User talk:Rui Gabriel Correia

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 11:06, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rui Gabriel Correia! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Wikipedia you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 19:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply] Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, you may not know that Wikipedia has a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Using different styles throughout the encyclopedia, as you did in Nelly Furtado, makes it harder to read. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.--Morenooso (talk) 22:40, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use styles that are unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Nelly Furtado. There is a Manual of Style that should be followed. Thank you.--Morenooso (talk) 13:06, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Advice - This article was put under semi-protection by an Admin because of nationalist edits like yours which can now be considered vandalistic. I'd recommend dropping the issue. --Morenooso (talk) 13:08, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for offering to help!

Basically, the articles need to meet WP:N. WP:BIO applies to the DeRose article, WP:N to the yoga practice. Basically, they need multiple, independent, reliable sources that cover the topics in a non-trivial way, or otherwise meet notability criteria. --Ronz (talk) 00:36, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. —DoRD (talk) 18:30, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Department of Redundancy Department

I am not quite sure about the degree od communication between editors. At any rate, I'd like to thank you for accepting me as a Reviewer. Much appreciated Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 12:28, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Danilo Caymmi has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Eeekster (talk) 20:03, 12 September 2010 (UTC) This has been resolved. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 12:22, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, glad you got it sorted out. I did make a couple of minor adjustments, though; I added the DEFAULTSORT tag (so that he gets listed in the categories under C for Caymmi) and removed a couple of categories that weren't really necessary (he doesn't need to be in both Category:Brazilian flautists and the general Category:Flautists at the same time, and Category:Flautists by nationality is meant as a container for the country-specific subcategories, not for individual people. Just so you know. Bearcat (talk) 16:25, 14 September 2010 (UTC) Thanks. I did wonder what to me seemed like duplication of categopries, but I was following what I found in other articles. Living and learning. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 18:16, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I would like to ask for your assistance with an article which is already published in German and English. If you are willing and able I would like you to translate it in Portuguese as it is an international competition for talented violin musicians. It had no Portuguese participants, yet. Actually there is no information in Portuguese about it anywhere in the web. I am available for any related questions. Don't bother with the tablet contents, I can do that by myself. Many thanks in advance. Kindest regards ArcCan (talk) 20:08, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ArcCan. I will gladly help. Point me to the article so I can take a look. Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 22:04, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You recently edited Backronym to note that "fuck" is a false acronym. Although I know this to be true (I have heard people tell various back-formation stories about the word), consensus is to keep the examples on the page to a small, illustrative set. That word, in particular has been removed since some editors found the mere mention of it objectionable. You may of course disagree with that reasoning, and if you have both reliable sources and a reasonable argument that the word should be represented on the page, please discuss this matter at Talk:Backronym before attempting to re-add it. Thanks, Cnilep (talk) 10:09, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've discussed it at Talk:Backronym. Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 10:56, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rui Gabriel Correia. You have new messages at Cnilep's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi there, I noticed your changes on the source cited on the Nicaragua page. I personally pulled that source while taking a Politics of Latin America Class and copied it verbatim. The source discussed nothing about Allende killing himself. Well, not in that sentence at least (the purpose of the sentence originally served to discuss a small migration of Chileans to Nicaragua). I'm sure there's a PDF copy online in English where you can search Page 150 and see for yourself.

If you seek a source that describes his suicide, I would suggest citing:

Labarca, Eduardo (2007) Salvador Allende, Biografía Sentimental, Catalonia, pp.339-405 ISBN 978-956-8303-68-6

Regards, Mbhskid520 (talk) 12:44, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I did not change any sources. I changed some of the text and added more on Pinochet's death. I changed the text because it appeared to have been written by someone with poor command of English ("After Pinochet obtained rule of Chile"). The reference you refer to is on the next sentence. How far back do references go in a piece of text? Besides I thought the purpose of the reference was to sustain the claim about "several hundred committed Chilean revolutionaries joined the Sandinista army in Nicaragua". The text was not in quotation marks, so I interpreted that the reference pointed to information in the source, but not a direct quote. I added right-wing to Pinochet to reinforce the ideological link between the two, but it can be removed.

But don't you agree that it sounds funny to say "After Pinochet obtained rule of Chile, several hundred committed Chilean revolutionaries joined the Sandinista army in Nicaragua"? As for a source on Allende's death, thanks for the lead, but we could simply use the WP itself? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvador_Allende#Death.

Regards, --Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 14:13, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Despite the fact that I do agree with you, I am looking at a hard copy of the actual text (small text, I have the larger one at home), and it seems to say those exact same words.

