Jump to content

User talk:Marine 69-71/Archive 29

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 25←Archive 27Archive 28Archive 29Archive 30Archive 31→Archive 35

Tony Santiago pictures

Hi, I have noticed that you are edit warring to insert Tony Santiago's pictures into many War-related articles. As I understand Santiago is marginally notable as an internet journalist not as a soldier. It would be improper to put in ledes photographs there are people famous as war heroes, who received high military decorations or died in action. It is especially improper to be done by you as you have a conflict of interests here Alex Bakharev (talk) 05:54, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Resolution #3603

Come what may with the AFD, Resolution #3603 is an honour to your work on Wikipedia, and it is small piece of Wikipedia history. I have transcribed s:es:Página:PRResolution1.jpg and would be interested in any additional pages so that the entire resolution can be presented in Wikisource mainspace. I have also started a translation into English at s:Page:PRResolution1.jpg. John Vandenberg (chat) 10:26, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

WP:BOX

I suspect that that might get reverted as well. I will begin a thread on ANI as soon as posible, most likely tommorow. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:44, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
I guess it would. Though I can't see how that solves the issue. - Caribbean~H.Q. 02:26, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
It looks good, but I'm not sure that Monkey will let it go. The only reason he ever edited a boxing article was because he was pursuing you around for some reason, this might get rolling again after the AFD reaches its inevitable "no consensus" closure. - Caribbean~H.Q. 04:52, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, but you must have noticed how he seems to enjoy creating straw man arguments. - Caribbean~H.Q. 02:32, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Not yet, I haven't check my e-mail yet. I will respond that way after reading it. - Caribbean~H.Q. 02:53, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hey Tony, como tas? Mira, esta (macabra) editacion (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Public_housing_in_Puerto_Rico&diff=prev&oldid=321905391) introdujo texto x un editor anonimo k podria solo ser vandalism. Que crees? Mercy11 (talk) 14:58, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Kirk Acevedo

Hi, you semi-protected Kirk Acevedo on April 15th 2009 "for 48 hours", don't you think it's time to unprotect it? --Ferengi (talk) 20:44, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

ANSO stub

Can you expand it? That's your job---you're their official National Historian! Thanks-Pr4ever (talk) 02:06, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Nudge

'Bout time, doncha think? :D bahamut0013wordsdeeds 15:21, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Raúl Juliá

I finally found myself with enough time to clean and expand this article, check it out. - Caribbean~H.Q. 19:02, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

All of you were born in March? - Caribbean~H.Q. 05:37, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Hmmm, I didn't say "birthday" because Chacón's article says that she was born on March 7th, is that a mistake? - Caribbean~H.Q. 23:25, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Serralles

Hello Tony, Might want to check out Juan Serralles. There is a new open-up section on descendants also. Mercy11 (talk) 02:11, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Wow! How did you make that star spin like that!!?? Thanks! Cuidate 'manito, Mercy11 (talk) 22:32, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Daniel Santos

Its definitely "Si Yo Fuera Millonario", but I can't recall the year. - Caribbean~H.Q. 07:11, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Tony, there might be some issues with this old article. Can you take a look at it and work your magic? I considered taking a look at them today, but some user posted some random rant against me in the talk page and I'm not interested in edit warring with this idiot. - Caribbean~H.Q. 21:46, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I will take a look at it tomorrow, but if that user posts another personalistic rant his account is toast. I have done nothing to have some immature kid vociferating nonsense. - Caribbean~H.Q. 07:09, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

new cat?

Hey guy, I've developed some 6-8 articles on Barrios de Ponce. Would it make sense to make a category to hold them all? Is it easy to make one? Can anyone do it? Thanks, Mercy11 (talk) 02:23, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Great! Incredible, it actually worked flawlessly!!! Thanks a million! Mercy11 (talk) 03:02, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Mercy11...

Tony, you know that I have a history of uncovering sneaky sockpuppets, but this case is easily the most disappointing if my suspicions are proven. From the edits of the user that posted a rant at the Macheteros' article, I noticed a pattern that seems to link that user to two more accounts, including Mercy (Details). If proven truth, I honestly do not want to block her main account, but we will need to take measures to prevent further abuse. Please take a look at the matter and give me your opinion. Regards, - Caribbean~H.Q. 05:56, 8 November 2009 (UTC)


Tony, waste no time in this matter.

Caribbean wrote: "There seems to be some connection between your edit pattern and that of these accounts, including close edits on five different articles. To be honest, this surprises me, since I consider you a constructive user. However, if you are indeed operating this account that would be a great disappointment, seeing how I was randomly attacked by one of them. If you are indeed running them, admit it, I will then block them and we leave things here. If you are not, be notified that I will open a checkuser case to determine who is running them, since its obvious that someone established is playing out a "Good hand, bad hand" scheme. For the time being, I am assuming good faith."

