User talk:Bedivere

/archive

Hello, Kuatrero! 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 excited about 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 when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 01:59, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply] Getting Started Contributing to Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Directories and indexes Where to: ask questions • make requests Tip of the day 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 (Simplified) • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry 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 IRC channels • Mailing lists The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper) Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Change undone Your newest change to Wikipedia has been reverted. If you have any trouble, or just complaints, please give full, descriptive, infomation on my talk page

Dear @Bedivere, I just want to annouce you that in some recent time like these beautiful days, I, and whom, seriously and suspiciously took a deep notice that you had produced many non-convincious edits, but not limited to the final decision of going reversing (simply known as you, "reverted" a change) that messed up the history change of page of Wikipedia. Your latest edit has been restored by the last revision by User:Wcquidditch Again, I am showed here to let you know about making consensus, useful contributions on all of Wikimedia platforms, including this, Wikipedia, a considerablly friendly online encyclopedia. Please keep an eye on this concern. Furthermore, it is better not to do this later. Thanks for taking the time to care for yourself and your activities. Yours sincerely, User:GreatPersonLikeMe 15:04, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They are incorrectly tagged. Makes these images worthy of being removed. The previous images are just fine. Please stop edit warring Bedivere (talk) 15:46, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I'm embarrassed I've showed up this place. Can you guide me how to make best-quality edits? Thanks. 14.185.38.51 (talk) 09:12, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Being truthful (as in: not inventing MOS) and competent is always a good start. The Banner talk 00:19, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

After hours of work I did an edit on Chilean Dictator Augusto Pinochet's Page yet some minutes after my edit was reversed arbitrarily under no other pretext than being "strongly biased" and with no further arguments, everything I added was backed by reputable sources, the Library Congress, Economists and acknolewdged Mainstream media, therefore I want an explanation with proper arguments, considering that what I added consists mostly of DATA and dates, things that do no vary according to political opinion.

Thank you in advance. Nachowski1809 (talk) 23:28, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A good part of the text you added into the Pinochet article is written in some biased terms. I don't mind with some of the text, given that it provides appropriate context; my problem is with the manner you present the topics. Bedivere (talk) 00:39, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Understood my friend, anyway let's keep our dialogue on the Pinochet talk page! Nachowski1809 (talk) 19:46, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 30 August 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2023 Gabon coup d'état, which you created and nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Tone 16:28, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Str1977. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to 2022 proposed Political Constitution of the Republic of Chile seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on the relevant talk page. Thank you. Str1977 ^(talk) 19:52, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Str1977 Two points: the 1980 plebiscite being of dubious legitimacy is a fact, not an opinion or allegation; the text has been in the article for a long time until you decided to start an useless edit war. Bedivere (talk) 20:38, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

¡Hola!

I know Santa Anna's full paternal name is properly "López de Santa Anna." Yet in English-language sources, in Texas history sources, he is commonly referred to as just "Santa Anna." Even in Spanish-speaking sources of the time, he is often referred to as just "Santa Anna." The best and standard biography of him in English is Will Fowler's Santa Anna of Mexico.^[1] It uses "Santa Anna" throughout. Just one example from a Mexican source, in a book from 1850, the title of the book is: Historia de México y del general Antonio Lopez de Santa-Anna.^[2] Okay, the full form. But on the very next page is an image of "General Santa-Anna." It pretty much uses "Santa-Anna" throughout, not "López de Santa Anna." Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