Guess publishing companies aren't doing their jobs, eh? I'm willing to wait until I go back home just to make sure and check on how much into the source I wrote and see if I can upload a temporary PDF file while at home. (I'll be heading back home in November, so that might require patience.) Mbhskid520 (talk) 15:56, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish is one of the Turkic languages, the one spoken in Anatolia; it is measurably affected by contact with Arabic and Greek. It is not spoken in Inner Mongolia, unless there is a Turkish consulate; therefore Turkic is correct. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:14, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, thanks! No special fuel I am aware of. I just regard it as a hobby to make articles I guess. Cheers and thanks for the encouragement! Ruigeroeland (talk) 08:36, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Rui Gabriel, I am writing to know if you can help me to translate into Portuguese the captions under the images in the Gallery of this page. Very grateful indeed !--Angler45 (talk) 05:52, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Angler45. I am on holiday out of the country and whenever that happens, I get logged out. Because I did not have a decent connection, I did not log in until recently, when I eventually saw your request. I'll help with the translations in a day or so. Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 19:09, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip, but some other editors made the clarification before I had a chance to do it. There is no edit war that I am aware of so if you feel the introduction could use some rewording, please go ahead. Not coming from North America, you are very well positioned to make meaningful contributions to the article. Tinss (talk) 16:29, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you translate or summarise this page? I would like to use it for my Bicycle helmets by country article. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 10:52, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, such as on Savanna Dry, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. Kudpung (talk) 23:57, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kudpung. I've been 'away' from WP for a few months and in getting back to it I forget to sign one or more edits. Thanks for the reminder. Um abraço, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 00:04, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rui Gabriel Correia. You have new messages at BurtAlert's talk page.
Message added 16:58, 20 February 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Hi Rkitko

I was reading up on soap and came across that information on the Soap substitute page. How do I use a WP page as reference? Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 17:34, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So sorry for the delay in answering you. I sometimes let my talk page get away from me. To answer your question, to include information on the saponin levels and usage of Passiflora foetida you would need an external reliable source. Wikipedia cannot reference itself. Try Google Books or Google Scholar for good places to start, but read through WP:V and WP:RS first to understand which kinds of sources are good to use. The soap substitute article could use additional references for each of those species listed. I'm not convinced each is actively used as a source of saponins for soap substitutes. I hope that helps. Cheers, Rkitko ^(talk) 15:04, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rui Gabriel Correia, I was writing articles about her in 4 languages (de,fr,en and pt). Since you are perfect in dutch and spanish....would be great to translate this article. What do you think? Let me know. Regards.--Cruks (talk) 11:29, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Causa Sui At 07:10, 27 June 2011 you reverted an edit by Nickstarinfinity (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) on the Hemp page. Nickstarinfinity had made numerous edits to that page. At 07:14, 27 June 2011, 4 minutes after your revert, a new user calling himsef Nickhemp registred and proceeded to make multiple edits to the same hemp page. I saw something odd when today I spotted references to "Cannabis industrialis". I tried to do a DNS lookup, but loks like that function is no longer available. Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 17:32, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. I've reverted the changes and left a note on the user's talk page. Some edits (including at least one of yours) were reverted as well, since there were intermediary edits to the page and I had to revert them all to remove the probable hoax. You might consider adding the article to your watchlist so you can revert these changes before intermediary edits are made. Thanks, --causa sui (talk) 18:50, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Olá gostava de te convidar para participares do Wikiprojecto Angola da wiki Lusófona. Até breve Zorglub-PRV (talk) 16:19, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I noticed you are listed at Wikipedia:Translators available. Could you please take a look at a post at Talk:Battle of Vukovar#Next steps: a call for assistance and advise whether you might be able to help in terms of an Afrikaans or a Portuguese summary? Thanks.--Tomobe03 (talk) 20:05, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I was on Wikipedia:Translators available and notice that you were on the list for Portuguese to English translators and wondered if you could translate Prince Peter of Saxe-Coburg-Kohary? Thank you or obrigado.The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 13:36, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Borututu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chokwe (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) 10:14, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted two of your edits where you incorrectly deleted "béchamel" from articles. Please verify if your own information is correct first before deleting content. - Takeaway (talk) 22:56, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have fun, Takeaway. I have better things to do then play games with the revert squad. I happen to be Portuguese and equally happen to be the former owner of a restaurant. If ever I was served a rissol with béchamel sauce I would tell the establishment what to do with it. Naturally you know everything there is to know about Portuguese cuisine. Pray do inform me how you come upon your knowledge of bechamel sauce in Portuguese rissóis. Have a great reverting time.