Well, likewise, Caribbean's case is easily the most disappointing case of WP administrators I know of. You see, I too had checked his edits and they showed nothing short of a history of abuse of authority. I see Macheteros is very close to his heart, and broke him down. Well, it is close to mine also, and I was disappointed to encounter his level of rudeness (I am being mild here knowing many of his other edits and I believe you know about them too), name-calling (idiot, etc), and his other totalitarian traits (untactful approach to say the least) which would easily qualify him for a dictator's job. Yes, I took exception to Caribbean's sticking his nose in the Macheteros article and reverting requests for citations, etc, without his investing time to discuss it, but instead lashing out with his uncivil, impulsive, and offensive comment of "No, that's BS, you may want to contend the FBI reference, but the Spanish one was verified ages ago". Let's not forget which side fired the first rant shot. Is this how they operate around here?

It is difficult for someone to do a constructive job around this place (read: the "constructive user" thing) if I must be constantly dealing with big-brother Caribbean lurking around and ready to shoot down my well-intended edits or comments. Point in case: Macheteros. Caribbean did not seem to like it when I asked for citations on what I saw as POV claims in that Macheteros article, and he reverted between 100%-110% of them, leaving in only material that seemed agreeable to him -- no talk, no discussion, no civil comment, nothing. Were his actions politically-driven POV? Maybe so, but then he should had allowed for equal time to edits that present an opposing argument. In my little exercise with Caribbean on the Mameyes landslide matter I discovered Caribbean wanted to have the final word at any cost, with a view that clearly diverged from what even the office of the US president has categorized as unequivocally "inflicting the greatest loss of life by a single landslide IN UNITED STATES HISTORY" (caps are mine for illustration). If we were to follow Caribbean's line of reasoning, we would also have to change the Ponce Massacre (and similarly with many other PR articles) to read "the largest massacre in Puerto Rican history UP TO THAT YEAR". (Caps are for illustration purposes only and would not be entered in the hypothetical alternative article edition. See Ponce, Puerto Rico#Mameyes landslide and Ponce, Puerto Rico#Ponce massacre. Some of the information in Macheteros was clearly obsolete to start with. And confronted with such big-guns welding Goliath as Caribbean, of course it was occasion to emerge combat-ready and loaded with all the weaponry we non-ax-welding editors have at our disposal, including, of course, sockpuppetry.

I am not making a case here to preserve my account: I ASK FOR NO MERCY from you or from anyone in this place. On the contrary, to ensure I save some of your descent time here is a list of my other accounts you should also block: Mercy11, You'veGotToBeKidding, "December 20, 2012", mummy34, Rob99324, dicktracy21, plain87dice, TruthRevealed33, LittlePrincess23. I certainly do not expect (nor want) any mercy from Caribbean,,,,ufff,,,knowing his style!,,, on the contrary, let him make competent use of his axing powers and let him get rid of my account through his express-o push button.

It was good knowing you, Tony. Thanks for your pacifist role; I know you tried. This place needs more people like you. You are someone here I never felt threatened by, someone with a good head on his shoulders, and for whom I was happy to work. Regards for the last time, Mercy11 (talk) 18:18, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

You got to be freaking kidding me, I actually led the assault to block sockpuppeter User:Wiki En Wiki and was willing to give you a chance! Its actually funny that you complain when I called your puppet an "idiot", when minutes before you insulted me and questioned my education trough it. You are clearly making some drama over the Mameyes edit, you were being pretentious and I told it to you, if you could not find a more recent reference then you can not claim 100% accuracy based on something that is five years old. By the way, yes, all of the articles that I have worked with are close to my heart. But you will see that have not tried to sugar coat the articles either, I did say that the EPB is a terrorist organization and even though its killing our sport, I offered in detail the fact that Puerto Rico's colonial status has even made into sports in the List of Major League Baseball players from Puerto Rico. Tony, I’m sorry to use your talk page for this, but its amusing that sockpuppeters must always claim foul play when discovered. Now, not only will I drop the "ax" due to your own admission of abusing accounts, but a CU will be run to find all of those that you failed to admit. Its a shame, I was expecting that you could go straight and was not going to block that account. - Caribbean~H.Q. 19:22, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
  • You know the sad thing is that I like both of you and that this couldn't have worked out in a civil manner without the name calling. Mercy, you must understand that Caribbean is being fair with you with his comment on your page. On one hand he has gotten along well with "Mercy", on the other he was attacked and responded to your other accounts without realizing that you and they were one and the same person. You should stick to one account and get rid of the other accounts since it is against policy. Caribbean is a respected administrator and a great guy to work with, he also offered to bury the hachet and not block you. From what I saw in the interaction between you and him, you both seemed to get along well in the beginning. Why not call it a truce, since you have so much to offer, and work out the differences as to the articles in the talk pages, without jumping at each others throats? At times I have been wrong in my assumptions and have been corrected by others and at other times I have corrected the assumptions of others. Yet, we have all remained friends because we communicated before making any changes in a respectful way. I hope that things can be worked out and that you Mercy, will continue to contribute to the Puerto Rican related issues of the project, but only with one account. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:12, 8 November 2009 (UTC)


