User talk:Briarfallen

Bugui Point Lighthouse

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Bugui Point Lighthouse, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://wahm.blogpostie.com/tag/masbate. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 07:10, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The CorenSearchBot made an error and it was reported to the maintainer's talk page that same day--Briarfallen (talk) 16:36, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of lighthouses in Florida

Hi there. If I may make a general suggestion/question, why not use {{convert}} when stating heights? Is there a special reason in this case? The heights looked too precise, but I was hesitant to make the change before asking, perhaps there is a source for such precision. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 17:59, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Muhandes,

The table on the 'List of lighthouses in Florida' is a sortable table. It had {{convert}} before, but when you try to sorting numbers like the Height column, it will not sort correctly (try sorting the 'Height' on the table on List of operating lighthouses in Florida). I have to add '{{lsc11amp|' before the number, to make it sortable. It will not sort correctly with {{convert}} before the number. (That's the only solution I know, perhaps you might know something I don't know?)

I also have an engineering background, I personally prefer a more precise number (for Wikipedia, I present numbers up to the tenth decimal only). I am also more familiar with feet (English unit), it is hard for me to visualize a meter because there are 3.28 feet in one meter. I think a meter is too long of a measurement to be shown only as a whole number. I prefer it to be up to the tenth decimal. A little more precise is better, isn't it?--Briarfallen (talk) 00:58, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look into the sorting issue, there must be a better solution. As for precision, no, it is definitely not better. The reason is that the original numbers in feet are rounded, not accurate, so giving a decimal point on the number in meters give the illusion that someone measured it up to the third of feet which isn't the case. See MOS:CONVERSIONS --Muhandes (talk) 06:31, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This was quick. Add |sortable=on to the convert template and it will add a hidden sort key. --Muhandes (talk) 06:32, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe what you just said. So what you are trying to say is if you were given a measurement of 2 feet, then it's one meter. And three feet, it is also one meter???

In construction, you have to give an accurate measurement, not rounded up. You do not construct something like lighthouses, bridges, buldings etc. by estimates or by rounding things up. And here in the U.S., we use feet and converting them to the tenth decimal in meters is more accurate. And that is by using a conversion by mathematics, and not my estimate.

Yes, please read MOS:CONVERSIONS carefully, especially MOS:CONVERSIONS#Unit conversions regarding precision on small numbers.--Briarfallen (talk) 16:36, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You don't believe it because I didn't say it. When it comes to small numbers precision is required. But we are not talking about small numbers here. I'll tell you the truth, which is the suggestion I started with. I don't bother much with thinking about this, I just use {{convert}}, and it chooses the precision on itself. See for yourself: 2 feet (0.61 m), 3 feet (0.91 m), 11 feet (3.4 m), 65 feet (20 m). See what happens? When it's a small value, like you said, it uses very accurate two digits, much like the example you gave. On large numbers, it uses less and less precision. To my understanding, this is based on MOS:CONVERSIONS. --Muhandes (talk) 17:05, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I personally believe that the height should be up to the tenths of a meter (for a number that small), but since you said that rules on precision of numbers are incorporated on the {{convert}}, then next time I'll do it that way. Thanks for letting me know how to sort columns on tables with {{convert}}.--Briarfallen (talk) 18:13, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Autoblock error

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).

Briarfallen (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This must be a mistake. I like contributing to Wikipedia and improve other pages, but I will never, never vandalize a page. You can check my contributions and see if any of them is a vandalism.

Decline reason:

You're not blocked; more than likely you're being affected by a block directed at someone else. See below for instructions on how to get it cleared. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:20, 10 October 2010 (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.

Clearing an autoblock

Due to the nature of the block applied we need additional information before we can decide whether to unblock you. It is very likely that you are not personally blocked. If you are prevented from editing, it may be because you are autoblocked or blocked because of your IP address. Without further details there is nothing further we can do to review or lift your block. Please follow these instructions:

If you have a Wikipedia account, please ensure that you are logged in.
Your account name will be visible in the top right of this page if you are.
If it isn't, try bypassing your web browser's cache.
Try to edit the Sandbox.
If you are still blocked, copy the {{unblock-auto|...}} code generated for you under the "IP blocked?" section. This is usually hidden within the "What do I do now?" section. If so, just click the "[show]" link to the right hand side to show this text.
Paste the code at the bottom of your user talk page and click save.

