Jump to content

User talk:TigreTiger

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, TigreTiger, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Speedy deletion nomination of Amares, Portugal

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on Amares, Portugal, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.

If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Inka888ContribsTalk 21:49, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Estremadura Province

[edit]

Hi, now that Estremadura Province is a disambiguation page, please don't forget the WP:FIXDABLINKS policy. Thanks, --JaGatalk 16:38, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry what? TigreTiger (talk) 20:37, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There are 50 or so links to the now-disambig page Estremadura Province that need to be pointed to the correct article. You can see the list here. As an example, here's an edit where I disambiguated Estremadura Province to Estremadura Province (1936-1976). I used navigation popups (with the popupFixDab flag set to true), which makes the job a lot easier. --JaGatalk 22:07, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I will have a look into this popup. There are several bad references in Portugal articles, likely I will create more disambiguation pages. With the popup thing, can one repair multiple links to DAB pages in one run? I think to improve Portugal articles it is really a lot of work, since my time is limited I would like to do it the most efficient way. TigreTiger (talk) 15:37, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, but WikiCleaner can. Be careful, though, it's a very powerful tool. I usually get the oddballs with popups or WP:AWB (although you have to get approval to use it), and then use WikiCleaner to get all the remainder in one go (a process I like to call "the nuclear option"). Cheers! --JaGatalk 17:32, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. If I am on one page I try to clean up all links within that page. I think I am maybe not good enough with WikiCleaner installation. I will do what I can with the normal tools. I also fix a lot of links that you will never notice, because they go to wrong pages instead of dab pages. I am really busy with Portugal geography. TigreTiger (talk) 20:25, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, to clean up all the dab links in a single page in one go, Dab solver is a fantastic tool. Check it out (I've set it up for List of islands of Portugal) - it's one of the best disambig tools I've ever come across. --JaGatalk 23:45, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Again thank you. I used it immediately: [1]. Will see how I can use it in the future. Seems there are a lot of tools around. TigreTiger (talk) 23:53, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Dab Solver works great for multiple issues in one page (e.g. [2]). I manually copy the page name to the toolserver URL. Any easier way? TigreTiger (talk) 00:16, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you Schwyz? --JaGatalk 11:17, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at your edit history, you're just about definitely User:Schwyz. I'm going to look into it, maybe start a sockpuppet investigation. You know, if you would just clean up after yourself, you wouldn't get caught so easily. --JaGatalk 11:36, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've requested a sockpuppet investigation here. --JaGatalk 23:32, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am not Schwyz. I don't know what you mean by "clean up after yourself". I am working on several pages and "clean up" a lot of links. There are a lots of links that I fix. See this five examples of ambiguous subdivision names:

People that didn't take into account the above ambiguities did link to the plain names.

It is lot of work to fix all links. The links come in from lot of different pages. At least in the area where I work, geography, I can almost always fix them. But I try to work efficiently. That means, I don't want to open a page to only fix one link in it. Better I open it and fix all within that page. This is how I work:

If I am on a specific page I try to "clean up" all links within that page.

I do not want to "clean/change" the links first, and then create the articles because that way, there would be lot of red links, that would be bad to the users of the wikipedia.

I see you have a problem with disambiguation pages appearing somewhere in your control tools for a limited time. Already within one day or so, it seems to be a problem for you. I don't know how else to work? TigreTiger (talk) 23:55, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Fermentelos

[edit]

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.

A tag has been placed on Fermentelos requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. 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 that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Inka888ContribsTalk 02:10, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE try creating longer articles

[edit]

