Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Bradford (talk | contribs) at 03:21, 19 August 2014 (→Unblock). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives

1 · 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

La sombra del Pasado

I try to create the page, I only do this. Alk@ 19:42, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Protection

Please help. Likewise kick (2014) film there is vandalism happening on the article Anjaan movie. Its done by an IP who seems to be a socket pup. Need protection for this page. Kindly help. Redards.

August 2014

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Misplaced Pages. It appears that you tried to give Corona de lágrimas a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Misplaced Pages has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Misplaced Pages:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you. © Tbhotch (en-2.5). 21:25, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Cuando los hijos se van (telenovela)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Cuando los hijos se van (telenovela), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.alma-latina.net/CuandolosHijosSeVan/CuandolosHijosSeVan.shtml.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Misplaced Pages:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:39, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Your edits at Marido en alquiler again

You've made more edits to Marido en alquiler that have restored problems that have previously been discussed. These include, but are not limited to:

• restoration of "px" in the infobox. - As Ihave explained previously, px is not required. The instructions for {{Infobox television}} specifically say that "px" should be excluded.
• restoration of cast tables - As we have discussed, cast should be listed per MOS:TV and should be in prose form, rather than tables. MOS:TV actually suggests the "ACTOR as CHARACTER" format. Since the section in the article is titled "Main characters", I used "CHARACTER portrayed by ACTOR" when fixing all the poor English used in the section. "CHARACTER portrayed by ACTOR" fits much better when character descriptions are included. There is simply no reason to use tables in this section; it is not a conventional format in TV series articles. Could you please explain why you keep ignoring advice instead of collaborating on the article as we are required to do? I note you have also edited the recurring characters section. That's great but please note that people are not referred to as "it", as you did in this edit. Individual actors should be referred to as "he" or "she". --AussieLegend (✉) 11:27, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

You know what ?. you got me tired, I'm doing what you gives laziness to do, because it's so easy to place a template for others to do the work for you, articles from soap operas have always edited that way, you get your out of nowhere saying and you demand that a soap opera, is a TV series. It is good that you know a lot. Yours ignorance is very good. I'm editing the way it has always done, and you get from nothing to enforce rules; believing that "Marido en alquiler" is a series of TV, things are rules, telenovela articles are edited in different ways, to articles from TV series. So do what you feel like it is because you have so much effort into that descriptions are placed and do nothing, wait for others to do the job for you.--Damián (talk) 16:17, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

There is an old English saying, "Two wrongs don't make a right". Here we have a specific essay that elaborates on that. It's called WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Just because something has been done a certain way doesn't mean that's the way to do it. In the case of the telenovela articles, most seem to need significant cleanup to acceptable standards. These articles are expected to comply with MOS:TV, the MOS in general and our policies and guidelines. The edits you are making do not comply with our requirements and if you persist, especially in edit-warring as you have been doing, you may find yourself unable to edit. --AussieLegend (✉) 17:44, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

August 2014

Please be particularly aware, Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. AussieLegend (✉) 17:38, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.  Bbb23 (talk) 23:24, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Unblock

Bradford (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I only did 2 reversal of any other single I reversed myself. Also since the problem had been solved, and leave everything as they wanted. So why the blockade, but it seems unfair one week block, and do not tell me it's because I have blocked 2 times above, clear is the way to undo a user, and of course at least make the attempt to order the release , but equally I will deny it. Yes I know it was my fault; but there is leave things as they wanted.Damián (talk) 02:10, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Nothing in what you say suggests that you are unlikely to do the same again. As for reducing the block length, you have already had two short blocks for edit warring, and it woudl not be helpful to encourage you to think that you are free to keep on edit warring over and over again, provided you are willing to accept a short block every now and then. If you continue to edit war after several blocks for doing so, a much longer block is the one thing that has some chance of conveying the message to you that edit warring is unacceptable. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:05, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Ok, at least if I will not unlock, I can reduce blocking to two days, or a day, please. I know I made a mistake, but these new changes in the articles of soap operas are a little difficult to accept, because it always is edited differently. Without adding descriptions to the characters.--Damián (talk) 04:24, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Well, of course if I block my right ?. And others do what they want and nobody says anything ?, right ?. Like this: .A nd of course true; only pay me. But it's okay, I do not bother them more for a week, I hope you can be happy and content.--Damián (talk) 17:08, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

