Referencing techniques - Our Lady of Sorrows Basilica (Caeté)
I have passed an article you created, but left a tag about naked references. Clean references are very important but they are things that other people might not bother to clean up for you. You can do it yourself and it's very easy. Check out this tip and try it. Get practice by doing it with the same refs you used, or even do it in your sandbox to see how it works. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:11, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. The article is about a very important Catholic basilica in Brazil, please do not delete it.
I have ease editting visually. But I have difficulty editting the source. In my native Wikipedia (Portuguese), I can edit visually. In the English Wikipedia I cannot do it. Gondolabúrguer (talk) 20:18, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nivaldo José de Andrade until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Immediate Geographic Region of João Monlevade. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. LizRead!Talk!01:29, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged IVIN Films for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
I contest it. 1: the company was responsible for the biggest crowdfundind for a film ever in Brazil, as mentioned in the article. 2: the film about Boniface was a milestone in the country's history - which neglects its heroes in a way that Americans do not understand - and it was attended by very important personalities. COVID-19 was terrible for the company, as it postponed some other documentaries. 3: and, finally, the Portuguese article "IVIN Films" has not been deleted and was written in 2018. If it is relevant in Portuguese, then it should have an article in English, which is the lingua franca. Gondolabúrguer (talk) 03:14, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
João Camilo de Oliveira Torres
Hello Gondolaburguer, while your article João Camilo de Oliveira Torres is sourced, it needs multiple sources and a more in depth description of the subject. The article is passable enough to remain on the site bit I’ve added a stub tag and sungle source tag. It would help if you expanded the page but other than that your continue editing, regards and happy editing :) N1TH Music (talk) 06:47, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have noticed. But you need sources for the list of books too each entry should typically be sourced in most lists however in this article it isnt so important as it’s about a living person. But you want to talk about his biography too. Also don’t mark major edits as minor. N1TH Music (talk) 06:52, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I linked five of his books, which are being re-edited by the Chamber of Deputies of Brazil: camara.leg.br
Yes it's good, keep up working like that, you seem to have had a couple other articles though so try to write more like that. Sourcing is very important. :) N1TH Music (talk) 07:10, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
[Off-topic.] My article about Yuri Vieira was erased. He is one of the most important living Conservative writers in Brazil. His deleted article: Yuri Vieira. Only the French version is left: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_Vieira. This is an absurd. Brazil speaks not Spanish but Portuguese, a secondary language, not an important one internationally. There are few English sources about anything relevant from here, believe me - you gringos now almost zero about my country, which is thought of as a giant slum with tropical rainforests. And some Wikipedia editors decided to erase the article about a very important and productive writer! Gondolabúrguer (talk) 20:53, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An article you recently created, Eder Borges, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Curbon7 (talk) 12:43, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yuri Vieira until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.
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.
Thank you for your contributions. It seems that you have added Creative Commons licensed text to one or more Wikipedia articles, such as José Monir Nasser. You are welcome to import appropriate Creative Commons licensed content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipedia guideline on plagiarism, such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described at Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Compatibly licensed sources, including the usage of an attribution template. Please make sure that any Creative Commons content you have already imported is fully attributed. If you are going to copy pages from portugese wikipedia, you MUST attribute the content to the portugese Wikipedia in your edit summary. Also, machine translations without copyediting to improve the english is not useful to the encyclopedia, as a browser already accomplishes the same thing.Slywriter (talk) 13:07, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Mr.Kitty 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 real person or group of people that 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. PRAXIDICAE🌈16:18, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. You currently appear to be engaged in the mass creation of articles on the Immediate Geographic Region's of Brazil. Such mass creation can be disruptive, and if you wish to continue creating large quantities of short, similar articles on this topic (or any topic) you should first see if there is a consensus for such action.
An article you recently created, Nem Tudo Se Desfaz, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. BOVINEBOY200800:56, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I give up, no more greater participation in Wikipedia. Much wasted time. Brazilian articles are not easy to write, because there are few sources in English about my country. Everything should be a draft for some time, like in the 2000s: first a draft, then an article, with plenty of collaboration, because I am not a superhero. But nowadays English editors want a brand new article finished, Spanish and Italian editors too. [Not your fault, I understand] Gondolabúrguer (talk) 19:49, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An article you recently created, Nikolas Ferreira, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969TT me12:24, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An article you recently created, Heraldo Barbuy, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969TT me13:39, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An article you recently created, José Monir Nasser, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969TT me13:48, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An article you recently created, José Dantas Motta, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969TT me13:49, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Pope's Exorcist until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.