If you are not blocked from editing the sandbox then the autoblock on your IP address has already expired and you can resume editing.

{{unblock-ip|1=98.85.103.97|2=[[WP:Block#Evasion of blocks|Block evasion]]: [[WP:VANDALISM|Vandalism]]|NativeForeigner}}

Go ahead and try to edit now. –MuZemike 02:42, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's working now. Thanks a lot.--Briarfallen (talk) 02:52, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just disabling this so it takes you out of the category. Please do put it back up if you're still affected by an autoblock. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Paranormal State

Just an FYI, the episode "Do Bad Things" most likely aired on the 14th along with "Who Is the Lurking Man?" because A&E has been airing two episodes a week and it would fit the pattern so far. Also I found a listing for TV on the 21st, and "Do Bad Things" wasn't listed for that day - but a new show Paranormal State: The New Class began that evening instead. Cyberia23 (talk) 16:06, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, One odd thing I noticed - according to the announcement banner for the new spin-off it says it will air "after an all-new episode of Paranormal State". On the A&E schedule for the 21st a Paranormal State episode with "Dwelling" in the title aired before the new spin-off. There is no episode in the list with the word "Dwelling" in it that I can find. Is it something not listed yet? I didn't catch the show so I have no idea what it was about. Anyway, I think were missing an episode somewhere. Cyberia23 (talk) 16:17, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind I found it "Dwelling of the Dead" #65 aired on the 21st before the new series.

Sorry, I changed the Ohio family episode back to the 21st. I originally had it on the 14th, then somebody changed it to the 21st. I changed it back to 14th, but then, I doubted myself, because I checked my shows recorded on DVD that night, and I only have Lurking Man. (I didn't get to watch last week's show (21st).) I checked the schedule on A&E for last night, and they switched the 10 & 11PM shows, so I thought, maybe A&E is not that dependable. Thinking that I am not so 100% sure, I changed it back to the 21st.

Thanks for updating the list. I am irritated with A&E. I didn't get to watch the new season till two weeks ago on the 14th(!) because I was waiting for it on Mondays & Tuesdays. I also missed last week's shows (21st) because I forgot the day change. Anyway, thanks for letting me know about the Dwelling show. Briarfallen (talk) 22:02, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Philippine Sea Plate br.JPG

A tag has been placed on File:Philippine Sea Plate br.JPG requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Marcus Qwertyus 01:01, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: User:Ronniericketts/Ronnie Ricketts

Hello Briarfallen. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Ronniericketts/Ronnie Ricketts, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: User does exist, or this is not a user page. Thank you. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 21:19, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ancestral home (Philippines) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ancestral home (Philippines) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ancestral home (Philippines) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. JaGa^talk 00:04, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Philippine Barnstar
		Briarfallen, good job on your quality work to Philippines' related articles. Time for some recognition with this barnstar! -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 22:09, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Barnstar. Sorry, I forgot to thank you sooner. - Briarfallen (talk) 14:57, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One of my edits was identified as vandalism

One of my edits on the page Mount Pinatubo was identified as vandalism. I added a link in the introduction to a section of the same article; why is this considered vandalism? Jarble (talk) 12:46, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because you were adding unnecessary links that goes back to the same article, the other one goes back to the same section. For what purpose? The lead section is supposed to be like an introduction that summarizes sections of the article. We do not create a link that takes you to the section of that article. That is the purpose of the table of contents. Please read WP:LEAD and WP:TOC. The other one, you added an internal link to the same section of the article. I was trying to figure out for what purpose. You cannot use Linking to change the color of the text or to highlight that section of the sentence. My first thinking is either you were playing or you don't know what you were doing. Please read WP:LINK regarding linking. I checked your talk page and read one editor commenting about unnecessary linking. I'm sorry, if I alarmed you, I just need to bring it up. If you are new, don't worry, we all made mistakes in the beginning. Thanks. - Briarfallen (talk) 14:18, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I understand why my edits were reverted, however, I'd prefer if these types of edits weren't identified as vandalism. I don't want to be mistaken for a vandal by Wikipedia's anti-vandalism bots (or by other editors). Jarble (talk) 15:38, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies if I used vandalism instead of just rolling it back. My way of thinking at that time is how I described it above. Mount Pinatubo is always vandalized and sorry if I misjudged yours as one of them. Thanks. Briarfallen (talk) 16:40, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Impressive articles about the Philippines

