User talk:Gsfelipe94/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Gsfelipe94. 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.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 9

Artistic tastes are hard to define, of course, but why do you think "Light Heavyweight" looks better than "Light heavyweight"? And why there, and in other tables, but not in the rest of the article or the division's article?

I find extra capitals ugly, but don't think we should consider eye-catchiness at all on Wikipedia, just plain English. Works best, according the MOS. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:20, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Just as I mentioned, it works better on fight card tables and those season tables. When written in a full text, it sure does look a bit odd. But when they're isolated like that, both words with capital letters seem to fit more. Got it? Gsfelipe94 (talk) 22:09, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

No, but I'll leave it up to you. Too nice a day for minor war. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:47, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

I don't get why an easy going discussion would become a war. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 22:34, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

I'd revert you, you'd revert me. Nobody would die, but we might get frustrated. Minor stuff. Before we know it, we might have one of these on our hands. I've been in a few over the years. In a way, actual war is much more productive. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:39, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Guilherme Arana is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guilherme Arana until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:13, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

You shouldn't worry with my language neither with my edits. What you should do is READ the guidelines (precisely WP:FPL, WP:FOOTY and WP:GNG) instead of creating wrong pages, like this one. Thank you, MYS77 ^✉ 23:37, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Better watch out. You're clearly very good material for reports. I'm not worried as the page isn't a wrong one. A player that has more name than the south clubs you probably cheer for and he'll end that argument of yours in just a couple of days, maximum weeks. Keep up the dirty words, it suits you well apparently. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 00:12, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

What dirty words? I've used it once. And I support Santos, the current champion of Campeonato Paulista (which your sacred Corinthians failed to reach even the finals), and even if I supported Chapecoense it doesn't make any difference. I'm IMPROVING the Brazilian football here, without being a raving fan like you.

Back to the ARTICLE, what really matters in WP: GUILHERME ARANA NEVER PLAYED A OFFICIAL MATCH IN HIS CAREER, THUS HIS PAGE CANNOT BE CREATED. WP:FPL provides the guidelines of what leagues are professional. Even Paulistão is professional, but he didn't play in any official matches during his whole career. Sputnik wrote: "Simply being part of a squad or named to substitutes bench is insufficient for this guideline to apply. Speculation as to future appearances is never grounds for notability." It's not what we want, it's the RULES, and you MUST respect it.

Ah, and you should use {{ping|username}} (MYS77 in my case) to notify when you reply to a message (or write it in the user's talk page), as I don't have time to watch over your page to see when you replied (or not). This is explicitly explained in WP:TALK, which you probably didn't read.

Have a great day. MYS77 ^✉ 01:05, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Oh really? Aren't you the arrogant one that calls others arrogant? You don't know me. I created the page in February and due to lack of other good sources, that it as a simple article while the season played out and Arana was expected to participate in it. So why would I be a raving fan? You're the hothead here, I've seen the summaries after that edit of yours. And I probably have less time than you do to edit articles. You're the so called well read editor and you don't read the good behavior guidelines as well as the original notification for proposing the page to deletion. Honestly, I don't have time to waste talking to you. You've been the arrogant non-sense guy from the start. Good ironies, peixe. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 01:33, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

I may have been arrogant, but at least I know the guidelines. He didn't play in an official match yet, and we are in May already. You should have used your sandbox to create a draft of this article, and then moved it to the current title after his debut. That page is still wrong and you should know that. If you don't want to know this, it ain't my problem. But I'm correct (when it comes to notability) according to our rules here. You, simply put, should respect it.

And careful with Club Guaraní out there. It would not be good to see two eliminations in two months, right? Have a great weekend, MYS77 ^✉ 01:45, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

• Ah, and the template Reply to (or ping, I've already cited that) works for a purpose: notify other users (thing that you aren't doing here). If I don't reply, then it's not my fault. I don't have to be watching your own talk page if you are replying me. Thank you, MYS77 ^✉ 01:48, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

