User talk:Virgrod

June 2011

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Afro-Latin_American. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. When commenting about a source's reliability, please take that to the talk page. Please do not use weasel words and remember to source your statements. Safety Cap (talk) 21:24, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

=================

Sorry but don't know what you mean. Be specific. I am putting back the changes for the time being. Virgrod (talk) 21:57, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Miguel Canela Lázaro

The article Miguel Canela Lázaro has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This page does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. LT90001 (talk) 05:47, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sufficient Notability of Canela Lazaro

The fact that a part of the human body, a ligament, has been named after Mr. Canela, should suffice for notability, IMHO. People reading about the ligament will naturally wonder who are the people after whom it has been named. They'd find some info in the wiki article about Mr. Canela Lazaro.

Virgrod (talk) 17:05, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Afro-Latino population in the USA

I seen you on the Afro-Latino talk page so I wanna see what you think of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Afro-Latin_American#Afro-Latino_populations_in_the_Americas.3B_the_USA_figure — Preceding unsigned comment added by B23Rich (talk • contribs) 23:07, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sensitive information

Hello Virgrod, I recently reverted your edit on the Joaquín Balaguer article because is a sensitive information and you have no references to back your claim. I am reverting again your revert and please do not include such information without references, Wikipedia consider that vandalism. Osplace 12:55, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please, see the talk page of the Joaquín Balaguer article and answer the SPECIFIC issues addressed there. Please, do not simply refer in the abstract about "sensitive information". Please, do NOT revert until you do so. Virgrod (talk) 14:04, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Ulises Heureaux (December 5, 2014)

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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. See BRD for 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

The amount of sources I have provided are overwhelming in favor of a Haitian father. Your additional edits of the history of Haiti are not only out of place but are in largely in favor of your own beliefs and cannot be sourced accurately linking it with this person's father. By further indulging in this path, you are hindering the accuracy of this article. You have contributed no relevant sources to back your beliefs, therefore it is difficult to place them. Savvyjack23 (talk) 05:12, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Savvyjack23 as stated in the article's Talk page, you have to realize that this site is not your personal blog. Different people have different POV. You keep on repeating that some sources call DH's a Haitian, as if that was under dispute. It is NOT under dispute. The issue here is the additional RELEVANT information about the circumstances that led UH's French grandfather and his son to move from the West to the East. That is the information that you want the reader NOT to see. That is wrong. I am making up nothing. The 1804 Haiti Massacre is a well documented event that DID happen. It clearly implies that the French grandfather left the West before 1804 (else he would have been killed). Please, STOP REMOVING TRUTHFUL AND RELEVANT INFORMATION. You are the one engaging in an unnecessary edit war, because you do not want to give the opportunity to others to make up their own mind. It is WRONG TO DO SO. Virgrod (talk) 06:01, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Savvyjack23 (talk) 06:57, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at Ulises Heureaux

Please see the result of Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Virgrod reported by User:Savvyjack23 (Result: Both warned) which contains warnings for both you and Savvyjack23. Continued reverting may lead to blocks. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 18:26, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of No Original Research Noticeboard discussion

Hello, Virgrod. This message is being sent to inform you that a discussion is taking place at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Luisito Pie

You edit recently made to the Luisito Pie article looks terrible. You want to make this article looks like a private investigation about him, with words like see image, that are not appropriate for a wikipedia article. Why are you adding references about a fact that the JCE, Dominican Republic highest institution in the subject had already clarified? That clearly violates WP:CRYSTAL, we should remove that part of the text right away. The article is protected and consensus should be reached before changing sensible content. --Osplace 19:29, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Osplace The fact is that there is currently an ongoing controversy about Pie, that covers both sides of the island. The press release by the JCE does not change the fact that there are OFFICIAL documents by the same JCE (which have been linked/sourced) which contradict parts of the press release. The JCE will need to further clarify which part of its own documents are true, because they do not agree with each other right now. The Haitian source says what it says (sourced and referenced). This is all relevant information that the reader should know. One possible way forward is to add a separate section "controversy on Pié's citizenship status" where this information can be put. Would you agree with that? Virgrod (talk) 21:09, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lets take this discussion to the article talk page. --Osplace 23:24, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Osplace 12:54, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ei-ichi Negishi, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Foul play, Orchard Hills and Daze (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:18, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]