User talk:SamEV/Archive 2: Difference between revisions

Archive 1

Tx.--Epeefleche 06:44, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They're the arms of the kingdom of Sicily. Michael Sanders 11:48, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SamEV, could you look at Template:British Latinos (Template talk:British Latinos) and see what you think about it...? Thanks! The Ogre (talk) 13:56, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again! Could you please go back and comment on Template:British Latinos (Template talk:British Latinos)? Thank you again. The Ogre (talk) 13:54, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:British Latinos has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — The Ogre (talk) 15:31, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what was wrong with my edits? how are they making a point? Iamandrewrice (talk) 11:41, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Latino (demonym), where you'll see how that matter has been much discussed before. If you made an innocent mistake, I retract the comment. But you seem like an experienced editor. SamEV (talk) 11:47, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hang on i'll have a look at the discussion... but i can add a reference, which was what i was just about to do before you changed it... and no i am not experienced at all haha! i only joined a week or two ago... and im still adopted. But thanks for the compliment anyway... lol Iamandrewrice (talk) 11:53, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I went by all the messages you have on your talk page. I didn't stop to look at the dates on them. SamEV (talk) 11:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah... i got pretty well known rather quickly haha... but yeah... anyway... ive edited what I think the page should be like... giving a reference on the discussion page... that way people can discuss it. Dont delete it yet... just see what people think. And what do you think? why did you delete it in the first place? i wasnt exactly sure on that even from reading the discussion page Iamandrewrice (talk) 12:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had to remove it, per Wikipedia's rules. Let's discuss any changes on the article's talk page. Leave a message there if you want. SamEV (talk) 12:06, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

oh... well yeah i did leave a message on it ^^ Iamandrewrice (talk) 12:11, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I replied on the page. And i don't understand how you can say that there is a need in any way to block me. I have done nothing wrong... Iamandrewrice (talk) 12:33, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, as I said in my reply at Latino (demonym), you don't have to worry about that. I haven't even reported you b/c you're so new. SamEV (talk) 13:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2007/02/weodata/index.aspx ☆ CieloEstrellado 07:43, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SamEV! We seem to have yet another problem with a racialized "Latin" template, I'm speaking of Template:Countries with Latin Populations (Talk). I've tagged as OR - could you comment please? Thank you. The Ogre 13:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again SamEv. You may want to gives your thoughts at Templates for deletion - Countries with Latin Populations. Thank you! The Ogre 22:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Poor Andrew. I hope he doesn't think we're all out to get him. I just wish he'd wait till he has a better understanding of all these issues and how Wikipedia works before making those edits. SamEV 22:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know... he is now permantely blocked, as well as all his sockpoppets... Such is life! The Ogre 14:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ouch ... SamEV (talk) 23:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding the reference and fixing my mistake. I have been trying to improve it section by section, and am just now getting to the Hohenzollern business. I'm going to be adding a lot on the story behind the Ems Dispatch and improve the rest. Any additions would be greatly appreciated! BTW, if you could find any sources that say Vauban built the fortress at Luxembourg, message me with it. Thanks! Monsieurdl ^{mon talk-mon contribs} 03:26, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam, I saw you showed some interest in my editing of Anglo–Spanish War (1585).

The most remarkable aspect of the Edict is that the protestants were granted any rights at all, but the country remained officially catholic; that is why Henry IV had to convert in the first place and why Spain could acquiesce in an end of the war it had intervened in for religious reasons. I rewrote the passage anyway. Regards, --BertSen (talk) 08:45, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Even if you don't like something. [1] Work for a consensus or go for dispute resolution. UnclePaco (talk) 17:40, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you serious? You practically threatened an edit war and to undo the recent progress in that article. I strongly advice you to be more genuine in your comments next time you come to my talk page. SamEV (talk) 20:07, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