I buried my hatchet on the day I wrote in the Not So Fast - Macheteros talk page message. The proof is I posted no angry response to Caribbean's kid-I-will-block-your-behind-if-you-keep-up-your-personal-attacks threat. And note this happened way before any sockpuppetry allegation was in sight. Did Caribbean miss that? Yes I admit I lost my cool on his reverting 100-110% of my Macheteros “citation needed” and resorted to sock puppetry. Frankly, I was exhausted from wasting my time with him on the Mameyes stuff, and now for the same exercise with Macheteros also? -- uffff. His Mameyes line of reasoning was clearly wrong. (Example, the result of the PR Campaign is “Militarily inconclusive”. Did anyone jump out saying “that's sugar-coating it”, that it should say “Militarily inconclusive up to 1995” because that’s the year Zwick published his “now-obsolete” article??? That's bound to drive anybody crazy.) But fine he’s the admin, let him have the last word.

In his "You got to be freaking kidding me" reply Caribbean spoke of having been "willing to give you a chance". But what chance is he talking about?? I followed all his demands, yet I never saw anything but blocks within 1 day. The instant he demanded that "[I admit it and we'll leave things here]", I did admit, did I not? So what is still his problem? I also voluntarily surrendered all my other known accounts (that Caribbean did not yet know about, nor had even asked for), right? What else does he want? What other accounts did he uncover from his checkuser exercise? I will tell you: None. So what is still the problem? Seems to me Caribbean is not happy with just giving me a life sentence, he wants capital punishment: Just yesterday he also blocked a totally new, totally unrelated, "I’mNotNewHere" account I created that same day (yesterday). Did I harass him with that account? No. Did I use it to perpetuate the actions of a sockpupetter? No. Did I create it surreptitiously? No. (he monitors Ponce, and knows I accessed Ponce in my very first login.) Did I go into Macheteros and tried touching his baby there? No. So why does the man continue to persecute me??? Even today, I created "ExSockPuppeter"; I got blocked too. What greater stigma than having to go around with a name like that?

Caribbean says he offered "to leave things there"; I complied, but Caribbean still continues to block me. Did I not redeemed myself already manifold? I admitted wrongdoing from the moment Caribbean made his demand – and I submitted to “authority”, if you will. I admitted I violated policy. But I also agreed to pay the price via the blocking of those (including Mercy11) accounts. Well, I am still being blocked on any new accounts, so what other price is there remaining for me to pay? I got blocked and admit I deserved it. But, have I not paid the price already? Why does he continue to persecute me.

You know Tony, wiki policies also do say “To ensure that all Wikipedia content is verifiable, anyone may question an uncited claim by inserting [citation needed] or a similar inline template.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed) He indirectly violated policy by openly refusing to provide the requested citations. Seems to me that Caribbean, especially being an administrator, should set the example and not revert the requests as he did. Sockpuppetry also works the other way, you know: Would he had mercilessly reverted all that work had it been the Mercy11 account that had requested the citations??

Which brings me to this point: So what now? What exactly was this administrator's (Caribbean's) original goal? To remove not just the various sockpuppet accounts including Mercy11, but also to remove the person of Robin as well – even if rehabilitated? Is that it???? Regards as ExSockPuppeter 22:03, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

    • I will clarify this one last time, I only issued the block after you insulted me following the "peace offer". It was you violated the terms. Good luck if you get a second opportunity, behave yourself. By the way, I did not block "ExSockPuppeter", you were simply begging to get that account blocked by selecting that name. - Caribbean~H.Q. 05:46, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Tony, uffff, I've been let out of prison. Looks like I am going to be unblock me. I had to make some promises, but ufff I am glad to be back. I can't live w/o this place and you guys!
I want a new name, something like ExSockPuppeter or maybe HopelesslyDevotedToYou. Is this possible to get a make up? Regards, 209.212.21.160 (talk) 01:52, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Test your World War I knowledge with the Henry Allingham International Contest!

As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.

