User talk:Jose Luis Rama Narbona

Welcome!

Hello, Jose Luis Rama Narbona, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ~~~~, which will automatically produce your name and the date.

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

– Fayenatic London 15:16, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Thank you for adding images to articles. I noticed that you have uploaded at least one of the images yourself to Wikimedia Commons. Please look out for notices on your talk page on Commons, in case there are problems about copyright. You will probably have to explain more about where you got the pictures from. – Fayenatic London 15:16, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 6 June

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 Gogea Mitu page, your edit caused a broken reference name (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) 00:30, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Wikipedia. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.Peter Rehse (talk) 07:36, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop continuing to remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia without resolving the problem that the template refers to. This may be considered disruptive editing. Further edits of this type may result in your account being blocked from editing. Peter Rehse (talk) 17:00, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do not reinstate Ewart Potgieter article

The original article you posted was deleted because it is a copyright violation; it is nearly identical to a web page about this individual. Changing a few words here and there is insufficient to avoid copyright violation. I note that you reposted the same article, with the same copyright violations, and that too has been deleted. Do not repost it again, or you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia entirely. This may be a good time for you to review your other contributions to the project, to ensure that they are not also copyright violations. Risker (talk) 13:05, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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 get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GM83 (talk • contribs) 22:23, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem: Gogea Mitu

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Gogea Mitu, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://www.historia.ro/exclusiv_web/general/articol/cine-fost-adev-rat-gogea-mitu, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Gogea Mitu and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Gogea Mitu, in your email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Gogea Mitu. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0", or that the material is released into the public domain, or if you have strong reason to believe it is, leave a note at Talk:Gogea Mitu with a link to where we can find that note or your explanation of why you believe the content is free for reuse.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Gogea Mitu saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! GM83 (talk) 22:53, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I have deleted the copyvio versions of this article (which was a lot of versions). It is not acceptable to google-translate non-English websites and put them in Wikipedia articles. This is a very serious problem. Do not do this again on any article, or you will be blocked from editing.
It seems you are interested in editing in the topic area of boxing (specifically very tall boxers). Before you continue, I strongly recommend that you become familiar with the notability requirements for articles about boxers. Mitu *may* meet this requirement, but Jim Cully probably does not. I am concerned, as well, that you seem to have a hard time writing fluently in English. Please take your time drafting articles, and make sure that you do not copy anything directly or closely paraphrase anything, not even translations. Thank you. Risker (talk) 02:16, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am going to add something further here. I have looked back in your edit history to see what articles first interested you, and I see that at least one of the articles you edited fairly early in your career was a messy copyright violation that went all the way back to 2006. (I've deleted that article, but it was Edouard Beaupré.) It is perhaps a bit more understandable how you came to misunderstand Wikipedia's expectations about copyright when this was amongst the articles you edited early on. I'm also pretty suspicious about some of the other early articles, going back before you edited them, and will check the source texts. Risker (talk) 03:50, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2015

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at List of tallest people. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 01:25, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Edouard Beaupré

Hi, I'm Sulfurboy. Jose Luis Rama Narbona, thanks for creating Edouard Beaupré!

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

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. Sulfurboy (talk) 19:24, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

After your re-adding the Edouard Beaupré article (in its previous condition) after it had been deleted as a copyright violation, and considering the number of problems you seem to have with copyright violations and a lack of understanding of Wikipedia's requirements in this regard (as far as I can tell, you have never responded to any concerns in this regard), I am sorry that it is necessary to block you from editing. It is not helping the encyclopedia to keep adding material that is owned by other people or organizations or websites. You are entitled to have your block reviewed, and it is fine for you to be unblocked, as long as you are able to demonstrate that you understand copyright on Wikipedia. This will require you writing a paragraph in your own words, on this talk page. Right now this is the only page you are able to edit. If you want to appeal this block, read Wikipedia:Appealing a block carefully and follow the instructions there. Important: Do not create a new account. Risker (talk) 04:43, 18 June 2015 (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).

Jose Luis Rama Narbona (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I would like to continue working and contributing to Wikipedia for the benefit of all and to make this site better and something for which we should be proud of how wonderful Wikipedia modern Library of Alexandria.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you

understand what you have been blocked for,
will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 01:20, 21 June 2015 (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.

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).

Jose Luis Rama Narbona (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I apologize for the mistakes do not recur please I would like to continue to contribute to Wikipedia. Sorry what happened. Please

Decline reason:

You will not be unblocked unless you can demonstrate that you understand Wikipedia's policies regarding copyright. Huon (talk) 20:26, 21 June 2015 (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.

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).

Jose Luis Rama Narbona (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I discupalme back again. I understand Wikipedia's policies regarding copyright. I just made a mistake and I've paid my penance. Please I would like to continue working on Wikipedia to be waived for all. I understand Wikipedia policy regarding copyright. Please.

Decline reason:

Demonstrating an understanding of copyright is different from claiming an understanding. We have no evidence that you actually do understand the policy. If you wish to be unblocked, you need to show, not state that you understand copyright. In your next appeal, please address the following:

What do you understand "copyright" to mean?
Why is copyright important on Wikipedia?
What is the difference between copyright and licencing?
What sort of licences are acceptable on Wikipedia?
How do you know whether something is under copyright or not?

Satisfactory answers to these questions will demonstrate a sufficient understanding of copyright. Yunshui ^雲 _水 08:45, 22 June 2015 (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.

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).

Jose Luis Rama Narbona (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand what it means copyright
I know how important are the rights author in Wikipedia
I know the difference between rights and license autor
I know that licenses are acceptable on Wikipedia
I know how to tell if something is copyrighted or not

Decline reason:

No. You have been asked five questions, and have answered none of them. Just saying that you know the answers to the questions will not do. You are required to tell us, here, the exact answers as you understand them. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 18:39, 22 June 2015 (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.

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).

Jose Luis Rama Narbona (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

(Redacted)

Decline reason:

You copy and pasted copyrighted text into your unblock request, which shows you have a poor understanding of our policies. I have revoked your talk page access for the excessive unblock requests and for the copyright violations. Further appeals may be made through the unblock ticket request system. Mike V • Talk 23:04, 22 June 2015 (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.