I've seen two of your articles, and to be blunt, they really suck. The two I've seen fall under a speedy deletion criteria called A1 (no context). I would suggest reading WP:YFA before writing another article. Take a look at Robert Falcon Scott it's today's featured article it's a good standard to hold yourself to. Best, Inka888ContribsTalk 02:19, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To echo what Inka888 is saying, please try to include a bit more information when you're creating articles. Towns and cities are inherently notable, so your articles will stay; however, the articles as they stand right now don't tell the reader anything. I can give you a name for someone who specializes in town articles, and he'd probably be more than happy to work with you; just ping me on my talkpage, and I'll be more than happy to help. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 02:38, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how the rules are, but do you need my permission to extend the stubs or to invite others? TigreTiger (talk) 02:44, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, not at all; I'd expand them myself if I knew anything about them (my personal specialty is in Burmese and Japanese subjects). When you create articles, you should have at least one reference; if you put one in, any of us can expand on it from there. Don't worry; I know you're new at this, we'll help you out. Is there a website where you're getting these town names from, and does it have any information on the towns? If there is, just post it here, and I'll show you how to add in additional information and references. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 02:50, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also your articles don't have to be perfect. I think it is good to have one reliable reference to start out with. Also put a little information about every important subject. For example if you are writing about a town maybe put these sections in: Government, Demographics, Crime (if it is relevant). And have a section for references and external links. If you have any questions about this feel free to ask me. Best, Inka888ContribsTalk 03:27, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore pretty much most of what has been said above. Stubs for actual communities that are found in an Atlas are fine. Such communities are inherently notable. The part about references is good advice. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 05:19, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to all. For all recent stub creations I added a link to Portuguese Wikipedia. I also saw that via bots links to other Wikis were added later. Source of my info is the list of towns in Portugal. Instead of userspace sandbox I prefer to have it editable for everybody. If I have time I make the stubs longer, but there is lot of other things I want to do related to Iberian Peninsula geography. TigreTiger (talk) 20:31, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine; it's always good to have at least one reference, because that way we can at least verify the existence of these towns. I'd be glad to take a look at some of these articles and maybe do a little work on them myself, I like geography and demographics. Thank you for your work!! The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 01:56, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Fermentelos for deletion

[edit]

A discussion has begun about whether the article Fermentelos, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fermentelos until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Inka888ContribsTalk 02:53, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Schwyz

[edit]

I am accused of being User:Schwyz. I am not that user. But I think he really made good contributions related to geography.

THANK YOU SCHWYZ!!!

Details at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TigreTiger

TigreTiger (talk) 03:44, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vila Real de Santo António (parish)

[edit]

This is an automated message from VWBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Vila Real de Santo António (parish), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.ealgarve.com/destinations/vila-real-de-santo-antonio.

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. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications 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.) VWBot (talk) 05:37, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Vila Real de Santo António (parish)

[edit]

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.

A tag has been placed on Vila Real de Santo António (parish) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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.    Thorncrag  05:41, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

G12 does not apply. The bot is stupid. It would be better if it could detect that the page in question states that its material /comes/ from Wikipedia. Why is this bot including Wikipedia clones? TigreTiger (talk) 05:44, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have enough

[edit]

PLEASE ALL YOU BOT USERS AND TEMPLATE MESSAGE PEOPLE. TAKE MORE CARE WITH YOUR ACTIONS. TigreTiger (talk) 05:48, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Same message I dropped on the article's talk: Sorry, the page in question is not a Wikipedia clone and this article is a blatant copy/paste job. Nice try. In the future please don't plagiarize.    Thorncrag  05:53, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
On second look I must apologize, I did not see the site listed text derived from Wikipedia due to its unusual placement. However in the future it would be highly advisable to make mention in your edit summary that you are splitting an article off, that would go a long way towards preventing this type of issue. Cheers.    Thorncrag  05:59, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Thanks for that advice. I will do so. My mistake. Thanks for coming back here. TigreTiger (talk) 18:05, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BLAH BLAH Municipality

[edit]

Why are you moving and creating chaos in the Portuguese municipal articles and creating multiple micro-articles (3) dealing with the same thing (municipality, name of the town and often also parish). Before doing that, which i disagree and is incoherent with the rest of wikipedia and with the portuguese municipal reality. --Pedro (talk) 19:26, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is (most likely, see here) a puppet of User:Schwyz, who has a long history of mass undiscussed moves. You may want to comment at the sockpuppet investigation if you believe he is being disruptive. --JaGatalk 19:58, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PedroPVZ, let me explain. Please see Paredes Municipality: "Currently, the municipality of Paredes has 4 cities: Paredes, Rebordosa, São Salvador de Lordelo and Gandra, being the Portuguese municipality with the most cities."

In Portugal cities and municipalities are not the same.

Can you say why you think otherwise?

Also see List of cities in Portugal: "In Portugal, the city is not an administrative division, therefore a city generally does not necessarily correspond to a municipality, with the exception of the entirely urban municipalities, such as Lisbon, Porto, Funchal, Amadora, Entroncamento e São João da Madeira." TigreTiger (talk) 18:50, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