oh okay —Preceding unsigned comment added by BigGabriel555 (talk • contribs) 23:22, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:People of former Portuguese colonies, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:People of former Portuguese colonies has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:People of former Portuguese colonies, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 21:00, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Jerry. I created that category but replaced it with another. In such situations, when it's a self-created category, what's the best way for me to have them deleted? SamEV (talk) 00:08, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted Category:People of former Portuguese colonies 3 hours ago; do you mean undeleted? Or do you meanCategory:People of the former Portuguese colonies? And if so, why do you want it deleted? JERRY ^talk _contribs 00:14, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I didn't check. Yes, I wanted it deleted, as I do others I created but which I then decided I had accidentally misnamed. Do I wait four days and nominate them for speedy deletion, or is there a different procedure you recommend? SamEV (talk) 00:25, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would create the new category pages, depopulate the former categories while populating the new categories. Then once the former categories are empty, I would nominate them for speedy deletion under crtieria WP:CSD#C1. JERRY ^talk _contribs 00:51, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. SamEV (talk) 00:55, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. No, I don't mean Category:People of the former Portuguese colonies. But I see that the others have either been deleted or tagged already. Thanks. SamEV (talk) 02:11, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

In the past you made edits the name of the emperors of Japan. A discussion about this topic has just opened (once again!) You are free to express your opinion here. Thanks. Švitrigaila (talk) 16:43, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know how to restore half of my edit on the Geography section. Before my edition, there were too many things wrong (it said, for example, 3 main mountain ranges and really they are 4 main ranges, not including the Cordillera Oriental, a minor one) and repeated (the islands Beata and Saona and Lake Enriquillo are repeated); and is a "poetic" language, not the proper language in a geographic section. And I saw in the article of other countries that the section Geography is not subdivided, which I think is right for an introductory article; it should be subdivided in the Geography of the Dominican Republic article. And that kid (?) BigGabriel555 wrote me (without signing) that he was going to revert my edition because there were not cites (and he never includes a cite); I can put the cites, if needed. Before I said that I was not going to write in that article but the problem is that it is the first article on the Dominican Republic and it has a lot of problems. But it seems that I will keep working on other articles that are empty or just stubs. Thanks for your support. --Pepemar2 (talk) 22:47, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will do as you say, changing just a few sentences, even if I do not see the point of it if a whole section is right. But I will try; it will take me time to work in other articles; and I work in Spanish Wikipedia and other Wikipedias, too, and I doesn't want to spend my time arguing. --Pepemar2 (talk) 00:45, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having trouble assuming good faith with this one after all his recent tendentious editing and abuse of socks. What do you think?--Rosicrucian^Talk 02:35, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...and with reverts like these, I really don't know what kind of point he's trying to make.--Rosicrucian^Talk 03:58, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you are discussing this problem. Maybe he is working with good faith but I think that he has a bipolar personality; when he is "maniac", he is extremely active without taking in account any consequence. If he is bipolar, the euphoria could disappear for some days and then return (of course, it is not the case if he is under medication). But it is a big problem. --Pepemar2 (talk) 19:36, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have started a RfC about this, and would appreciate you weighing in as you're part of the dispute.--Rosicrucian^Talk 22:04, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just added my name. The madness has to end some day (soon, I hope). SamEV (talk) 21:31, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for trying to keep my changes in the Geographic section; it is madness. I have not changed many things in other sections because most of them are out of my field of knowledge. But geography I know a lot; I have travelled all over my country since I was a kid (I am very old now). Even if I do not agree with the figure from BigGrabriel555 (see my comments on the Discussion page), I will not change it to see if we could get some peace. --Pepemar2 (talk) 22:17, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you should change it. Because then if he changes it back he'll finally get blocked, as it's mandatory. Así que por favor, reviértalo. Nos estaría haciendo un favor a todos, y a Wikipedia. (De veras). SamEV (talk) 22:21, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You know what, don't. He already reverted four times. He can be reported already. SamEV (talk) 22:31, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rosicrucian, do you think we should report him? SamEV (talk) 02:03, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can. He's reverted after being warned by an admin. I've already added the latest incident to the RfC.--Rosicrucian^Talk 02:10, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I had the report ready. But I decided to wait (while I had dinner) to see if Caribbean H.Q. would notice Gabriel's last revert. I even left him a message. I came back about the same time you restored the article. Gabriel's last edit seemed to have some vandalism thrown in for good measure, btw. SamEV (talk) 02:17, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...and he's still reverting. I've added the latest revert to the 3RR report.--Rosicrucian^Talk 04:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. - Rjd0060 (talk) 05:47, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The report against you on the 3RR noticeboard has been closed. You clearly made four reverts on the page, this one having a clearly inappropriate edit summary, but I have concluded that the report was frivolous or vexatious and since the page is semi-protected the IP won't be making further edits. Please be careful not to violate 3RR in the future and remember that reverts of vandalism are only exempt in the case of simple vandalism, which is something that anyone who has never seen the page before would identify as vandalism (i.e. blanking sections, adding cuss words, etc.) If consensus is definitely against an editor, then let other editors make the reverts instead. Stifle (talk) 09:40, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS if you think that an IP is a banned user, list on WP:RFCU. Stifle (talk) 09:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know "!@#$" [note: edited by SamEV] was an inappropriate slang term. I have blocked the account indefinitely. Thanks, Nishkid64 (talk) 02:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, unfortunately it is in the D.R., at least. SamEV (talk) 02:51, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just having a bad day -- nevermind. Regards. Why is it that even when I sign it appears as if I didn't? Am I doing something wrong? --21:17, 14 February 2008 (UTC)Mig