I will not send it to you. I'll stay all night here sad because I've met such an amazing user. I'm too worried about rubbing you the wrong way. It might affect the next game, so I ougtha know that, right? Oh my god, I'm too afraid right now. Thanks for giving me an epiphany. You're amazing! Gsfelipe94 (talk) 02:38, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Hey, thanks first for your kind words. Problem is, when a reader/user/editor sees the "fixed" image and then checks the report, he can say that it is wrong as there is no source for that "fixed" image. I follow given sources (FIFA lineups e.g.). Not saying you are wrong, but another user can come and claim otherwise to use "their" lineup. Kante4 (talk) 18:55, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I understand it. Unfortunately CONMEBOL usually has some of this stuff wrong. They have the Uruguay line-up a little bit twisted though. I've seen difference from their live coverage and the report coverage as well. I also agree with you, but most of the time I think people actually check only the article line up instead of the report's.Gsfelipe94 (talk) 19:05, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Ok. If no complains are incoming, i use the ones from the article. Kante4 (talk) 19:17, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Hey, will take a look into it tomorrow. Yeah, he's not very good at making the lineups, same for the Women's WC, he made a lot of errors. Kante4 (talk) 23:12, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Christian Cueva, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. GiantSnowman 17:42, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

You also removed it without having a source backing your removal. It goes both ways. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 18:59, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Hey man, how are you?

This source says he signed a permanent deal on 15 July. Soccerway says he only played seven Série A games before 15 July. That's why I've changed. If I'm wrong, can you provide a reference to when he indeed signed a permanent deal?

Thank you, MYS77 ^✉ 14:40, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Hey, you're right about the fact that Corinthians secured the permanent signing on that date (at least that's what was brought to news). However, the permanent signing was only made official on 1 August as you can see here. That even created a discussion about his contract being irregular during the transition of loan to permanent spell. Therefore, I considered his games as a loan until that date, when it was officially registered as a permanent player. Btw, thank for improving the article. I do not have time to improve all of those articles of brazilian footballers. Unfortunately, most of the time people create one, it's poorly done. The ones I did, though they're from young players, had as much info as I could get. So with some of those other articles I focus on at least updating the transfers and all that stuff. Anytime, man. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 14:46, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, I'll add this ref to the article and compose it duly. Ah, and I thought your club could've won the last week's derby against mine, so the terribly poor manager would be fired :) But anwyay, that's football... Cheers, happy weekend. MYS77 ^✉ 16:06, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

• Ah, and still, with his permanent signature being on 1 August, that makes him with 9 matches and one goal during the loan spell, right? Cheers, MYS77 ^✉ 16:10, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately that's a part of the process of rebuilding the team, but anyways... We have the second match later on :) About the matches, as far as I remember, they were correct as 12/1. But it could be 9. I think I've counted them properly until that date, but not 100% sure as it's been a while now. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 19:12, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Let's leave this as it is, then. Not so sure of it too, so if you counted them I'll trust you. Cheerio, MYS77 ^✉ 19:53, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Your addition has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Yunshui ^雲_水 10:01, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

It's a good thing to link the article you out of the sudden come here complaining. I had to search to find it. Btw, you removed original content as well, which shows you can't distinguish the original. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 12:23, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I didn't mention the exact article because in reviewing your edits I found a couple of other instances where you had copied directly form another site. The content you just restored still contained a lot of copied text from other websites - you absolutely cannot restore copyright violations to Wikipedia in the hopes that "someone [will] edit the content later". I have removed it again; please do not restore it. You are an experienced Wikipedia editor; that you are not aware of something as basic as the copyright policy is deeply concerning. Yunshui ^雲_水 12:56, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I see that you have also restored the copyright violation at Ultimate Fighting Championship. Consider this a final warning: if you insert copyrighted material into any article again, you will be blocked from editing. Yunshui ^雲_水 12:59, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm fully aware of that. However, I don't know which other articles are you referring to. As far as I'm concerned, the only one you have an argument is TUF 21 article's. As I said, the majority (first 5 or 6 episodes) were written as I watched the episode (just like I'm doing it now with the 11th one). That being said, I'll keep the episode 6 to 10 data removed, not even hidden. But the previous episodes were written as I watched. If you think it's similar, it's because there's nothing different to watch there. Those 5 episodes were written by me and not any other recap. Another thing is to write results, that has nothing to do with recaps, so no need to remove them as well.

