User talk:Lagarto-spock

A belated welcome![edit]

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Lagarto-spock. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! /wiae /tlk 16:10, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lagarto-spock, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Hi Lagarto-spock! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like AmaryllisGardener (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give CD Transportes Alcaine a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Zaragoza CFF. 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 Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 19:16, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Australia women's national rugby union team[edit]

Hi there, I have removed your re-addition of the provincial match to the Australian national women's team main article. It's a warm-up game, not an official international match. Listing these minor matches on the main team page just clutters the article. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, see Wikipedia:NOTSTATSBOOK. If you insist it is notable then please address the issue in your reply to this talk section rather than simply re-reverting the edit. Better yet, add the result of the test match against New Zealand this weekend, which is notable, instead. -- Ham105 (talk) 21:20, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Lagarto-spock. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 23 December[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the FIFA Women's World Rankings page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (2015 Women's European Trophy) has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating 2015 Women's European Trophy, Lagarto-spock!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Are you able to add your sources? Thanks.

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Boleyn (talk) 14:26, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:FLAG[edit]

Please engage in the discussion at Talk:2016–17 Primera División (women)#Flags before re-adding the flags to the article. For one thing, only Spaniards are likely to know what regions those flags refer to, so they're useless for most of the readership from the get-go; second, why does a reader need to know what region a player/team is from at all? There are no regional quotas in the Spanish league, so they're totally irrelevant. Please post your reply at the earlier discussion link. – Pee Jay 19:11, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:FLAG again[edit]

Hi. Why don't you want to follow the general guidelines for the use of flags? Asturkian (talk) 07:32, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

June 2017[edit]

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Ligas Regionales (Spanish women's football), without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Dl2000 (talk) 17:26, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Women's international rugby union[edit]

Please do not remove column formatting from pages when you update them (as you did with Women's international rugby union). The formatting is there to help readers comprehend articles more easily and make articles consistent across Wikipedia. Your removal of this formatting does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Grutness...wha? 02:02, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve 2017 Copa de la Reina de Fútbol[edit]

Hi, I'm Boleyn. Lagarto-spock, thanks for creating 2017 Copa de la Reina de Fútbol!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please add your sources.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Boleyn (talk) 18:47, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Women's Four Nations Championship[edit]

The article Women's Four Nations Championship has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:TOOSOON - interesting source but very tentative and conditional, couched in terms of "countries like...", and the caveat "Who these Four Nations teams would be is not confirmed".

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Cabayi (talk) 15:20, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Women's Four Nations Championship for deletion[edit]

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Cabayi (talk) 18:57, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of 2018 Women's Four Nations Championship[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on 2018 Women's Four Nations Championship, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for Deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discusion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Cabayi (talk) 09:50, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to join Women in Red[edit]

Thank you for creating several articles on women and their works over the past couple of months. We have become aware of your contributions thanks to research undertaken by Bobo.03 at the University of Minnesota.
You might be interested in becoming a member of our WikiProject Women in Red where we are actively trying to reduce Wikipedia's content gender gap.
If you would like to receive news of our activities without becoming a member, you can simply add your name to our mailing list. In any case, thank you for actively contributing to the coverage of women (currently, 17.14% of English Wikipedia's biographies).

Our priorities for November:

The Women in Red World Contest

Continuing from month to month:

#1day1woman Global Initiative

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Ipigott (talk) 10:51, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017[edit]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Antonio Karmona, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Giant Snowman 11:25, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Antonio Karmona. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Giant Snowman 12:06, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ANI[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Matthew_hk t c 12:51, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

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

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 2017[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:19, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have continued to edit in violation of WP:MOSFLAG, despite being informed of it multiple times, and you have been asked to discuss your editing on multiple occasions, and a look at your contribution history shows that you have never used a talk page once in your editing career on Wikipedia. Discussion is not optional on Wikipedia, and until you establish that you understand this and that you are willing and able to communicate with other editors, you are going to remain blocked. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:21, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lagarto-spock, regarding your self removed comment, this is English wikipedia, which had its own rule, other language wiki may relax on fair use policy on media or the use of flag, but in English wikipedia, there is WP:MOSFLAG. Moreover, any language wikipedia project, requires participation in discussion and reply to the incoming message of the user talk page. Matthew_hk t c 20:51, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

Lagarto-spock (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

127.0.0.1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Lagarto-spock". The reason given for Lagarto-spock's block is: "Disruptive editing".

Blocking administrator: The Bushranger (talk • blocks)

Decline reason: You are not auto-blocked, you are blocked directly, as the block message above indicates. You need to address the reason for your block, not try to edit logged out to evade it. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:46, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here: I've only tried to inform. he did not know that placing an icon with the region of origin of each person could be attributed as a disturbance.

Decline reason:

If you are not going to bother reading messages which other users send you, and instead rely on your own intuition of what Wikipedia policy might be, then I have no confidence that you will be able to abide by the rules of this site in the future. Yunshui ^雲 _水 16:34, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Lagarto-spock Did you ever read your own talk page, as well as WP:ANI, Talk:2016–17 Primera División (women) and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Community flags in Spanish women's national football team, #Team section, again that you was informed either by ping or message? Matthew_hk t c 13:10, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't read this messages. Besides, I considered that the removal of those symbols or icons was a sign of vandalism too... it only informed those. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lagarto-spock (talk • contribs) 13:25 6 December 2017 (UTC)

I suspect there's a language competence problem here. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:11, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Lagarto-spock, your talk page is for communicating. As I said in my block message, and I'll repeat it for emphasis: communication is not optional. You are expected to at least be aware of what the community is trying to communicate to you, in English, as this is the English-language Wikipedia, and if there are concerns with your edits, you must discuss the concerns that other editors raise with you in order to reach a consensus on whether or not your editing is appropriate - and, in this case, you were editing in violation of the manual of style, in other words, established, solid consensus. Multiple other editors repeatedly reverting your edits should have been a sign that their edits were not vandalism, and they attempted to communicate with you for six months - in which, according to your statment, you did not once read your talk page. If you cannot, or will not, communicate with other editors on the English-language Wikipedia in English, then I'm sorry, but you cannot edit the English-language Wikipedia. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:57, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

and "here we go again" (And the donkey goes back to wheat) Is there anything I can do to get my suspension be eliminated? [ ]Yes or [ ]No — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lagarto-spock (talk • contribs) 2017-12-07T13:25:56 (UTC)

I think the first thing you would need to do is communicate in clear and comprehensible English - I have no idea what "and "here we go again" (And the donkey goes back to wheat)" is supposed to mean. After that, you would also need to address the comments made above. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:43, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]