User talk:MartinVillafuerte85

Welcome!

Hi MartinVillafuerte85, and a warm welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you have enjoyed editing as much as I did so far and decide to stay. Unfamiliar with the features and workings of Wikipedia? Don't fret! Be Bold! Here's some good links for your reference and that'll get you started in no time!

Editing tutorial, learn to have fun with Wikipedia.

Picture tutorial, instructions on uploading images.

How to write a great article, to make it an featured article status.

Manual of Style, how articles should be written.

Most Wikipedians would prefer to just work on articles of their own interest. But if you have some free time to spare, here are some open tasks that you may want to help out :

RC Patrol - Keeping a lookout for vandalism.

Cleanup - Help make unreadable articles readable.

Requests - Wanted on WP, but hasn't been created.

Merge - Combining duplicate articles into one.

Wikiprojects - So many to join, so many to choose from...Take your pick!

Oh yes, don't forget to sign when you write on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments. And finally, if you have any questions or doubts, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Once again, welcome! =)

- Mailer Diablo 16:15, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

George Michael

I've undone you move of the George Michael article. While you did it all the correct way for topics where the two meanings are of equal popularity I think you'll agree that the musician is by far more famous than the DJ. A good way of finding this out is by looking at the "What links here" for the article in the toobox - this shows that all the incoming links are about the musician. Cheers, violet/riga (t) 20:17, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

August 2009

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did to Ghost (film), you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. kollision (talk) 15:06, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

September 2009

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Thelma & Louise, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. mjwilson (^Talk/_Contrib) 15:07, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

October 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Desperately Seeking Susan has been reverted, as it appears to introduce incorrect information. Please do not intentionally add incorrect information to articles. All information in this encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable, published source. If you believe the information that you added was correct, please cite the references or sources or before making the changes, discuss them on the article's talk page. Please use the sandbox for testing. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. TheFeds 00:22, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did with this edit to 9½ Weeks, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Alansohn (talk) 17:20, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

November 2010

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Showtime movie channels. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Please do not add or change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to Movie Network. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Please do not add or change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to HBO. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Reubot (talk) 00:37, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Galaxy (Australian television). Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Showtime movie channels. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Reubot (talk) 02:12, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

January 2011

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at showtime movie channels, you may be blocked from editing.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Galaxy (Australian television), you may be blocked from editing.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article United International Pictures, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

Reubot (talk) 04:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

February 2011

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Movie Network. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Reubot (talk) 07:25, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April 2011

Please don't redirect an existing article, as you did at Cinema International Corporation, without first gaining consensus at its talk page. Thank you, Mr. Credible (talk) 23:36, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In New Hollywood, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Midnight Express (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line 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) 13:46, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited TNT (TV channel), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Asian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:58, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Hi, Martin, You've made a couple of edits to Swissair Flight 111 that I've reverted. Wikipedia depends on the citation of previously published reliable sources to allow the verification of what it says. Don't worry too much about how you cite it, someone else can always fix that, but it is essential that you identify the source. If you're not sure how to do something, you can always ask at the wp:Help desk. LeadSongDog come howl! 13:01, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When you change the name of airline articles

There is other work that needs to be done.

Were there any notable people on board? If so go to the person's article and change the name of the flight.
If an airport was involved in the crash, go to the airport article and change the name of the flight.
Ditto for the type of aircraft. Most aircraft articles have a incidents and accidents section. So change the name of the flight there.
Ditto for the airline involved.
There is also the List of accidents and incidents involving commercial aircraft. Most accidents are on that list. If they aren't, please feel free to enter them.

All WP articles can be improved and I appreciate the work you're doing. It can just be better. Cheers....William 13:56, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Aeroflot Flight 217

The article Aeroflot Flight 217 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced; no notability asserted.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Electric Catfish 02:02, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the proposed deletion: you'll still need to provide sourcing. Acroterion (talk) 02:06, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 2012

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Pan Am destinations. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Comp dude¹²³ 03:35, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 22

Hi. When you recently edited McDonnell Douglas DC-10, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Airlines (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 13:20, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of accidents and disasters by death toll

Why do you continue to replace this list, which contains a variety of accidents and disasters, with one that lists only aviation disasters? Chris857 (talk) 22:01, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Tarlneustaedter. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Lockheed_L-1011_TriStar, but you didn't provide a reliable source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 01:44, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

September 2012

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Pan American World Airways. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Please provide a source for the seating capacities that you added for the Pan Am fleet. Seriously, PLEASE add sources whenever you edit Wikipedia. Comp dude¹²³ 04:46, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding a source. —Comp dude¹²³ 05:28, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Boeing 747. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Comp dude¹²³ 01:39, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like you are ignoring these messages. You've been told countless times to cite your sources but have failed to do so. Am I talking to a wall? I really don't want to get you blocked, but you really have got to cite your sources, I can't say that enough. If you need any help, you can always ask me and I would be happy to help you. Thanks, Comp dude¹²³ 01:45, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

At least say where you got it so maybe someone else can try to cite it. -Fnlayson (talk) 14:46, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Boeing 777, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. —Comp dude¹²³ 05:13, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please cite your sources for the recent additions you made to Swissair. I shouldn't have to keep telling you to do this. —Comp dude¹²³ 04:13, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at De Havilland Comet, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Nigel Ish (talk) 16:36, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you can't back something up with a source when you add it, don't add it at all. —Comp dude¹²³ 05:19, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Boeing customer codes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cruzeiro do Sul (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:15, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Swissair, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page LTU (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 13:02, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

October 2012

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Boeing 747. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.

Hello, I'm Denniss. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Boeing 777, but you didn't provide a reliable source. I've removed it for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Denniss (talk) 15:28, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Lockheed L-1011 TriStar. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Denniss (talk) 17:09, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to McDonnell Douglas DC-10. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. - BilCat (talk) 21:51, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding information to Wikipedia without citing it to a reliable source. You have been asked to please stop adding unsourced information but you continue to do so without showing any signs of noticing or understanding this. Continued behavior along these lines despite these requests can be seen as disruptive editing and can result in your being blocked from editing. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:38, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

November 2012

This is your last warning. The next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Airbus A340, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. You continue to alter information that is cited to reliable sources without providing a source for your changes or any explanation. A lot of people have told you to stop doing this, as can be seen by your talk page. This sort of editing will tend to get very rapidly reverted, thus making it rather pointless, and will, sooner or later, end up in you getting blocked or banned. Please reconsider.Nigel Ish (talk) 09:13, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the above. If you again make a change to a sourced specification table without providing sources for the revised data you add, this will be considered vandalism and you will be indefinitely blocked. Please read WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:IDHT. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:36, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning. Your repeated unsourced changes, as you did at Airbus A330, are considered vandalism. You may be blocked from editing without further notice. -Fnlayson (talk) 23:39, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at McDonnell Douglas MD-12, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. - BilCat (talk) 17:54, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent disruptive editing, consisting of repeated uncited changes to cited data without sourcing following multiple final warnings without any acknowledgement or discussion. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:24, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

MartinVillafuerte85 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

190.236.185.7 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "MartinVillafuerte85". The reason given for MartinVillafuerte85's block is: "Disruptive editing".

Blocking administrator: The Bushranger (talk • blocks)

Decline reason: You have been blocked directly, and must address the reasons for that block. Kuru (talk) 20:56, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

MartinVillafuerte85 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I need to create more pages!!!

Decline reason:

You're still not listening. This very page is full of warnings, yet I don't see a slightest attempt to read and understand them. I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Max Semenik (talk) 17:26, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.