User talk:Garavello

Welcome

Hello, Garavello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Carioca 22:39, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for reporting that linkspamming to WP:RFPP. Rather than semi-protect the page, I have blocked that editor for 48 hours for spamming past final warning. Please let me know if they linkspam that article again and thanks for the help here. Sorry it took two RFPP reports for them to be blocked but they had not been warned the first time. Thanks again - Alison^☺ 18:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heroes Edit

Thanks for the tip and for the explanation. HipHopLives 23:40, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indy 500

Sorry, but it has to be updated since so much changes. I'll curtail, but there is still going to be updating during the race. Soxrock 18:13, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about Soxrock. He knows that there is a rule against what he is doing. It has been brought to his attention several times. I'll back you up on this. If you wish, could you get the attention of an admin and tell him what's going on? He knows it's wrong but continues to refuse to comply with an OFFICIAL Wikipedia policy. --Ksy92003 (talk) 18:16, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's alright. I already took care of it. Thank you anyway. And I'm sorry that you also got into a dispute with him. --Ksy92003 (talk) 19:29, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Editing Copa America

Excuse me, but this took place during CONCACAF Gold Cup 2007, I was actively involved in doing so during the middle of each goal. Link me to a Wikipedia rule that says I have to wait till the end of the game and I will gladly do so. But otherwise, I will assume that I can edit it during game. Thanks. Bladesofhalo 00:05, 27 June 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Aside from a few edits I made, most of them were correct. As I said before, it was done a immense number of times during Copa Oro, and no one seemed to have any problems with it. As long as everything is correct and done in the fewest possible amount of edits, then I do not really see an issue. besides, it is better for me to do it in-game, that way I do not have to write down every single goal that was scored and then take longer to type all the information out when I can add it bit by bit. Besides, if something is incorrect, other users can change it. That simple, thats the whole idea revolving around Wikipedia. Thanks for the comments and concerns. Bladesofhalo 00:22, 27 June 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Look, I am not gonna start an argument over this, I am not here to do so. But even if I were to stop editing during the game, there's nothing to stop other users from doing the same. And, by deleting information that has already been added, you too are contributing to clogging the edit history. It makes it harder for everyone because they have to re-add correct information previously added. So, yes I can see what you are talking about, but just let people add information during the game, and you can help by correcting player's names. This way everything can run smoothly. And we can both help by removing any vandalism that may arise. Thanks for the discussion though. And go Brazil, I am rooting for them. Bladesofhalo 00:39, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll heed your advice and will not edit during in-game. I will also help remove any information added during the game. Bladesofhalo 23:02, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi with regard to the above, Exus my butting in, just as I am watching the Copa America in England I have an interest in the topic. I was just wondering if it is appropriate to add an "in use" tag during the match if Bladesifhalo wishes to do as was suggested and copying all the text into a word processor during the game and doing one final edit at the final whistle, then removing the tag? If that would help/work? Exuse my ignorance of the matter if it isn't appropriate of course! ♦Tangerines BFC ♦·Talk 23:43, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying. Perhaps I did not explain myself correctly as I did not say that adding the "in use" tag would automaticallu solve the issue of users editing "in game", I merely asked if it might help. I fully realise that it won't stop it completely, just that it might stop some users. ♦Tangerines BFC ♦·Talk 23:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And my reply above crossed with your second message!! Yes "in use" isn't ideal and it isn't specifically for this purpose, but maybe if it at least stops some users from live game editing then, if between us we can agree to add it during each game, then it might help? If you agree, are you ok adding it? thanks, ♦Tangerines BFC ♦·Talk 23:56, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will add the tag now and remove it just after the match has finished! ♦Tangerines BFC ♦·Talk 00:02, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the replys, we will see if the tag will deter editing until the end of each game. Bladesofhalo 00:02, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About Copa Libertadores

I read in the internet that the main sponsor from 2008 onward will really be Santander. So, Copa Santander Libertadores isn't exactly wrong, it's only not official yet. RFG19 00:38, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is the source I found.

www.acionista.com.br/santander/240107_vendas_ativos.htm

RFG17 23:04, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copa América 2007‎