This is not about what other users do. However, please note that I have warned ElNiñoMonstruo about edit warring and pointed out that he has breached 3RR on that article. --AussieLegend (✉) 17:27, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Obviously you do not know this person; also generated in the past edit wars. And of course never have locked on these grounds; but clearly not?, pay out of the first you see, and want others to do it ?. And I have several tests of several acts of vandalism ElNiñoMonstruo, and evidence that is always in edit wars. But no matter, I can wait for my lock. Anyway this is what you wanted.--Damián (talk) 18:15, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Again, this is not about what other editors do. --AussieLegend (✉) 18:41, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Bradford (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi, I'm asking you to reduce blocking me until Monday, that is a tall order; is all I'm asking. I know I made a mistake, but it can be done. I have already done is done, and you can not change. But as it is evident that I say no, at least make the attempt. I am sorry please.Damián (talk) 21:55, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I'm not going to unblock you, because I'm unconvinced that you understand what you did did wrong. In your next unblock request, I suggest you clearly explain how you will handle similar situations in future. PhilKnight (talk) 22:43, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

PhilKnight, It's okay; the next time this happens, I try to talk to the user who is or just going to: Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring‎, and I try not to violate this. If I reverse 2 times, and one reverts me, I will help any administrator, but I try not to fall into more edit wars, and if something happens, an administrator will ask for help. But I have made several good editions in wikipedia, and I'm not user making vandalism. My only mistake is to fall into edit wars.--Damián (talk) 23:12, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Bradford (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Well it is my last request will not know how many times you can order the release; because this is a little different to other wikipedia. But if I understand it is to fall edit wars, I know that before I talk to the user that I have conflicts to reach a consensus, or ask for help from a manager wikipedia, I know that violates one of the important rules of wikipedia and is three-revert rule, for next time, which I hope does not happen again ever again; or at least ask for help any administrator or try to reach a consensus, or try not reverse over 3 times. Come please I do not want to keep locked. If I want to put this well accepted conditions :/.--Damián (talk) 07:16, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Accept reason:

You at least seem to understand the reason for the block. Considering that you have served over half of the block, I have accepted this request and unblocked before the expiration, because I believe that not unblocking now and letting the block expire in three days doesn't change much. However, this is not the first time you are blocked for edit warring; hopefully this time you will have understood how to behave in a dispute. If you are blocked again for edit-warring you are unlikely to be able to successfully request an unblock again. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 03:10, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

@Salvidrim:, Thank you very much; if it gives again a case of edit wars, I try to follow the rules of wikipedia and ask help an administrator. I will do everything so that this does not happen again.--Damián (talk) 03:21, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Elimination of information

(English translation follows)

Damián, En los dos días antes que lo bloquearon, usted quitó más que 1,000 letras de trabajo de otros, 16 veces distintos. 16 veces in solo dos días, caray! Y siete veces más, quitó más que 500 letras. (Y su historia de antes está igual.) No le parece, que algo pasa mal? Sí señor, contribuye mucho a Misplaced Pages. Pero tambien, usted roba mucho. Tal vez todo el mundo está contra de usted, pero puede ser que está usted contra todo el mundo? Ya tiene 19 años. Que comportese como adulto, no como niño de berrinches. Si quiere evitar los bloqueos, aprenda como trabajar CON otros. Quita de trabajar CONTRA otros.

English translation:

Damián, in the two days before you were blocked, you removed more than 1,000 characters from the work of others, 16 different times. 16 times in only two days, for goodness sake! And seven more times you removed more than 500 characters. (Your prior history is the same.) There's something wrong here, don't you think? Yes you do contribute much to Misplaced Pages. But you also remove/rob much. Maybe the whole world IS against you. But could it be that you are against the whole world? You're already 19 years old. Behave like an adult, not like a child throwing tantrums. If you want to avoid being blocked, learn how to work WITH others instead of working AGAINST others.

Paulah88 (talk) 19:28, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

@Paulah88:, First I do not know who you mean, second who told you that I am 19 years ?; I recommend that you not jump to conclusions, without proof or something to prove it. Now if you mean the article Jaime Camil, I have not taken anything away, so I left you placed. Now if you mean; to this edition. Well that issue is correct, you can not use IMDb and Misplaced Pages references in Spanish, that goes external links, now if you can not understand that, I can not do anything for you.

Spanish

Primero no sé a que te refieres, segundo quien te ha dicho que tengo 19 años?; te recomiendo que no saques conclusiones, sin tener pruebas o algo que lo demuestre. Ahora si te refieres al artículo de Jaime Camil, no he quitado nada, he dejado lo que usted colocó. Ahora si te refieres; a está edición. Pues esa edición es correcta, no puedes usar IMDb y wikipedia en español como referencias, eso va en los enlaces externos, ahora si no puedes entender eso, yo no puedo hacer nada por usted.--Damián (talk) 20:17, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

English translation follows.