Hi, i am so impressed with the articles that you contributed in Wikipedia specially the geographic articles about the Philippines. We are planning to launch a wiki project in the Philippines and we are looking for editors who are currently in the country to participate. I ran through your edits and was impressed but i realized you're not in PH! I hope you drop by the local wikimedia chapter in Manila if ever you visit PH soon.Sunkissedguy (talk) 05:29, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your comment about my editing. I am just trying to help improve the Philippine-related articles here on Wikipedia as more people around the world refer to this as a veritable source of information. Wikipedia is about informing and not misinforming, so I try to edit within policies of Wikipedia and make sure that everything is verifiable not something I made up. I have the feeling that some Filipino editors assume that Filipino Wikipedia articles are only for Filipinos. My focus, or any editor I think, should be quality (WP:GACR) and readability (WP:Readability not the length of the article. I believe that the collection of Filipino articles here in Wikipedia reflect on who we are as a group, so in my capacity, try to improve them. I am just a regular guy. I have made mistakes in editing, but I always try to learn from it, and treat it as part of the learning like everyone should. What Wiki project are you talking about? Thanks, again. Briarfallen (talk) 17:32, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

its the GLAM-Wiki Project and Wiki Loves Monuments, I do the project management work for Wikimedia Philippines. Were planning to launch another high impact project putting snippets of wikipedia articles in public spaces but this is still in process. I am glad that you are very active in improving articles here. I honestly dont edit much because i focus mostly on the offline stuff. I agree, most pinoys tend to be "not encyclopedic" and I am glad that you're one of those few people who improves the articles about the country.

Sunkissedguy (talk) 16:38, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion on the article Balete Drive

Please answer on my talkpage. I recently removed the section "Movie" and some categories of the article in accordance with the WP:Highway Article Structure, as this is a major road in the Philippines, but it was identified as vandalism. The beginning of the article show that it refers to the street, however, the topic the article is dealing is mainly about the Movie Hiwaga sa Balete Drive. I suggest you change the title of the article to Balete Drive (Movie), Balete Drive (Mystery) or Balete Drive (Road). The merging of several issues in this article is contrary to the Merging Standards of Wikipedia. Kj plma (talk) 06:01, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry if I identified your edit on Balete Drive as a vandalism. It is not one of the pages that I regularly contribute to, but it is automatically on my WATCHLIST after a Categorizing edit. I still would revert it though because, from my point of view that time, you left the lead section a mess because it was left unfinished, the infobox was incomplete. Also from my POV, what you added were personal opinions because none of your references are working (WP:Verifiability and WP:Verifiability, not truth). There is also uncertainty on what you added, please read WP:ALLEGED and WP:WEASEL. Please read about referencing on WP:Citing sources and Wikipedia:Citing sources/Example style, or you could try using citation templates, please read WP:Citation templates.

Yes, Balete Drive is badly written and needs improvement, but I have other articles that are more my priority. The article is about the road Balete Drive, Mahiwaga... is only a movie based on the street and should not be separated because it cannot stand on its own. You could have helped that section by removing the advertising segment yourself as you already know that it is stepping the line. The External link should have been the reference for the movie, and the section title, changed to 'Pop culture'. It is not a merging issue. The Commercial Zoning section is an incomplete sentence as it is not mentioned that what it is zoned for, is it just for commercial use? Wikipedia articles are read by people around the world and different countries have different zoning rules. That is the reason I added the Clarification notice, which you removed. Why did you removed my the 'clarification needed' template? Please explain. Its reference is not clear on where to go to verify the zoning.