You are allowed to think what you want but I actually did verify if there were Portuguese recipes for rissoles that used béchamel. Here is one: http://cozinhapequena.com/risoles-de-camarao-e-a-chance-de-ganhar-uma-casa/ - Takeaway (talk) 23:19, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that you will find such recipes does not prove that they are right. It is like saying that if you find a recipe for pizza with custard that THEREFORE, pizze are prepared with custard. And just for your information, the recipe you are using as an example, is a BRAZILIAN, recipe. I happen to be married to a Brazilian, been to Brazil a few times and know that they do things different - like using béchamel in prawn rissoles. THAT IS WHY the note I left on my edit was "NOT IN PORTUGAL". So, perhaps you might now want to acknowledge that you were wrong and undo your revert? As for the other revert, it is not even worth commenting - or anyone that can imagine a SOLID thing like a croquette having a SAUCE as a main ingredient ..... What can I say. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 23:30, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You will find many more "wrong" Portuguese recipes if you type the following in to Google: bechamel rissóis site:.pt - Takeaway (talk) 23:35, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And here are some people who apparently do succeed in making a croquette out of a béchamel sauce: http://www.tastespotting.com/detail/32575/Chicken-Breast-and-Bechamel-Croquettes http://www.3coups2fourchette.com/recette.entree.amusebouche.263.html http://www.marmiton.org/recettes/recette_croquettes-au-jambon-simone_37065.aspx http://norecipes.com/blog/polenta-croquette-filled-with-leeks-and-ham-hock/ http://lifestyle.inquirer.net/food/food/view/20110210-319424/Salpicao-with-foie-gras-adobo-croquettes-with-bchamel-sauce-comfort-food http://tvnz.co.nz/masterchef-masterclass/euro-croquettes-4036911 http://tamarindandthyme.wordpress.com/2009/09/03/croquetas-de-jamon/ - Takeaway (talk) 23:42, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you are still sceptical about the use of béchamel sauce in a croquette, here is a webpage from the James Beard Foundation quoting Larousse Gastronomique which says: "Larousse writes that the filling of croquettes is a mixture of vegetables or cooked meats, usually leftover from another use, chopped fine and mixed with béchamel or brown sauce." (see The Official James Beard Foundation Blog, Eat this Word: Croquettes) What can I say. - Takeaway (talk) 00:23, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Takeaway, you simply just don't get it do you?????? I am NOT disputing the fact that béchamel sause is/ gets used in making croquettes - but it CANNOT be al alternative to POTATOES, MEATS, etc, as it was said the article. Stop trying to prove your point and simply go and read it. It is like saying hambugers are big round buns a filling of meat patty, or vegetable patty OR KETCHUP. Do you see it now? Yes, ketchup is a main ingredient of a hamburger, BUT NOT in place of a solid filling. As for béchamel in Portuguese prawn rissoles, what can I say. I'll have to write to Jimbo and that him the project has failed and we have to start all over again. The whole time we were going after verifiable TRUTH, but you have now hit the nail on the head - if you find it on google, ergo, it therefore is the truth. I am off now to go edit the page on elephant to add that I just found on google a page talking about a goat that gave birth to an elephant. Scientists are puzzled by the flimsy wings on the baby elephant's hips and are doing DNA tests. I bid you a tranquil Sunday. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 08:52, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great news, Geataway! I've just used your search for rissois - and I quote - "type the following in to Google: bechamel rissóis site:.pt" and you are right!! People are doing it wrong! I've just substituted "béchamel" for "flores" (flowers) and whereas there were 12000 entries for "rissois + béchamel", there are 22000 for "rissois + flores". No wonder they need a bailout! They are putting flowers in thei rissoles!!!! Good lord! Tell you, Takeaway, I think ths means a great future for the two of us - let's set up a culinary school in Portugal and teach these people how to make a proper Portuguese rissole! You already have all the answers, I'll put in the hard slog! Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 09:49, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's a great idea. You seem like such a nice person. I really want to work together with you. - Takeaway (talk) 10:19, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lol! Peace, and 'um abraço', brother. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 10:30, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, if you have an issue with a redirect that doesn't qualify for speedy deletion, please take it to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion rather than blank the page as you did with Tuberoid. Thanks! -- KTC (talk) 21:52, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As the {{R from trade name}} suggest and a quick google search confirmed, tuberoid is also the trade name of a ethionamide product. As such the redirect was appropriate. In any event, Sminthopsis84 has since turned the page into a disambiguation page making this discussion moot. KTC (talk) 22:13, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear KFC NO, the redirect was NOT "appropriate" as YOU claim. The redirect appears on a page labelled as "Glossary of botanical terms", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_botanical_terms. So instead of coming out with guns blazing, YOU should have first looked into it before discharging .... Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 22:22, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies! Of course, thank you to minthopsis84 for seeing what needed to be done and actually doing it - unlike others, who thrive on bullying .... Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 22:27, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I assume that bullying comment was directed at me. How was I bullying? I merely pointed out (nicely!) that a redirect page should not be blanked, and in my comment noted the venue / process where a redirect which you believe to be problematic should be taken for discussion or nominated for deletion. It's not my problem if you over react.... And my username is KTC whereas the other user in question is Sminthopsis84... -- KTC (talk) 00:16, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi KTC, perhaps it is a lack of understanding on my part of how some things are done. I have often deleted redirects that point to the wrong target, so I was not aware that this one works in a different way, actually resulting in blanking a page. That is why I could not understand why it should be referred to a discussion. So, yes, I overreacted on that count, but maintain that my thinking was correct - "tuberoid" on a list of botanical terms pointing to a product for tuberculosis was wrong. I apologise for overreacting. Have a great weekend. Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 07:34, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think you were right to remove this uncited edit from the article Retinal scan, but I think it may have been a good faith edit rather than vandalism. Best not to bite people until we're sure they need biting :) ciphergoth (talk) 16:35, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I hope you are well and thriving!! WikiAfrica has just put out a call for two Wikipedians in Residence. One in Cape Town at WikiAfrica, at the Africa Centre; and the other for WikiAfrica Cameroon in Douala, at doual’art. If you are interested, please contact either Marilyn [marilyn.doualabelldoualart.org] for the WikiAfrica Cameroon call or Isla [islahfafricacentre.net] for the WikiAfrica position in Cape Town.

