User talk:Natubico

Geographic location template.

Hi, I have seen you made some improvements to the Eijsden-Margraten article, which is great. One of the things I noticed is this edit in which you moved the {{geographic location}} template to a separate section. The current standard for all Dutch municipal articles is to have this above the provincial navbox. One of the reasons is that there is no text associated with it, so it is not orphaned in the middle of the article. Moving it is not wrong by itself, it is good to see people taking an interest in these articles. But I was wondering what your rationale is for this change. Keep up the good work! I will update some additional fields to the infobox shortly. CRwikiCA talk 23:28, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly the main reason to remove it was the fact that the way is was in my opinion looked a little disorderly, so that for lay-out reasons an other place was searched.

That would have been right under the Intro, or under the Population centres section, because here there ís an association with the text in these sections; especcially Intro's of place-articles mostly for a big part contain information about the place's location, so that the locationbox in principle can very well be in its right place thereunder.

But, the problem mostly is and was in this case as well, that due to the info-box being at the side, a location-box in it's current shape cannot be put there.

As in the first following lower positions the box would indeed not really be suited to the sections it would be in between, this was no option eather.

So in this case it was put near to its original place, but thus that the original somewhat disorderly look of this part of the article wasn't there any more.

Kind regards,

Natubico (talk) 17:28, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will make several points with regard to the article. I saw you added a link to the NL-wiki, note that this is already linked from the language bar on the side and that it is generally discouraged to include it in the external links as well.
The actual way the Wikipedia article looks differs from screen to screen, depending on the resolution of the monitor. It is true that the {{geographic location}} box can look somewhat messy when there is not much text in the actual article. This can also be remedied by having a line link to the commons or by reducing the size of the box so it fits. It is fine to have a separate section for this template, but then ideally it should be the long-term goal to be accompanied by text as well. When it is seen as an additional navigation box, without text, then placing it on top of the provincial navbox is good as well.
It is good to see people work on the Dutch municipal articles. Let me know if you want any advice about the article. CRwikiCA talk 20:38, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Oost-Maarland 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:

there, dedicated to that saint. By the 18th century already the name had been deformed to "Aoust").

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:48, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

August 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Eijsden-Margraten 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:

* [[Folklore]] (among others several citizen soldiery's ;

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:42, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I added the closing ). CRwikiCA talk 13:22, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Eijsden-Margraten, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Organic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 12:41, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

September 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Eijsden-Margraten 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 2013, like in 2009, the brass-band "Koninklijke Harmonie Sainte Cécile)" from Eijsden was the winner in the World Concert Division of the fouryearly World Music Contest,

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:02, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Maastricht, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bunde (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:13, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Maastricht, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bunde (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:53, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oost

Please, stop adding that material to Oost, Limburg. Wikipedia isn't a blog, and we only repeat information which has appeared in reliable sources, which your own website is clearly not. If no significant book, journal or (in some circumstances) has covered something, Wikipedia doesn't cover it either. Mogism (talk) 15:59, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The big problem in this case is that the Vivism philosophy of life has that many aspects, that are or actually seem to be not directly in the interest of most aspects of nowadays economical activity, that since its presentation some 25 years ago as good as no others than the founder himself seem to have seen the necessity to directly or indirectly promote this principle one way or another.

On the contrary, it often looks as if there is a more or less general consensus about keeping it as unknown as possible, so that for instance the owners and employees of companies that edit the books and jourrnals that are known and recognized as reliable sources will hardly have to fear that soon a conciderable part of their clientele will buy less or no more of their products as a result of the fact that they have been convinced by the Vivistic vision that as good as no paper editions can be that important that trees have to be killed for their production.

It was with this reality in mind that this user hoped that a non-commercial project as Wikipedia might accept a slight deviation of its rules by that in this special case a webiste of somebody who does represent the relevant user (a foundation) but is'nt the user itself is used as a source. Natubico (talk) 17:30, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Natubico, "Vivism" is not a notable philosophy and the material you keep adding to Oost is not acceptable. I will look more closely later on, but it is my understanding that you are operating two accounts--you get one, not more. (And of course you have been blocked for socking on the Dutch wiki.) I am considering blocking one of them, and you get to pick which one you want to keep; whether you can continue editing here depends on whether you have made actual positive contributions. In the meantime: Wikipedia is not a soapbox where you can expound on your personal philosophies. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 00:27, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In this context one can think of the case that somewhere a horse has got into a water and is about to drown. A passer-by immediately calls a tow truck to rescue the animal. When the truck has arrived and been droven backwards unto the water a police agent arrives and orders that the truck must be removed, as according to traffic rules it is not allowed to drive and to stand still there. Natubico (talk) 01:57, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 2014

Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames that give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website, I have blocked this account; please take a moment to create a new account with a username that represents only yourself as an individual and which complies with our username policy. It also appears that your account is intended to be used for the purpose of telling the world about an organization, person or cause that you consider worthwhile. Unfortunately, many good causes are not sufficiently notable for their own Wikipedia article, and all users are discouraged from editing in any area where they have an inherent conflict of interest. You may wish to consider one of these alternative outlets.

If your username does not represent a group, organization or website, you may appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice.

You may simply create a new account, but you may prefer to change your username to one that complies with our username policy, so that your past contributions are associated with your new username. If you would prefer to change your username, you may appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock-un|new username|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 03:44, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, "Stichting Natuurbescherming", that's an organization, which your user name is clearly representing. So I let you keep VKing; this one is blocked indefinitely. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 03:45, 5 July 2014 (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).

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

Request reason:

The name Natubico in itself doesn't clearly represent a group (called Stichting Natuurbescherming); the only thing that links this name to the mentioned foundation is the fact that this link is mentioned on the userpage. So all that has to be done is taking the relevant mention away there. Natubico (talk) 02:39, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The issue here is slightly different than the automated template implies. Wikipedia accounts are for individuals only, not for groups or corporations; shared use of accounts is not permitted. Only one person may have access to an account, ever, and the username must reflect that. The Stichting Natuurbescherming cannot have an account at all, no matter the username. Each member or employee of the Stichting who wants to edit Wikipedia is welcome to create an account of their own; if you want your accounts to be associated with the Stichting, usernames such as "John at Stichting Natuurbescherming" would be acceptable. You should probably take a look at the Terms of Use, though. Huon (talk) 02:56, 15 December 2014 (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).

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

Request reason:

The name Natubico ís a personal username, that on this occasion had been 'lended' to the mentioned foundation. Now that this has turned out to be not quite in line with certain Wp-rules, the owner of the name will henceforth use it as his individual user name.

Decline reason:

Firstly, you need to change your username, so for your next unblock request you should use the text:

{{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}}

Secondly, I am unconvinced that you should be editing articles where you have a significant conflict of interest. PhilKnight (talk) 17:42, 18 December 2014 (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.