Please improve the lead section based on the reason I mentioned above and check your references as references that lead to nowhere is not allowed on Wikipedia (WP:Verifiability). Please follow Wikipedia rules and help maintain the integrity of Wikipedia. Thanks. Briarfallen (talk) 17:32, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Balete Drive

The {{Infobox Road was finished anyway and the Article, at least, had been improved. Kj plma (talk) 05:58, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your help with the Tagalog at the Language Reference Desk. 184.147.123.69 (talk) 21:02, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Philippine WikiCon

You are invited to the 3rd Philippine Wiki Conference (WikiCon) on May 26, 2012 9am-1pm at the co.lab.exchange in Pasig City. Please fill this form should you signify interest. --Exec8 (talk) 17:45, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invitation. I would love to join you fellow Filipino Wikipedians, but I am in the US, and it is not possible for me to visit this time. Thanks, again. Briarfallen (talk) 17:59, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

official seal

Mr. Briarfallen, with all due respect to you,, the one that I have placed is the Original Seal my Municipality, it was agreed upon by me and the Local Government to enhance the Seal and revert it to it's original state, as of now the issue is with the approval of the National Historical Institute, and may I ask, have you been to Maragondon? all my life i have lived there and in Cavite. And also, about the other seal in Cavite,, as of the moment I am doing some enhancement on the seal, is there any way that you can grant me permission to edit them? Some are already obsolete. Thank you very much!

Rex s dimaala (talk) 14:52, 10 June 2012 (UTC) red dy[reply]

Official Seal of Kawit, Cavite

As far as i know, the one that I uploaded is the "OFFICIAL SEAL", please verify again.\ Thanks! Rex s dimaala (talk) 15:01, 10 June 2012 (UTC)red dy[reply]

As you are the uploader of the file, you must provide the verification that that is indeed the official seal of Kawit. It is not up to the readers to verify it. Please check the official seal submitted by User:Namayan, Seal of Kawit, Cavite. He had to obtain permission from municipal government of Kawit to use the official seal when he uploaded the file. Please do not forget to read 'Replaceable' as you are not following it. Thanks. Briarfallen (talk) 16:26, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

maragondon seal

please verify the updated seal of maragondon and correct it, and upload it. since you are the original uploader, i dont mind if you have all the credits, i just wanted to have it corrected 94.99.124.23 (talk) 02:01, 11 June 2012 (UTC)red[reply]

I am not the original uploader of the original seal of Maragondon. Please check the official seal of Maragondon in the article: File:Ph_seal_cavite_maragondon.png - Official seal of Maragondon. The original uploader of the file, User:Namayan, had to ask permission from the municipal government of Maragondon to used the Official seal when he uploaded the it. The file uploaded by user User:Rex s dimaala‎ cannot be used as he never submitted any verifiable information or link that would prove that the seal he submitted is OFFICIAL disregarding rules of WP:Verifiability. As a Filipino Wikipedia contributor, editing is not gathering of credits or for personal gain, but presenting to the world Philippine-related articles that are neutral, not biased, verifiable, not a product of someone's imagination. Thanks for your concern. Briarfallen (talk) 16:26, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

maragondon seal

thanks for the info,, how can i obtain a link or license perhaps on the updated seal,, it was only through verbal that i coordinated with my municipality. same as your advocacy that the world should know the correct details and info i, pls do look on this matter as this is the correct seal of the municipality,, if you will look closely to the old seal, it has only segments of the bamboo,,that segment represents the number of barangays in the municipality as the article says,, there are 27 barangays now present in the municipality. 94.99.43.203 (talk) 20:19, 11 June 2012 (UTC)red[reply]

Please read Commons:OTRS. Even if you made seal, copyright is owned by the municipal government and their approval will indicate that it is the official seal. Briarfallen (talk) 21:07, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Naga, Camarines Sur

I noticed that you have been adding wrong information in Naga, Camarines Sur article specifically in Education section. Kindly stop this vandalism or I will direct this concern to the admins. Mabalos! --Filipinayzd (talk) 01:13, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is very insulting. Before you make an unverified accusation, why don't you check the revision history of Naga, Camarines Sur and checked who really added those schools. And then why don't you check what I have done to that article since I started editing it last May 2012. All the things I have added in Naga have references on them. I am actually cleaning and guarding it from vandalism and now you are accusing me of vandalizing it. That is why Wikipedia has the revision history as proof of who did what, please use it before pointing your finger to anybody. Briarfallen (talk) 02:01, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Change of section title to "Exile in Dapitan" and sub sections of people.

