User talk:Enano Humano

Resource based economy

I have no clue to what you are referring to on the Resource-based economy but please do not edit the article for some personal reason or opinion you hold about Fresco who apparently you visited in the last few years, according to the link you posted?

Whatever, the redirect is important and was sorted out on the talk page previously, you can reference that if you are curious about that information. [1] Diff.

You did not use an edit summary either. Warning do not remove information without a reason or not use an edit summary, but mostly what you did in that edit was not constructive. It appears you appeared started an account to make this one edit. If you wish to be a productive editor on Wikipedia get familiar with the rules and regulation guidelines. Thanks Earl King Jr. (talk) 07:33, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

STOP Auto promotion to TVP!

Please! Stop auto promotion to the venus project! Don´t bother the people!

see more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Resource-based_economy#Auto_promotion_to_TVP_in_this_article

I do not have a clue about what you mean. I warned you about not using an edit summary. You created an account and immediately started edit warring. Are you a member of the Venus Project? If a single issue edit warrior its best you learn something about Wikipedia. Most of what you are saying on the talk page does not really make sense. This is an encyclopedia. Tne part you keep reverting is there because though Fresco is not notable for his Resource based economy, except in a small circle, it qualifies and redirects to information that is related since he copied a term which has been in general use before Fresco used it. Earl King Jr. (talk) 15:00, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please read and don´t ignore the most relevant sources, if you don´t do that, you are only a fanatic of the venus project and jaques fresco. Please use your crital thinking! Don´t bother the people! Enano Humano (talk) , 30 December 2013

Venus project

You are against the small consensus now on that Wikipedia article. You are mistaken to think it's anything more than a simple redirect. No one cares about the politics or friends or enemies of Venus project. I suggest you stop before someone reports you for edit warring or worse. Calling a fellow editor a vandal in your edit summary is a bad idea. Please stop that. There is no place for that kind of anger or fighting over edits on Wikipedia [2] <---- Read this about Wikipedia not being a battleground and take heed. Thanks Earl King Jr. (talk) 13:36, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am against your manipulation and the venus project bad intention. You still ignoring the real sources:Please! Stop auto promotion to the venus project! Don´t fool the people! see more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Resource-based_economy#Auto_promotion_to_TVP_in_this_article

January 2014

Hello, I'm Josh3580. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Resource-based economy, with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Josh3580_talk/hist 09:33, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Please check the sources and the arguments by me against auto-promotion to venus project by Earl, see more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Resource-based_economy#Auto_promotion_to_TVP_in_this_article

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Sjö (talk) 21:28, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is not fair, you are ignoring complety the sources about the manipulation from venus project and his fans in this article ( they don´t have a economic model o theory, please visit the website of venus project and read ), but ok, you have the power to do that and much more, but you know, this is no correct! Wikipedia must be impartial . . . you are making a mistake! :/

See more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Resource-based_economy#Auto_promotion_to_TVP_in_this_article

See too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Resource-based_economy#Article

Please check, Again the sources:

- Response from Patent office of USA to venus project over RBE: https://archive.org/details/IntentoderegistrodelaEBRporTVP (RBE can´t have owner)

- Legal process about rejection RBE patent: http://trademarks.breanlaw.com/77829193-resource-based-economy.html ( venus project can´t prove the authority over RBE)

- Article. Debunked the venus project: http://theoverthinker.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/8.-Spirit-Of-The-Times-2012_issue8_web.pdf (venus project get money from activists to make a movie but they never made this movie and the money is lost)

- Real Bibliography from academic books:

* Barry C.Field (2000), Natural Resource Economics, McGraw-Hill. ISBN 0-07-231677-2.

* Thomas H. Tietenberg (1988), Environmental and Natural Resource Economics, Scott-Foresman. ISBN 0-673-18945-7.

* Philip A. Neher (1990), Natural Resource Economics: Conservation and Exploitation, Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-31174-8.

* Steven C. Hackett (2001), Environmental and Natural Resources Economics: Theory, Policy, and the Sustainable Society, M.E. Sharpe. ISBN 0-7656-0682-8.

* Erhun Kula (1992), Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment, Springer. ISBN 0-412-36330-5.

* Juan C. Suris Regueiro, Manuel M. Varela Lafuente (1995), Introducción a la economía de los recursos naturales, Civitas. ISBN 84-470-0613-1.

* Pere Riera (2005), Manual de economía ambiental y de los recursos naturales, Thomson. ISBN 84-9732-369-6.

* Carlos Romero(1994), Economía de los recursos ambientales y naturales, Alianza Editorial. ISBN 84-206-6811-7.

* Alan Randall, Ricardo Calvet Perez (1985), Economía de los recursos naturales y política ambiental, Limusa. ISBN 968-18-1727-3.

* Roxana Barrantes (1997), Hacia un nuevo dorado: Economía de los recursos naturales, Consorcio de Investigación Económica. ISBN 9972-670-00-7.

Welcome!

Hello, Enano Humano, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

As well as the links above, please let me point out to you our policy on repeatedly undoing other people's work. This is the three-revert rule, and it's not obvious how it works, so you will likely find the material at the link to be helpful. Again, welcome. Tom Harrison ^Talk 11:15, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tom! Again don´t support Earl more, you can do your work very well in wikipedia if you please check the sources and the arguments by me against auto-promotion to venus project by Earl, see more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Resource-based_economy#Auto_promotion_to_TVP_in_this_article If the you find a mistake or manipularion in wikipedia, you must do the right thing! ACTUALLY THIS IS THE CASE for RBE Article!

Edit warring

You are edit warring and also have broken the frequency of editing guidelines about reverting [3] Earl King Jr. (talk) 00:02, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:46, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring, again

Your recent editing history at Resource-based economy shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Your editing pattern shows that you are the user that also edits as 69.74.180.17 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 24.186.3.217 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Please note that any discussion about including the link in the article has to be grounded in Wikipedia policies and the like, e.g. WP:HAT. I can only speak for myself, but please also note that I am not in any way associated with the Venus Project. Your continued assertions of autopromotion on my part are groundless and insulting, per Wikipedia:Etiquette.Sjö (talk) 11:53, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is a fake acdusation I am writting from latin america, is a shame for wikipedia this acdusation!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Enano Humano (talk • contribs)

It does not matter if you are writing from the moon. You are an incompetent editor that is trying to sell some baloney from some internet war, here. You could care less of cooperating with other editors. You know nothing and do not care how to edit constructively. You should be blocked for a while and topic banned from this subject. Earl King Jr. (talk) 08:17, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

lol you are only a fanatic of venus project Earl King. My bad for you guy. Keep saying lies, the real sources have the evidence: http://trademarks.breanlaw.com/77829193-resource-based-economy.html— Preceding unsigned comment added by Enano Humano (talk • contribs)

July 2017

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at Resource-based economy, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Sjö (talk) 08:08, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia. Sjö (talk) 15:05, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey please relax, maybe was a mistake from my side.