If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:43, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIV (October 2009)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XLIV (October 2009)
From the coordinators
Articles of note

New featured articles:

  1. 1982 British Army Gazelle friendly fire incident
  2. Amagi class battlecruiser
  3. Battle of the Alamo
  4. Brazilian cruiser Bahia
  5. Ellis Wackett
  6. Inner German border

New featured lists:

  1. List of Knight's Cross recipients of the Waffen-SS
  2. Order of battle in the Atlantic campaign of 1806

New featured portals:

  1. United States Air Force

New featured pictures:

  1. A synagogue in New York City remained on D-Day
  2. Battle of Kennesaw Mountain
  3. Journée du Poilu. 25 et 26 décembre 1915
  4. Siege of Sevastopol, 1855
  5. The burning of Columbia, South Carolina, February 17, 1865

New A-Class articles:

  1. AH-56 Cheyenne
  2. John Lloyd Waddy
  3. Lewis McGee
  4. M22 Locust
  5. Operation Coburg
  6. Operation Teardrop
  7. SMS Nassau
  8. Tosa class battleship
  9. USS Congress (1799)
  10. USS President (1800)
  11. Winter War
Project news
Contest department
  • The contest department has completed its thirty-first month of competition; its second month under the new and improved scoring system. A total of 53 articles were entered by nine editors. Sturmvogel 66 came in first with 96 points, followed by Auntieruth55 on 80 points. They are presented the Chevrons and Writer's Barnstar respectively. Honorable mentions go to Ian Rose (38), Abraham, B.S. (33) and Parsecboy (10). Our thanks go to Cuprum17, Ed!, The ed17 and Piotrus, who also fielded entries. All editors are encouraged to submit any articles that are working on for next month's contest.
Awards and honours

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:34, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Four Award

As a past WP:FOUR awardee you may wish to comment at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Four Award.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:27, 8 November 2009 (UTC)


Boxers nicknames again

You were recently involved in a discussion with regards boxers nicknames. There is a continuation of that discussion with specific reference to Audley Harrison on the BLP page here. Please feel free to add your opinion there once more. Regards. Vintagekits (talk) 10:24, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

PORTREX

Tony, have you see this? - Caribbean~H.Q. 05:36, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Also, it seems that my e-mail's security settings are messing up the image attachment. Would it be posible for you to upload it here once the piece is done? I believe cropping should be enough. - Caribbean~H.Q. 05:52, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Phi Sigma Alpha GA nomination

Hey hope you are well, I nominated it and now Phi Sigma Alpha is currently a good article nominee, please when you have the time could you review it. Thanks El Johnson (talk) 19:23, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I hope we dont have problems. El Johnson (talk) 04:36, 15 November 2009 (UTC) Saw the fixes, thank for that too.El Johnson (talk) 04:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree it can be a bit confusing, changed it, what you thought it was, was actually what I was attempting to say. Question; about how long does the whole nomination, acceptance, non acceptance process take? Just wondering since its my first time :)El Johnson (talk) 06:27, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I will take care of this review, I'm curious what we can do with the list of fraternities. Maybe if we add a little history and format to it... Presto! FL material. - Caribbean~H.Q. 00:39, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: Cotto

