User talk:Milesmyth

Hello, Milesmyth, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement.

Happy editing! SwisterTwister talk 04:07, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Finding your way around
Table of contents Department directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
How you can help
Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

Stop

Look my friend, El plan director de Trujillo says

El ámbito territorial del proceso de Agenda 21 de Trujillo es el Area Metropolitana de Trujillo (Ver
Plano 1 y Plano 2) , que abarca un extenso territorio de aproximadamente 110,000 Has., y alberga a una población de aproximadamente 750,000 habitantes. Comprende la Ciudad de Trujillo, conformado por los distritos de Trujillo, Victor Larco Herrera, El Porvenir, Florencia de Mora, La Esperanza y el sector del Milagro del distrito de Huanchaco, así como el conjunto de centros poblados y asentamientos humanos urbanos y rurales del valle de Santa Catalina, cuenca baja del rio Moche, correspondiente a los distritos de Moche, Salaverry, Laredo y Salaverry; organizados como una sola unidad de planeamiento, un solo espacio económico y social con vínculos intensos y sistemas de servicios compartidos con un evidente destino común
para todos sus componentes.

So you cannot add the populations of the districts in way that you want it.—Rafaelkelvin (talk) 14:32, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stop Making edit warring please, what is in the article has its references.--Milesmyth (talk) 14:34, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Look the talk about this in spanish wikipedia, es:áreas metropolitanas más pobladas de Perú, and so on. If you persist adding false information I report you.—Rafaelkelvin (talk) 16:07, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You already were reported of edit warring my friend, according can see the article has its references.--Milesmyth (talk) 16:10, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cuando respondes en una discusión hazlo en orden para que se te entienda, tan solo agregas más argumentos en tu primera respuesta y la verdad no se entiende nada.—Rafaelkelvin (talk) 17:38, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please speak to me in english. Sorry don't speak spanish--Milesmyth (talk) 17:40, 7 May 2012 (UTC).[reply]

If you don't speak spanish, you cannot assured what the references say. Therefore you could be wrong. —Rafaelkelvin (talk) 18:18, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've only seen the numbers and some other words I understand a little but nothing more.--Milesmyth (talk) 18:22, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but you need understand what is a metropolitan area, and what is a province. And you must read the Plan director de Trujillo, for undoning my editions, therefore, if you don't know spanish is better that you stop with your editions.—Rafaelkelvin (talk) 18:25, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've already said you that the article has the same data in spanish wikipedia and is blocked and only can be edited by administrators. That's why you must stop making edit warring. sorry.--Milesmyth (talk) 18:27, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, I'm not in a edit warring as you say it. Second, in nowhere of Trujillo (Perú) of spanish wikipedia says that Trujillo is the second largest city or metropoli in Peru. Check it yourself.—Rafaelkelvin (talk) 18:32, 7 May 2012 (UTC) Oh sorry, you don´t speak spanish.—Rafaelkelvin (talk) 18:33, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The project wikipedia in English has its own links. sorry.--Milesmyth (talk) 18:36, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is not an answer, that resolve the trouble.—Rafaelkelvin (talk) 18:39, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any trouble because all has its references.--Milesmyth (talk) 18:45, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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).

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

Request reason:

as it says lines above:Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not. I'm new in wikipedia project, first created Sorpkent account but didn't like that user name anymore and I don't use it and so I created this new one, about the IP I don't know much but I know that the same IP can be used for many users so you can't say is mine. I've been collaborating very well. If you think I must be blocked it's ok, I don't have any problem to be blocked, if you think it's right it's ok. And as I checked the spanish article has the same data as english and was protected just for these users cmonzonc and rafelkelvin can't edit it; and if you leave these users edit as they want you wouldn't be acting very well or you would be unauthorizing to the spanish administrators. So I suggest maybe you should protect the article in english too for avoiding their editions (of cmonzonc and rafaelkelvin). As you can see in their last reversions or editions they deleted in the article some important information about the city even the skyline image, that can be presumed as bad faith or vandalism.If you take a review the history of spanish article Trujillo, it was protected just after cmonzonc user made his last edit warring and vandalism act. Now that spanish article only can be edited by administrators.Thanks.--Milesmyth (talk) 20:29, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I'm sorry but this still is considered an improper use of an alternate account. You got into editing conflicts with your "old" account. Two days after those, you created a new account and returned to the same articles to repeat the same conflicts. If you had intended to retire one account, you would have linked the two, as per the directions. Instead, it appears you have attempted to make it look like there was another editor who provided consensus to your edits - very very wrong (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 00:10, 8 May 2012 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I'm not asking for unblock, that's ok, I don't have any problem about it. what I'm requesting to you is to protect the article Trujillo, Peru now to avoid the vandalism acts of the users mentioned and as you can see how they deleted some important information about the city, even the skyline image. In spanish is protected and has the same data as in english.And I think if spanish administrators have protected the article is for avoid just those edit warrings and vandalism acts and just of those users mentioned and if the administrators keep that information in the article as it is now, I guess is because the information is sustainable.and if you leave these users edit as they want you wouldn't be acting very well or you would be unauthorizing to the spanish administrators. So I suggest maybe you should protect the article in english too for avoiding their editions (of cmonzonc and rafaelkelvin). As you can see in their last reversions or editions they deleted in the article some important information about the city even the skyline image, that can be presumed as bad faith or vandalism.If you take a review the history of spanish article Trujillo, it was protected just after user cmonzonc made his last edit warring and vandalism act. Now that spanish article only can be edited by administrators. And nobody can demonstrate there's false information added in the article, because that hasn't happened. Those users claim to have the absolute right in the theme but they are not experts about it, and They interpret the things as they want, to make their editions, even they don't respect the official documents as of municipalities of cities and even they don't respect the official Statistics of the Informatics Institute of government of Peru. So you can evaluate the articles and you're gonna realize what I say is what's been happening. Thanks--Milesmyth (talk) 00:15, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Unblock not requested. While blocked, this account can only be used to request unblock, and not to request article protection or anything else. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:47, 8 May 2012 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