I just want you to know why I and other editors may remove some references to "López de," not for any animus against Spanish naming practices or history, but because, in English (and dare I say, in Spanish) it is the standard usage—it is his common name (see Wikipedia:COMMONNAME)—and it is the standard usage in secondary sources, etc. Best, TuckerResearch (talk) 14:18, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly are you hoping to achieve? Jqzk (talk) 19:11, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, but it's been you who has been calling me silly and making pointless removals of content. You also have broken the three revert rule. Stop it. Bedivere (talk) 19:12, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All untrue. I'll ask again: what exactly are you hoping to achieve? Jqzk (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:16, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How is that untrue? Just look at your talk page and that of the article. You're obviously either trolling or vandalizing and very soon action will be taken. Bedivere (talk) 19:29, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your accusation of vandalism was untrue, and him calling that silly is not a serious personal attack. I suggest you discontinue the edit war and resolve the editing disagreement on the talk page. Consider getting a third opinion. PhilKnight (talk) 19:38, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 30 November 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Henry Kissinger, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. starship.paint (RUN) 06:38, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Following up from this discussion, I see the merge template you added to Economy of Chile (here), and to Inflation in Chile (here), but it still doesn't seem to be listed at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Current discussions. I believe that is because you added the {{Merge}} templates by hand to each article, instead of letting the bot do it following addition of the {{subst:Requested move}} template, as recommended by WP:RM#CM. This means the discussion won't be seen by too many volunteers and may stagnate. If I were you, I would back out the two templates and start over, following the guideline. If you do, the bot will create a new discussion for the move, and it would be best if you closed and collapsed the current one, lest you get some people contributing in error to the old discussion. If you need help doing that, {{ping}} me. Mathglot (talk) 00:34, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mathglot Will do. I had no idea these request for merging would need to be added to requested moves. Thanks for your advice. Bedivere (talk) 01:00, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mathglot I've tagged the articles again with Twinkle and these were not added to RM. That is because there is a proposal for merging the inflation article into the economy one, not to move either of them. Have a great day Bedivere (talk) 04:42, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ohhh, that's my bad; I apologize for the extra effort I've caused you. I'll have to brush up on my moves and my merges. I owe you one; next time you have some grunt work to do, give me a ping, and I'll take care of it for you. Once again, my apologies. Mathglot (talk) 04:45, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to apologize @Mathglot, thanks for your efforts! Bedivere (talk) 04:55, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hola, solo di el contexto necesario en el artículo. Espero entiendas.

Saludos

@Carigval.97: Debes tener presente que aquí existen diversas políticas como WP:REFBOMB que debes respetar, por lo que te revertiré nuevamente. Saludos. --Bedivere (talk) 14:43, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hola, he eliminado las excesivas referencias (REFBOMB) y las he re-distribuido. Asimismo, no puede hablarse de una «promoción», pues se menciona su exabrupto con Ciper y un autor al que acusó ser de su directorio (lo que no necesariamente lo deja bien). Por ende, solicito tu deferencia, cordura y honestidad intelectual para que la comunidad de editores decida sobre el contenido del producto final y no el artículo en su estado embrionario.

Dicho eso, repondré lo escrito.

Salutes CV

You have recently edited a page related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. You have shown interest in the Russo-Ukrainian War. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:28, 18 January 2024 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. My IP address is 200.86.6.88. Bedivere (talk) 06:20, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline since you're not blocked directly and it would be really hard to lift the proxy block. It's better, actually, for you to go follow the instructions at WP:IPECPROXY and request IP block exemption by email. — Daniel Case (talk) 07:40, 1 February 2024 (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.