Its no big deal, I expected Pacquiao to out-speed him. The truth is that the Philippines need a hero more than us, we have 61 world champions as well as prospects in at least ten of the divisions, plus the world-class Arroyo brothers are making their professional debut within the following three months. On the other hand, they have Manny, Pancho Villa and Donaire among a few others. For a third world country, these people bring hope, for us he was just another champion forced to live in the shadow of Trinidad and Gómez. Unfortunately, if he is faced against Mayweather, Manny will be outboxed badly. I'm more intrigued by the fact that the "torch" is now waiting the next carrier. Who will take it first between Juan Manuel López, César Seda Jr., Kenny Galarza and McWilliams Arroyo? That remains to be seen. However, while most people expect "Juanma" to make it, I think that Seda can really establish himself since his popularity in his region is growing fast. His size and speed are very good for that division; a fight against an undefeated, yet beatable, champion like Omar Andrés Narváez would do wonders for him. On the other hand, Galarza's perfect KO percent will earn him an opportunity against Juan Urango next year, according to his manager. Galarza excels against pressure fighters and Urango is a big-but-extremly-slow pressure fighter, taylor-made for a more mature Galarza. The Arroyo brothers are a wildcard, since they will most likely sign with a big company and get pushed fast, especially McWilliams, so we may see at least one of them holding a belt by 2011. My point? We should be grateful that we have so much young talent, instead of worrying about a single loss. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:15, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I guess, but the category will still exist. So, what do you think about the prospects mentioned above? I bet that you didn't know some of them, mostly due to lousy promotion. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:44, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Well, now might be a good time to take note, these kids seem quite promising, some even more than our current champions when they were at this stage. I have been meaning to ask, did you receive the expansion proposal that was sent in my reply last week? I have been monitoring the new articles lately, and the degradation of the ones that are falling into our project is accelerating. In the last two weeks, there have been at least four vanity pages that have survived until my scan, when last year we had an average of 2-3 that survived that long in a month. Of the constructive ones being created during these two weeks, two are already tagged and none are beyond stub class. I think that if we don't target the quality of the existing articles, the amount of pages needing attention within scope may spin out of control. - Caribbean~H.Q. 04:54, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, that's the one  :-) As for the stubs, take for example Guaraguao and Jonathan Torres. Guaraguao was tagged as "orphaned" only four days after being created, while Jonathan Torres was tagged just two minutes after its creation. The remaining ones are Yarleen Santiago & Dariam Acevedo (these two go together, since they are a dupleta) and then there's Historia de Las Mascaras de Hatillo Puerto Rico, which was certainly created with good intentions, but I'm not sure if there is more to support the topic, perhaps it should be integrated in Hatillo's article. - Caribbean~H.Q. 05:36, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
The Hatillo merger was the best way to deal with that article, which amazingly survived this long. By the way, we have another one today: Pedro Julio Serrano. These just keep coming. I will make sure to expand Puerto Rico Baseball League next, but the improvement/creation ratio almost feels like trying to cut a wave with a butter knife. Thus, I will open and coordinate a second proposal for the other project members, while we work with the ICPR. - Caribbean~H.Q. 04:01, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

edit warring et al

Hello Tony, and thanks for the note. My only dissapointment is the Badge of Shame that I carried for a while after being allowed back in...it's now gone, and I believe you had something to do with its removal. ñiff ñiff ñiff I was hoping I could wear it a bit longer
;-(
Caribbean and you, and others, are welcome to work on the Macheteros article. I recognize the article has probably gone thru several iterations in the past, and hopefully I didn't miss any consensus, but I seek to improve it, certainly not the opposite. The article can be improved even passed its current GA status, I believe. Some of the stuff there could be challenged by other editors, why not clean it up now between the 3 of us? As for edit warring, I wouldn't even mention it. My belief is if I take down the same thing more than once (never mind 3 times!), then I am edit warring, but the key here is the word "same", as in "identical". To be specific if you move Cuba around to see where it fits, I don't take that personal, but just an attempt to express your view. Likewise, Caribbean and others should feel free to revert me, I won't report it unless it become personal (aka, goes over the 3 RR's). That's how I understand the policy. Nevertheless, thanks for the tip, and I will review the policy on edit warring once more to ensure I didn't missed anything. Thanks, Mercy11 (talk) 03:09, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Pedro Julio Serrano

Thanks for the note, I'll have a look in a few hours and see if I can find anything other references, but you're right, it looks like the only reference on the article at the moment is the subject's own blog. --Canley (talk) 05:35, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Quesito

Puede ayudarlo? ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:20, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

change

Hi, there was a monumental change (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Puerto_Rico&action=historysubmit&diff=326743838&oldid=326706940) in the Puerto Rico article. Maybe an ancient version was uploaded. A lot of things were included (even the padlock protection disappeared) and it lost me what this user is trying to do. What do you think? Regards, Mercy11 (talk) 19:53, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

No, I didn't, was I supposed to? You are the one that deals with the PR-related articles around here, right? so I came to you. I read it here:(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mercy11#Boricua_Barnstar). Regards, Mercy11 (talk) 20:37, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

I took some time to read the entire revision, its generally some POV and random changes. However, some of it resembles what we used to see from Portoricensis, so we must keep an eye on his contributions before we end up in another mess like last time. I also deleted a page that he created back in 2007, that had somehow survived this long, despite failing CSD A7 miserably. By the way, since you are a fan of old school boxing, perhaps you would like to know that Wilfredo Vázquez, Jr. is scheduled to fight for a world title in March 2010. I also did some work on Sr.'s article back in October, with a good lead and cleanup it has potential. - Caribbean~H.Q. 21:49, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

need some help again

Aduana building in 1917, still with two floors

, could you please help me out so that they wont be erased. Te lo voy a agradecer muchoEl Johnson (talk) 05:49, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


