User talk:Tortugadillo

Welcome!

Hello, Tortugadillo, 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 and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Firsfron of Ronchester 07:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: [1]

I moved your comment to the bottom (where it should have been in the first place). Hut 8.5 07:48, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Rathskeller (disambiguation)

A tag has been placed on Rathskeller (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Wisdom89 (talk) 07:33, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

March 2008

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Wisconsin Idea‎ , you will be blocked from editing. Jeepday (talk) 04:18, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to University of Wisconsin–Madison‎ , you will be blocked from editing. Jeepday (talk) 04:19, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: your post at my talk page, these are the edits that are vandalism, you can find the list of admins begining with "J" at Wikipedia:List of administrators/G-O, you can review other helpful hints for editing at Wikipedia:Introduction. You may also want to review WP:NPOV. If you have more questions let me know. Jeepday (talk) 02:56, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response at my talk Jeepday (talk) 03:31, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jeepdday doesn't have to be an admin to be able to warn people, JSYK. --Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 17:10, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive743#vandalism? Jeepday (talk) 04:05, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:3RR

It appears that you are in an edit war on the Hoofer Sailing Club page. Please be aware of the wikipedia three revert rule, since you have already made three edits in the last 24 hours. In addition, please do not mark major revisions as "minor", as you did here [2]. The "Minor" designation is reserved for small edits or typos. Redrocket (talk) 05:31, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a wikipedia editor, the same as you, and I noticed that you had made three edits on the page in a short period of time, which is considered edit warring. I thought I'd give you a warning before you broke the policy, which would result in a blocking from wikipedia.

If you don't want to accept the good warning, so be it. It was given in good faith, which you didn't seem to accept. Good luck in the future. Redrocket (talk) 05:54, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I looked closer at your edits and since several of them were made in succession you have not violated WP:3RR, my warning was premature. It's a good policy to understand, however, as it appears you are still in the middle of an edit war. Please be careful to discuss major edits on the talk page to try and reach consensus. Thanks! Redrocket (talk) 06:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From your comments on my talk page, I don't know what you smell, but it's not me. Good luck finding the source of your odor. Redrocket (talk) 06:25, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:3RR

You're clearly involved in an edit war. Referring to my edits (and the edits of any other editor who disagrees with you) as vandalism is not showing good faith. Furthermore, the paragraph I have deleted is clearly WP:OR. Making a "Lord Of The Flies" analogy is original research. In addition, your continued use of a mailing list as a source is questionable as a reliable source. I have opened up a discussion on the Hoofer Sailing Club talk page, and also at [[3]]. Feel free to discuss the matter at either or both locations. Thanks! Redrocket (talk) 07:54, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a courtesy, I just wanted to let you know I've moved our conversation from the WP:AN board to WP:ANI, it's a better fit there. The new discussion is here [4]. I apologize for any confusion. Thanks! Redrocket (talk) 11:09, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hoofer Sailing Club‎

Please see the talkpage of the article and hese discussions [5] and [6] at the reliable sources noticeboard. Do not restore the material without proving that these are verifiable, and please note that webforums/lists do not count. Note that the word vandalism here has a very specific meaning, and you have been using it inappropriately. --Slp1 (talk) 20:22, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your personal opinions and conclusions do not belong in Wikipdia articles. If you can find a reliable source which makes the same claim, then please cite it. Corvus cornix_talk 21:18, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I really suggest slowing down and reading all the policies and guidelines for article content carefully. This is not a place to promote your personal opinions.--Slp1 (talk) 21:40, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions, including your edits to Hoofer Sailing Club. However, please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information about living persons must not be libelous. Any controversial statements about a living person added to an article, or any other Wikipedia page, must include proper sources. Thank you. Corvus cornix_talk 21:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Hoofer Sailing Club, as minor if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits (see Help:Minor edit). Marking a major change as a minor one is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearranging of text without modifying content should be flagged as a 'minor edit.' Thank you. —Travis ^talk 22:22, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:40, 13 March 2008 (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).

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

Request reason:

I believe this block is inappropriate. Yes I restored aspects of the article a couple of times, but Slp1 reverted four of my edits over the past 24 hrs ([7],[8],[9],[10]) yet he hasn't been blocked. I think it's wrong and shows bias for "King of " to come along and arbitrarily block one person if indeed there's an edit war going on. This is a disagreement on content and verifiability, so the appropriate action is arbitration, not an unfair block. I have no urgent need to edit this page--nothing's that urgent. This is on principle. Part of the problem may be that i'm on a slow computer and it takes awhile for pages to load and for me to make edits and then save them. Thanks.

Decline reason:

Your edit history shows that you violated WP:3RR on Hoofer Sailing Club. A 24-hour block is the standard and reasonable result of such a violation; that you believe that you are on the right side of the edit-war is not relevant. Edit-warring is never acceptable. — FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 11:34, 13 March 2008 (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.

Indefinitely Blocked

Your frequent criticism such as these and the recent one such as this lead me to believe that you are User:128.104.60.104 (as well as User:128.104.60.172/Other University of Wisconsin IPs, which added back the potentially libelous edit as well as vandalized in this edit) and have been abusing multiple accounts to add various POV-pushing statements that are unacceptable. You may ask for this block to be reviewed by placing {{unblock|your reason here}} on your user talk page.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 17:54, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems you confirmed that you are that IP with these subsequent edits: First Edit Back on June 7th Reinstating Edit by this Account.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 18:00, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Memorial Union Cameras.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Memorial Union Cameras.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 06:43, 25 July 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sdrtirs (talk) 06:43, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Memorial Union Cameras.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Memorial Union Cameras.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sdrtirs (talk) 06:43, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:WI Union member sign.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:WI Union member sign.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:56, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:WI Union member sign.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:WI Union member sign.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:57, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]