User talk:FLACOPAILO
Disambiguation link notification for December 26
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
- 1150 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- 1170 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to San Luis and Hurlingham
- 1490 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- 1090 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Libertad
- 1130 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Show
- 1140 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to La Luna
- 1160 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Independencia
- 1310 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Master
- 1320 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Area 1
- 1340 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Renacer
- 1500 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Vida
- 1510 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to RBN
- 1540 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Lider
- 1550 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Popular
- 1560 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to La Voz
- 1570 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Rocha
- 1590 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Dolores
- 1600 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to EME
- 1630 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Hurlingham
- 1670 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Basilio
- 580 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Andina
- 650 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Belgrano
- 690 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to K24
- 730 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to BBN
- 810 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Federal
- 840 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to General Belgrano
- 860 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Digital
- 890 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Libre
- 930 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to San Justo
- 940 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Excelsior
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
Welcome!
[edit]
|
Disambiguation link notification for January 2
[edit]An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- 1490 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- 1090 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Libertad
- 1130 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Show
- 1140 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to La Luna
- 1160 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Independencia
- 1310 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Master
- 1320 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Area 1
- 1340 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Renacer
- 1500 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Vida
- 1510 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to RBN
- 1540 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Lider
- 1550 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Popular
- 1560 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to La Voz
- 1570 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Rocha
- 1590 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Dolores
- 1600 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to EME
- 1630 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Hurlingham
- 1670 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Basilio
- 580 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Andina
- 650 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Belgrano
- 690 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to K24
- 730 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to BBN
- 840 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to General Belgrano
- 860 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Digital
- 890 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Libre
- 930 AM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to San Justo
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:46, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Araus
[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 Araus requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
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 deleted 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. Theroadislong (talk) 16:45, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
This is a lack of respect. The Araus article, it's a really good article with many valid references. I don't know why censore my article.
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Araus 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/Araus 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. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 17:18, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
- This is a fascist point of view, because are a good article with interesting data, many valid references. I don't know why censore this article.
- Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FLACOPAILO (talk • contribs)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Araus. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Remove the AfD template does not end the discussion; it just makes editors of the article unaware that the discussion is ongoing. Do you really mean to stifle discussion that might lead to reasons to keep the article? —C.Fred (talk) 03:02, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
Please, stop with censoring, please. Basta
2 questions
[edit]Hi FLACOPAILO. Two questions
1) Why do you believe that links to camionargentino.blogspot.com.ar and pesadosargentinos.blogspot.com.ar/ are not violations of WP:COPYLINK? 2) Do you have a connection with either blog?
Thanks Jytdog (talk) 04:23, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
- Hi 3ytdog
- 1) Because I think there is no violation?
- Because they are reliable sources and are the only ones to attach references about heavy machinery, agricultural, etc. It is completely legal, it has the correct and just information, without errors.
- I hope you like it and take the time to read both pages and see the information you have. The published scans are owned by the blog, the vast majority is material of the collection itself.
- 2) Yes, it's from a friend of mine, who is writing the two books of Argentine Truck and Argentine Heavy. It is a joint project of 100 historians in Argentina, both well known.
- And yes, I participate in Pesados Argentinos and Camion Argentino. I would invite you to enter the two websites, to corroborate the information.
"DONT DELETE the references, are very important and unique. This is a lack of respect with the work of the people.
- Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by FLACOPAILO (talk • contribs) 05:10, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
- The correct thing to do to protect Wikipedia, is to check to see if these refs are OK, or is you are violating copyright via WP:COPYLINK. I have posted at
Wikipedia_talk:Copyright_problems#Blog_hosting_scans_of_newspaper_articles_and_transcriptions_of_themto ask for input.
- The correct thing to do to protect Wikipedia, is to check to see if these refs are OK, or is you are violating copyright via WP:COPYLINK. I have posted at
- Would you please clarify if you earn any money from those two blogs? Thanks.
- Jytdog (talk) 05:27, 6 January 2018 (UTC) (redacted, used a different venue. see below Jytdog (talk) 17:41, 6 January 2018 (UTC))
- I think you're not wanting to understand. No copyright is being violated, since I am part of the project. And this account is managed by several people WHO ARE PART OF THE PROJECT
- How do I have to make you understand?