It is the only documentary about Liberation Theology in Portuguese. It is relevant, free, available on IMDB and YouTube, and will be mentioned at the article. Gondolabúrguer (talk) 01:49, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you cite a Portuguese-language source that is reliable, we can find somebody who speaks Portuguese to verify the material. —C.Fred (talk) 20:44, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Why the censorship? Both you and C.Fred are working to censor an open (free) documentary which is relevant and had independent sources (both negative and positive). This guy even blocked me forever, claiming a lie - that I threatened him legally (?????). Absurd. Who do you work for? The CCP? Gondolabúrguer (talk) 23:10, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gondolabúrguer! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 01:44, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent editing history at Liberation theology 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. —C.Fred (talk) 20:45, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You are CENSORING a relevant information for Wikipedia and blaming me for "edition war". I do not know whom you work for - the CCP? -, but I will keep adding this relevant information about the Marxist theology. Gondolabúrguer (talk) 21:01, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You have repeatedly been told that the documentary is not covered in independent sources and should therefor not be included in the article. Your statement above shows your intent to continue to edit war. —C.Fred (talk) 21:42, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
IMDB, Gazeta do Povo and Icatólica are independent sources. But you cannot read in Portuguese, plus you work for censorship. You are the kind of person that should be banned from the Western civilization. Gondolabúrguer (talk) 21:52, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Legal threat where? Your name and information will be given to JOURNALISTS covering the issue of censorship, Liberation theology and Socialism in Brazil and abroad. Gondolabúrguer (talk) 21:54, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As I stated, threatening to take the matter to the press has the same chilling effect that a legal threat does. If you prefer, we could take the "Your name and information" part of the threat to be a violation of WP:OUTING, which calls for an indefinite block. —C.Fred (talk) 22:00, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is not a legal threat. You are using shenanigans to censor a user posting about a documentary on Liberation theology. You are openly Leftist, as your description shows. You use your editing power to shut up an information which you hate. Gondolabúrguer (talk) 22:04, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The cached version suffers the same problem with the payroll overlay preventing reading the article. As for Boff's site, I'm concerned that it's more of a blog than a vetted, editorially-reviewed piece, so it fails the definition of reliability. —C.Fred (talk) 22:28, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
TITLE: “Eles estão no meio de nós” conta como a Teologia da Libertação tenta destruir a fé católica
TEXT: “A Teologia da Libertação é um meio de usar a igreja para fazer a revolução”, diz um dos entrevistados no documentário ‘Eles Estão no Meio de Nós”, disponível gratuitamente no canal de Bernardo Kuster no YouTube. Com quase três horas de duração, o documentário conta como a Igreja Católica foi objeto de ação de militantes esquerdistas que utilizaram a força, o poder e o prestígio da instituição para substituir a religião pela política, em especial a de viés marxista. Com vários depoimentos — inclusive de bispos — e farta bibliografia, o filme expõe até a interferência de espiões da União Soviética entre os sacerdotes. E é sobre isto que vamos falar neste episódio do Quarentena Cult. Gondolabúrguer (talk) 22:30, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
TITLE: Advertência sobre o documentário “Eles estão no meio de nós” contra a Teologia da Libertação