One other thing, what's supposed to be different in the Ultimate Fighting Championship update? That's what everyone saw on the video and has a small sentence writing the same thing I would've. "There are three kits: a country one, an universal one and a champions one. That was advertised on the video, not originally written by the source. I agree with the TUF 21 argument, but this one is completely exaggerated. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 13:31, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

The text you added to the UFC article was copied verbatim from the list here, from the fourth line of the list onwards. You've now rephrased it in your own words, which is absolutely fine; thank you for doing that and for addressing the issues at the TUF 21 article. Yunshui ^雲_水 14:37, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Very sorry. I thought they were obvious. Will not do it again. WWE Batman131 (talk) 01:46, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the List of UFC events page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help) and an unsupported parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

As you may know fights may end a few seconds earlier on someone else's TV before it may happen on yours or another person's I place the result after it's been announced time zone differences may play apart in your opinion of speedy updates JMichael22 (talk) 23:06, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

That's not accurate and has no relation to wait for official announcement of the result. I'm watching live on the same timezone. What you did was add the "round" and "minute"section before the announcement was done. It took you two minutes to add the "decision (split)", because you waited to see what would be announced. You should've also waited to add those first two sections you added earlier an unnecessarily. There's no need to rush updates here, just keep it right. Also, please keep the discussion where it started (your talk page), otherwise it looks odd with replies in different pages. Thanks. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 23:16, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

You Seriously Don't Understand the concept of information as long as it's accurate there should be no complaining on your part if the information was wrong then I'd understand but the information is correct 100% true so Stop harassing my edits seriously there is 0% difference between what you placed and what I had placed before you so STOP harassing my edits I've done nothing wrong I've edited the facts JMichael22 (talk) 02:26, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm not harassing anything, dude. You're the one who comes out of nowhere to update such articles. Help is always welcome, but why the hurry in doing 10 updates in 2 minutes if you just can wait for the result? This is not a play by play thing. "Oh, fight ended, let me add the round and minute". You can easily wait and avoid wrong updates as there's a chance something could be double due to your out of timing update. That's well known to happen in other sports events, that's why there's no "live updates". That's twice tonight I told you that. Please remember that if you continue to update such articles. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 02:32, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey. I see you tried to acclimate yourself in the poster realm. Please don't. It just makes your thirst for conflict look even greater. WWE Batman131 (talk) 03:55, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

What's your age again? You're being the stalker here, not me. Personal attacking almost. Watch out, you tend to easily put yourself into situations of sanctions here at Wikipedia. Keep on helping articles the right way, then you're good ;) Gsfelipe94 (talk) 04:11, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

He'd say the same thing. Your arguments are wrong as the TUF Finale poster didn't follow suit with your "style". I'm not the one stalking here. I can bring up at least 4 million occasions where you've sent me a talk page message expressing something you didn't like. You argue with everyone. Me, Hungry, at least a dozen Brazilians from the soccer articles, and plenty more. And I'm the one with the personal attacks? Oh, please. Anytime we discuss something you always display ageism. So back up, boy. WWE Batman131 (talk) 04:23, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

If no poster was released during the fight week of that event, then it's obvious there's no need for a change. So if I try to avoid mistakes you do out there, I am "stalking" you? It's plain simple to see when I enter an article and notice something odd. I don't argue with anyone, except perhaps you, due to the fact that you're the one that argues with anyone over anything. If I bring a discussion up with an article, then I've argued all along? You have some trouble when it comes to separate things right? And being Canadian and not understanding anything about football articles I update or visit, I don't understand how you "bring" discussion. It looks like you wasted your time checking hundreds of updates and yet I don't remember any situation like that. It's interesting to notice that, cause your arguments don't even make sense. That includes the "ageism", as you're the one who told me to "remember you were 15/16, something like that. As I said, I know it's a waste of time to discuss anything with you, unless it's really necessary. That's not the case here, so I don't see this discussion going further. Lemme find and imaginary editor to begin an argument, as you find a lot of them here. :) Gsfelipe94 (talk) 07:48, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kenny Robertson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page San Juan. 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) 08:56, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey, yeah will take care of it if lineups and kits are presented. ;) Sorry, forgot about the copa america, any games left to do (or new)? Kante4 (talk) 08:39, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

No, I don't think so. Maybe some of the mistakes were corrected, I don't know. About the Libertadores finals, kits and line ups are already there. And they will after next week's final game as well. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 13:45, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok, on my to-do list for tomorrow. Kante4 (talk) 19:06, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

 Done. Kante4 (talk) 11:08, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, Kante :D Gsfelipe94 (talk) 14:53, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Yup, will remind that. ;) Kante4 (talk) 07:10, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Done. Kante4 (talk) 12:50, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