Hi, I'd just like to talk to you about your edit here and its edit summary. What if we renamed it as "Life in exile and marriage" instead? I don't think that adding sub-sections for people like Josephine and Polavieja and Blanco are necessary. Articles like Ferdinand Marcos, Napoleon Bonaparte or any articles here on Wikipedia that is about a person don't have those. Some of them even have "Personal life" sections talking about their marriage and children.119.224.27.62 (talk) 02:18, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rizal was not married to Josephine when he was in Dapitan, they lived together, so 'marriage' in the section title is inaccurate. Rizal also went to self-exile in Hong Kong if you read his biography. Just 'Life in exile' in the title is ambiguous. I was just dividing the long section of his 'Exile in Dapitan' dividing it into subsections because it is too long. That is what you do when have a long section per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout, and I am just worried about readability. You don't seem to be worried about readability. There is nothing wrong with naming a subsection for a person per WP:MOSHEAD, that subsection is not about who that person is, but their relation to Rizal at that period of his life. Do not compare this article to other person's article, as Rizal's life is different from theirs.

Then why did you add Josephine's name as a sub section for "Exile in Dapitan" then? It doesn't make sense. And yes I am worried about the readability as you can see that's why I messaged you..lol. Btw I am using those articles as an example because Jose Rizal's article has to comply with Wikipedia's standards just like these articles that I presented to you. Rizal's life may be different from theirs but we gotta follow Wikipedia's standards.119.224.27.62 (talk) 06:15, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What? I said there is no rule preventing anyone from naming a section with a person's name. There is nothing wrong with Josephine's name on the subsection. There is no rule stating that you can't. Wikipedia prefers you break up long text or sections (like Exile in Dapitan) into subsections, and naming them separately. Please read Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout under Body Sections. You follow Wikipedia's standard by following Wikipedia's rules, not by following what others are doing. What if they are wrong as well? Briarfallen (talk) 12:12, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did not add the subsection Pio Valenzuela, I moved it from a lower section because it happened in Dapitan before Rizal and his family left the town. If you think Valenzuela is not an important person, then you don't know the life of Rizal. The readability of the article is awful as the chronology of his life is not followed, a result of having too many chefs in the kitchen.Briarfallen (talk) 03:26, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm well if you want to make the article chronological then what if we re-arrange it like Napoleon's article? If you read that article you will notice it has sections that named and arranged in chronological orders. 119.224.27.62 (talk) 06:15, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We should continue this discussion in the talk page of Jose Rizal (talk) and I am making a copy of this conversation in that talk page.Briarfallen (talk) 12:12, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Changing of City type in the infobox of the page Imus, Cavite

Good Day Sir Briarfallen! I'm glad that you've made many corrections and contributions in the page Imus, Cavite, but can I ask why you made the city type Highly-Urbanized City instead of Component City in the infobox? Even though we already know that Imus is already qualified to be a Highly-Urbanized City, the Republic Act 10161 or AN ACT CONVERTING THE MUNICIPALITY OF IMUS IN THE PROVINCE OF CAVITE INTO A COMPONENT CITY TO BE KNOWN AS THE CITY OF IMUS states that it is only converted into a Component City not Highly-Urbanized City and based on what I have heard and doing some researches online, a component city can be upgraded into a highly-urbanized city or independent component city, but such conversion or upgrading must be conducted with a plebiscite again, if the people of the city favors the said conversion. I just want to clarify Sir. If I'm wrong or I'm right. Thank you very much! Jimboy (talk) 05:37, 01 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Jimboy. Maybe you're right. My mistake, I thought once a town becomes a component city and if the population is over 200,000 and income of over P50,000,000, the city qualifies as highly-urbanized. It has to be certified first by NSO. Sorry. I'm reverting it. Briarfallen (talk) 19:28, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed blackout in protest of RA 10175

Dear Briarfallen,

Greetings!