Just wondering if you could have a look at the article when you can? Specifically all the various "qualification scenarios" which are getting way over the top. I see that you previously removed them. However, I don't know the wikipedia policy on these things so just wanted to ask you what you think and what the policy is on these things as they keep getting added, but not only that they are written in very poor English much of the time which isn't an issue other than it does nothing to benefit the article. Thanks ♦Tangerines BFC ♦·Talk 03:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting that you don't feel the Gold Cup is a major competition. Since you said qualification scenarios were NEVER included in articles for major football competitions, and scenarios like the ones I put up were included for the previous Gold Cup (and then deleted or changed as the tournament progressed), the only logical conclusion is that you do not consider the Gold Cup to be a major competition. I'd be interested in a response. - 71.146.250.128 16:02, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So, because you seem to be the ONLY one who has deleted this section, whereas I am NOT the only one who has restored and/or contributed to it, your opinion automatically counts for more than ours. How interesting. - 71.146.250.128 16:40, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. Have it your way. But just for the record, and so we're absolutely clear on this, your obstinacy in the face of public opinion has caused a pretty fair number of needless edits in itself. Had you just left the sections alone, they would have been gone in three days, having served their purpose, and I really don't think the number of edits would have been insurmountable. - 71.146.250.128 00:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please note my language. You are, in fact, the only one who ever deleted those sections. True, n'est ce pas? - 71.146.250.128 04:47, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further to the comments above, the fact that Garavello is the only editor who has removed the qualification scenarios and numerous other editors (the vast majority of whom have been anonymous IP users) have contributed to it, is of no importance and no relevance. The number of edits has at times been absolutely ridiculous, often with contradictory information, editors disagreeing over who and who hasn't qualified, and too many edits being made in very poor English which unfortunately makes little sense. Wikipedia is not a blog site, and there is no need to keep changing the qualification scenarios, especially when as soon as groups have finished, it is known who has qualified. And to use the same reasoning above to retain them, by tomorrow we will know who has qualified anyway, so why the obsession with qualification scenarios when within just over 24 hours all will be known. ♦Tangerines BFC ♦·Talk 22:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Garavello I notice that when the competition started you asked for the article to be semi-protected. Given that there have been quite a few instances of vandalism, usually during and just after each match, do you think it perhaps should be done again for each match (or as in today and tomorrow) two matches? Just to try and stop the over the top edits during matches and shortly after? ♦Tangerines BFC ♦·Talk 22:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

October 2007

Thank you for making a report on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize even after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. Thank you! Jmlk 1 7 00:07, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

== peer review ==

I was wondering if you could take some time out of your schedule to head over to the Heroes (TV series) talkpage and give us an honest peer review. The page has gone through some major changes in the last few months, and it would be fantastic if a prominent editor/contributor like yourself, could head over and give us at the Heroes Wikiproject some sound opinion and ideas on improvements for the page. We have all worked very hard at improving the page, and we need great outside, reliable and trustworthy users to come over and help us improve. I you are interested in joining the peer review discussion with other prominent users/contributors, much like yourself, please follow the link. Thank you very much for your help and your continued effort to improve Wikipedia and its quality! Wikipedia:Peer review/Heroes (TV series)/archive2--Chrisisinchrist (talk) 05:14, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Current PW

Template:Current PW has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.
As the creator of the template, I thought you should know. -- Yellowdesk (talk) 00:24, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stop adding to the list

What you are doing is original research. You see where I'm going with this. Just because someone who casually says one thing, it doesn't make it %100 percent true. So it doesn't matter who said what, unless it's an official statement, It's considered fake, or Original Research. --Lbrun12415 15:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SPFC

Hi there

Portuguese references are fine as long as you indicate that they are in Portuguese -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Round16-2legs

Template:Round16-2legs has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. MicroX (talk) 17:16, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 2013 Brazilian Protests may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

In [[January]], the [[mayor]] [[Fernando Haddad]]] announced that the bus fare would be readjusted from [[Brazilian real|R$]] 3,00 to R$ 3,20,

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:06, 14 June 2013 (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) 13:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Garavello. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]