First you tried editing my edit and you got the time wrong I didn't it is 2:52 not 2:46 which you put pay attention to results if you are going to try and edit and second I placed it on time when the result was announced third I'm going to ask again do not harass my edits anymore no longer do you need to leave messages or comments on my talk page it's not needed anymore I would appreciate you leaving me and my edits alone you don't need to comment on my edits unless I place wrong untrue information JMichael22 (talk) 02:30, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Dude, I told you to keep the discussion on your page for the conversation to make sense. Anyway, you added wrong information and kept the disruptive behavior for more than a year. You're the one acting wrong with those type of updates. They will be reverted if the result was not announced and you updated. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 02:40, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Gsfelipe, I noted this edit [1], which has since been reverted by another editor but without a proper explanation in the edit summary. If you review the instructions and example for Template:Infobox swimmer, you will see that it has been consciously decided not to use a second, redundant national flag icon in this infobox; the only authorized use of flag icons in this particular template is in the "national team" field of the infobox, and not the infobox medals table. Once is enough. Flag icons also should only be used for those swimmers have represented their country in international competitions such as the Olympics, FINA world championships, etc.; athletes who are notable as channel swimmers, entertainers, college athletes, etc., and not as international competitive swimmers, should not use flag icons, either. The flag icon is reserved for swimmers who have been members of their respective national teams. Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:13, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Understood. Thanks. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 14:48, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Obrigado pela sua cooperação gracioso, Dom Felipe. If you work on swimmer bio articles with regularity, there are 146 articles in Category:Olympic swimmers of Brazil, most of which still need to be converted to the current standardized version of Infobox swimmer. If you have the time and inclination to work on them, you would be doing a great service for WikiProject Swimming. About half of the 4,000 transclusions of Infobox swimmer have been upgraded to the current standardized format in the last four months, but obviously a substantial number still need work. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 06:30, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Hey, we should probably take a professional approach to this. Usually we don't mention the co-main event in the background, unless there's an injury and replacement or title bouts and title eliminators. This is really just a co-main event bout between two guys. We haven't mentioned Hendricks-Woodley in the background of 192, Miocic-Rothwell in the background of Fight Night 76, and others. I'm not opposed to this. It's just something we don't really do for regular co-main event bouts. What do you think? WWE Batman131 (talk) 19:58, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

There was a paragraph when the fight was "targeted" for the event. Since it was confirmed later, it could be justifiable already. But it's a relevant bout not only due to their current moments (specially Arlovski), but they're both former champions. It's not that usual to see former champions face each other in non-title bouts. I think it's worth a mention in this case specifically. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 22:21, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks. WWE Batman131 (talk) 22:33, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Hey man. Can you help me with this guy who keeps vandalizing the UFC 191 page? Look at his edit summaries. They're quite amusing. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=UFC_191&action=history WWE Batman131 (talk) 02:40, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

He's done enough to get himself suspended for edit warring, but so did you. There's also personal attacks and it doesn't look good for both. You can take your chances and report him, because if I did, the right thing would be to report both for edit warring (even though you're right on this one). Gsfelipe94 (talk) 02:43, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Report us both. It's too late now and it's what's best for all. WWE Batman131 (talk) 02:47, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Will do then. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 02:53, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

At first I wasn't even aware that the order of the first three bouts on the mobile version of the website was different from the official version. I found out through him sending me an image of the official website. Since it was only an image, I checked the website just in case and was shocked to find out that that was indeed the order that they had on there. I did not and still do not have any proof that the mobile version of the website is "outdated" as he stated. When I made the edits (prior to my knowledge of mobile being different from the official website) I chose to not change or add a reference because When I clicked on the already present website reference, it automatically took me to the mobile version, being that I was using my mobile device to make the edits. Due to prior research of the fighters involved in the first three bouts and common knowledge of the sport, all common sense and logic led to me believing (like I always did) that the order of the bouts on the mobile version was the correct one. As soon as I found out the mobile version and official version were different I re-edited the page to rearrange the bouts to the most logical order and changed the prior reference from the official site to the mobile. I was never aware that you guys didn't accept mobile versions of websites with more logical information as references until I read his complaint and your response. I apologize if I caused any inconvenience or misunderstanding on your website. My main intentions were to help improve and accurate the content on the page based on my knowledge and common sense. Also keep in mind that I'm a new user on this website and still have things to learn about it. It was all sia learning experience for me from beginning to end. Jesu1999 (talk) 04:41, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

It's not my website. Anyway, you were disruptive and engaged in personal attacks + edit warring. You should check the guidelines about such things to avoid them when you're back from your suspension. Keep in mind to be civilized and engage in proper discussion instead of situations like that one. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 17:41, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