If you are not interested in applying, I would be very grateful if you could spread this call far and wide among your networks to ensure that both projects get excellent candidates. Here is the link for the information page: http://www.wikiafrica.net/two-wikipedians-in-residence-for-africa/

Best regards, Islahaddow

(This message was sent using Lucia Bot at 22:32, 16 November 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Do you live in Angola?

(Note: Please send answer to my talk page)--Sabri76'^talk 09:56, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Serfdom in Russia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Grzywna (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) 09:43, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rui! Just a friendly note that {{Wikify}} has been deprecated in favor of more specific templates. For example, in Portuguese inventions, I replaced {{Wikify}} with {{Tone}}. Happy editing, and happy new year! GoingBatty (talk) 05:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, GoingBatty. I saw that it had been deprecated and the prompt to use more specific templates, but going through the aternatives, I could not see one that was specific to lack/ absence of notability. Thanks for helping and have a grear 2013 too. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 08:49, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CORRECTION!!!! Sorry, this has nothing to do with naotability - I was tinking of an article that I proposed for speedy deletion for lackof notability. Got the two incidents mixed up. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 09:59, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rui Gabriel Correia. You have new messages at Malik Shabazz's talk page.
Message added 12:28, 4 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Bom dia Rui. I appreciate your request, but how may I be of service? Your best bet would be to upload the image, providing the valid release information on Wikimedia Commons. After that, it just a matter of using it in your Portuguese Wikipedia article (and likewise English variant). Can you please specify how I may assist you? ^{ruben jc} ZEORYMER (talk) 01:28, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rui Gabriel Correia. You have new messages at HammerFilmFan's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tiderolls 17:45, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• The editor deleted my message to you rather quickly, so I'm posting a diff to make sure you have an opportunity to read my post. You may read the message here. Tiderolls 17:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• To reply to your message on my user talk; the guidelines you quoted do not apply a user's own talk page. Editors are granted wide latitude in the maintenance of their user talk. There are limited circumstances that prohibit an editor from deleting messages from their own user talk but none of the circumstances apply in this case. I agree, working on content is much more rewarding. I thank you for your contributions. Regards Tiderolls 18:13, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are right - I did for a second blur the two. But thanks for your help (about deleting on article talk page), even though it was summarily ignored, like water off a duck's back. Like I said, there are better things, a whole world out there. If you ever need any help with creeating/ editing related to Portuguese/ Portuguese-speaking countries, please feel free to drop me a note. Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 18:27, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for kicking in on the article. I'll be looking over the changes you made and will consider it a learning opportunity.

I had the edit window up for days and essentially got stuck, because I clearly haven't written enough to do it adroitly yet. Poco a poco.

Once again, thanks. Chango369w (talk) 00:41, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chango369w. I was actually lured to go back to the article when I saw you edit summary "Added a medical studies section". I would love to see a section like that for every flower, fruit, plant, seed, name it. So I applaud your efforts. I know it is a lot of work looking up sources, otherwise anything you claim about medical properties will be taken down within seconds. In fact I landed yesterday on the eugenia page to see if it was related to the curry tree. The Portuguese page makes some very big claims that are still in need of good references - http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murraya_koenigii. Regards, and "bom trabalho" Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 02:16, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rui Gabriel Correia. You have new messages at Faizan Al-Badri's talk page.
Message added 11:01, 26 April 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Arctic Kangaroo 11:01, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rui Gabriel Correia. You have new messages at Faizan Al-Badri's talk page.
Message added 10:46, 2 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Faizan -Let's talk! 10:46, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I try to solve interwiki-conflicts. You reverted Marcello and Religious_institute_(Catholic). Marcello is quite difficult, because there are different forms of the name in different languages (Marello, Marcel, Marcellus, ...). Some versions of Wikipedia have articles to different forms of the name, others only one. I try to explain, why I removed each link:

• cs:Marcel links back to Marcel_(given_name)
• de:Marcellus (Name) should better point to de:Marcello
• it:Marcello is already on wikidata:Q5405462
• la:Marcellus is a difficult case. But maybe Marcellus and [[la:Marcellus] fit together better.
• hu:Marcell is also difficult. But hu:Marcell links back to Marcel_(given_name).
• nl:Marcel links back to Marcel_(given_name).
• ja:マルケッルス Unfortunately I don't speak Japanese. But ja:マルケッルス links back to Marcel_(given_name)]].
• pl:Marceli is difficult.
• ru:Маркел is difficult. But ru:Маркел links back to Marcel_(given_name).
• sk:Marcel links back to Marcel_(given_name).
• sl:Marcel links back to Marcel_(given_name).
• sr:Марцел is difficult. But sr:Марцел links back to Marcel_(given_name).

