User talk:Cristiano Tomás/Archive 12

Invitation to the renewed discussion on Willem van der Haegen

Greetings,

I have previously involved another user in our discussion in regards to Willem van der Haegen. First, I must state that we are not the same person and I did not know that doing this was against wikipedia policies. My intention in asking him for help was not to validate the changes I proposed by means of meatpuppetry or sockpuppetry (at the time I did not even know the definition of this, since I am new to wikipedia. I am genuinely sorry for that). In fact, after you told me a single source was not enough to reidentify Willem van der Haegen as 'De Kersemakere', I did step down, linked the information I already had gathered to a friend and asked him to do his own research. Afterwards, he decided that doing the edits himself was the best way of not aggravating you any further. If you had actually read through his edits carefully you would have noticed that he took the trouble to correct my previous mistakes of not using encyclopedic language, portraying speculation as a fact and including only one source. He cited many sources for his edits and was sure of making clear what was speculation and what was not. Nonetheless, in sight of the events of the last few days, I engaged in in-depth research pertaining the aforementioned subject and therefore invite you to the current discussion.

Best regards,

Frid.antonia-arlon (talk) 23:02, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Horasis in Cascais

Hi. There are many organizations that hold meetings in Cascais and it would be pointless to list all of them. I do not see what is particularly special about Horasis but if you feel that it is a notable organization then it would seem more appropriate to mention it in the text. It certainly looks like blatant propaganda as a photo caption and detracts from the subject of the photo, which should be the hotel not the Cocktail Party. A paragraph in the Economy section saying that Cascais hosts regular events such as the Ironman competition, the Harley-Davidson Owners Group and Horasis would be better. Roundtheworld (talk) 12:14, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

@Roundtheworld: Hey there. There are indeed many organizations in Cascais, but to equate the notability of an event that attracts foreign heads of state annually (horasis) to a Harley group is intellectually dishonest as one is obviously far more notable. Just as numerous other city pages have images with captions referring notable events held there, from Davos and the WEF to Las Vegas and CES, there is nothing out of line in referencing the horasis meeting in the Cascais article. Cristiano Tomás (talk) 19:32, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

To be honest, I had never heard of Horasis, so I am not sure how really notable it is. There are 2000 Harley-Davidsons blocking the traffic in Cascais today so in terms of importance to the city I would say that was pretty important. But that was not my point. It's OK if you want to insert a photo of the hotel, given its history, but a photo of a cocktail party is not. Roundtheworld (talk) 09:15, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Renewed discussion on the Willem van der Haegen article

Hello, since you have not replied to my message nor commented on the talk page of the article, I must assume you are not interested in this subject anymore. As a matter of fact, I created a bullet list and invited you to the discussion (which you ignored) with the sole intention of giving you a chance to contribute or object to future edits on the article.

Here follows a summary of my research and proposed changes:

Besides Claeys research, I have found 6 secondary sources which refer to Willem as Guilherme Casmaca (5 of which also point out that this name derives from the Dutch, Keersmaeker, Kaasmaker, Kasmach etc). In addition to that, primary sources strongly associate the name Casmaca (or De Keersmaeker) to Willem van der Haegen: a) he is referred as 'Guylelmo Hersmacher' (a transliteration of Keersmaeker) in the latin manuscript 'Descripcam' by Valentim Fernandes (from 1506, therefore published during the lifetime of Willem, 1430-1507/9), b) he is solely referred as Guilherme Casmacain the will of his wife Margarida registered by the notary André Fernandes (1510), c) Gaspar Frutuoso in Saudades da Terra (primary source) refers to him as Guilherme Cosmacra, d) last but not least, in 1470 the archives of Bruges mention a Flemish merchant who traded with the Portuguese who went by the name of Willem De Kersemakere (I had the trouble of finding it myself and adding it to wikimedia, this is the document used by Claeys in his research and which was used by the French historian Jacques Paviot in 2006 (five years before Claeys) to reidentify Willem van der Haegen as Guilherme Casmaca/Willem de Kersmakere). As you see, several sources (primary and secondary) attribute the name Casmaca (and variants) to Willem van der Haegen, they even differ in the exact origin of the name, but they all agree on the surname itself.

For all these reasons, I will proceed to edit Willem's wikipedia article again, including the surname Casmaca (please bear in mind I do not wish to remove the name van der Haegen of the article, I merely want to present the other names which Willem van der Haegen was/is known by). Furthermore, I will refrain the different hypotheses in regards to the origin of this surname to the 'possible origins' subsection (this includes the research done by Claeys and Paviot, as well as the claims made by Jorge Forjaz, José Guilherme Reis Leite and Pedro da Silveira that the surname (Kaasmaker/Kasmach) derives from the Dutch word for 'cheese maker').

