User talk:44 Gabriel

September 2024

Hi, 44 Gabriel. Thanks for patrolling new pages. I've declined your deletion request for a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. Please take a moment to read the new tutorial for patrollers, criteria for speedy deletion, and particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion or proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. Thanks! 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:E0C1:A3E1:922:144 (talk) 13:51, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

Hello, I'm Liz. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:58, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Liz, why can't these pages that have no history or other affluent pages or anything literally be deleted? There is no rule that allows this, in fact I even wonder if I create an infinite number of redirects if no one is going to delete them the way you have done, even if I have no use for it. Can you help me select or indicate the correct criteria to use? 44 Gabriel (talk) 08:04, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz. Why am I going to use test pages or my sandbox if the intention is to delete the same ones that are empty, without tributaries, without history! 44 Gabriel (talk) 08:07, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Vitoria-ASC, you may be blocked from editing. ✗plicit 11:13, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation

Hello, 44Gabriel. While checking over the Estádio D. Afonso Henriques article, I found that you copied text from an outside source with this edit. That is a copyright violation. I have removed the initial text I've noticed (although there may still be more.) Please do not copy text from other sources. Doing so usually constitutes both a copyright violation and plagiarism. This general rule includes copying material from websites of charity or non-profit organizations, educational, scholarly and news publications, and all sources without a copyright notice. For further information, you should review WP:COPYPASTE. If you have questions, please ask. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 01:26, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, you wouldn't mind giving your opinion in the discussion of the merger or elimination, whichever is best from the article Estádio D. Afonso Henriques (1965). This is because there were only 3 articles that said that there were 2 different stadiums in Guimarães, when that is not true. However, I put it up for discussion on the Spanish wiki and the merger has already taken place there, on the Dutch wiki a consensus has already been reached and it will be held in the merger soon. However, on the English wiki, no one seems to be interested in this, nor do they even respond. Am I doing something wrong or in the wrong place, at least from what I read they say to have a discussion next to the article, while in the previous two there is a dedicated space for discussion and so it was very simple, convenient and effective!? 44 Gabriel (talk) 10:17, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good mornig @CactusWriter. What I did was translate the Portuguese article into English, because the article was quite simplistic, or now articles are only translated when they don't exist. In any case, the references are there to prove it. But of course I know that copying paste shouldn't be done and that wasn't the intention. 44 Gabriel (talk) 09:44, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for explaining. That's understandable. For future reference, it's always a good idea to be cautious when copying text from other sources -- including translations from other Wikipedias. Not all Wikis have the same level of oversight and review. I can take a look at the merge discussion and see if I have a qualified opinion on the subject. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 16:44, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi 44 Gabriel. Thank you for your work on Vitória S.C. (water polo). Another editor, MPGuy2824, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

please add a ref to the target page for the water polo team (and the other teams).

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 01:52, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MPGuy2824:Hi, what are you referring to, was doing something like I did in this edition?

By the way, you wouldn't mind giving your opinion in the discussion of the merger or elimination, whichever is best from the article Estádio D. Afonso Henriques (1965). This is because there were only 3 articles that said that there were 2 different stadiums in Guimarães, when that is not true. However, I put it up for discussion on the Spanish wiki and the merger has already taken place there, same on the Dutch wiki. However, on the English wiki, no one seems to be interested in this, nor do they even respond. Am I doing something wrong or in the wrong place, at least from what I read they say to have a discussion next to the article, while in the previous two there is a dedicated space for discussion and so it was very simple, convenient and effective!? 44 Gabriel (talk) 09:09, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding refs: Yup, that's kind of what I meant.
Merger discussion: You've put it in the right place. It is possible that the folks who comment on most of the merger discussions are off-wiki (or at low-activity). I wouldn't recommend that you close the discussion yourself or do the merger unilaterally, given that there has been some objection. Have patience, more editors will respond eventually. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:36, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think so too, thanks 44 Gabriel (talk) 09:57, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Football in Mozambique, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pemba. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 19:52, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:52, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CSD R3

Hi, 44 Gabriel. Please note that CSD R3:

Only applies to recent creations
Generally does not apply to redirects that are the result of a page move
Is not merely for redirects you personally view as not worthwhile, but rather for names or misspellings that, as the criterion says, are implausible.