As a Filipino Wikipedian, I hope you are aware of the passage of Republic Act No. 10175, also known as the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, which was signed into law by President Benigno Aquino III on September 12, 2012. Currently, there is a discussion on the Tambayan, the noticeboard for Philippines-related topics, about a proposed blackout of the English Wikipedia in the Philippines in order to protest the passage of RA 10175, similar to the blackout against SOPA and PIPA held earlier this year. I feel that your input on the subject will definitely help in the discussion.

Please feel free to participate in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines#The Cybercrime Prevention Act, and I hope your input will help the Filipino Wikipedia community determine which is the best course of action against this law. Similarly, we hope to get as much input from as many Wikipedians as possible.

Thank you and maraming salamat po!

Kind regards,

Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

April 2013

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Werieth (talk) 15:17, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of TOFIL Awardee

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on TOFIL Awardee requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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, you can place a request here. Briarfallen (talk) 03:44, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Imus Cathedral, Briarfallen!

Wikipedia editor Noian just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Nice job!

To reply, leave a comment on Noian's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Imus Cathedral

It was so cloudy when I took pictures of this Cathedral; however, the very old caretaker sacristan granted my request to open all the lights inside, thus, I am lucky[1]. I have photographed more than 200 Philippine churches and towns, and this Cathedral is close to my heart, since Bishop Artemio Casas, DD reigned herein even before Cardinal Tagle became a priest. Hope you create more articles on the 200 Churches I photographed in 10 provinces including Metro Manila. Pax Christi and Ave Maria!--Ramon FVelasquez (talk) 17:24, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I could start other articles about other churches, but I have other articles to maintain with not enough time in my hand. I also changed some of the descriptions of Imus Cathedral pics you uploaded in Commons as they are too long, more than what is needed for Commons[2]. I just replaced some with an interwiki link to the Wikipedia article. I hope you didn't mind. Thanks. Briarfallen (talk) 02:21, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. I am not familiar with the rules so I appreciate every tip or correction, I want to learn more. I have photographed 10 provinces, and as mystic and visionary, I am enthroning in the Internet the Eucharist and Ave Maria, per the Churches. Best regards.--Ramon FVelasquez (talk) 16:22, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Cavite Bible Baptist Academy

The article Cavite Bible Baptist Academy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Tagged for lack of references and notability for four years, without any substantive work to improve the article

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bearian (talk) 21:16, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Mount Sungay) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Mount Sungay, Briarfallen!

Wikipedia editor Sulfurboy just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Great article.

To reply, leave a comment on Sulfurboy's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Davao Occidental

You may consider redrawing maps of municipalities of Davao del Sur after making Davao Occidental maps. --Exec8 (talk) 18:09, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am slowly working on them. Briarfallen (talk) 06:39, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem: Michael de Aozaraza

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Michael de Aozaraza, 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.americancatholic.org/Features/Saints/Saint.aspx?id=1146&calendar=1, 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:Michael de Aozaraza and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Michael de Aozaraza, 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:Michael de Aozaraza. 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:Michael de Aozaraza 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:Michael de Aozaraza 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! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:52, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry about this. I hope to find that there is some obvious explanation which I have failed to notice. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:52, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to apologize if you believe there is some copyright violations, but it is not intentional. There are only few sources available about the event, and I very much read all the reliable sources online. My purpose was only to keep the essence of the story and avoid straying from the real story (which had been in my browser for some time). I also have four other sources not just one. I revised the article and changed some of the way the story was told, but I cannot change the facts as I do not want to fabricate my own story just so to satisfy this copyright rule. Maybe you can try to help as well by seeking other sources, if not, just point what else is wrong with the article and help improve it, not just finding faults. My only purpose is to help Wikipedia and create an article about this unselfish saint and share his story, no personal gain here. Thanks. -- Briarfallen (talk) 03:13, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I also have other sources, why did you just put one? That is biased reporting. -- Briarfallen (talk) 05:19, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems

Hello, Briarfallen.