Sincerely,

Frid.antonia-arlon (talk) 00:37, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

@Frid.antonia-arlon: Thanks for the head's up. Sounds good. Cheers, Cristiano Tomás (talk) 01:21, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for replying to my message. I appreciate that. I hope there will be no hard feelings between us and that we can collaborate in future projects someday. As I said in my previous message, I did not intend to use of meatpuppetry to implement my edits on the article. I am genuinely sorry about the whole misunderstanding and the way things turned out.

Best regards,

Frid.antonia-arlon (talk) 01:40, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Southern California Wiknic & Bonfire invitation

270° panorama overlooking La Jolla Shores Beach as seen from the Martin Johnson House, Scripps Institute of Oceanography, during a late August sunset. Photo by Gregg M. Erickson

Meetup-San Diego-September 2K19

Who: All members of the public

What: Southern California Wiknic & Bonfire.

When: Sunday 1 September 2019, 2:00PM PDT / 1400 until 10:00PM PDT / 2200

Where: La Jolla Shores

Sponsor: San Diego Wikimedians User Group ( US-SAN )

Your host: RightCowLeftCoast (talk · contribs)

Please add your username to our attendees list so we know how many will be attending, and please add your intended potluck contribution to the list.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject San Diego at 18:27, 1 August 2019 (UTC). You can unsubscribe from future invitations to San Diego Wikimedians User Group events by removing your name from the WikiProject San Diego mass mailing list, and from the Southern California meet-up group by removing your name from the LA meet-ups mailing list.

Disambiguation link notification for September 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Portuguese Architecture, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gothic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:28, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Ouidah into Fort of São João Baptista de Ajudá. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:38, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Portuguese Architecture, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aveiro (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:28, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Santa Barbara Pastoral Region, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santa Barbara (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:23, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Can you explain a deletion to me?

You deleted an addition to Morgan Hill, California's Wikipedia page. The addition was about an earthquake that was reported by people in Morgan Hill, California. I was told by the TeaHouse to not make separate articles for earthquakes unless they have a very significant event/death in them. But, the TeaHouse told me that if people from a town report the earthquake, I can add the earthquake information to the towns history, as it is a part of the history of that town. Please explain why it was deleted, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elijahandskip (talk • contribs) 15:18, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Question on Notability

When would you call an Earthquake notable? 8% of a town reporting it isn't enough, so what percentage makes it notable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elijahandskip (talk • contribs) 15:10, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Salazar

Dear Cristiano, you undid my revision of Wikipedia page on Salazar; your argument was: "Way too excessive number of images; also a gallery is not the proper format for that section". As I am new to Wikipedia page editing, please guide me:

• What is the number of pictures suitable for this specific page on Salazar?
• If a gallery is not suitable for that section, what is your suggestion to place some of my pictures?
• Which of my pictures do you consider useful for readers?

Thanks for your advice, Gadogado123 (talk) 18:16, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

@Gadogado123: I have added one of your images to the article of his grave. All other images were quite bad images, either in relevance or quality. Galleries are almost never used in biographical articles, wikipedia is WP:NOTGALLERY and excessive use of images is highly discouraged and will be reverted by most editors. As I added the grave image to the article, there is nothing more I suggest adding. Cheers, Cristiano Tomás (talk) 01:26, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. Gadogado123 (talk) 10:16, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 7

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

António de Oliveira Salazar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Vimieiro

John V of Portugal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Cabinda

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:40, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Royal and Venerable Confraternity of the Most Blessed Sacrament of Mafra

Caro Cristiano,

Antes de mais, felicito-o pelos seus muitos e bons contributos para este projecto, sobretudo no que se refere a Portugal. Aproveitando os seus vastos conhecimentos de português e inglês, será que podia rever o texto do artigo acima referido, de forma a que o mesmo cumpra os requisitos da Wikipédia? Obrigado.--Green356879 (talk) 15:41, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

"Castilian languages"

Regarding the category of "Castilian languages", did you mean to say a 17th-century source, or the 17th edition of Ethnologue? I'd be interested in tracing that source. Kotabatubara (talk) 22:38, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

@Kotabatubara: Yes sorry it was late and I was tired so I misspoke. My point still stands that it is not a widely used or accepted linguistic term outside of one reference in one edition of one publication. Sorry for the confusion, but I still believe it shouldn't be included in the infobox, its hardly notable or accepted. Best, Cristiano Tomás (talk) 23:30, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 14

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

António de Oliveira Salazar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Vimieiro

Portuguese House of Burgundy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Silves

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:47, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 21