What should I do? What is the right place to discuss this? May I remove at least the links to de, and it? Alexander.Meier (talk) 15:12, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Well, for starters, what you are doing is just plain odd! It is like going down the street with a broom sweeping, while you van see that jist behind you there is a truck fitted with brushes sweeping right right you ......... But worst of all, you are labelling your efforts "wikilink conflicts". What conflicts? I am really puzzled, after all, you signed up 3 days ago and isntead of starting with common small edits like we all do, you go for admin and upkeep tasks that are automated. I am not sure I understand what you are trying to achieve .......

Perhaps you are right in asking "What is the right place to discuss this?". I don't know - try the usual places such as the Village pump etc ......

Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 16:53, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi Rui Gabriel Correia! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Multilingual editing encouraged!!! But being multilingual is not a necessity to make this project a success. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 20:38, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Listen here you self-righteous prick,

Do not lecture me on my command of the English language, I am an American and English is my first language. My mistake with embark and embarkation was a simple slip of the memory and wording. You must forgive my outright rudeness in this message, but if there is one thing that gets me it's passive aggressiveness, and you seem to be a master at pissing me off. Now I assume you will get flustered with this message and report me or something, but quite frankly I don't give a shit. I have added more to this encyclopedia in this year alone than what you will in your entire tenure, and editors like you are what discourage editors like me.

Thank you,

Cristiano Tomás (talk) 21:39, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rui Gabriel,
The fact that you can hold your face above my comments above and ask that we work together in a friendly manner makes me respect the hell out of you. No apologies necessary, my comments were emotion based when they should have been logic based, and with that I offer my own apologies. I hope a great deal we can work together, and I hope that you won't take my pride-driven backlash as a sign of my total character and ability.

On another note, I hear South Africa is lovely, my grandfather moved there for some years from Mozambique after it gained independence. I was born in America, but my life has been divided between the US and Sintra. It truly is a beautiful "Eden", is it not?

Do let me know if I can ever be of any help. I mainly work in Portuguese royalty and Portuguese history in general, but if I'd be glad to try to help with anything.

Thank you,

Cristiano Tomás (talk) 23:13, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rui Gabriel Correia! Thanks for participating in the World Digital Library-Wikimedia Partnership. Your contributions are important to improving Wikipedia! I wanted to share a few updates with you:

• We have an easy way to now cite WDL resources. You can learn more about it on our news page, here.
• Our to-do list is being expanded and features newly digitized and created resources from libraries and archives around the world, including content from Sweden, Qatar, the Library of Congress, and more! You can discover new content for dissemination here.
• WDL project has new userbox for you to post on your userpage and celebrate your involvement. Soffredo created it, so please be sure to thank them on their talk page. You can find the userbox and add it to your page here.
• Our first batch of WDL barnstars have been awarded! Congratulations to our first recipients: ProtoplasmaKid, ChrisGualtieri, TenthEagle, Rhyswynne, Luwii, Sosthenes12, Djembayz, Parkwells, Carl Francis, Yunshui, MrX, Pharaoh of the Wizards, and the prolific Yster76!! Thank you for your contributions and keep up the great work. Be sure to share your article expansions and successes here.

Keep up the great work, and please contact me if you need anything! Thank you for all you do for free knowledge! EdwardsBot (talk) 16:35, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:History of California until 1899 § Proposed move. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 15:08, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. The relevant guideline is WP:CANVAS. When it comes to enforcement, the consensus that I've seen is that it's more of a exacerbating factor than anything, something that's usually ignored unless it's part of much larger and worse problems.

As far as consensus-building goes when there is canvassing, it's usually appropriate to point out the canvassing if it wasn't disclosed, and possibly point out conflicts of interest or relevant ArbCom enforcement. Beyond that, consensus is not a WP:VOTE, so it shouldn't matter much who comments, but how editors think the relevant policies/guidelines apply, and what sources are available and their quality. --Ronz (talk) 16:14, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The difference between canvassing and simply notifying people who might have an interest in the topic is in the motivation and the execution. It's okay to simply and neutrally notify people who might (e.g. by virtue of having edited the article before) have enough an interest in the topic to have something useful to contribute to the discussion — what's not okay is to "canvas" votes from people you consider likely to support a particular outcome while ignoring people who might legitimately have a different opinion, or to present your case in an overly biased way (e.g. "these crazy people think my pet topic is not notable, you and I know better so come help save it!"), or other behaviour which suggests that you're deliberately trying to stack the discussion in favour of a particular outcome.

