![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
It's an extant, multiple conviction, which is mentioned in every major Italian source (including his autobiography). There is no way it can count as WP:UNDUE as it's one of his most notable biographical facts, and has had a major effect on the shape of his life - even leading to a number of years as a fugitive. He's also been convicted more than once. I can't see how you can make an argument against its inclusion in the lead. Every other article on people with similar convictions, mentions them in the lead. Avaya1 ( talk) 05:29, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Flavio Briatore shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. 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. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.
If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly. Avaya1 ( talk) 06:08, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
{{
cn}}
if you had wanted to. I stand by my claim, your intent is clear, you wish to portray him in a negative way.
Mt
king
(edits)
06:44, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
If your are going to try and quote WP:3RR at least get it right; it says "A "revert" means any edit (or administrative action) that reverses the actions of other editors, in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material." so as you see it does cover different material. Your intent, when in relation to a WP:BLP is very relevant. Mt king (edits) 07:30, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Mtking
We were in correspondence earlier this month about moving the user page "Day Pitney". Could you please advise as to the status of making a request at WP:DRV?
Thank you
Tabajek ( talk) 15:46, 29 November 2011 (UTC)tabajek
Why is there a problem you put original research tag. The storyline is not an original research, its a based on this episode. Have you watched it on TV or YouTube? Becuase, the show is conflicted with the first season of The X Factor (U.S.) and Survivor: South Pacific? It seems this is not a truly original research. ApprenticeFan work 03:19, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SuperKombat (2nd nomination), you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SuperKombat (3rd nomination). Cunard ( talk) 06:56, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Please see a discussion at User talk:EdJohnston#Flavio Briatore. You and Avaya1 should stop editing the article until agreement is reached, by joining in a discussion that incudes some other editors. More details on my talk page. EdJohnston ( talk) 02:30, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Mtking. We've had this conversation before. For an Australian you sure have some kind of obsession with a single, smaller university's athletic program. No others, just the Montana Grizzlies football. I've looked through your contributions; the only college programs you've focused on is this page and those related to it. It's 100% modeled on better-known programs from the around the country, it uses the college football project as a guide. It is just like the hundreds of other programs around the country. Yet, you're not obsessing over theirs. The thing is, you're not just focusing on this page, but all those closely related to it. And, you aren't spending ANY time pursing this matter on any other school. You've mentioned yourself that you know nothing about American College sports, so why not leave it to an editor that does? You're clearly, clearly stalking. I'm hoping that you mean well because I don't want to report you. Though, I know from messages on my talk page that you probably wouldn't be so lenient. So, please go away. Out of the millions of Wikipedia editors, you're the only one that cares so deeply about every page I edit to the point of following me around to at least ten different articles. The fact that you're using your time to comment on articles about things thousands of miles away and which you admittedly know nothing about just confirms it. Please, please, stop stalking me. Dsetay ( talk) 21:58, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.83.36.193 ( talk) 07:50, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello Mtking. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of East End Brewing Company, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article claims coverage in reliable sources. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 06:13, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the constructive criticism, I'll definitely take it on board, I think I'll give The Age hacking scandal article a rest for a while but I think there's some good material that could be included, hopefully others will get around to it. -- Brandonfarris ( talk) 05:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Did you know that when Amber called the 12th on casting, on the background, where the girls are still, she appeared not 12th, but last? On the background of the girls appeared in the same order in which they were called, except Amber. What you tell about this? Maybe it meant that she would leave the show? KIRILL95 ( talk) 14:25, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Yellow should never be used as a background, or as a text color on a white background. It's just too hard to read. If you would, please change it. -- erachima talk 04:52, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I've responded to your latest suggested unblock conditions at User talk:Brandonfarris. To be frank, I don't think that you're helping by suggesting these conditions - im my view, they're not at all in line with WP:BLP given the extent of the problems Brandon was creating and the way in which he was going about this. Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 02:45, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
OK. I done wrong. But keep in mind that you are removing truthful information. And then you shout the other participants look for links. Have you at least once added links or other participants should do all for you? KIRILL95 ( talk) 11:22, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Why do you remove the truthful information when in the article are references? Maybe you'll return the name Angelea in the table and we'll stop these disputes? Or how much time her name wouldn't be in a table? Indefinitely? KIRILL95 ( talk) 18:21, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
But she discussed separately. KIRILL95 ( talk) 11:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Can you have a look at the material Brandonfarris added to the Crikey article, the "Controversies" section? I do not feel comfortable editing it, but - as I've pointed out on the talk page - I don't feel it's encyclopaedic at all, and that it's clearly there for POV reasons. Since WP doesn't usually list every "apology" or settlement from a media organisation - and it would be absurd if it did - I think the entire section should be removed until there's something substantial to include in it. Garth M ( talk) 00:37, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Whats is the matter with you man? Do you have a problem or something? DO dislike the Klitschko Brothers or something? I mean come on. I have used so much time on the article and for what? To see it get deleted? Please dont delete it man. Please answer me, dont hide answer me. Why dont you look at the other fight article that are so much less significant? You havent event looked at them or anything. Why do you bother about deleting the big fight article?.