TEXT: Na segunda-feira,dia 24 de outubro, promete-se exibir um documentário extremamente negativo contra a Teologia da Libertação no contexto das eleições,atacando Lula e membros da Igreja e teólogos da Teologia da Libertação. Acusa-os que através dela quererem destruir a Igreja por dentro e introduzir o comunismo no Brasil. Tópicos da propaganda já divulgados, com vozes acusatórias, logo no início, mostram que se trata de um documentário, cheio de falsificações e distorções muito graves. O organizador é um blogueiro (defensor ferrenho de Bolsonaro). Ele há muito tempo disse estar preparando esta documentação. Por que lançá-la logo agora, na corrida final das eleições presidenciais? Quem é esse blogueiro? Diz-se jornalista (mas sem curso nenhum), católico ultra-conservador, que através de seu youtube ataca duramente a Igreja Católica que saiu do Vaticano II, dos documentos oficiais da Conferência Latino Americana de Bispos (CELAM),e da própria CNBB, documentos que reconhecem a validade da Teologia da Libertação. O documentário acusa a mim de hereje. É falso e mentiroso. A Congregação pela Doutrina da Fé nunca fez esta condenação, nem condenou doutrina minha, apenas um”comportamento” que pode pôr em risco a fé cristã. Afastado o risco, posso seguir adiante. Isso pode ser lido na edição nova do livro em questão naquela época, Igreja: carisma e poder (1982) onde se publica o document oficial do Card. Joseph Ratzinger (Record 2021) e também a minha resposta. Este blogueiro tem atacado furiosamente o falecido e muito querido pelo Papa Francisco, Card.Cláudio Hummes, igualmente a CNBB. Esteve presente no Sínodo Panamazônico em Roma. Dia após dia fazia lives acusando de herético ou falso praticamente tudo o que lá se dizia. Penetrou,sem licença, nas Catacumbas onde os bispos do Pacto das Catacumbas renovavam seu voto da opção pelos pobres de Jesus. Filmou sorrateiramente e publicou depos denunciando como uma barbaridade o que lá se fazia. Foi descoberto e afastado do lugar. Contra mim em seu youtube disse tantas calúnias e verdadeiras mentiras,negando-se a publicar minha resposta em seu youtube. Fui obrigado a processá-lo. Perdeu o processo em todas as instâncias e teve que pagar pesada multa, por atraso e resistência à justiça. Vale acrescentar que este blogueiro pelos excessivos ataques às autoridades em seu youtube foi acusado pelo STF entre os tantos que estão sob processo. A polícia retirou-lhe o computador e todos os arquivos. Nem por isso deixou de atuar com suas falsificações em seu youtube utilizando os meios de amigos da mesma corrente ultra-conservadora. Afirma e reafirma que Teologia da lIbertação é herética e foi condenada pela Igreja. É outra falsidade. Há dois documentos sobre este tipo de teologia,ambos do Card. Joseph Ratzinger de quem fui amigo e por sua ajuda foi publicada minha tese em alemão,altamente apreciada por ele. No primeiro documento de 1984,“Libertatis Nuntius sobre alguns aspectos da teologia da libertação”chama atenção para riscos da utilização de algumas categorias da análise marxista acerca do capitalismo explorador,mas não condena ninguém. No segundo documento de 1986 Libertatis Conscientia realça os aspectos positivos desta teologia da libertação. Este quase nunca é citado, apenas o primeiro. Isso ficou mais claro num encontro do Papa João Paulo II em 1986 com bispos brasileiros em Roma que afirma: “esta teologia da libertação não é só ortodoxa mas necessária”. Neste mesmo ano de 1986 numa carta aos bispos do Brasil reitera que “esta teologia da libertação não é só oportuna,mas útil e necessária” num contexcto de opressão. Em suas encíclicas João Paulo II falou também de “uma nova e autêntica teoria e práxis de libertação”, de “uma autêntica teologia da libertação humana integral” (Centesimus Annus, n. 26) e dos “valores positivos” de “uma nova maneira de enfrentar os problemas da miséria e do subdesenvolvimento que faz da libertação a categoria fundamental e o primeiro princípio de ação” (Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, n. 46). Mais ainda, segundo o Papa João Paulo II, “desse modo se poderia romper a pretensa fatalidade dos sistemas – incapazes, um e outro de assegurar a libertação trazida por Jesus Cristo – o capitalismo desenfreado e o coletivismo ou capitalismo de Estado”. Face a esta vigorosa manifestação oficial do Vaticano sobre a teologia da libertação resultam falsas, mentirosas e caluniosas as afirmações desse blogueiro. Ela não é herética, é otodoxa, é oportuna, útil e necesária, portanto, faz bem à Igreja que se põe ao lado dos pobres, como Jesus. Ela sustenta a busca da justiça social e a libertação das opressões materiais,psicológicas e espirituais que sofrem,libertação a partir deles mesmos com o apoio da mensagem de Jesus Cristo Libertador. Quem ver a documentação falsificadora, mantenha seu espírito crítico e considere tal fato, no contexto das eleições, como uma manipulação para influenciar os eleitores a votarem naquele que nos seus quatro anos de seu governo oprimiu o povo brasileiro, especialmente, os pobres, as famílias que perderam cerca de 300 mil pessoas por causa de sua omissão e sua temosia: o atual presidente do Brasil. Somos pela liberdade de expressão mas dentro de parâmetros éticos mínimos. Mas somos muito mais amigos da verdade: Amicus Plato sed magis amica veritas. Gondolabúrguer (talk) 22:36, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
First the problem was "lack of independent source", which is a lie. Then, the antagonistic website of Liberation theologian Leonardo Boff is "only a personal blog". Then, "paywall" - OK, problem solved.