Think of it like an election — it's kind of like difference between a non-partisan effort to encourage people to get out and vote in principle, and encouraging people to come vote for your particular candidate (which is technically okay in that context, but there are strict rules about where and how you can or can't do it.) Bearcat (talk) 18:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rui Gabriel Correia. You have new messages at Talk:Flickr.
Message added 23:56, 16 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

kikichugirl (talk) 23:56, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm a little late to the dispute, but I note that you made three reverts at the article (1, 2, 3) after adding the disputed content. Generally, per our three revert rule, you should mostly be blocked for this edit warring for at least 24 hours. As you may not have known, I'll let you off with a warning now; next time please discuss after a change you've made is reverted; I note that you tried, but you seem to have neglected following through to our verifiability and anti-original research policies. Being bold is good, but Wikipedia is built by consensus, so please try to focus on the discussion more next time something like this happens. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:47, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I have watchlisted the article page in case there is such removal happening. I note, however, that the reverted edits pointed to primary sources which you used to evidence your own conclusions, and not an independent source reporting on any controversy surrounding Flickr and the nudity available. That is why the other editors were pointing to WP:OR. Now, if reliable newspaper or book sources were pointing towards such a controversy or thing to be aware of, that would likely be supportable within an article. Looking through Google, I'm only finding individual instances (1, 2) of issues stemming from nudity on Flickr, but not about nudity on Flickr per se. At the moment, at least, the issue doesn't seem to have enough secondary coverage beyond "Flickr allows users to post nude and sexual images.(cited to Flickr) Gross misdemeanor charges have been leveled against users who have uploaded nude images of others onto Flickr; (example from case)." How due/undue it is would require further discussion, of course. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:27, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for that utter mess that I made of the Portuguese people infobox, I was trying to correct it on a mobile as my computer is faulty. Do you agree with me that as per articles like Danes the box should just indicate their primary religion? Those numbers looked random and unsourced, never mind strange. On articles such as German people, with their Lutheran-Catholic split, it is necessary, but there is no such significant split in Portugal or its diaspora. Unless a source could ever prove that. Indiasummer95 (talk) 12:31, 21 July 2013 (UTC) obrigado[reply]

Hi, Indiasummer95. I'll check Portuguese sources and will revert. Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 12:36, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rui Gabriel Correia. You have new messages at Takeaway's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Rui Gabriel Correia. You have new messages at Takeaway's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Rui Gabriel Correia. You have new messages at Takeaway's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Portuguese East India Company, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Philip II (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) 13:34, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rui Gabriel Correia. Thanks for your edit to Jesus. However, per MOS:POSS bullet 3 (and perhaps also bullet 2), it is normal to write Jesus' as the possessive of Jesus. In fact, some grammar books claim that the final s after the apostrophe should be omitted whenever it would lead to three or more consecutive sibilants. I'm not sure about that, but the case for Jesus' seems pretty clear. I hope you won't mind, but I have restored it. Kind regards, --Stfg (talk) 10:03, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Talk:Windows XP shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Please not that your use of Talk:Windows XP violates talkpage guidelines including, but not limited to, WP:NOTAFORUM. Talk pages are for discussing improvements to the article, not for espousing personal opinions. AussieLegend (✉) 17:12, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Blackmane (talk) 18:30, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Don't restore this material again or you will be blocked. --John (talk) 18:36, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Hello there, your purposes will be better served by containing the edit warring discussion in one place. Please post any relevant diffs about which you need to complain at the ANI thread rather than at WP:ANEW. And it will help your case greatly if you can work out a less confrontational way of stating your case. It really gets people's backs up when wikilawyering language gets used so it will genuinely harm your case if you don't moderate it. Please don't post any further at ANEW - keep the discussion in one place at ANI from now on. Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 19:59, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

I think you should note what you said in your edit summary about editing as an IP alongside your claimed the wiki age, otherwise the impression could be – for those who check your edit count – that you are suffering from the Münchausen syndrome.

Cheers.