Re: unbiased

Thanks, but I don't consider myself unbiased I want you to know that, and I don't believe anyone anywhere is truly unbiased either,,,everyone around here included. I believe we all come from different backgrounds, experiences, beliefs, even DNAs that hard-wire us to be the (biased) way we are. I will agree some people try to be less biased than others, but they are so only with tremendous effort and at a significant cost to their own selves. When confronted with panic, under surprise, under attack, under the effect of the supernatural, etc, etc, they will switch back to their normally biased ways. I do appreciate your thoughts however and your welcoming nature,,,,but, ho ho ho, hold on, I am not ready to live up to the "part of the group" thing, that stuff sounds too much for me, I am still learning my ropes around this place. I will keep my eyes open for irregularities and let the others know if I see any, if that's what it takes though. Will be in touch. Regards, Mercy11 (talk) 05:39, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

ok, ok. but,,,No, I think I understood you well, initially as well as your reply now. I just wanted to share a few thoughts. But thanks for your continued remarks; they are very thoughtful. I'll help in what I can. I'll also be watching to continue to learn from you guys that have been in these trenches for sometime. Thanks Tony, Mercy11 (talk) 23:13, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

One request

Hey, 'manito, please help me out with something would you?

Someone is messing up with my account. Sort of giving me some rights or what have you. I saw it in my log, please check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/rights What is this person doing and how can I get my account back to normal. I don't want that stuff this Jake Wartenberg is giving, especially if I don't know what it does. I just want to be a plain editor and maybe look out for the integrity and neutrality of Puerto Rican related articles. Would you check it out (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/rights) and see if it can be reversed? Thanks, Mercy11 (talk) 23:32, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time. I breath some relief now - ufff. Regards, Mercy11 (talk) 03:27, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for taking care of the custodial duties on the Edwin article. I really appreciate all the work that you admins do! Regards, TallMagic (talk) 20:31, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Joe Sanchez image

OTRS has a very large backlog at the moment, so images tend to get deleted before the permission is reviewed in OTRS and noted on the image page. I went in and found his two emails and have undeleted and tagged the image. If that ever happens again, let me or another OTRS person know and we will find the permission and restore the image. Sorry for the inconvenience. MBisanz talk 04:19, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Politics of Puerto Rico

What do you think of Seablade's edits to this article? I see that he is doing a ton of changes and has removed some references, but haven't really browsed through them fully. Mercy left me a note about them ealier, I reverted once per that request, but he reverted back and has done several changes without edit summaries. Perhaps a POV check could be in order? - Caribbean~H.Q. 05:54, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I just want to say thanks to you for revising my updates and put it back over 98 % of them!

Best regards and Thank you,

--Seablade (talk) 05:39, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

  • You are welcome Seablade, do things in accordance to policy. Mi hermano, let me tell you that Wikipedia is not about what we like or want, it is about what is, facts. If you heed the advice that I gave you in your "talk page" you may actually do quite well here. Tony the Marine (talk) 18:20, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

san guivin!

gracias por el saludo! afectuosos abrazos! --Cerejota (talk) 23:16, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Igual a ti Tony, buen provecho! El Johnson (talk) 23:39, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Jajajaj, eres terrible con ese pobre pavo! Same to you! Feliz dia. Mercy11 (talk) 03:18, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Que se cuide ese pavo... Tony, que lo pases bien, saludos. --Jmundo (talk) 17:37, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the greeting, though I don't like some of the hypocrisy behind this holiday's history. Seablade is still going over Politics of Puerto Rico. Some of the stuff that he is posting is pretty irrelevant to the article, like Fortuño supposedly being a long-shot candidate for the US's VP, just because he was mentioned once. Some of these edits are beginning to look like some sort of propaganda. What shall we do about it? - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:50, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Francisco Ramírez Medina

Tony, I have been browsing our historical articles and this one seems like the best option to start the effort with ICP. Of all of the notable revolutionaries, Ramírez was the one that received the highest political rank, but also the one that we know less about. If there are still some official documents around, the ICP can easily track them down and at least give us some information on his background and death. Roberto Fernández managed to get a lot of information surrounding Roberto Cofresí that way, which we used to create a proper article for him. - Caribbean~H.Q. 02:47, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Mano, I'm not surprised since that happened in 2002. I must admit that Calderón is one the politicians in my blacklist. She had everything in her hands to resolve Puerto Rico's status, but refused to pursue the Asamblea Constituyente when the patriotic movement was on its peak following Vieques' ordeal. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:28, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

WARNING vandal

I came across a vandal in PR related articles, I think he should be blocked immediately [[3]] as can be seen there,El Johnson (talk) 00:53, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem, just glad he/she is gone. Cant wait to be done with finals so I can get around to spending more time here.El Johnson (talk) 04:01, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

It seems like they are getting slightly smarter. He used summaries to mislead RCP. Ha, like that would would work with us. - Caribbean~H.Q. 02:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Hila Levy move

That looks like a good solution to our earlier problem. Like many things once pointed out, it now seems "obvious"! ;-) Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 17:08, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Rita Moreno

Hi, http://www.speakersonhealthcare.com/speakers/Rita_Moreno.php says she is the 1st FEMALE to have won all 4, but the wiki article Rita Moreno says she is the 1st HISPANIC FEMALE. which one is right? Mercy11 (talk) 14:04, 2 December 2009 (UTC)



Hummm, then still...

instead of "She is the first and only Hispanic female and one of ten performers who have won an Emmy, a Grammy, an Oscar, and a Tony..."

should not wikipedia read "She is the first and only Hispanic and one of ten performers who have won an Emmy, a Grammy, an Oscar, and a Tony..." ???????

