User talk:Enmanuelgac

More citations needed

I see you have added this template to a number of cruise line articles. They all appear adequately cited to me so I am going to revert them. If there are any statements in the articles which you feel specifically need a source please add the citation needed template next to them Lyndaship (talk) 10:28, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Lyndaship 👍 Enmanuelgac (talk) 19:35, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

Hello, I'm Paper9oll. An edit that you recently made to Talk:Royal Caribbean International seemed to be a test and has been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 16:31, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

👍 Enmanuelgac (talk) 23:39, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Royal Caribbean International. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
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 and 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. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 07:42, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I understand... I will to do the correct following the wiki rules 👍 Enmanuelgac (talk) 07:46, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. — Czello ^(music) 09:18, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cruises as an industry

Not as far as wikipedia is concerned, it is a sub-group of tourism and the link you supply is not to an industry but the means of supplying it. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 08:13, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your next link mearly describes what it is, not the industry it is in. And I'll thank you not to make snide and rude comments in edit summaries. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 07:33, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tinkering

for heaven's sake stop tinkering with the infoboxes. If you want to experiment use your sandbox Murgatroyd49 (talk) 08:06, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 09:04, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Enmanuelgac reported by User:Czello (Result: ). Thank you. — Czello ^(music) 09:21, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain namespaces ((Article)) for using articles as sandboxes and edit warring..

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Courcelles (talk) 10:43, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to tinker, please create a user sandbox. You can be unblocked once you develop some more skill in making edits. Also, you must not edit war. Courcelles (talk) 10:44, 22 May 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hello, I feel bad for the behavior of this user Murgatroyd49 who tries to prevent me from providing clear and updated information about the Royal Caribbean company and what this user has done, according to what I see, is a way of appropriating those public Wikipedia topics that anyone can edit and seeing that I am editing a lot, he tries to prevent me from editing in the topics again, because I am a Wikipedian just like him, but in my new case... he is abusing his experience to not edit in those topics and misinform because he thinks he is right about some things from the general point of view and not from the point of view of this user Murgatroyd49. I hope how read this understand me, tks! Enmanuelgac (talk) 08:31, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

See WP:NOTTHEM. Your request should only discuss your actions. 331dot (talk) 08:52, 1 June 2023 (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.

In the meantime you attempt to circumvent your block by editing while logged out - see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Enmanuelgac - an accusation which you have not denied. You don't even address your own behaviour and how it resulted in the block, you just blame @Murgatroyd49, an editor who is in good standing. 10mmsocket (talk) 08:35, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please 10mmsocket,with all due respect, don't defend it and do not stick to this case, you have been on the English Wikipedia for a long time... May this case be resolved by a user without bias. Enmanuelgac (talk) 08:41, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is not about bias. It is about addressing the behaviour of editors who refuse to accept when they are in the wrong, who edit war, and who engage in sockpuppetry. 10mmsocket (talk) 08:44, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

you right Enmanuelgac (talk) 08:45, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Due to a technical limitation, I seem to be unable to apply a site-wide temporary block on top of the existing indefinite block from article space. So, I am in a quandary - do I impose a site-wide indefinite block, or do I just give you a warning that any future instances of editing article space while logged out will result in an indef site-wide block? How about this: if you undertake never to edit article space again while not logged in until such time as the block is lifted, I will be content to leave it at that. Do you agree to that? Girth Summit _(blether) 09:06, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Girth SummitAt this point I’d just indef as NOTHERE. Courcelles (talk) 13:50, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've got no concerns if you want to go ahead and do that, Courcelles. Girth Summit _(blether) 14:35, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Courcelles (talk) 14:42, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For evading the partial block to make even more useless edits, this is now a sitewide, indef block. Courcelles (talk) 14:43, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

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

Request reason:

I promise not to edit the Royal Caribbean articles again, where the problem began, to respect the rules of Wikipedia and the ideas of fellow Wikipedians.

Decline reason:

Your unblock request will need to directly, and specifically, address the reasons you were blocked and what you plan to do differently in the future. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:55, 22 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.

Enmanuelgac (talk) 20:57, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]