- I do not earn money with websites. It is a non-profit project. You will see that they do not have any publicity,
- Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by FLACOPAILO (talk • contribs) 05:33, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for saying that you do not make money from the websites.
- It does not appear that you have read WP:COPYLINK - this is the potential problem... in any case people will reply soon at the noticeboard... Jytdog (talk) 05:45, 6 January 2018
- Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by FLACOPAILO (talk • contribs) 05:33, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
The trouble are your fascist comment, wikipedia isn't a free encyclopedia. Maybe can think about this before censore the contribs. Right?
(UTC)
CCI Notice
[edit]Hello, FLACOPAILO. This message is being sent to inform you that a request for a contributor copyright investigation has been filed at Contributor copyright investigations concerning your contributions to Wikipedia in relation to Wikipedia's copyrights policy. The listing can be found here. For some suggestions on responding, please see Responding to a CCI case. Thank you. Jytdog (talk) 17:41, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
Another lack of respect... an investigation for censore the investigation. It's sad, really sad.
Wikipedia, the fascist encyclopedia
Note on using talk pages
[edit]Quick note on the logistics of discussing things on Talk pages, which are essential for everything that happens here.
In Talk page discussions, we "thread" comments by indenting - when you reply to someone, you put a colon in front of your comment, which the Wikipedia software will render into an indent when you save your edit; if the other person has indented once, then you indent twice by putting two colons in front of your comment, which the WP software converts into two indents, and when that gets ridiculous you reset back to the margin (or "outdent") by putting this {{od}} in front of your comment.
And at the end of the comment, please "sign" by typing exactly four (not 3 or 5) tildas "~~~~" which the WP software converts into a date stamp and links to your talk and user pages when you save your edit.
That is how we know who said what, to whom.
This is as important as "please" and "thank you". Please follow this etiquette. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 05:39, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
- I would prefer that you do not censor me, disrespect me or offend me.
- This is not a free encyclopedia, it is an encyclopedia full of bastards, fascists, censors, beasts and blights.
- I find it inadmissible that you disrespect me and offend me in such a way that I can not add the correct and appropriate information.
- You should reveal the authoritarianism and the indignity, before continuing to fuck. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FLACOPAILO (talk • contribs)
- This is a project where editors have to work together. Making personal attacks makes it difficult for cooperative editing to occur. Please refrain from such personal attacks. —C.Fred (talk) 16:09, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
It is you who are making attacks on freedom of expression, and of being able to contribute to this "encyclopedia", deleting, censoring and attacking me.
They should reveal the fascism and authoritarianism that they carry within, they are very violent.
- There is no guarantee of freedom of expression on Wikipedia; free to edit does not mean free to run amok. If your edits do not comply with guidelines, they will not be allowed to stand. —C.Fred (talk) 17:47, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
My editions are legal, dignified, honest and backed by reliable information. Your prejudices and lack of education do not help one to work in peace.
It is all control, but you like to engender violence in your words.
You made it clear to me that wikipedia is a den of authoritarianism, violence and sectarianism. I already understood everything.
- Users have made a good-faith inquiry of whether your edits comply with copyright rules. While they may be legal in the strict sense, that does not mean that they comply with Wikipedia's rules on free content—particularly on linking to sites that present material they don't have copyright to. —C.Fred (talk) 17:51, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
Investigate, what is this? FBI? KGB? good...
Another thing, what is free content? Perhaps "CamionArgentino" and "PesadosArgentinos" are not free? What do they infringe? This "encyclopedia" is full of content that is not free and that has no copyright, and have never made a problem.
It is disrespectful and lacking in education as they are offending me.
- As was stated above, the concern is whether the blogs are carrying copyrighted material without the owners' consent. If you feel there are other problems with Wikipedia content, you're welcome to point them out.
- The goal is that the content of Wikipedia be free for others to use without needing to pay royalties. To that end, essentially all the text on Wikipedia and many of the images must be under a "free license", such as CC BY-SA 3.0, that allows unlimited re-use with only attribution. There are limited exceptions, for things like album covers, that are not free to re-use, because the owners hold an all-rights-reserved license—and those are governed by very strict policies on when, where, and how they may be used.
