User talk:Dereck Camacho/Archive

Hello, Dereck Camacho, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! SwisterTwister talk 04:17, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Finding your way around
Editing articles
Getting help
How you can help


Teahouse logo
Hello! Dereck Camacho, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse, an awesome place to meet people, ask questions, and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us! Rosiestep (talk) 23:53, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adding categories

Dereck, please be more careful when considering adding the "Rape victims" category. Read the headnote on the page for that category. I removed the category in Traci Lords and Raffaëla Anderson since they don't meet the considerations laid out in that note,j which are intended to be highly restrictive, especially in the case of living people. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 16:52, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (National Republican Party (Costa Rica)) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating National Republican Party (Costa Rica), Dereck Camacho!

Wikipedia editor Prof tpms just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Please add suitable pictures to the page to make it more attractive.

To reply, leave a comment on Prof tpms's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

OK, perfect, I think it can be done. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 04:17, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited National Republican Party (Costa Rica), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Liberal. 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) 09:10, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, noticed. Thanks. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 09:25, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited National Republican Party (Costa Rica), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Popular Vanguard Party. 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) 10:39, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Parliamentary elections

Hello Dereck. Please don't create separate articles for parliamentary elections. For elections held on the same day, we stick to a single article where possible. Please add any content to the general election articles (I've merged all the ones you created). Cheers, Number 57 13:21, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All that effort for nothing :(
Number and what about the infoboxes? the current infoboxes of the general elections are very incomplete and the parliamentary articles complented that. Now the information in the infoboxes is lost and to expand the information in the current article's infoboxes would require to find the parameters and pictures again. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 20:03, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You can try putting the infoboxes halfway down the articles – either directly below the president one, or in the parliamentary results section. However, I should warn you that in my experience, some editors are of the opinion that general elections should only feature an infobox for the president (I am sort of neutral as I am not a big fan of infoboxes anyway).
I wouldn't say it was all for nothing, as I moved much of your text to the general election articles. Plus you can still get to the parliamentary article titles (e.g. Costa Rican parliamentary election, 2014 – this link will take you to the general election article, but you will see the link appear in the top left-hand corner of the article, just below the title – if you click on that, it will take you to the redirect. You can then access the article history using the history tab. Click on an old version (e.g. this) and you can then click edit, and recover all the code). Hope that makes sense? Number 57 20:08, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes thank you, I'll try that. About the infoboxes it could be better to include the information in the same infobox for president, after all the leaders were all presidential candidates, with the exception of the two cases with second rounds. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 22:20, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And about the effort is mostly because it was hard to make the templates, infoboxes and find the pictures, but I'm glad the information could be use in the other articles. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 22:22, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
As the infobox isn't really designed for displaying the combined results, I have tried something slightly different – what do you think of the infobox layout at Costa Rican general election, 1994? Number 57 19:33, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Number I think is very good, a very well done change. Although I do think is better to use the name of the party instead of the acronym , probably for the English speaker reader is easier to read than a series of letters that do not correspond with the English name and also some Costa Rican parties do not have a real official acronym, for example Democratic Force is sometimes refer as PFD and others as FD, and of course in English would be DF :p --Dereck Camacho (talk) 22:53, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Good point – feel free to amend what I did. Number 57 09:56, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Dereck, good work on the new articles – just to let you know there is a new infobox type for primary elections, so you can use type = primary. Cheers, Number 57 21:45, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you and thanks for the information I'll check it Number --Dereck Camacho (talk) 22:42, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited New Generation Party (Costa Rica), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Orange and Centre. 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) 11:49, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Broad Front (Costa Rica)
added a link pointing to Guanacaste
Tibetan Parliament in Exile election, 1964
added a link pointing to Ando

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:05, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:New Generation Party (Costa Rica)/meta/shortname

Template:New Generation Party (Costa Rica)/meta/shortname has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. RES2773 (talk) 17:40, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:New Generation Party (Costa Rica)/meta/shortname

Template:New Generation Party (Costa Rica)/meta/shortname has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. RES2773 (talk) 17:41, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Costa Rican general election, 1953, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Popular Vanguard Party. 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) 10:53, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Indigenous territories of Costa Rica, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Salitre. 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) 09:48, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

List of mayors in Costa Rica
added links pointing to Mora, Santa Bárbara, Cartago, San Carlos, San Mateo, Osa, San Rafael, San Pablo, Heredia, Palmares, Paraíso, San Isidro, Cañas, Belén, Alvarado, La Unión, San Ramón, Carrillo, Montes de Oca, Goicoechea, Jiménez, Tarrazú, Talamanca, La Cruz, San José, Abangares, Pérez Zeledón and Grecia

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:15, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New Generation Party (Costa Rica)/meta/shortname listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect New Generation Party (Costa Rica)/meta/shortname. Since you had some involvement with the New Generation Party (Costa Rica)/meta/shortname redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Stefan2 (talk) 23:00, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Costa Rican general election, 1974
added a link pointing to Left
Costa Rican general election, 1978
added a link pointing to Popular Vanguard Party
Costa Rican general election, 1982
added a link pointing to The Left

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:32, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 16 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of Presidents of Costa Rica

You did a great work on this article! I really like the way you reformatted the lists there. Just keep it up in the future! Cheers! --Sundostund (talk) 01:48, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Sundostund --Dereck Camacho (talk) 02:22, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Dereck Camacho. 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]