Thanx for the tip -- kindest regards and all the best -- Mig 17:06, 15 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Migdiachinea (talk • contribs)

The fact is that we have, besides the flag and coat of arms, a national bird and a national flower, that's all; at least declared by laws. Of course we could include other things but it is necessary that is by tradition, not by law (for example, merengue as a national dance). For me, monuments should go on a different page, and it would be a good one, with so many monuments. The cultural institutions, such as museum and others, could go in another page relate to Culture in the Dominican Republic. We have to start writing new articles instead of increasing the size of this; when I try to look for any information, I find that there are few Dominican pages of interest or with enough information. I do not know if you can develop those pages; I do not have much time now because we are having some problems in the Spanish Wikipedia. In any case, you know that you can count on me. --Pepemar2 (talk) 22:50, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that it is ok to write something about some monuments together with symbols; anyhow, monuments are symbols of a historical event or person. But I think that it would be nice to develop an independent article on Dominican monuments, or maybe a Category:Monuments of the Dominican Republic and add articles to that category. I will try to do something about that and I will let you know. But we are having a lot of problem because a lot of photos and images of the Dominican Republic (in English and Spanish) are being deleted because of violation of copyright or something similar. I do not know if I can keep working without knowing if the format will be completely different the next time that I visit it. --Pepemar2 (talk) 00:48, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is Canada (in terms of land area) not the UK. The UK of course is where the Sovereign's largest number of subjects reside. YourPTR! (talk) 14:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're quite right. SamEV (talk) 13:36, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

my friend if you look white you are white i look white and am american but maybe somewhere down the line i have a non white ancestors but i look white so there for i am same thing in latin america,in other words just because you cant trace there whole ancestry does not mean they cant be consuidered white, also there is no such thing as a one drop rule in latin america like in north america and there is no such thing as a pure race includeing the caucasian race you just add to the ignorance that everybody in latin america is just a mutt and are the reason we even need to have articles like this--Wikiscribe (talk) 19:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiscribe, I agree with you, so your message is misdirected. This will become obvious if you re-read my comment and others I made there before. SamEV (talk) 19:38, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See the talk page. I think some of these things need careful attention. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crystalclearchanges (talk • contribs) 17:03, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