It is common sense which effect this fight had.? Everybody that has just a little interest in boxing knows that. Why dont you deal with the other fight articles first??? Everybody knows how huge og significant this fight was going to be and was.
Devon Alexander vs. Lucas Matthysse
Saul Alvarez vs. Kermit Cintron
Saul Alvarez vs. Alfonso Gomez
Saúl Álvarez vs. Matthew Hatton
Lucian Bute vs. Jean-Paul Mendy
Julio César Chávez, Jr. vs. Peter Manfredo, Jr.
Nonito Donaire vs. Omar Narvaez
Nonito Donaire vs. Wladimir Sidorenko
Sergio Martinez vs. Sergiy Dzinziruk
Sergio Martinez vs. Darren Barker
Julio César Chávez, Jr. vs. Sebastian Zbik
Yuriorkis Gamboa vs. Daniel Ponce de León
Yuriorkis Gamboa vs. Jorge Solis — Preceding unsigned comment added by David-golota ( talk • contribs) 22:24, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
It's an extant, multiple conviction, which is mentioned in every major Italian source (including his autobiography). There is no way it can count as WP:UNDUE as it's one of his most notable biographical facts, and has had a major effect on the shape of his life - even leading to a number of years as a fugitive. He's also been convicted more than once. I can't see how you can make an argument against its inclusion in the lead. Every other article on people with similar convictions, mentions them in the lead. Avaya1 ( talk) 05:29, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Flavio Briatore shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. 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. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.
If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly. Avaya1 ( talk) 06:08, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
{{
cn}}
if you had wanted to. I stand by my claim, your intent is clear, you wish to portray him in a negative way.
Mt
king
(edits)
06:44, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
If your are going to try and quote WP:3RR at least get it right; it says "A "revert" means any edit (or administrative action) that reverses the actions of other editors, in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material." so as you see it does cover different material. Your intent, when in relation to a WP:BLP is very relevant. Mt king (edits) 07:30, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Mtking
We were in correspondence earlier this month about moving the user page "Day Pitney". Could you please advise as to the status of making a request at WP:DRV?