Bedivere (talk) 06:20, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Sebastián Piñera, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (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, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 19:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On 7 February 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2024 Chile wildfires, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Schwede66 03:25, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On 7 February 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Sebastián Piñera, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 13:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So it won't get deleted, and can you remove the speed delete template since I updated the copyright license to Fair use already. Hjajajsbbxb12 (talk) 15:30, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hjajajsbbxb12 Using the fair use template is no free pass to getting any file included in Wikipedia. It needs an educational purpose. This file is not even used, and even if it was used, a shorter, or even a simple screen shot would suffice, but not an entire video taken off YouTube. The template still stands. Bedivere (talk) 15:32, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What template is an educational purpose. Hjajajsbbxb12 (talk) 15:34, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you update the copyright license for me, in order for it to remain on Wikipedia. Hjajajsbbxb12 (talk) 16:02, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It does not seem like it would or should remain on Wikipedia. Firstly, you would need permission from the copyright owner to upload it here and release it under a free license. Simply uploading it and putting a fair use tag on a file that will get no use, will only get it deleted. Bedivere (talk) 16:03, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did have permission from the copyright owner aka SML to put it on Wikipedia. Hjajajsbbxb12 (talk) 16:57, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you have permission "to put it on Wikipedia", I don't think that is enough. We need it to be freely licensed, for example, under a Creative Commons license. And you'd need the copyright owner to send a permission email to the Wikimedia Foundation. See commons:COM:VRT for more information. Bedivere (talk) 16:59, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is Because I can't overwrite existing files. Hjajajsbbxb12 (talk) 16:28, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious why you felt undoing the redirect and restoring a WP:CONTENTFORK and what is a fairly blatant WP:COATRACK article that was a was a good idea. You acknowledged there was a POV issue with the tag but surely some discussion first as to why you wished to restore it. @Kahastok: as the original editor. WCM_email 19:12, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wee Curry Monster I added some comments on the Tierra del Fuego talk page. Bedivere (talk) 19:14, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've answered there. Just for info, my watchlist works and I check it regularly, I'd appreciate it if you didn't ping me please, I'm a bit old school that way. WCM_email 19:35, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Since I usually respond on my talk page, I thought it would be better to ping you. Thanks for responding my comment, will continue the discussion over there. Bedivere (talk) 19:38, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because You should've warned me on commons, instead of blocking me, and I promise that It was an accident. Hjajajsbbxb12 (talk) 19:40, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You were given a last warning and you continued to upload unfree files. Disregarding warnings resulted in your block. Please message me on Commons when you're talking about issues from that site. Bedivere (talk) 23:47, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't because I'm blocked on commons, but I made an unblock request, and you should accept it, or shorten my block to two weeks, and i will no longer upload non–free images on commons, but i will ask you here, if i'm allowed to upload the image in commona or not. Hjajajsbbxb12 (talk) 01:01, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It will be up for another admin to decide if they unblock you or shorten the block, not you. You can't and should not upload non-free images on Commons: that is why you got blocked in the first place. Asking for an obvious response is completely pointless. Bedivere (talk) 01:07, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I said that I promise to stop uploading them, and I will only upload Public Domain images on commons, when I'm unblocked. Hjajajsbbxb12 (talk) 02:04, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's the same promise you've made several times. I'm not buying it this time. Bedivere (talk) 02:08, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bedivere, I see that you're replacing Mickey Mouse title card screenshots with your own title card screenshot that doesn't have the mice pictured, as on The Cactus Kid (1930 film). I disagree that your black-rectangle title card screenshots are "free" and the others are "non-free". Your screenshot is exactly the same as any other screenshot — it doesn't become "free" just because it doesn't have the mice on it. It's still a screenshot from the film, and therefore "non-free".

I also see that on pages that already have screenshots from the film, like Traffic Troubles, that you're adding the black-rectangle title cards further down on the page. Why are you leaving the "non-free" images in those cases?

I would be happy to upload more actual (non-title-card) screenshots, if that would resolve the question in a positive way for both of us. I just think that the black-rectangle shots are unhelpful as the sole illustration on the page. What do you think? Toughpigs (talk) 16:36, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. It is not factual that these screenshots are non free. Since they only depict the title, which only consists of letters, they are too simple to be copyrighted and as a result they are free. I have left the screenshots of the film themselves (still under copyright) because they may be illustrative enough. In the case that resulted in your reversal (Cactus Kid) I don't see how your image benefits the article more than the free title-only screenshot (without the mice). I would recommend you to upload different shots from the shorts, as fair use may apply, but also retaining the free title-only screenshot within the articles (in some section, for example) if you are to replace the info box images. Have a great day @Toughpigs. I'd also like to note that title cards from Mickey in Arabia onwards (until the Kangaroo short) are free too, and these do include the mice. Bedivere (talk) 16:42, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, if different shots are good with you, then I'll work on that. Thanks for your answer! Toughpigs (talk) 16:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop edit warring on Get a Horse! You may have a good point or you may not, but when two different editors are disagreeing with you, you have to take the discussion to the article talk page. You've reverted edits five times in two days -- this may not be strictly a 3RR violation, but it's very close.

Edit warring is disruptive even if you are correct. Please discuss the issue on the talk page, not through edit summaries. Toughpigs (talk) 18:32, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not reverting again but please understand that reinstating the file is contrary to Wikipedia policies, as such a use is not permitted when a free alternative is available. I have already said it all on the talk page and if you continue reinstating the file, I will request its deletion. Bedivere (talk) 18:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your close of WP:Articles for deletion/Leopoldo Soto Norambuena. As a particpant in the AfD, you are deemed to be WP:INVOLVED, therefore may not be the one closing it. Owen× ☎ 20:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I did participate in the AfD. However, I was the only vote to delete. I think the consensus is clear against deleting, and the page was getting vandalized, that's what led me to do it, but if I should not, it rather stays as it was. Bedivere (talk) 20:34, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure your intentions were good, and since you closed contrary to your !vote, no one can accuse you of being biased. But it looks very bad when someone who was involved in the debate proceeds to close that debate. And more generally, as a non-admin, you should limit yourself to closing only XfDs where the result is uncontroversial. Please see WP:BADNAC for details. Thank you! Owen× ☎ 20:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]