Regards, Mercy11 (talk) 21:33, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanksgiving

Thanks for the wished, and a belated return: Happy Turkey Day! I was out of town to visit family, and my internet access was so brief I didn't bother with WP. I don't mind driving for 13 hours, and I don't mind driving in the rain, but driving the Interstate 77 in West Virginia made me want to slit my wrists. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 21:52, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Tax and customs laws reference

Tax and customs laws reference on Politics of Puerto Rico

This article does reference to a within Tax and custom law article. The reference still there however the article was deleted. I search the older version and found that the article read like this:

Tax and CUSTOM laws Under Commonwealth laws, residents of the island do not pay federal income taxes on Puerto Rico source income, although they do pay on US source income, as well as federal salaries. However, all commerce is taxed by the U.S. Federal Government before import or export. Puerto Ricans who work for the Federal government or that gained income from transactions in a State (such as stock dividends trade in the NYSE), pay federal income taxes.

Island residents pay all Social Security taxes and federal payroll, registration, communication, and taxes other than the income tax. However, Puerto Rico is excluded from the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) in spite of its contribution, and in general receives less money in return for its contribution. For example, in the Medicaid program, Puerto Rico receives less than 15% of the funding it would be allotted as a state. For Medicare, Puerto Rico pays fully but only receives partial benefits.

In my opinion the article must be re-included since now the reference source to this data is at hand. Maybe that was the reason to delete before, however nobody delete the reference. Now all the source reference are on the Puerto Rico article and should be included just as the previous versions.

Regards,

--Seablade (talk) 00:43, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Done,

I followed your recommendation!

Thank you,

--Seablade (talk) 03:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Old Pr baseball game poster.gif listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Old Pr baseball game poster.gif, 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. Damiens.rf 13:57, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Oscar Garcia Rivera2.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Oscar Garcia Rivera2.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. Damiens.rf 14:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Oscar Garcia Rivera .jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Oscar Garcia Rivera .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. Damiens.rf 14:03, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Puerto Ricans arriving by ship.gif listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Puerto Ricans arriving by ship.gif, 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. Damiens.rf 14:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

File:PRarrivebyplane .gif listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:PRarrivebyplane .gif, 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. Damiens.rf 14:08, 7 December 2009 (UTC)


File source problem with File:Steamship from Corsica.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Steamship from Corsica.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.

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 19:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Damiens.rf 19:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC)


File:Sixto Escobar El Mundo.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sixto Escobar El Mundo.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. Damiens.rf 20:17, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Utuado Massacre.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Utuado Massacre.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. Damiens.rf 20:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Casaroja.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Casaroja.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. Damiens.rf 20:57, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

PONCE MASSACRE.JPG

Hi Tony,
While surfing around, I came accross this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Damiens.rf
Of particular interest to me was this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ponce_Massacre.JPG,
where it says that
"This image or media has no source information. Source information must be provided so that the copyright status can be verified by others. Unless the copyright status is provided and a source is given, the image will be deleted after Monday, 14 December 2009. "
Up for DELETION???? What's going on??? this file is everywhere I look, internet or not, dealing with this subject. It is a classic photograph. As I recall it was taken by an El Imparcial newspaper photojournalist.
Could it really be true that this file has a copywright violation when it has been in wikipedia since at least mid year, yet a pic of the Font-Ubides House I uploaded in October/November got deleted in 3 days of upload?????
What do you think? I mean, is not like someone can travel there today and take a replacement picture!! Give me a break!
Mercy11 (talk) 22:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Some people just can't accept the truth and find it impossible to believe they don't live in the rosy, cinderella world that put them to bed when they were toddlers. The Ponce Massacre image has been there for 5 years according to the log. I see you are inundated with NfD notices; I'll work on the Ponce Massacre copyright waiver. Regards, Mercy11 (talk) 00:01, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Forget it - I see you 've already done it. Mercy11 (talk) 00:09, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

re:algo raro

is hard to assume good faith when someone nominated so many images in one day. --Jmundo (talk) 01:40, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Agendas Tony, just agendas. - Caribbean~H.Q. 02:50, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Olga Viscal Garriga.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Olga Viscal Garriga.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. Damiens.rf 19:58, 8 December 2009 (UTC)


