. I think that they probably should be merged, but I haven't formally proposed merging them. Since you probably know more about the topic than I do, I thought I'd give you the first crack at addressing the issue. What do you think? -- Cuppysfriend (talk) 16:48, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Ars Disputandi has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The sole source used for article proves it exists but does nothing at all to establish that it is notable. Article does not seem to meet WP:GNG standards in the slightest.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DreamGuy (talk) 03:23, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ars Disputandi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ars Disputandi until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. DreamGuy (talk) 02:24, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Technopat. I noticed that you recently removed some content without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry: I restored the removed content. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Technopat (talk) 21:16, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Two editors are advocating for the exclusion of any mention in the Zeitgeist: The Movie article that Peter Joseph, the creator of that film has stated publicly that words attributed to him in a story cited as a source in the article misquoted him, and that he has not distanced himself from the ideas expressed in that film, as that cited source indicates. I have responded to their arguments, but neither of them has responded directly to my counterarguments, but simply repeat the same statements of theirs over and over. Myself and one other editor disagree with them, so two editors are for the material's inclusion, and two are for its exclusion, with no sign of consensus in sight. Can you please offer your viewpoint in the discussion so that we can achieve consensus? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 01:12, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:Louis André#Larkin, Church and State -- PBS (talk) 13:18, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ars Disputandi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ars Disputandi (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DreamGuy (talk) 03:06, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Anticlericalism and Freemasonry, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lodges. 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) 17:03, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
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) 13:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Papal ban of Freemasonry/catholicism and freemasonry. Since you had some involvement with the Papal ban of Freemasonry/catholicism and freemasonry redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Jenks24 (talk) 11:10, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mamalujo. 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)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Miguel Pro.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:16, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:PlutarcoSalute.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:24, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mamalujo. 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)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:PlutarcoSalute.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:30, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 17:05, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Proud Boys. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Acroterion (talk) 17:05, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mamalujo. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, given your userbox I thought you might be interested in helping Carl Malamud's case for the public domain, crucial also for Wikisource: https://boingboing.net/2019/04/25/happy-law-day.html . Best regards, Nemo 21:06, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Tube.crop2.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm GRuban. I wanted to let you know that some of your recent contributions to Chris Cuomo have been reverted or removed because they seem to be defamatory or libellous. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. GRuban (talk) 18:11, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:22, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I used to edit under yt95 several.years ago (I have forgotten my login details) and this editor more than once crossed my path but, unless I am missing something, and without a sequence of warnings, he doesnt appear in his edit history to have done anything to justify this. Indeed it is the blockers who seem to cast doubt on what was once the lofty aims of Wikipedia. yt95 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.24.141.153 (talk) 14:42, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article Aristeo Pedroza has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Absent of sources for 11 years and 8 months with its corresponding article in Spanish providing none.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Aristeo Pedroza has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 05:37, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]