- So, the concern with CamionAregentino and PesadosArgentinos is that they're hosting material that is under an all-rights-reserved license, but they haven't obtained the rights to redistribute. WP:COPYLINK states that we should not link to such sites, even in references. —C.Fred (talk) 18:00, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
and what would be the problem of that? does not violate anything about the license or the useless wikipedia rules. When they finish extorting with all these idiocies, they will realize how wrong they are.
I think this is another lack of respect more. All because it is "blogspot", if it were a common web and there would be no problems? The material is documented WITH SOURCES AND WHAT NOT, is because it is owned by the research group. I have repeated it many times and you are determined to censor me, ban me and expel me from wikipedia. Vomitive, the less. If the RESEARCH GROUP, OWNER OF THE RIGHTS OF CAMIONARGENTINO AND PESADOSARGENTINOS, they accept to add links to wikipedia and they do not oppose, since THEY ARE THEY THEM that add them ... what is the problem? What bothers you so much? "The free reproduction of the material hereby presented (used WITHOUT PURPOSE OF PROFIT), in a partial and complete manner is permitted, and it is necessary and fundamental to mention the site and the author of the article." ENTER BOTH BLOGS, READ WHAT IT SAYS.
- The research group controls the newspapers and the blogs? Explain that, please. —C.Fred (talk) 18:11, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
- And I see the problem: "used WITHOUT PURPOSE OF PROFIT". Wikipedia's licensing rules deem that any material under a license that restricts commercial re-use is not free material. So, per Wikipedia, the license doesn't qualify as a free license. —C.Fred (talk) 18:14, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for helping explain C.Fred. My concern is that the blog appears to host material that violates copyright - namely, it hosts scans of newspaper articles and ads, and in many places has transcriptions of those scanned pieces. The disclaimer says this is OK under some kind of fair use ratonale. In the US at least fair use would not cover the scans of articles and definitely not transcriptions of the whole articles. It is the concern about hosting copyright violating content that brings in WP:COPYLINK. I am also not sure that these blogs are WP:RS but that is a separate question. Jytdog (talk) 18:33, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
First, we only have control over what they have given us and we have obtained the source.
AGAIN, you have not entered the blog and you have not seen what CC we have, so it is difficult to continue explaining.
AGAIN, THIS BLOG DOES NOT VIOLATE ANYTHING RIGHT. We have not received a single claim for anything, everything has been transferred without problems and we do not face any kind of judgment.
We are freer than you and we have LESS PREJUDICE THAN YOU TWO, since we share our works and our material FREELY, WITHOUT CHARGING AND WITHOUT PROBLEMS. Unfortunately, they do not want to understand it and they accuse us of violating copyright, which is not the case.
- If I follow your comment above, you work for the blogs in question. Because of your conflict of interest, you should really not be adding them directly to articles. If you really think they're reliable sources, place an edit request on the talk page of the article in question; then, an independent editor can review the change. —C.Fred (talk) 18:54, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
it is clear that they only want to bother and argue without any sense.
They are reliable sources and have already been added. Stop restricting, annoying, bothering and offending. I do not know how to make you understand.
They do not have to check a source that complies with the required license
- Yeah the yelling isn't helpful, and you are not actually addressing the potential copyright violation issue. This is not about the blog being public for anyone to read, but rather about people on the blog violating copyright by reproducing copyrighted works without permission. I did enter the site and have read the disclaimer which says "The sites have a copyright disclaimer that says (via google translate) "It is allowed the free reproduction of the material here present (used WITHOUT PURPOSE OF PROFIT), partially and totally, being necessary and fundamental the mention of the site and the author of the article. Thank you very much. *** The images that are attached to the articles are merely illustrative, and may not be the originals of the vehicle in question (or correspond to the equivalent of other markets / countries) and merely serve to identify them." As I noted I am not convinced that this actually meets fair use criteria, which is why I have asked others to look at it the issue. And yes as C.Fred noted there are COI/ WP:SELFCITE issues here as well. Jytdog (talk) 19:25, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
I think you're a disrespectful maleducad, since nobody rapes anything. Only you are violating my space, provoking, disrespecting and insulting.