Hello, Gondolabúrguer. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Eder Borges, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Hello, Gondolabúrguer. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:The Garden of Afflictions, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Hello, Gondolabúrguer. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Eder Borges".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
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.
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
I see that you have done magnificent work on Conservatism in Brazil.
Lately I have been making templates for national variants of conservatism, similar to the templates already existing for conservatism in Australia, United States, etc. I made one for Brazil and tried to incorporate all the elements from your article and from the "category" on Conservatism in Brazil. Tell me what you think. Please make additional edits if there’s something wrong or missing.
Some information:
This sort of template is meant to cover the entire modern history of conservatism in the respective country, not just contemporary politics/philosophy.
A person may be both a prominent intellectual and a prominent politican and thus qualify representation in both categories.
Centre-right parties belong in the conservative camp by international standards.
On some categories such as Media there should be more links to add.
Once this template is finished, you or I should incorporate it in all the respective articles.
Good! The template is necessary. Please post it. (Thank you!)
Off-topic. (Not related to the template itself.)
Let me tell you a bad thing about censorship. Unfortunately, many English articles about Conservative politicians in Brazil - many of them written by me - have been erased by editors claiming that "they are not relevant". Shame! There are Conservative senators, deputies, municipal councillors etc. who are Conservative. They must have an English article. The same about their political enemies, of course.
About intellectuals. Writer Yuri Vieira's English article has been erased. I needed to link it to the French article, the only one left. And literary critic José Monir Nasser's English article has been erased, too. Fortunately, José's French and Portuguese articles have been left. Both Yuri and José are relevant Conservative persons here in Brazil.
And a free 2022 Brazilian documentary on YouTube (link: https://youtu.be/RahB38Rgd6w) - this one a movie, not a person - about Liberation Theology was not allowed to be linked, as a reference, in the English article about that Marxist religious thought.
An article you recently created, Manuel Jacinto Nogueira da Gama, Marquis of Baependi, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969TT me11:43, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Check the Portuguese article. The person is historical (1700s) and it is hard to find reliable and independent sources about him. (A curiosity: he is my ancestor; however, we do not know much about him!)
Hi. I see in a recent addition Benigna Victima de Jesus you included material copied/translated from the Portuguese Wikipedia. That's okay, but you have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. It's also required under the terms of the license. I've added the attribution for this particular instance. Please make sure that you follow this licensing requirement when copying from compatibly-licensed material in the future. — Diannaa (talk) 13:42, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I do not get it. The Portuguese article is accepted by the Portuguese Wikipedia. No copyright infringement.
It is okay for you to copy the Portuguese Wikipedia, but you have to say that you did so. It's called attribution, and it's required under the terms of our license. — Diannaa (talk) 01:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Gondolabúrguer. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Nikolas Ferreira, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Hello, Gondolabúrguer. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Nem Tudo Se Desfaz, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Hello, Gondolabúrguer. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:José Dantas Motta, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Hello, Gondolabúrguer. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Heraldo Barbuy, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Hello, Gondolabúrguer. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:José Monir Nasser, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Praseodymium-141 was:
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Manuel Jacinto Nogueira da Gama and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Hello, Gondolabúrguer!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! 141Pr {contribs/Best page}18:55, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
An article you recently created, Nadir Dias de Figueiredo, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969TT me12:53, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. The most important glass industrialist in the Southern Hemisphere not notable? There should be a voting for this.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Heraldo Barbuy and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Nem Tudo Se Desfaz and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:José Dantas Motta and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Hi Gondolabúrguer! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Kj cheetham (talk) 10:45, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Greenman was:
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:José Monir Nasser and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Greenman were:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
The comment the reviewer left was:
The only additional sourcing since the previous decline is a duplicate of one of the two previously existing sources.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:José Dantas Motta and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:
Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Nikolas Ferreira instead.
