User talk:NAIDEPIKIW NONA

Welcome!

Hi NAIDEPIKIW NONA! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! DoebLoggs (talk) 10:04, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Panasqueira, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cova da Beira. 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) 06:03, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022

Hello, I'm Haploidavey. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Gaius Appuleius Diocles, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please take a look at the article talk page. The sole evidence for his existence, let alone his origin and career, are the two contemporary slabs (one from Rome, the other from Praeneste) cited in the article. Anything more is just guesswork and wishfull thinking, unsupported by any reliable scholarly source. Haploidavey (talk) 10:04, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your most recent addition to the Diocles aricle is an ingenious piece of editing! Regards, Haploidavey (talk) 10:31, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! You're welcome. NAIDEPIKIW NONA (talk) 10:37, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Economic Adjustment Programme for Portugal, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 15:39, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Wikipelli. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Estado Novo (Portugal) seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Wikipelli ^Talk 22:19, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Big Three (Portugal), did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Discuss at the article's talk page before reverting for a third time. SLBedit (talk) 14:32, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm SLBedit. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Big Three (Portugal) seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. You have now ignored my suggestion to discuss at the article's talk page several times. SLBedit (talk) 14:58, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Big Three (Portugal), you may be blocked from editing. SLBedit (talk) 19:11, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 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) 01:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

Your recent editing history at Airbus Group, Inc. shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. BilCat (talk) 00:21, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Airbus Group, Inc. shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. BilCat (talk) 01:30, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 2023

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Académica de Coimbra (football) a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Associação Académica de Coimbra – O.A.F.. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 04:23, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@NAIDEPIKIW NONA The page has been moved back to the original location, and the histories will be merged. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 04:23, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to move the page to its original, and correct title Associação Académica de Coimbra - O.A.F. but it didn’t work. Can you do it? I can’t. NAIDEPIKIW NONA (talk) 12:46, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@NAIDEPIKIW NONA as I'm trying to convey to you, "Associação Académica de Coimbra - O.A.F." is not the correct title, "Académica de Coimbra (football)" was decided in move request, and should be left unless further discussion occurs. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 14:07, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You also removed new content and the article doesn’t display its most up to date version now. NAIDEPIKIW NONA (talk) 12:54, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Covilhã

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Covilhã, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 15:33, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello NAIDEPIKIW NONA! Your additions to Covilhã have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 21:52, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We can’t say that sheep cheese and grilled lamb are features of local cuisine using different words like lobster or sushi. This fanatical policy is stupid and Wikipedia is doomed and losing relevance AND people because of persons like you. NAIDEPIKIW NONA (talk) 10:08, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

--Blablubbs (talk) 15:37, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]