When in doubt, the correct venue is WP:RfD. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 02:09, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,@Tamzin. Ok i will try there, but make no sense when even the title is completely wrong! 44 Gabriel (talk) 02:12, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean 7 similar redirects for what!? 2 or 3 still leaves room for different ways of seeing the article now 7? If there is no more. 44 Gabriel (talk) 02:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's the kind of argument you're free to make at RfD. It isn't a valid reason for speedy deletion though. Redirects from misspellings and alternate spellings are allowed. R3 is just for cases where the misspelling is very unusual and unlikely to help anyone. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 05:40, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Is this how it should be done? F.C. Porto and Sporting C.P. rivalry

I mean the first time, I performed Step I " Tag the redirect(s). Enter {{subst:rfd|content= at the very beginning of the redirect page you are listing for discussion and enter }} at the very end of the page." as it says to do WP:RfD, more specifically How to list a redirect for discussion.

So if the first option isn't the correct way and if the latter isn't either, I honestly can't understand, the article may not be as useful as it seems and I'll have to ask you for help! Thanks. Thanks.09:27, 28 November 2024 (UTC) 44 Gabriel (talk) 09:27, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamzin, Also where do I found this "XFD" thing? And I looked through the page and it doesn't show me anything for that. «

Enable Twinkle in the Gadgets tab of your preferences.
Go back to the redirect page, and choose "XFD" from the new Twinkle menu.
Fill in the form and submit it.

» 44 Gabriel (talk) 09:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you've enabled Twinkle, there should be a button labeled "TW" in the top right corner of every page. Click on that and there's an "XFD" button. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 11:13, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I dont find it, so it means its not enabled and i can use. So it has to be like this? 44 Gabriel (talk) 11:23, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have to enable Twinkle in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. Or you can follow the manual instructions, but so far you have not followed them. When it says to put {{subst:rfd|content= at the start of the page and }} at the end, that's all you do, nothing else. No deletion reason, no other templates, not for step 1. That comes in step 2, when you edit the RfD log page. Or, again, enable Twinkle and use that.

If you're still struggling, please ask for help at The Teahouse. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 11:36, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks is working now 44 Gabriel (talk) 11:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unrelated to the csd part of this discussion, i'll recommend using wp:massxfd for nominating multiple similar redirects at once. should reduce the workload by at least 3 seconds~ cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 12:16, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've already enabled the script, but the massCfD button doesn't appear. By the way, CfD isn't for categories, because when I switch to CfD in XFD it only gives an error message for categories. 44 Gabriel (talk) 13:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

it'll appear in the "tools" menu around the left corner, as the "mass cfd" and "mass rfd" options

also, i'm not entirely sure what kind of error you're getting with categories. twinkle's xfd menu automatically selected cfd when i went to nominate a category cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 13:47, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

its true but you can change that in top of the box. 44 Gabriel (talk) 13:48, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

yeah, but... why would you? the xfd tool automatically selects the right venue cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 13:51, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

because I must have done something wrong and the massCfD button isn't showing up. 44 Gabriel (talk) 13:54, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

can you show a screenshot of the "tools" menu? should be in the left or right corner, depending on your layout

for example, it looks like this on my end. eyes more astute than those of a newborn naked mole rat will notice that the mass xfd options are available

there's probably some personal info in there

cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 14:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cogsan Anyway, you can't discuss it in one topic as if it were for all of them? I think this is one of the few cases where they've played around with creating redirects. Other similar pages don't contain as many redirects as this one. 44 Gabriel (talk) 13:46, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

how so? i'm not much of a Guys Kicking Balls™ expert, but those seem like differently worded variants of the same redirect to me cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 13:49, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]