The comment the reviewer left was:
This draft is either essentially the same as the article with the same name, or a subset of the article with the same name. The draft will be replaced by a redirect from draft space to the article.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Nikolas Ferreira and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
An article you recently created, Carlos Crespi Croci, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969TT me12:12, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Greenman was:
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Heraldo Barbuy and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Prezado Gondolaburguer, notei que você tem repetido o seu padrão disruptivo em outros wikis além da Wikipédia em português, como na Wikipédia em espanhol e em inglês, onde você já foi bloqueado muitas vezes por guerras de edições, comunicação beligerante e ameaças legais. Recentemente, você passou a adicionar a ligação para Lista de santos brasileiros na Wikipédia em português de forma massiva, uma edição que foi contestada por múltiplos em razão de ser enganosa e contextualizada, visto que quase a totalidade dessas biografias são de pessoas que não passaram pelo processo de beatificação e canonização. Após ser revertido por mim e outro editor, você não procurou o diálogo e tornou a inserir sua edição controversa, o que vai contra os princípios de um projeto colaborativo. Após ser bloqueado na Wikipédia em português, você repetiu suas edições abusivas aqui. Estarei revertendo todas essas suas edições massivas e reportarei aos administradores da Wikipédia em inglês o ocorrido, sobretudo porque você, como forma de retaliação, passou a adicionar vandalismo nas páginas. Isso é inadimissível. Ademais, você está fazendo traduções de biografias sem relevâncias para outros idiomas, até em hindi, e isso configura abuso crosswiki, então reportarei você aos administradores globais.
Translation for non portuguese speakers: Dear Gondolaburguer, I noticed that you have been repeating your disruptive pattern on other wikis besides the Portuguese Wikipedia, such as the Spanish and English Wikipedias, where you have been blocked multiple times for edit wars, hostile communication, and legal threats. Recently, you have been massively adding a link to the List of Brazilian saints on the Portuguese Wikipedia, an edit that has been contested by multiple editors due to being misleading and miscontextualized, as the vast majority of those biographies are of individuals who have not gone through the process of beatification and canonization. After being reverted by myself and another editor, you did not seek dialogue and proceeded to insert your controversial edit again, which goes against the principles of a collaborative project. After being blocked on the Portuguese Wikipedia, you continued with your abusive edits here. I will be reverting all of your massive edits and will report the incident to the administrators of the English Wikipedia, especially because you retaliated by adding vandalism to pages. This is unacceptable. Additionally, you have been translating irrelevant biographies into other languages, even in Hindi, which constitutes crosswiki abuse, so I will report you to the global administrators. Ertrinken (talk) 14:12, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Vandalism does not work at the English Wikipedia, militant lady "sai minion". You are currently trying to avoid the inclusion of "See also", referring to a list of saints, blessed, servants of God. You will lose here. Gondolabúrguer (talk) 14:55, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You have been blockedindefinitely from editing for disruptive editing and legal threats. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.
@Ayaena:They were blocked for disruptive editing and legal threats. Considering their cross-wiki constant disruptive edits, they're likely soon to be globally locked (user Ertrinken sent an email to the Meta stewards) Dinoz1(chat?)11:38, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Dinoz1 @Ertrinken Hiya, how's it going? I'm sorry to hear about that.
But, I didn't understand about “they”, is this account used by more than an individual?
Anyway, Wikipedia, being a collaborative project, thrives on the principles of neutrality, reliability, and verifiability. As we continue to contribute and shape this vast repository of knowledge, it is crucial that we adhere to Wikipedia's conduct when it means “its users” to ensure the integrity and credibility of the information we provide. This is for sure.
However, I think the little guy above has crossed some boundaries, and from what I see, on two different Wikipedias.
@Ayaena Thanks for your response! I used "they" because I didn't want to assume their gender, thanks! Anyways, I totally agree. They even returned on a new IP (the message above me) for block evasion. I think a global block is necessary.Dinoz1(chat?)16:09, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
An article you recently created, Football in Minas Gerais, is not suitable as written to remain published. While it appears to be notable, it needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. There are large sections which are wholly uncited. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. I did this rather than removing the uncited material in the article, which I felt would be more disruptive. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to ask on my talk page. When you have the required sourcing (and every assertion needs a source), and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Or feel free to ping me to take another look.Onel5969TT me10:57, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by S0091 was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Nadir Dias de Figueiredo and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Tutwakhamoe was:
Make sure your draft meets one of the criteria above before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If the subject does not meet any of the criteria, it is not suitable for Wikipedia.
The comment the reviewer left was:
Websites of the subject's lectures, promotional pieces, and articles that the subject published/took part in creating can not be used to prove his notability. Make sure to include multiple significant coverage from reliable and independent sources in order to prove that the subject passes WP:NACADEMIC or WP:NBIO.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:José Monir Nasser and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Carlos Crespi Croci and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Floripes Dornellas de Jesus until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.
Hello, Gondolabúrguer. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Nadir Dias de Figueiredo, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Hello, Gondolabúrguer. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Carlos Crespi Croci, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
