RixToken2007

  Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Ha*Ash, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. See MOS:ETHNICITY Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:16, 7 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Aya Nakamura. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. See MOS:ETHNICITY. We don't highlight either a persons ethnicity or place of birth when irrelevant to why notable. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:09, 10 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Soolking. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. M.Bitton (talk) 19:48, 25 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Please stop. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, as you did at Camila Cabello, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Please read MOS:CONTEXTBIO for what goes in the intro and lead of an article. Ethnicity is explicitly mentioned as something that is not appropriate and what you have been adding to articles. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:19, 25 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

  You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Ha*Ash § Nationality of duo. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:37, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Michelle Rodríguez (Mexican actress). Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:57, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Gabriela Spanic. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Telenovelafan215 (talk) 19:33, 14 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:54, 28 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited El Fantasma (singer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Norteño. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:03, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Please do not refer to the subjects of BLP articles, or any other human being, as "it" as you did in this edit and in other places. Thanks. Canterbury Tail talk 15:04, 14 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Again, you are referring to BLP subjects as "it" which is not acceptable. You seem to be having some real issues with pronouns on articles. Making edits that use he and she interchangably. Referencing them as "it" or "the". This sentence from the above edit "She was born in Cuba and spent most of his life and career in Mexico, Its main citizenship is Mexican" just illustrates the problems with this. Referring to a subject as an "it" is a serious issue. I understand that English may not be your first language, and can guarantee that it's better than my speaking of other languages, but you really need to make sure you're getting these correct otherwise it's incredibly belittling and disparaging to the article subjects. Please take more care over your usage of pronouns in BLP articles and your edit summaries. Canterbury Tail talk 15:59, 15 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm sorry, my native language is Spanish and Portuguese, I speak English through the media, but I'm trying to improve it, thanks for your advice, I hope I don't repeat the same mistake again Bogartlipa1989 (talk) 16:03, 15 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. Sorry to say this but you must try harder on the pronoun front. You are still referring to people as it. It is never ever acceptable to use it with a person. If your English isn't of a sufficient level to contribute to Wikipedia without making these (unintended) highly insulting comments, then maybe another language Wikipedia would be a better fit for you. I know other Wikis need good editors. Canterbury Tail talk 15:28, 28 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Please do not add or change content, as you did at Ritchie Valens, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 20:10, 2 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

On Shakira's page there are VARIOUS sources that support what the text that you deleted. AlexanderShakifan29 (talk) 05:15, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Only her most notable works are cited in the file. ALL Discography and Videography are not featured works Bogartlipa1989 (talk) 05:18, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

The attribution of having opened doors to several Latin artists (NOT ALL) and more songs than are credited are substantiated and have their respective sources (Even several of that) AlexanderShakifan29 (talk) 05:27, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Well, maybe you are right about the attribution of having opened doors to several Latin artists. that's my mistake.

But I repeat, notable works only highlights his most notable works. Maybe not just Hips Don't Lie, but that's the most notable one. Are you really going to add her entire discography? You could add one, two, or several work projects. But I assure you that not all of them have stood out like the others. Bogartlipa1989 (talk) 05:33, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I am going to recommend that you check the pages of Madonna, Rihanna or Beyonce so that you can see that what you deleted on Shakira's page was totally inexplicable. If you don't know about wikipedia pages about singers, try to avoid editing them. First learn basic things (You've been an editor for more than 10 months, I guess you must have learned the minimum by now). I see that this is not the first time that they have suggested improvements in your editions. AlexanderShakifan29 (talk) 00:37, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

The difference is that the people mentioned above are established artists, and Shakira? How many of her songs are known worldwide? 2? maybe 4.

But I see that this is personal, since you take into account my time on Wikipedia as if the mere fact that your record is older makes you better here, so aren't we all equal on Wikipedia? Bogartlipa1989 (talk) 00:45, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I don't speak in that aspect, on Wikipedia everything is NEUTRAL and I see that your edits are malicious. If you are going to edit something that is sustainable, why do you eliminate it? I see that you have a certain favoritism for other artists and it is normal, but from that to practically downgrading another artist for no reason is something practically childish. For this reason, I recommend you go to a Wikipedia in Spanish, which I see is your language. There you learn to edit well and correctly. You learn that and to be impartial, you will gladly continue editing here again. If you continue deleting information in an inexplicable way and you still wage war on edits, I will have to report you. Good afternoon :D AlexanderShakifan29 (talk) 00:59, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

What do you base on saying that my edits are malicious? What am I implying to show favoritism to someone? All I see is that you took things personal with this.

Tell me in what "inexplicable way" am I deleting information? because I am leaving my arguments on the table. You only come to defend this with fanaticism.

And by the way, it's a little strange the way I wrote to a user on his discussion page and you responded there and then came here to continue, taking into account that both act mutually when one is not there. Bogartlipa1989 (talk) 01:07, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

It's not fanaticism, I'm not referring to all your contributions but I just saw that several times your edits have been reverted due to the lack of sources and explanation for them. What you deleted on your Wikipedia page with the excuse that it doesn't have several hits is practically an edit of vandalism. The good thing is that an editing war was not started. And finally, now you accuse me of having more accounts here? AlexanderShakifan29 (talk) 01:15, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Well, I don't have a problem with you having one or more accounts, but

First, don't delete it from "my Wikipedia page" delete it from an article. I already told my arguments about those editions above, I simply said that her most important works should be on the file. You took my comment personally about whether he has more notable works.

And second, are you telling me that "The good thing is that an editing war was not started" when literally minutes before you have accused me of "wage war on edits"? So why are you telling me that an edition war hasn't started if you've already threatened to sue me for that reason?

I will no longer continue with this discussion, because it seems to be going in a direction that is not where it initially started. have a good night Bogartlipa1989 (talk) 01:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I said that if the situation continued with an edition war, it would not start because otherwise an administrator would have had to come in the middle of everything. AlexanderShakifan29 (talk) 03:10, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Please stop. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, as you did at Nelly Furtado, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. As before, and it seems you still wish to ignore the Manual of Style. Please read MOS:CONTEXTBIO for what goes in the intro and lead of an article. Ethnicity is explicitly mentioned as something that is not appropriate and what you have been adding to articles. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:41, 1 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

"Portuguese" is not an ethnicity, it is a nationality, so if my edits are wrong then why don't you correct them instead of reverting them? You are so arrogant that you are always looking for what I edited. Bogartlipa1989 (talk) 15:45, 1 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

I did correct them. Basically I returned the article to the consensus version that existed before you started editing it and you removed the explanatory note. Lots of discussion about this topic on the talk page of the article going back 14 years - you are not making new arguments. Latest is in archive 5 which resulted in the consensus version before you changed it. Note that Portuguese-Canadian is an ethnicity descriptor per that article. Suggest you actually read MOS:FIRSTBIO and MOS:CONTEXTBIO and look at the examples, not just ignore the articles that explains part of the manual of style. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:33, 1 August 2024 (UTC)Reply