HandsomeFella (talk) 13:43, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Editor's Barnstar
	I'm sorry about the nonsense I posted on Wikipedia on July 22, 2013 . Thanks for editing it out. Here's a barn star. Skyler Janious (talk) 20:31, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:57, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have an answer to your comment—and a question for you—here. Regards, Jeh (talk) 07:04, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Seven hills of Istanbul, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Alex2006 (talk) 07:42, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My dear, in wikipedia there is a rule which is called WP:BRD (Bold, Revert, discuss). I invited you to bring your thoughts on the Talk page of the corresponding article, and you ignored it. Next revert I will be forced to bring you to a board. Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 07:48, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I wait for your thoughts. Sorry, but wikipedia works by discussing, and not keeping reverting. Bye Alex2006 (talk) 07:50, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I made an edit as is the nature of the WP, you reverted my edit and suggested I discuss it "if [I] don't like it". It is not a matter of liking - it is a question of logic, pure and simple. If there really are seven hills (at least 230 cities in the world claim to be built on seven hills), they they have been there for billions of years, it has nothing to do with them wanting to copy Rome. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 07:57, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to mention - I reverted ONCE, you reverted TWICE and you are going to block me for reverting? Intersting! Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 07:59, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Gabriel, please don't take it personally. I am not going to block you because you reverted, but because you are refusing to discuss on the talk page. :-) please read again WP:BRD. About the seven hills of Constantinople, I will be glad to discuss this issue with you on the talk page. Alex2006 (talk) 08:28, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rui Gabriel Correia. I didn't have a gut instinct, as I don't speak Portuguese. However, I was looking up the pronunciation of a Portuguese word which now escapes me, and found myself trying to understand [ɨ]. What also escapes me is why I concluded that listing this as 'back' as opposed to 'central' was simply a typo. I was merely looking at the tabular environment of [ɨ] on that page and putting one and one together. But upon further inspection, I concluded (for some reason) that I was not obviously correct. Sorry I'm not able to remember more of my thought process. Jerry (talk) 02:09, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gabriel. As you have previously expressed an interest in the matter, please can you participate in the move discussion. HelenOnline 08:42, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Rui Gabriel Correia: I see you have not participated in the current move discussion although you specifically asked about a new move discussion on the article talk page last year. Please let me know if you have any concerns or questions about it. (Sorry to ping you and repeat myself but I am not sure if you have seen my post here.) HelenOnline 10:14, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. As you have now realised, there were (at least) two Burkes who were botanists. David Burke only collected nepenthes, orchids etc., whereas Joseph Burke seemed to be wide-ranging in his interests, but it's hard to tell as his article needs a complete re-write. (At present, it looks like a straight lift out of the book cited.) This article lists species collected by him. I hope this is of some help. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 20:03, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Middle English, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Valuable (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) 09:06, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lui, yes, perhaps leaving the user a short message in an edit summary referring them to their talk page might be a good idea. Unfortunately there aren't any other ways to attract their attention besides blocking them again. Graham87 01:21, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As you did with the Griquas, reverting what was rigt and then fixing it. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 16:12, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand your English I'm afraid, please relax and write legibly. So Rui, if you're upset about the Griqua edits, it was my intention to put back the point about the pseudo-military structure they maintained for their society. You removed it; I don't know what your studies are in southern African history (where are you based by the way?), but I believe you were wrong there - the Griquas had a mobilised society. Abu Shawka (talk) 11:57, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

By the way Rui, as an afterthought I recommend you read the book "Settler Colonialism and Land Rights in South Africa" by Edward Cavanagh. It has a good run-through of Griqua society and how it developed, especially the Orange River settlements. Abu Shawka (talk) 12:09, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend that you put the bok to some useful purpose and share some of its information on the Griguas, about their military structures, kapteins etc. It would be riveting to learn how they acquired guns, as there were prohibitions on the sales of guns to anyone who could later pose a threat. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 12:55, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I gladly will, but please Mr Correia, no more snap edits by people who haven't read up on the subject! Or at the very least, no more angry tantrums if I revert those edits. (Seriously, a few months ago I had an furious American trying to tell me that Cape Colony Administrator Sir Richard Southey was an Apartheid leader! A colonial administrator nearly a hundred years before the body of apartheid legislation was passed! If you're well read on Cape history you'll see the ridiculousness of this sort of claim, and why I'm brief when it comes to uninformed outsiders' edits.) Abu Shawka (talk) 13:17, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, the Griqua had their guns from before that prohibition came in. They were decommissioned commandos from earlier cape history. Even as late as the 1870s though, workers on the mines could acquire firearms before they returned to their homelands, so even the Gcaleka were full armed with guns by then. Abu Shawka (talk) 13:20, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What you've done there isn't invalid in and of itself, but simply raising a discussion on the article's own talk page won't necessarily result in any specific action being taken — it may or may not result in discussion, but it won't necessarily lead to anything actually happening as a result of that discussion unless you or somebody else actively takes the followup step of initiating a real AFD nomination.

If you want to actually nominate the article for the real deletion process, rather, what you need to do is place {{subst:afd1}} at the top of the article, and then follow the process to actually create and list a formal nomination. Hope that helps a bit... Bearcat (talk) 21:35, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CSD isn't the same process as AFD. CSD (or "speedy deletion") doesn't require discussion — from the moment you place the template, an administrator can review the situation absolutely anytime and either delete the article immediately if they agree with your assessment or strip the template if they don't. Sometimes that takes a few hours, while other times it happens within minutes — that depends solely on how quickly somebody gets to it, not on waiting for a discussion to formulate consensus.

If the article is up for a full AFD discussion, though, then that type of template cannot be removed from an article, whether anyone else agrees with the assessment or not, until the discussion has been completed and assessed for consensus and closed accordingly.