Perdón. Tu propio user page dice que naciste en junio de 1996, entonces acabas de alcanzar a 18 años. En lo segundo, no hablo sobre mi trabajo, sino sobre otras paginas. Las paginas en que tú quitaste el trabajo de tantos otros. Ellos te resistan, y tú echas la culpa a ellos por ser bloqueado. La culpa pertenece a todos otros, y no a ti? Mira a tu propia "contributions" pagina. No veas cuantas veces quitaste partes grandes de otros? Quita de pelear contra los administators - los que te bloquean. Escucha a sus correciones, aceptalo, y aprender ser buen editor si mismo.

Aug 14, 16:19. A vida da gente. -3,948 letras

Aug 14, 00:35. Quererte así. -1,059 letras.

Aug 14, 00:01, Libre para amarte. -10,061 letras.

Aug 13, 23:56, La impostora. -1,531 letras.

Aug 12, 23:21, Los rey. -15,955 letras.

Aug 12, 22:51. Vivir a destiempo. -20,955 letras.

Aug 12, 18:52. La que no podía amar. -3,875 letras.

Aug 12, 14:00. Lo que la vida me robó. -7,223 letras.

Aug 12, 01:07. Santa diabla. -3,672 letras.

y mucho más.

English translation:

Pardon me. Your user page says you were born in June 1996, so you just turned 18. Secondly, I'm not talking about my work, but other pages. The pages where you removed the work of so many others. They resist your changes, and you blame them for being blocked. Is the blame entirely upon others, and not on you? Look at your contributions page. Don't you see how many times you removed huge parts of others' work? (list) Stop fighting with the adminsitrators - those who blocked you. Listen to their corrections, accept it, and learn to be a good editor yourself.

Paulah88 (talk) 21:28, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

@Paulah88:, Creo que si hubieses sido más especifica, hubiera entendido, ahora prefería hablarte en español, si no te molesta, lo que sucede en esos artículos, no es por que me gusta hacerlo sencillamente hay reglas, y lo que he eliminado de esos artículos,imcumplen las políticas de wikipedia, si quieres puedeas mirar este historial, para que te des cuentas que no son inventos míos. Según lo que dice acá en el manueal de estilo de wikipedia, dice claramente que no "somos una guía de progrmación", entonce todo lo que he quitado es claramente basandome en estás normas de esa página; la lista larga de episodios por día, lo he eliminado igualmente; esa información imcumple la polítca de Lo que Misplaced Pages no es, es información sin referencias e innecesaria y una larga lista de títulos y ya. Muchos usuarios como ElNiñoMonstruo no quieren entender eso, ElNiñoMonstruo solo cree que yo estoy en contra de él, y que solo hay complot e incluso; acá puedes ver como otro usuario le ha explicado, y él mismo se comporta como si todos estuvieramos en contra de él, y que yo me creo dueño de wikipedia. Pues las políticas de wikipedia son muy claras y éste tipo de información no son aceptables, pero si usted no está de acuerdo, puede dirigirse a los links que le he dado y en la misma discusión de cada uno, exponer argumentos de el porque estás ediciones deberian ser aceptadas. No son cosas mías, son las políticas y reglas de wikipedia. Disculpa que no te escriba en inglés, pero es un poco dificil traducir textos largos.--Damián (talk) 21:45, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Damian, I included the Spanish so you would understand me clearly. But this is not our private conversation; it is part of wikipedia's English public discussion. Please put what you wrote into English so the public discussion is available to everyone. In our culture, that is the polite thing to do. If you do not have time to translate, please be polite by removing your untranslated comments. Paulah88 (talk) 01:21, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

@Paulah88:, Well first, it's my talk page; and I think as you asked me to explain, but anyway:

I think if you had been more specific, I would have understood, now preferred to speak in Spanish, if you please, what happens in these articles, it's not that I like doing simply are no rules, and I deleted those items, breach wikipedia policies, if you want a deal-breaker you look this history, you know for accounts that are not mine inventions. As it says here in the Manueal style wikipedia, clearly states that no "are a program guide ", then all you have removed is clearly basing on that page are standards; the long list of episodes per day, I've also removed; that information imcumple policy consideration of What Misplaced Pages is not, is referrals and information without unnecessary and a long list of titles and now. Many users like ElNiñoMonstruo not want to understand that, ElNiñoMonstruo just think I'm against it, and there's only plot and even; here can see another user as explained to him, and he acts as if we were all against him, and I think business wikipedia. For policies wikipedia are very clear and this type of information are not acceptable, but if you disagree, you can go to the links I gave you and in the same discussion of each, to make a case for why you are editions should be accepted. They are not my things, are the policies and rules of wikipedia. Sorry I do not write in English, but is a bit difficult to translate long texts.

There I've left this translated, I hope you can understand.--Damián (talk) 01:52, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for translating. Tan amable (very kind of you). Paulah88 (talk) 03:49, 18 August 2014 (UTC)