That´s Okay, I didn't want anything, except just wanted to draw your attention to warn to you about some possible vandalism acts in article Trujillo, Peru of some users. I'm Sorry this is my last edition, I won't be bothering you anymore.Thanks again.--Milesmyth (talk) 22:16, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This isn't a request to be unblocked. Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:53, 9 May 2012 (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.

The {{unblock}} template is only to be used for the sole purpose of requesting unblock. If you are not using the template for this purpose, then please don't use it at all. Thanks. →B music ian 01:10, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

please can you check the article Trujillo, Peru?, user:cmonzonc has made a vandalism act deleting important information about of the article as I warned to you. sorry but had to say you to help you in this case. thanks.--Milesmyth (talk) 9:03 pm, Today (UTC−5)

Decline reason:

Once again: this template is to be used to request unblocking, and nothing else - if you're not asking to be unblocked, do not use this template. If you must draw attention to this page, see {{help me}}. —DoRD (talk) 02:25, 9 May 2012 (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.

Thank you very much for your answer DoRD and thanks a lot for the template.--Milesmyth (talk) 05:22, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please use the {{help me}} template appropriately.
The {{help me}} template is for help in using Wikipedia, not for unrelated issues. If you would like to ask such a question, replace the code {{help me-inappropriate}} on this page with {{help me}} to reactivate the help request. Alternatively, you can also ask your question at the Teahouse, the help desk, or join Wikipedia's Live Help IRC channel to get real-time assistance.

Please I want to inform you that User:Cmonzonc is making vandalism acts in the article Trujillo, Peru in english wikipedia, he is doing here what spanish administrators don't let him do in spanish article because they have protected the article. I guess If spanish administrators keep the information in that spanish article as it is now is because that information is sustainable with the references that has. Cmonzonc is deleting important information about Trujillo peru article, I suggest somebody to check it, evaluate the two articles and if you see that is true what I say I suggest to you to undo the vandalism acts of that camouflaged vandal. thanks. The fact I'm blocked has nothing to do in this. thanks.--Milesmyth (talk) 15:04, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your request is not an appropriate use of {{Help me}} and Cmonzonc's actions are not vandalism. Achowat (talk) 19:06, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If deleting information that has its references and even to delete a skyline image of an article that has been corrected by other user is not vandalism then what is that?. And of course Cmonzonc is a very well camouflaged vandal. You're not evaluating the articles, and you are unauthorizong the spanish administrators, they don´t let him to edit anything in the same article in spanish wikipedia, they have protected the article Trujillo just to avoid his edits you can check it he's been the last user who made a vandalism act in that article before was protected by the spanish administrators. Thanks.--Milesmyth (talk) 15:04, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism is the willful intent to do harm to the Encyclopedia. What you're talking about is a content dispute. Achowat (talk) 19:52, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok but if spanish administrator still keep the content as it is now is because that content is sustainable with the references that have now. I don't think spanish administrators be wrong, and they have protected just for this user don't be doing there what he's doing here. Thanks.--Milesmyth (talk) 15:04, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your argument may well be right, I haven't looked into it because, frankly, Peruvian municipalities don't interest me. What matters in this situation is that by violating WP:SOCK, you violated the community's trust, and your opinions on content dispute are largely irrelelvant. Achowat (talk) 20:05, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, that's enough for me you already understood the things, and I'm not talking about my opinion on content but I'm talking about opinion of spanish administrators on the content.--Milesmyth (talk) 15:04, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]