Thank you
Tabajek ( talk) 15:46, 29 November 2011 (UTC)tabajek
Why is there a problem you put original research tag. The storyline is not an original research, its a based on this episode. Have you watched it on TV or YouTube? Becuase, the show is conflicted with the first season of The X Factor (U.S.) and Survivor: South Pacific? It seems this is not a truly original research. ApprenticeFan work 03:19, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SuperKombat (2nd nomination), you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SuperKombat (3rd nomination). Cunard ( talk) 06:56, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Please see a discussion at User talk:EdJohnston#Flavio Briatore. You and Avaya1 should stop editing the article until agreement is reached, by joining in a discussion that incudes some other editors. More details on my talk page. EdJohnston ( talk) 02:30, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Mtking. We've had this conversation before. For an Australian you sure have some kind of obsession with a single, smaller university's athletic program. No others, just the Montana Grizzlies football. I've looked through your contributions; the only college programs you've focused on is this page and those related to it. It's 100% modeled on better-known programs from the around the country, it uses the college football project as a guide. It is just like the hundreds of other programs around the country. Yet, you're not obsessing over theirs. The thing is, you're not just focusing on this page, but all those closely related to it. And, you aren't spending ANY time pursing this matter on any other school. You've mentioned yourself that you know nothing about American College sports, so why not leave it to an editor that does? You're clearly, clearly stalking. I'm hoping that you mean well because I don't want to report you. Though, I know from messages on my talk page that you probably wouldn't be so lenient. So, please go away. Out of the millions of Wikipedia editors, you're the only one that cares so deeply about every page I edit to the point of following me around to at least ten different articles. The fact that you're using your time to comment on articles about things thousands of miles away and which you admittedly know nothing about just confirms it. Please, please, stop stalking me. Dsetay ( talk) 21:58, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.83.36.193 ( talk) 07:50, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello Mtking. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of East End Brewing Company, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article claims coverage in reliable sources. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 06:13, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the constructive criticism, I'll definitely take it on board, I think I'll give The Age hacking scandal article a rest for a while but I think there's some good material that could be included, hopefully others will get around to it. -- Brandonfarris ( talk) 05:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Did you know that when Amber called the 12th on casting, on the background, where the girls are still, she appeared not 12th, but last? On the background of the girls appeared in the same order in which they were called, except Amber. What you tell about this? Maybe it meant that she would leave the show? KIRILL95 ( talk) 14:25, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Yellow should never be used as a background, or as a text color on a white background. It's just too hard to read. If you would, please change it. -- erachima talk 04:52, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I've responded to your latest suggested unblock conditions at User talk:Brandonfarris. To be frank, I don't think that you're helping by suggesting these conditions - im my view, they're not at all in line with WP:BLP given the extent of the problems Brandon was creating and the way in which he was going about this. Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 02:45, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
OK. I done wrong. But keep in mind that you are removing truthful information. And then you shout the other participants look for links. Have you at least once added links or other participants should do all for you? KIRILL95 ( talk) 11:22, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Why do you remove the truthful information when in the article are references? Maybe you'll return the name Angelea in the table and we'll stop these disputes? Or how much time her name wouldn't be in a table? Indefinitely? KIRILL95 ( talk) 18:21, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
But she discussed separately. KIRILL95 ( talk) 11:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Can you have a look at the material Brandonfarris added to the Crikey article, the "Controversies" section? I do not feel comfortable editing it, but - as I've pointed out on the talk page - I don't feel it's encyclopaedic at all, and that it's clearly there for POV reasons. Since WP doesn't usually list every "apology" or settlement from a media organisation - and it would be absurd if it did - I think the entire section should be removed until there's something substantial to include in it. Garth M ( talk) 00:37, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Whats is the matter with you man? Do you have a problem or something? DO dislike the Klitschko Brothers or something? I mean come on. I have used so much time on the article and for what? To see it get deleted? Please dont delete it man. Please answer me, dont hide answer me. Why dont you look at the other fight article that are so much less significant? You havent event looked at them or anything. Why do you bother about deleting the big fight article?.
It is common sense which effect this fight had.? Everybody that has just a little interest in boxing knows that. Why dont you deal with the other fight articles first??? Everybody knows how huge og significant this fight was going to be and was.
Devon Alexander vs. Lucas Matthysse
Saul Alvarez vs. Kermit Cintron
Saul Alvarez vs. Alfonso Gomez
Saúl Álvarez vs. Matthew Hatton
Lucian Bute vs. Jean-Paul Mendy
Julio César Chávez, Jr. vs. Peter Manfredo, Jr.
Nonito Donaire vs. Omar Narvaez
Nonito Donaire vs. Wladimir Sidorenko
Sergio Martinez vs. Sergiy Dzinziruk
Sergio Martinez vs. Darren Barker
Julio César Chávez, Jr. vs. Sebastian Zbik
Yuriorkis Gamboa vs. Daniel Ponce de León
Yuriorkis Gamboa vs. Jorge Solis — Preceding unsigned comment added by David-golota ( talk • contribs) 22:24, 23 December 2011 (UTC)