You're right buddy maybe I should've waited to see if the nonsensical bout order on the official website changed to match the logical order on the mobile version since you guys apparently only accept "official" versions of websites. 172.56.26.7 (talk) 20:39, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Seriously do your research as I did visit the official Foxwoods Resort Casino website it gives the address of their location JMichael22 (talk) 05:57, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Here is the link to contact Foxwoods Resort Casino Foxwoods Resort Casino Information I am using this official link to show the adress and location to the Casino JMichael22 (talk) 06:13, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Also wood like to add this link Countdown to UFC Fight Night: Mashantucket JMichael22 (talk) 06:21, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

The video use Foxwoods, not Mashantucket. The Yahoo link decides by themselves to call it "UFC Fight Night: Mashantucket, while it was never used as a name for the event. The UFC uses Ledyard (as you can see here) and other big medias such as MMAJunkie and MMAWeekly. I get the fact that Mashantucket is a special region with an address, located within Ledyard. That's why I added it as Ledyard. But if you want to change it again, do your thing. I'm not going to revert anything. However, you should at least add to the event's page an explanation to the location of the event. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 12:18, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Hey, all good (bit busy in real life but ok), hope you are fine aswell. I do not know someone, maybe raise your question at WP FOOTY. Someone will help or know someone that can help you i assume. Kante4 (talk) 20:19, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Ok then. Thanks! Gsfelipe94 (talk) 22:00, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi man, how are you? I noticed you still have the Guilherme Arana draft. As the guy is already created, you can create a redirect from the draft page or ask to an admin if he can delete it, that's up to you :)

Cheers, MYS77 ^✉ 22:47, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Hey man, everything's cool. What about you? What's this draft page that you're talking about? Not sure it's what I'm thinking.Gsfelipe94 (talk) 15:49, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I think I wasn't that clear. I meant this page. The draft is unnecessary, as the guy is created and will not be deleted for sure. Cheers, MYS77 ^✉ 03:50, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Ok man. Thanks! Gsfelipe94 (talk) 13:42, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

No big deal and I won't try to re-vert, but Holohan/Smolka was initially scheduled as first fight of Main Card portion, before two the headlining bouts were scrapped. Bout order other than headliner does not really matter at all since the entire card is streamed solely on Fight Pass. Cheers. Ppt1973 (talk) 20:06, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm not creating any big deal here, am I? I only said that it wasn't scheduled for that position when it was moved up to main event status. If it had info also saying it was turned into co-main before, no problem. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 16:56, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Norman Parke

added a link pointing to Newport

Stevie Ray (MMA)

added a link pointing to Durham

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:36, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I invite you to a discussion on the In the News nomination of UFC 193. --George Ho (talk) 08:04, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

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. The discussion is about the topic UFC 193. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! George Ho (talk) 23:26, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Gsfelipe94, I would just like to ask if you are going to be participating in the DRN mediation case for the UFC 193 article. Participation is voluntary, but it would be helpful to have an indication that you are either: a) not going to participate, b) reserve the right to participate, but do not currently wish to, or c) you currently wish to participate. Remember to keep the discussion focused on content, not editors, if you decide to participate. Cheers, Drcrazy102 (talk) 05:21, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

I didn't notice that you were unpiping. I thought you were removing content. I had trouble with people not accepting additional content. I think you were one of them. --George Ho (talk) 17:47, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of UFC champions, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Matt Hughes and Demetrious Johnson. 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) 09:04, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Yo thanks for deleting what the anons put on the Dominick cruz and tj Dillashaw's wiki page they're a**holes they need to stop vandalising..

But thanks for the making The page right much appreciated Wwemeowmeow (talk) 04:58, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Hey, sorry for relinking to the wrong PC on 2016 Sport Club Corinthians Paulista season. Do you have any other source on a second, distinct dude nicknamed PC being loaned from Cornithians to the Strikers though? I haven't heard anything about a second PC from Corinthians on the Strikers end, unless he's just an unannounced trialist at the moment. An English source would be nice because this is the English wiki and all :P I'm just curious because I try to keep up on NASL news is all. Anyway, keep up the good work! American Money (talk) 23:33, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

The source on the page makes the distinction between both players. The PC you linked has PC as a nickname, but the other one has it now only as a nickname but as his initials. The only source I think about is the one I linked there though. He is on loan for an undisclosed amount of time. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 23:36, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I have no idea what happened here. I was simply reverting some vandalism by multiple users and apparently got caught in an edit conflict. I've spent the last 20 minutes trying to figure out what happened. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 11:50, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

No problem, man. It was a recurrent issue. Relax. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 14:06, 31 January 2016 (UTC)