User talk:Doirocoa

Welcome

I've noticed your recent contributions to Wikipedia and wanted to thank you for your addition of new cities to the encyclopedia. I have only one comment. In the future please put a space after you use a comma. And when creating a new article the bullet pointed (*) isn't necessary. But style guidelines do require bolding the article's subject when it is first used in the article. Just follow the format used with other city articles.

Thanks again for your contributions. LH (talk) 05:57, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I second this advice. You have edited before as an anonymous user, often bringing more damage to articles than benefit. Please bear in mind that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and we have a manual of style. Format and punctuation should not be random, please follow the same patterns you already find elsewhere on Wikipedia. Thank you. Hús ö nd 20:54, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doirocoa, obviously you are not paying due attention to the advice. Even though it is clear that you are editing in good faith and want to provide good contributions, what in reality happens is that you are causing quite some damage. Your edits are a format nightmare, with little regard for punctuation (namely usage of commas, which are supposed to be placed immediately after a word and then have a space before the next word); you keep inserting info that is not necessary and which you won't see elsewhere (like these explanations of "towns", "vilas"); you often create wikilinks to articles that do not exist- red links; and the overall level of English in your edits is unfortunately inadequate. Your edits take so long to fix, and the benefit brought by them is so scarce, that usually it's preferable to just revert them altogether, thus rendering your job futile. Honestly, you might have better results on the Portuguese Wikipedia. And you need to start listening to other editors' complaints, instead of insisting in the same mistakes. Regards, Hús ö nd 11:16, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Pedras Rubras

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Pedras Rubras, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

non-notable location

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Ironholds (talk) 10:44, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Doirocoa, I have to escalate the advice to a warning, as you are not paying any attention to the concerns expressed by other editors and keep damaging articles with your good-faith edits; especially when it comes to format, punctuation and insertion of unnecessary or redundant content. Fixing your edits is time consuming, and most of them have reversion as the only remedy. If you continue in this manner, you will have to be temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. Hús ö nd 12:36, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you ignore previous warnings and persist with the same spelling, punctuation, format and style disruption that are time consuming to fix, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Consider having a close look at how other articles are edited, and compare before making your own edits. Thank you. Hús ö nd 13:14, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our policies concerning neutral point of view and biographies of living persons will not be tolerated. Hús ö nd 13:06, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Doirocoa! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 687 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Paulo de Carvalho - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Tonicha - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 22:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jean Paul Cara

The article Jean Paul Cara has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced, notability therefore unclear

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 02:01, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Joe Gracy

The article Joe Gracy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced BLP. Does not pass WP:MUSIC, or WP:BLP1E.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Abductive (reasoning) 12:03, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Avril au Portugal

The article Avril au Portugal has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non-notable (unreferenced)

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. RJFJR (talk) 01:47, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of São Salvador de Lordelo

The article São Salvador de Lordelo has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No WP:Sources found for Portugal, only for Rio de Janeiro

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. CommanderWaterford (talk) 15:59, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]