User talk:Langus-TxT/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Matilde

Hola! Yo acabo de llegar de Ushuaia. Te respondo por acá porque ahora no puedo entrar al correo. Gracias por valorar nuestro trabajo! y te agradezco por defender el artículo. Tengo para subir como unas 3 mil fotos, así que cuando me "libere" te digo para que hagas traducciones (si querés). Mientras, quería preguntarte (como un pequeño favor) si podés revisar si hay algún artículo en inglés que no esté en español. Gracias y saludos! --Gastón Cuello (talk) 19:17, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Dale, cuando quieras.

Pegándole una revisada rápida a mi watchlist encontré estos:

Standard Fruit Company
South American Mission Society
1982 British Army Gazelle friendly fire incident
Traveling wave reactor (que tiene una pequeña sección aquí)

Igualmente, seguramente hay muchos artículos que se podrían expandir a partir de su versión en inglés. Voy a tratar de estar atento a ambos casos y te aviso.

Saludos! --Langus (t) 20:33, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

If you can go working them would be better. I'm uploading pictures from my trip. Anything contact me by mail or Wikipedia in Spanish because observers who control me. Regards :) --Gastón Cuello (talk) 18:29, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I saw the article of self-determination. You could spend the references of the establishment of the colony in my user talk in Spanish? It's for article kelper in Spanish (which is more extensive and complete). What is the "dispute"? --Gastón Cuello (talk) 18:34, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello. According to the talk page guidelines, talk page comments should be addressed in English on the English Wikipedia - no matter who you're speaking to - in order that they can be understood by the community as a whole. If use of another language (such as Spanish) is unavoidable, please provide an English translation. Thanks, Kahastok talk 18:12, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Noted Kahastok, relax, you know that's what I usually do. The purpose of that guideline is to allow for effective collaboration between editors (hence, "Good practices for all talk pages used for collaboration"), not because of Big Brother-style morbidity; WP:IAR would apply in this particular case. However, I understand that conversations about content could be useful to others, so in the future I'll speak to Gaston in English.

@Gaston: I'll explain myself in Spanish there, I think it would be easier for you to understand me.

Cheers/Saludos! --Langus (t) 02:11, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Ok. --Gastón Cuello (talk) 02:50, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Antonio Rivero, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tierra del Fuego Province. 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) 09:15, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Editing others' comments

Hello,

It appears that you need to be reminded that per WP:TPO, you are not allowed to edit other people's comments, as you did here. This explicitly includes adding responses in the middle of others' posts, let alone editing others' text with your own additions, which is what you did.

If you have something to say on the subject, you can say it without editing WCM's post. Please do not edit anyone else's talk page post in this way, or in any other way rejected by WP:TPO. Kahastok talk 19:31, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

What you're doing is evil. Since this RfC is viciously plagued with false information, and launched without proper consensus of what to ask, and how to ask, I felt entitled to such a great measure.

It seems to put great emphasis on some guidelines but not others, depending of who is the one in breach of them. Specifically, I note you didn't point out Wee Curry Monster about WP:RFCQ, nor opposed to a one-sided RfC. Or should I say "Request for Canvassing". --Langus ^TxT 20:21, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

February 2016

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for breach of WP:OUTING policy. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:05, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

You must not seek out other editors off-site and link to material that could identify them in real life - the fact that you have had a similar attempt to out the same editor oversighted on Commons in the past means you clearly know that such activity is not acceptable. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:12, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Time-out

@Boing! said Zebedee: I'd like to discuss the edit that prompted you to take actions, suppressing it and blocking me. I don't believe that my comment was a disclosure of personal information (although I realize now that my choice of words, IIRC, may have lead you to think otherwise), and the link I provided definitively wasn't "material that could identify them in real life" (unlike, arguably, to what happened on Commons). Further, I'm not "seeking out other editors off-site" and I can prove that's not the case.

However, I'm not sure how can I defend myself since an WP:Oversighted diff is not even accesible by admins... Am I correct?

If there's a way to obtain that diff, I'd ask you to email it to me so I can confirm what I'm saying and start the appealing process. Clearly I won't be posting it again here.

Thanks. --Langus ^TxT 21:57, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I cannot reveal the link you posted, as it has now been suppressed by Oversight (I am limited to revision-deletion and I cannot see Oversight-suppressed revisions). I would not reveal it anyway, as doing so could perpetuate the possible outing - if you genuinely did not realize that you had posted a link that might have led to outing a Wikipedia editor in real life, then providing it to you might actually "out" them to you. I would have assumed good faith and simply warned you not to post anything similar, had I not seen that you have had conflict with the same editor before and have previously had edits Oversighted on Commons relating to possible outing of them (and you admit above that you had indeed posted information that arguably might have outed them). After that, having seen what looked like a second occurrence of possible outing of the same person from you, I thought I had little option but to block and revision delete. However, if this is genuinely inadvertent, then I suggest you request unblock at WP:UTRS, as it is not possible to examine the incident on-wiki for obvious reasons. If you do make such a request, please bear in mind that the policy described at WP:OUTING expressly prohibits the posting of any off-wiki "opposition research", which means you should post nothing whatsoever on-wiki about connections you think someone might have in the wider world - committing yourself to not doing that would be a good start. Also, please feel free to make it clear in your UTRS unblock request that whoever reviews it can contact me and I will explain my actions, although I can no longer see the edit in question and would probably not be much help. The UTRS people should also, of course, contact the other party. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:18, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Langus-TxT. 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)

Re-establishment of British rule on the Falkland Islands listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Re-establishment of British rule on the Falkland Islands. Since you had some involvement with the Re-establishment of British rule on the Falkland Islands redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. --Nevé –selbert 21:25, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:50 Pesos (AR) Islas Malvinas (back).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:50 Pesos (AR) Islas Malvinas (back).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) 17:06, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:50 Pesos (AR) Islas Malvinas.jpeg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:50 Pesos (AR) Islas Malvinas.jpeg. 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) 17:07, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:100 Pesos bill (back) - Evita (Argentina).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:100 Pesos bill (back) - Evita (Argentina).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).