Regarding your note at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2014 December 31 to User:Justlettersandnumbers, it says on every edit screen, "Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted." This is the rationale for removing content that violates copyrights. You should perhaps read WP:AGFC, which is specifically about how the assumption of good faith applies to copyright issues. If you have copy-pasted or closely paraphrased copyrighted content, no one presumes you are deliberately attempting to violate copyright policies, but we also cannot assume that you are following them. If you are still violating copyright. then we have a problem.

I have looked at the article Michael de Aozaraza which you created on 11 January 2015 and compared it to the putative source, and I see substantial problems. Your note on the talk page disputing this is concerning, as it suggests you may not understand our copyright policies.

Comparing some of the text, for example:

Source	Article
As soon as they arrived in the island of Okinawa they were arrested and kept in prison for a year, after which they were transferred and condemned to death by the tribunal of Nagasaki. [3]	As soon as they arrived on the island of Okinawa, the group was arrested and kept in prison for a year.They were later transferred and condemned to death by the tribunal of Nagasaki.
They were subjected to an unspeakable kind of torture: After huge quantities of water were forced down their throats, they were made to lie down. Long boards were placed on their stomachs and guards then stepped on the ends of the boards, forcing the water to spurt violently from mouth, nose and ears. The superior, Antonio, died after some days. Both the Japanese priest and Lazaro broke under torture, which included the insertion of bamboo needles under their fingernails. But both were brought back to courage by their companions. source	But before they were terminated, they were subjected to an unspeakable kinds of torture. Huge quantities of water were forced down their throats. Thereafter, they were made to lie down with long boards were placed on their stomachs. Guards then jumped at the ends of the boards forcing the water to spurt violently from mouth, nose and ears. The leader of the group, Antonio Gonzales, was the first to expire in prison on September 24, 1637. Both the Japanese priest and Lazaro broke under torture, which included the insertion of bamboo needles under their fingernails. But both were brought back to courage by their companions.

These are only examples, passages selected at random for check from the article.

While facts are not copyrightable, creative elements of presentation – including both structure and language – are. Your use of this information follows verbatim for long stretches with minimal alteration.

As a website that is widely read and reused, Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously to protect the interests of the holders of copyright as well as those of the Wikimedia Foundation and our reusers. Wikipedia's copyright policies require that the content we take from non-free sources, aside from brief and clearly marked quotations, be rewritten from scratch.

It is important that you avoid this problem in the future by making sure content you add to Wikipedia is properly rewritten to comply with our copyright policies. The essay Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing contains some suggestions for rewriting that may help avoid these issues. The article Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches, while about plagiarism rather than copyright concerns, also contains some suggestions for reusing material from sources that may be helpful, beginning under "Avoiding plagiarism".

Please let me know if you have questions about this. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:37, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Briarfallen. Moonriddengirl has basically said it all better than I could have, but I wanted to try to explain a little why I wrote what I did here. Please understand that I do not question your good faith, your commitment to Wikipedia, the number and correctness of your sources or the value of your contributions. The only thing that I'm concerned about is your understanding of, and adherence to, our copyright policy. So I find your remarks at Talk:Michael de Aozaraza fairly worrying: it isn't the number or quality of the sources that matters, nor the title of the page the material is copied from (you wrote "the name of the article where this was allegedly copied is about St. Lorenzo Ruiz not Michael De Aozaraza" – how does that help?). The only thing I am concerned about is whether the text you added to the page was copied from a source that does not allow copying, because that is against our copyright policy. If an editor is found to have done that repeatedly, a Contributor copyright investigation or CCI may be opened: volunteers go through all edits by that user, and remove or delete any that are copyright violations. That is a great deal of extra work for other editors. So if you think there may be other articles where you have copied content from the sources instead of writing in your own words, it would be helpful if you could identify them – you could perhaps list them here? Please, for your own sake, read about copyright, and show that you understand what we mean by it. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:21, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Moonriddengirl or Justlettersandnumbers, as soon as I found the accusation, I followed the instructions on the template and revised the article at Talk:Michael de Aozaraza/Temp. My foremost intention after realizing my mistake was to correct the article, which I did. First of all, I believe in Wikipedia as a free source of encyclopedic information. I always follow its rules from formatting to referencing and I also update other articles, not just mine, to Wikify them as much as I can. I and like all other editors are all volunteers here, unselfishly spending our free time in building Wikipedia. I was bewildered by what Justlettersandnumbers wrote in Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2014 December 31, from my point of view, was disrespectful like hinting that I'm a repeat copyright violator or something just because of one instance, instead of telling me first, so that we can work on the article. If I made a mistake, it is not intentional, and my only purpose is to contribute and improve Wikipedia while abiding its rules, including copyright (and remember Wikipedia:Assume good faith).