Your tone

Was inappropriate here. Issuing warnings in bold with <big> tags; threatening to block an editor with whom you are in a content dispute; and insisting your superiority over said editor is behavior unbecoming of an administrator. ÷seresin 23:11, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

My note to you was made because you were warning Damien qua administrator, and, as I noted, it was not an appropriate warning because you are not a neutral party and it was not delivered professionally. I was not suggesting that his behavior would not warrant a block (though I am not convinced that it would), only that your warning was inappropriate. If you feel he deserves a block, there are avenues where you can appeal for third party administrator advice. ÷seresin 01:43, 9 December 2009 (UTC)


Painter

File:Portrait of McClintock.jpg
McClintock by Tony.

Hi, Marine. Are you the author of this painting? --Damiens.rf 03:05, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

The answer is no, just the owner of the photo taken. By the way, I realize that you are right about the "poster" image issue. Tony the Marine (talk) 03:11, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Do you understand the difference between owning a photograph and owning a photograph's copyrights? (Good to hear about the posters issue. Try to be less arrogant next time some inferior editor contest your work. Even the greatest user can commit mistakes.) --Damiens.rf 03:15, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
I do own the copyright to the photo which I took. Hey, you are not an inferior editor, you are a damn good one, hell I remember having a fine level headed conversation with you once. I guess you hit me hard with the image things (some of wish I don't agree with), but we all can get a little out of hand sometimes. Listen there are a couple of images that I would like you to reconsider, Colberg and the Ponce Massacre, especially the latter which is a sensitive issue for the Puerto Rican community. I will fix the the source on the General's image. Tony the Marine (talk) 03:28, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Taking a picture of a copyrighted painting does not transfers the copyright to you. There was no creative work in producing such a simple copy of the image. Please, consider deleting it to save us some time.
About the Ponce image, please understand that by being a picture of a sensitive issue for your people have no impact on our policies. We can't take copyrighted pictures and use as we wish. If that image is really famous (like in a award-winning picture), we could use it in an article section discussing the image itself. But if what you want is an impacting image o illustrate articles that deal with the Ponce Massacre, I'm afraid you'll have to find a free image. We don't keep non-free material just because it fits our convenience.
About the Colberg image, track down its copyright holder. By "source" you sometimes seems to understand "the website you happened to download the image". But this is not enough to determine the licensing status, or to ponder any possible WP:NFCC#2 concerns. I suggest you find some book that use this image and see who it credits. Usually, books behave better in regard to copyrights than websites. --Damiens.rf 03:40, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
More about Ponce

The article Ponce Massacre says the image was made by the newspaper El Imparcial. Can you attribute this information to some reliable source? And the article El Imparcial says this newspaper was destroyed by the government. This shouldn't be hard to source. Now, try to discover what happened to the newspapers archive, or actually, to the archives copyright! Was it donned to the government? Was the copyrights declared null? Some research may end up showing this image is in the public domain, what would be great. --Damiens.rf 03:55, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

It may also be of your interest the existence of quite a number of PD images of the trial that followed the massacre. Just search for Ponce 1937 at http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pp/mdbquery.html to see them. --Damiens.rf 04:10, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

...

Marine, please take a look at my recent comment on the Ponce picture deletion discussion. Basically, I believe the image could be used if the article discussed it with original text based on more than one source. More details there. --Damiens.rf 12:49, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about that...

I don't log in very much anymore! I mostly edit and read anonymously these days—it's a lot calmer this way—and so I don't see my talk page... I am glad to see the issue was resolved, though! In general you are best off dealing directly with the editor who tagged it, and posting to a community noticeboard regarding the copyright status, if you believe the decision was handled wrongly. Cheers, and I hope you are doing well. Kat Walsh (spill your mind?) 03:16, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

PD or not PD

Hi, Marine. this picture is tagged as PD but have a lot of fair-use rationales. What's it's real licensing status? --Damiens.rf 12:31, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Marine 69-71. You have new messages at Talk:List_of_Puerto_Ricans#Acceptable_Maria_Arrillaga_?.
Message added 18:29, 10 December 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Happy Holidays

Tony, thanks for the Thanksgiving Day note. I'm back on-line now after returning from a deployment to Afghanistan for the past 8 months. Hope all is well for you. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 19:05, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

you are being discussed

at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Uninvolved_Admin_Requested:_User:Damiens.rf_multiple_JPG_deletions_and_related_matters Mercy11 (talk) 21:42, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Marine_69-71/Archive_29&oldid=1143388791"