I do not see you so sorry with other "contributors".
What you do is called censorship, lack of respect, fascism, authoritarianism and violence.
When do they start with the burning of books and crimes? I see that they carry authoritarianism and violence in their blood. I do not doubt that they are from a gang of kidnappers and indoctrinators.
I think you are violating the dignity of others, and you are being very disgusting. You should reveal it. You have no right to trample on the work of 100 people, who are in order, UNDER THE LAW.
January 2018
[edit]
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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. See BRD for 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:40, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
I do not feel like it, I would like them not to bother, offend or disrespect while another wikipedia is making a GOOD edition, with proven and good quality content.
I think you're being very authoritarian, and this is a free encyclopedia.
THOSE WHO OFFEND with a war of editions ARE YOU, WHO DO NOT UNDERSTAND, do not know, do not interpret, do not read, annoy, assault and offend gratuitously.
I would ask you please to stop attacking me in my discussion page and stop reversing my changes.
It is bad education as you refer to my person without knowing me.
THERE IS NOTHING TO DISCUSS, I want them to leave me alone and stop attacking me.
REGARDS
Erroneous use of the term fascist
[edit]Hi your use of fascist as a ubiquitous reply to any editing or comments that you don't like shows a certain lack of understanding of the word. Here is a link to the Wikipedia page on the subject that should help you to avoid its misuse in the future. Fascism Domdeparis (talk) 09:07, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
you are wrong, because here I am being offended, disrespecting, restricting the right to edit with truthful and reliable information.
So, they are being authoritarian, fascist, mediocre and violent.
I got tired of explaining that I am part of two research sites and because of the license they have, there is NO PROBLEM of sharing links and links.
And the information they contain (images, scans, etc.) are mostly from THIRD PARTIES WITH AUTHORIZATION and their own material.
How do I have to make them understand that? Do they do it on purpose?
Shouting on Wikipedia
[edit]Hi your use of capital letters is considered here as shouting and is frowned upon by the community. Please look at this link for more info. WP:SHOUTDomdeparis (talk) 09:13, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
there is no scream, there is only BLINDNESS and no desire to read from you.
Only using capital letters it seems that one can attract the attention of people who only harm the one who contributes with respect, information and dignity.
I would ask you please to stop disrespecting me.
- Nobody is disrespectful towards you I believe. You are taking this way way too personally. I suggest taking a step back and try and look at this from a neutral point of view. If you feel that there have been personal attacks you can read this WP:NPA and then follow the advice. Just to give you fair warning accusations of fascism is not a nice thing to say and you may be the one who is reminded about not making personal attacks yourself. And please sign you posts on talk pages using the buttons or by typing ~~~~. Domdeparis (talk) 15:56, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
That they deny personal attacks on my contributions, is a mockery.
Stop being so lacras and authoritarian, they are very sad and leave much to be desired.
They do not seem pleasant to you, but they are being fascists from the moment they censor me, they put in objection without proof my sources and above they think without knowing.
To avoid the calfique of "fascists" stop writing on my conversation page and retire. Also, stop objection to my contributions and the two projects in which I participate.
They are going to avoid being "insulted and offended".
I will not sign anything, until they retire and lift all the unfounded accusations that I have to endure. They tire me— Preceding unsigned comment added by FLACOPAILO (talk • contribs) 16:06, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
- FLACOPAILO I'm not sure if you're implying you won't use a signature but you should probably read WP:SIGNHERE. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 16:17, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
the one that should stop bothering where they do not call it, is you.
Disambiguation link notification for January 9
[edit]An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- Araus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Ford Thames
- List of automobiles manufactured in Argentina (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Stark
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
January 2018
[edit] Hello, I'm IdreamofJeanie. I noticed that you made a comment on the page User talk:Chrissymad that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. IdreamofJeanie (talk) 13:31, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Primefac (talk) 14:12, 11 January 2018 (UTC)