It is not my intention to violate the copyright rules of Wikipedia with the Michael de Aozaraza article that I started. I am also not a Catholic and there is no self-gain in writing this article. I only started it after seeing the sole picture in the article at Wikimedia Commons where I spend most of my time. The amount of information online about Michael de Aozaraza is limited. After Moonridden isolated and show the problem sections above, I realized that maybe I didn't change enough from the source, but I did try. In my effort not to write the article without changing history, the real facts or the 'hows' from the limited source, I tried to be as close to what was written not thinking that I'd be violating copyright. If you think I did, then I apologize. My problem is nobody seems to be checking the revised version on Talk:Michael de Aozaraza/Temp so that it can be reinstated. That is my primary concern. If there are more problem with the article then please help me improve it. We are supposed to help each other here at Wikipedia. Thanks. -- Briarfallen (talk) 03:36, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As I said above, Briarfallen, "Assume good faith" has specific interpretation when it comes to copyright - please read WP:AGFC ("assume good faith/copyright"). The revised version will be checked, but there is a workflow at the copyright problems board, and it is currently a bit backlogged. There are older articles than this that need processing.

On discovery, copyright problems are removed from publication immediately, with notices like the one you received above left to help the person who contributed the content to see what the issue is and to understand how to correct it, either by supplying permission, giving evidence that the material is not copyrighted, or rewriting it. I can certainly understand that it is surprising to realize that you have inadvertently run afoul of policies, but, again, nobody assumes you have deliberately violated the policy. It's simply imperative that we fix it as soon as possible, as this is a legal issue. Quite often, people who run into these problems in one article will have run into them in others, as it's usually caused by misunderstanding what our policies are. Checking for this is, again, not an assumption of bad faith. It's simply checking to make sure that mistakes, if they have been made, are rectified as quickly as possible. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:34, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Then what else is the problem, Moonriddengirl? I corrected the article as soon I was told about the copyright issues. Why hasn't anyone update the article? What else is wrong? Let us solve the problem together. What else do you think was a copyright violation? Please list them, so I can correct them. My sole purpose is to help build Wikipedia. Like I said above, there is no selfish intention here. You can delete the whole article if you want if you think that can help Wikipedia. -- Briarfallen (talk) 23:10, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To Justlettersandnumbers, please let me correct you I did not say that because I have other sources I did not violate copyrights rule. I have other sources, why did you have to block the whole article? Thanks to Moonriddengirl, she pointed out the problem section. And then you said on Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2014 December 31, "My main worry is that the many large edits by Briarfallen may contain other copied material." That is just plain rude and disrespectful to other editors. From WP:AGFC, "Good faith corrective action includes informing editors of problems and HELPING them improve their practices." It didn't say humiliate them or spread unproven accusations. -- Briarfallen (talk) 23:10, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The problem, Briarfallen, is that in doing so you also created a copyright problem on January 11th after having had an article blanked for copyright problems 12 days before and then wrote on January 27th on the talk page of the second article "I also disagree with the submission of this article for copyright violation". It's important, as WP:AGFC says, to inform you of why the article was blanked for copyright issues so that you stop. When problems persist after warning, blocking is the next step, and nobody wants that. As to when an article will be addressed, it will be addressed when the day where it is listed is processed at WP:CP. -Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:15, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Briarfallen. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Briarfallen. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 01:44, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:TOFIL Awardees has been nominated for listification

Category:TOFIL Awardees has been nominated for listification. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:15, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:25, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Carmona, Cavite has been nominated for deletion

Category:Carmona, Cavite has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 01:13, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]