EDGARR is back... The Ogre (talk) 18:13, 21 February 2008 (UTC) sorry you missed me I was on Vacation. I missed you guys also. Hey SamEV, I liked your above response very much. Also your work in White Hispanic. Why is it we are having difficulty in the latino article.. Seems to me we are on the same page on just about everything else EDGARR (talk) 05:48, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for contacting me, I posted something for you in my talk page, please view.EDGARR (talk) 06:37, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I read it, and found it encouraging. But let me say that Branden's opinion is not relevant, as it is not specific to Latinos, the subject of the article. The other point you made about including the rest of the American Heritage quote has validity, but it really belongs in the Controversy section, IMO. SamEV (talk) 06:45, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will add in the controversy section. Branden's is considered the foremost authority on the subject, his studies apply to all human beings. Writes good books, check him out.EDGARR (talk) 08:27, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SamEV its BigGabriel555 i was looking at the D.R. page today and i saw all these need citations and verification stuff and i wanted to tell you that we need to work on the page alot so if you have any spare time maybe you can help fix the page up thank you

Hello SamEV its BigGabriel555 i was looking at the D.R. page today and i saw all these need citations and verification stuff and i wanted to tell you that we need to work on the page alot so if you have any spare time maybe you can help fix the page up thank you. BigGabriel555 (talk) 03:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

what do you think of Latin Europe now? (it took me ages by the way so if you don't like it I will have to drop dead) ;) 89.241.246.10 (talk) 15:44, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much i will help as much as i can. BigGabriel555 (talk) 23:20, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,SamEV, I was going to add a another sections to the Latino article called Notable Latinos. However you say their is already an article with that title. Can you tell me how to find it? I did a search, but nothing came up. Thanks in advance...EDGARR (talk) 00:11, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With regard to the Indo-Europeans and the Indo-European Homeland pages The statements that are being contradicted are unsupported. They are flat statements without citation. If anyone wants citations for my contradictory statements I will provide them -- none should be in doubt. There is no evidence that Hattic was spoken in all of Anatolia in 6000 BC - 7000 BC to the exclusion of any form of IE language. The burden would be on the author to support such an extreme view. The statement is of course biased and definitely POV and that is why my statements are being objected to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthwelltold (talk • contribs) 04:12, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So support your statements. What good is it to fight unsupported statements with equally unsupported ones? See the obvious symmetry? SamEV (talk) 04:30, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SamEV! I don't know if you know this, but User:Crystalclearchanges is a suspected sockpuppet of User:Iamandrewrice. Just thought you should know... By the way, I've changed my mind regarding the gallery in Latin Europe - the stuff the other user said convinced me. I shouldn't have let myself carry away as I did! I am now against a gallery in such an article. See you around! The Ogre (talk) 07:53, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, check his talk history - it's very instructive... The Ogre (talk) 07:59, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What was wrong with my contributions? huh? Crystalclearchanges (talk) 17:08, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why can I not just be left to get on with editing??? :( Crystalclearchanges (talk) 19:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As of now you are, aren't you? You haven't been blocked. SamEV (talk) 20:59, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its kind of hard to concentrate on articles when I'm told I'm going to be blocked, and the "suspected sockpuppets" mentioned on the list are literally growing every 5 minutes, so I think someone is up to something here. I don't understand what is supposed to come of this. I was just trying to get on with my editing, and actually have a good reputation for once, but no, i'm never allowed am i... ¬_¬ Crystalclearchanges (talk) 21:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hello... can you go to the WP:Administrator's noticeboard of incidents or whatever it is called... as there is a thread about me there, and one person seems to think I am being disruptive. Can you join in the conversation please? Crystalclearchanges (talk) 21:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI there thats the right link... its the bottom thread... Crystalclearchanges (talk) 22:15, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll check it out. SamEV (talk) 22:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Crystalclearchanges (talk) 22:18, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Check your email. Crystalclearchanges (talk) 22:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yo quiro poner mi pinga en su boca. tu estas un maricon. su madre es una puta. tu quieres mi leche en su cara o en su culo.

--big gab