a city or a town, currently, is just a status. Not the same as in the past when city or town had real importance. A municipality is an administrative unit of the country, the second one after the central state, and after the municipality there's the parish. Those cities you mentioned are honorary titles, these dont even have a city hall and most of the population dont recognize them as real cities, are governed as just civil parishes like any other parish. Some cases are rather complex I know. most are not that complex. The municipality of Paredes is a extended reflexion of the city of Paredes. the info about other towns or cities should be on the parish of that town. You can argue many things. You said Porto city is the same as Porto municipality, but in reality is much more complex. Some say it is smaller, remember that Foz do Douro is an historic town, and still today it has its identity, some say it is the same as the municipality and other say it is larger than the municipality. Saying what is a city is rather complex today. It is the same as saying the city of London and the city of Westminster are real cities, because these have city status... and unlike in the Portuguese case these are historical cities, in Portugal the status is being attributed randomly to locations (that clearly dont deserve it) to get some votes in the last 20 yrs, because politicians know these have no real importance for the state any longer but have to some ignorant voters in some of those parishes.
the organization of the Portuguese local administration and the ones that deserve articles are: Municipality and Parish, you can have articles on neighborhoods or hamlets, to deal with more specific information. City and Town do not need proper articles. Articles is a place were you can write stuff about them. And in most cases, if not all, will be just a repetition of the information on the Municipality (in the case of the central parish) or parish (in the case of honorary cities and towns in other parishes). -Pedro (talk) 19:56, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot for your reply. I learned some new stuff from it, e.g. for the city halls.
I think we agree that except for Lisbon, Porto etc., a municipality is not the same as a city. Not in area, not in population, not in administrative importance. We seem also to agree on the fact that administratively the municipalities and the parishes are more important. I think we also agree every municipality should have an article and every parish should have an article.
The thing we do not agree is to whether cities in case they are not the same as a municipality (e.g. Lisbon) or in case they are not the same as a parish should have their own articles. I think a city like Póvoa de Varzim which is not the same as the larger Póvoa de Varzim Municipality and not the same as the smaller Póvoa de Varzim Parish can also have its own article.
Is this summary correct? If we know what we disagree about, it might be easier to find a solution. What is your view about our disagreement?
TigreTiger (talk) 20:18, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • As for Povoa it is the same, there's some confusion on what is the city and what is not, even for us, and is subject to interpretation by different bureaus and people's heads. Of course you must follow bureaus like INE or the city hall planning to try to make some sense. Currently there is the tendency to call the parish of Póvoa as "city center". It doesnt make sense to create a separate article for the city of Póvoa de Varzim as if it doesnt control more territory, it does and it belongs to it, the city info is on the municipality article, and of course it includes its rural territory that are part of it too. You must understand that the city hall is the same for all the territory of the municipality and is the city hall that governs all the territory and mayor of it all, rural or urban areas. Some "cities" such as Rio Tinto, in real life it is just a Porto suburb, the "city" is supposedly made up of two parishes, but in real life, that is not the case, each parish is independent and the only common (and relevant) administration is made by the mayor of Gondomar. the complex municipal issues are in these cases: Gondomar and other municipalities around Porto and Lisbon. If the city is made up of multiple parishes and is the municipal seat there are no issues. because it is the same! in real life, the administration of the mayor over the territory be it city parishes or not, is the same. there's no difference. --Pedro (talk) 22:05, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

October 2010

[edit]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Lagos, Portugal, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. JoJan (talk) 09:03, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. A page you recently created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for new pages, so it will shortly be removed (if it hasn't been already). Please use the sandbox for any tests, and consider using the Article Wizard. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article. You may also want to read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:04, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning; the next time you create an inappropriate page, you will be blocked from editing without further notice. One more recreation of that substub and I will block you for edit warring. PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:11, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

The block lifts in 24 hours. Please take the time to review WP:STUB for the minimum content of what should go into an article. PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:15, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand. Are you ill? TigreTiger (talk) 07:20, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tuma River - blocked for creating a stub

[edit]

User:PMDrive1061 blocked me for creating a stub on Tuma River.

Tuma River (Río Tuma) is a river in Nicaragua.

Agriculture influences the quality of the water [3].

==See also ==

==Links==

{{geo-stub}} [[Category:Rivers of Nicaragua]]

Let's try this again: You did not create a stub. You wrote one short sentence, rewrote two short sentences and you engaged in an edit war. I gave you plenty of polite warning, you pointedly ignored me and still you continued. If you feel that you have been blocked unfairly, please state your case. If you misuse your talk page privileges, they will be suspended for the duration of the block. PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:22, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing: If you violate WP:CIVIL again, I will extend the block. PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:23, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That last rant coupled with the very real possibility that you are a returning blocked user sealed the deal. Your talk page privileges are revoked as well. Your venom and your hatred are not welcomed here. PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:46, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TigreTiger&oldid=1185266603"