A declined CSD, further, doesn't mean that the article can't subsequently be AFDed instead — there are only certain specific criteria by which an article can be CSDed, and even an obviously deletable article doesn't necessarily always fall into one of those criteria. So you still have the option of formulating a full AFD by {{subst:afd1}} instead, and following the directions on that template to formulate and complete a full AFD nomination — you just can't nominate it for speedy deletion again, that's all. Bearcat (talk) 22:08, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I sympathize with your confusion. Wikipedia can be confusing in its procedures, sometimes, especially if you've never explored them before. You've made a case for deletion already, basically based on the suspicion that that the article is rife with conflict-of-interest. To intiate an WP:AfD, as Bearcat says, add the template {{subst:afd1}} at the top of the article, then copy and paste the comment you made on the article's talk page onto the page that template will create for you. If you do that, I'll ensure that page makes it through the rest of the process. Best wishes, Xoloz (talk) 22:18, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for housekeeping on Virginiana! It gave me the idea for the edit I made right after yours:s see if you like it even better? I notice you made that edit on similar pages and thought maybe if you did more.... -- B.S. Lawrence (talk) 14:33, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

H — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.175.228.11 (talk) 00:31, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rui Gabriel Correia. You have new messages at Talk:Lakh.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Ysangkok (talk) 12:30, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

By "assessment", it was meant how their activities were perceived by important people who studied about them, both Pedro Taques de Almeida Paes Leme and Robert Southey did it.Grenzer22 (talk) 20:20, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It makes a lot of sense. If you were familiar with Bandeirantes history, you'd already have come upon those quotes. I have read them time and again, when studying the subject. Besides I have copies of the books of both Pedro Taques de Almeida Paes Leme and Robert Southey. If you were familiar too with these names, then you'd know they are a source for historians.Grenzer22 (talk) 23:16, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously you don't understand English! The HEADING/ TITLE, "assessment" does not make sense. I am not talking about the content of that section - just the title. Ok? Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 01:27, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm sorry if you think that my edits are POV but it is not my intention. A number of my edits were in fact designed to make NPOV.

On indigenous people I removed info because it was far more detailed than the rest. On Native americans my edit is consistent with how it is on other pages. On Angola I changed it to MPLA because that is how it is commonly refered to on the page. Don't no why you mentioned Vietnam, my edit was correct. On indigenous people, I removed redress because it was a figure for the total indigenous people, not the total seeking redress. I have reasons for my other edits.

Maybe I dont explain my edits well enough but I dont think its fair to call my edits blatant POV. My edits hardly make the pages more biased. Just to clarify that is my IP but always forget to login. Regards.Stumink (talk) 07:29, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gabo - see my post User talk:Dodger67#Evidence of severe bias in editing. Also, if you take a look at the editor concerned's talk page and review the history (particularly the deleted text) - one sees that it really appears to be frequent and general problem with the editor concerned. Lets see if this continues and if so, suggest we post the details for comments / advice on the Military History talk page. Also, I would like to see Rogers point of view. Rgds. Farawayman (talk) 00:55, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, my friend. It would appear we stumbled upon these issues at a very similar time. I have been actually tangling with the IP at 1954 Guatemalan coup d'état and related pages. As a matter of fact I just filed an SPI for the pair of them, here, because the evidence seemed compelling enough for me. Vanamonde93 (talk) 01:51, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I just read your comment on farawayman's page; so they are in fact the same person. The problem seems very frequent, though, so I intend to let the SPI run its course, they will perhaps get a rap on the knuckles. Do you disagree? Vanamonde93 (talk) 01:53, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I see you had your dealings with them - and still at it, sanitising references to the US (x2). Stumink claims that he/ she forgets to log in, but, if you look at the edits on the 4th of May, he/she edited as Stumink at 21:16, then as an IP at 21:24, then again as Stumink at 21:27 and again as an IP at 21:35. I think that a rap on the knuckles is really getting off very lightly. Perhaps for the sock, yes. But what about all the rest of the POV editing on everything that is different from what he/ she is? A block and stern warning on the PDU is the very least. And he / she should be monitored from here on. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 02:23, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I didn't make myself very clear; I am not at all a fan of the POV pushing they are indulging in, but POV pushing by itself is not an actionable offense here, which is why I'm letting the SPI run, and we will see what comes off it. I mentioned a rap on the knuckles not as what they should get, but rather as what ther are likely to get, if they own up to it at the SPI. Anyhow, let's see how it goes. Vanamonde93 (talk) 04:15, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't online when you messaged me, but I am now. What did you want to discuss? Vanamonde93 (talk) 21:31, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The word peut-être is pronounced "per-tight" in Quebec French, it's strange ? Fort123 (talk) 23:58, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot possibly imagine that it is pronounced "per-tight" in Quebec. Perhaps some urban legend or similar sort of nonsense. Regard, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 08:33, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=te69JK28DDo

The word fête is pronounced "fight" in Quebec French. Fort123 (talk) 16:17, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are not sure, because you are not a Quebecker. Fort123 (talk) 16:16, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there RUI GC, AL from Portugal "here",

indeed, my summary in this person's article was highly exaggerated whilst reverting you, accept my sincere apologies and the certainty it won't happen again.

My defense now: no need for the "da" in the infobox, that way we keep it more compressed and, besides, the club's full name already appears in storyline.

Happy editing, sorry again for the antics --AL (talk) 02:07, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• The "...one-liners and overlinking TOS!" bit was about another user not yourself, i just wrote about him in that summary. Now for the rest: i sincerely apologized after realizing i had blown things out of proportion stupidly, and you not only do not accept the apologies but reply in taunting ("...won't be coming... near your playpen", "Carry on playing", poking fun at my use of "my bad") and accusations (when you imply that r