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Belém (Lisbon), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Museum District (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:06, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Portuguese people page - needs to become permanently semi-protected

Dear User talk:Cristiano Tomás,

Happy that my actions have caught the attention of people like yourself. Arbitration is it? Sadly, I have never had this kind of reaction for the countless, productive edits up to now. Now that I have your attention, can you join me in getting rid of the endless unsigned IP address and sockpuppet vandal users, (as I previously published on the page talk) and support my request for PERMANENT semi-protection of this page? This latest Madrid-based VANDAL user started off with IP address activities with the sole purpose of deletion and trying to add on the Moors topic right at the top of the Portuguese people page. They also deleted the Portuguese importance on globalisation and wanted Spain there instead. Their intentions had nothing good about them and never was there any other contribution from this user. After I removed and warned them repeatedly for malicious and destructive conduct, they started using another IP address and after warned with blocking, created a sockpuppet account trying to pass for a different user. This is not the first or second or third time I’ve identified such behaviour. It is part of a pattern I’ve started investigating. It is almost invariably done by Brazilian or Spanish or Hispanic users who may sometimes be based elsewhere like Italy or Canada- all stemmed from one of these two nations. Fascinating. The Brazilian users try to insult the Portuguese by implying they are mongrels, an historical hang up against the colonial power which some Brazilians feel deeply against. The Spanish try to brush away their undeniable Moorish legacy and blood, by pushing it Westwards. I don’t believe the Portuguese have an issue with the Moorish influence, but enough is enough. Again, the Spanish have been taunted by the English-speaking world for their brown-ness and the American “Hispanic” stigma perpetuated the rumours which the English had spread against Spain centuries earlier: the Arab Spaniards are trying to invade Britain and have endless riches in the Americas... let’s plunder their ships. I understand the sentiment from Spain and now with the Islamic extremism, the Moors topic has been reignited. Not Portugal’s problem. Now look at both pages, and explain to me why is the Genetic History of Iberia in the Portuguese people page and not on the Spaniards page- that beggars belief as Iberia is 75% or thereabouts made up of, Spain:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_people

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaniards#Background

Many Spanish have a serious identity crisis and try and avoid their Moorishness like the plague as attested on international and reputable news compilations like these two... among countless other examples:

https://youtube/AS07hDVoJcM

https://youtube/EQbY8xIAQuo

Their page is already protected, meaning no vandals are allowed to mess with the page, as should be. High time the Portuguese people page was permanently protected. Thanks in advance for your support and keep up the good work.Melroross (talk) 14:18, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

user:NormanGear Continued harassment

Caro Cristiano Tomás,

Escrevo em português porque creio ambos partilhamos origem Lusa. Tenho observado e como é do teu conhecimento relativamente à página https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_people repetido vandalismo no que concerne a etnia, língua e cultura portuguesas. Já requeri a semi-proteção desta página várias vezes, sem resposta até ao momento. Creio seja justificável e necessário para manter editores vândalos e intrusões maliciosas quase contínuas. Um dos utilizadores que iniciou com endereços IP, há várias semanas assinando user:NormanGear, tem não apenas revertido e manipulado a página supracitada como de facto copiado e adicionado literalmente, edições minhas com fontes devidamente verificáveis mas com incidência ou exclusivamente relacionadas com o povo português. Estas cópias refletem a componente Celta dos portugueses por um lado e por outro a componente Moura onde este utilizador manipula consoante o que acha mais indicado na página https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaniards e vice-versa na https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_people. Resultando numa inequívoca intenção deste utilizador de projetar os portugueses mais “mouros” do que são factualmente e os espanhóis mais “celtas” e menos mediterrânicos do que são. As únicas contribuições deste utilizador focam-se apenas neste aspeto, não tendo eles quaisquer outras entradas. Mais sinistra é a conduta de contínuo assédio da parte deste utilizador que além de invocar todas as siglas possíveis e imaginárias na Wikipedia para me fazer bloquear, reverte todas as minhas contribuições invocando “repetição”. Como anteriores discussões não funcionaram e este assédio é inédito, requeri intervenção pois hoje já foram efectuadas 3 reversões de entradas minhas nesta página (totalmente válidas). A intenção ainda que tendo em boa-fé e sem prévio conhecimento, várias violações à politica de edição na Wikipedia, tem sido sempre e continua a ser contribuir duma forma positiva e factual para o melhoramento da enciclopédia virtual fabulosa e acessível que é ou tenciona ser, a Wikipedia. Podes por favor intervir ou aconselhar uma vez que não tenciono continuar com um utilizador constantemente na sombra a destruir as minhas contribuições e causar transtorno contínuo? Com gratidão Melroross (talk) 22:48, 14 January 2020 (UTC)