User talk:Juandavid ph

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Juandavid ph, 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 click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! 115ash^→(☏) 10:07, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Juandavid ph, 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 click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! 115ash^→(☏) 10:07, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: List of Reportedly Haunted Locations in Colombia has been accepted[edit]

List of Reportedly Haunted Locations in Colombia, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as List-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Hell in a Bucket (talk) 09:18, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 19[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of reportedly haunted locations in Colombia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page AUC. 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) 11:48, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: List of reportedly haunted locations in La Candelaria has been accepted[edit]

List of reportedly haunted locations in La Candelaria, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as List-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:11, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 17:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your request concerning Edward321[edit]

You made a number of significant errors in this edit to Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement.

Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement (or "AE") is where you go after the Arbitration Committee has applied sanctions of some kind to an editor, and you think that editor has broken those sanctions and needs to be dealt with. You case is not that kind.
The Arbitration Committee itself is the last stop for behavioral disputes, not the first place to go.
Where you wanted to file a report is at the Administrators' Noticeboard/Incidents ("ANI" or "AN/I")
But your very worst mistake is in thinking of the article (any article) as your article. Nobody on Wikipedia "owns" any article. Every article is available for editing by any editor. Please read WP:Ownership thoroughly and understand what it means. You can certainly complain about Edward321 not responding to your requests for information, but you do not own the article and cannot prevent any editor from editing it.

In my opinion, if you make this complaint at AN/I, the result will not be that Edward321 will be banned from editing the article. Possibly an admin will drop a note on his talk page telling him that he's required to explain his edits when asked to. At the very, very worst, if he continues not to respond, he might get a short block, during which time he cannot edit Wikipedia at all, but nothing that he's done that I can see warrants him being blocked from that article specifically. BMK (talk) 23:11, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You said on my talk page that your were "kinda new on policies", and it's been suggested to me that I point out a few of the most important ones to you, so here goes:

Reliable sources - All information on Wikipedia must be verifiable, and the way we do that is by supporting the information with a citation from a reliable source. Not every source of information is reliable. Generally speaking books, newspapers, magazines and journals are considered to be reliable, but even some of these can be discounted if they're not credible, or represent one person's opinion and not the consensus of experts on the subject. It's best to read our policy on reliable sources to get a good idea of what is acceptable and what is not. If there is disagreement between editors on whether a source is reliable, a discussion should be held on the article's talk page, and if no consensus can be found there, the Reliable Sources Noticeboard is frequented by editors who know a lot on that subject.,

Notability - Wikipedia has standards about what is and isn't considered to be notable enough to include in the encyclopedia. The policy can be found here, the general notability guidelines are here, and many specific subjects have specific guidlines which you'll usually find by looking for a page called "WP:Notability (subject)", where you replace "subject" with the topic you're looking for. We are a general-interest encyclopedia, so many things which would not be included in traditional print encyclopedias will find their way into Wikipedia, but we are not totally open-ended, we do maintain our standards as best we can. Again, if you and another editor have diagreements about notability, start a discussion on the article talk page.

Fringe theories - Wikipedia, in general, follows scientific consensus on most subjects which are the proper study of science. That doesn't mean that we don't mention theories which are outside the mainstream, but we also don't give them equal footing with mainstream scientific opinion. The way we handle these "fringe theories" can be found here, and should be followed closely. We wish to make our encyclopedia as accurate as possible for our readers, so we try not to present unscientific information about scientific subjects, or, really, any wild speculative theories about anything in which there exists a well-established mainstream explanation. Disagreements concerning fringetheories should first be discussed on the article talk page, and then, if necessary, taken to the Fringe Theories Noticeboard.

Neutral point of view - Wikipedia is intended to be written from a neutral point of view, which is to say that we don't give our opinions, we give the opinions of our sources, we don't one way of looking at things over another, we present all ways of looking at things - but at the same time, giving primary value to those mainstream points of view in which there is a consensus. We can see that NPOV and FRINGE might appear to be contradictory, but that is not really the case. We don't want Wikipedia to say "X is true and Y is false", we want to say "While some people believe Y, the majority of experts on this subject say X", and then present the citations from reliable sources which back up that statement. Disagreements with another editor about neutral point of view should be discussed on the article's talk page, and can later be taken to the Neutral Point of View Noticeboard if necessary.

Those are just a few of the policies you should keep in mind. Another place to take a look at is this page about what Wikipedia is not, which is something else that is useful to remember. Best, BMK (talk) 00:38, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

One final thing, "vandalism" has a very specific meaning on Wikipedia, which you can read about here. Specifically, it is not "vandalism" for one editor to revert the edits of another editor when he or she disagrees with them, or thinks that they aren't improving the encyclopedia. This kind of disagreement happens all the time, and they should always be hashed out on the article talk page if possible before any additional steps at dispute resolution are taken. What one should never do is simply re-revert back to your preferred version of the article, since doing so is the first step to edit warring, which can lead to being blocked from editing. BMK (talk) 08:00, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Juandavid ph. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Juandavid ph. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Juandavid ph. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Reportedly haunted locations in Antioquia[edit]

A tag has been placed on Category:Reportedly haunted locations in Antioquia requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:47, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Reportedly haunted locations in Cundinamarca[edit]

A tag has been placed on Category:Reportedly haunted locations in Cundinamarca requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:49, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]