Advice

Please, the page of European Costa Rican was vandalized by you, and others, the percent of white costa ricans is 47%, I put this source, and your sources dont talk about this supposed immigration of europeans in your country. Greetings from Mexico. --Bleckter23 (talk) 03:31, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

Hi Dereck. Sorry for the situation with Bleckter23. He is a sockpuppet with a large history vandalizing pages and insulting users. He took advantage of my inactivity to pretend to be me. Greetings. --Bleckter (talk) 08:31, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Citizens' Action Party presidential primary, 2017, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carlos Alvarado. 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) 10:03, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Concertación presidential primary, 2005
added a link pointing to National Renovation
Democratic Unity Roundtable presidential primary, 2012
added a link pointing to Mario Silva

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Democratic Unity Roundtable state primaries, 2017
added links pointing to Amazonas (state), Cojedes and Enrique Márquez
Democratic Unity Roundtable state primaries, 2012
added a link pointing to Cojedes

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:08, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A word of encouragement

Checking your latest works I hope you don't feel underappreciated. I think you did a good work creating new articles for the Chilean primary elections, and I'm sure others think the same. Greets. --TV Guy (talk) 03:01, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Of that I’m sure. There’s a user that hate me and has for sport to undo everything I do if he can, that’s why I stop collaborating in Chile-related Spanish articles and I will do the same in English, I’m actually going to keep all the articles out of my watchlist. But thank you. TV Guy --Dereck Camacho (talk) 03:08, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alianza presidential primary, 2013, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Renovación Nacional. 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) 10:26, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I'm noticing that, yes, it could became a problem, but let's hope not. Edler von Udinium

Ways to improve Carlos Alvarado Quesada

Hi, I'm Boleyn. Dereck Camacho, thanks for creating Carlos Alvarado Quesada!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. This needs more WP:RELIABLESOURCES added, especiaally as it is on a living person.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Boleyn (talk) 19:42, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Parliamentary diagrams

Hello! Thanks for adding in new parliamentary diagrams. Please remember to make sure that the correct colour is used (for example for Die Linke, SPD, FDP and AfD on German diagrams), diagrams are properly formatted in SVG, and there will be a consensus in support of your edit.

As much as left-right Parliamentary diagrams are the norm, many diagrams instead base how parties are placed by how they sit in that actual legislature. That's why I reverted your edits to Irish and Turkish diagrams. JackWilfred (talk) 14:29, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Irish Parliament is set out like a cross between the Westminster Parliament and a half-cycle, so there's an argument for either setup. I personally think the half-cycle currently used is better. JackWilfred (talk) 17:40, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The Swedish Riksdagen is the only place I can think of that puts the far-right in the centre. This is mainly because Swedish politics has a 'left bloc' and a 'right bloc' that has each side of the parliament, and so the Sweden Democrats are put between them. JackWilfred (talk) 13:07, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at Dalai Lama

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 01:51, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Help

Files have to remain the same file type when updated. You can't replace an SVG with a JPEG, but you can replace it with another SVG file.

However, I wouldn't recommend that your JPEG file be used as the diagram for a number of reasons. Firstly, he general SVG diagram template is widely accepted and preferred, and the SVG format allows it to be used in any size. Secondly, the JPEG file is quite small and doesn't show the colours very well, it contains artifacts, and it has a white background instead of a transparent one that will look a bit ugly.

Sometimes diagrams that resemble the exact seating plan are accepted. Catalonia and Canada are good examples, but they have to be SVG and of comparable quality with the template diagram. JackWilfred (talk) 13:00, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Epic Barnstar

The Epic Barnstar
Awarded for Dereck's epic work on creating and improving articles related to the history of democracy and making them more accessible to readers. Mvblair (talk) 12:29, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Mvblair, you're very kind. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 18:12, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Buddhism in Costa Rica, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shaolin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:23, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Costa Rican Elections; IDESPO poll

Please take a look at my commentary on the Costa Rican election talk page about this poll, and let me know if you agree with me from a position of strict neutrality. Those who conducted the poll admitted its shortcomings and say that it cannot be generalized. As such, I don't think that poll belongs on the list (in either the English or Spanish version of the page). I have already removed it from the English version. Wilford Nusser (talk) 00:26, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, a reversion without explanation. I will refer this to arbitration. I see you've been warned about edit wars before... Wilford Nusser (talk) 00:38, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Now, unfounded accusations. Go ahead and request a sockpuppet investigation. I dare you. That ISP is in Panama; I am in Washington DC. So if you want to embarrass yourself, feel free. Wilford Nusser (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wilford Nusser this kind of language is not allowed, scratched or I will report you. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 01:07, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I never wanted this to escalate. I advised you of my change, my reasons for it, and requested discussion in good faith. I quoted the article and linked the source on the talk page there. If you look at my history here, I have never been involved in anything like this, in over 10 years of editing articles. Your response-- particularly the "vandalism" accusation when there was an explanation on the talk page, and the subsequent accusation of sockpuppetry-- show anything but good faith on your part, nor do they show that you followed the rule of assuming good faith with me. So don't lecture me on Wikipedia etiquette, my friend.
This is all I will say about this. I do not relish such disputes, and in general you do seem to be a positive contributor here. I too welcome the input of other editors on the subject, especially any with expertise in survey methodology. (For the record, I managed the telephone research department of a social science research firm for six years. I would not have questioned the inclusion of that poll if I didn't have that knowledge.) --Wilford Nusser (talk) 01:43, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wilford Nusser after all your hostility and attacks is too late to try to ammend things, for now let's see what the admins say. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 01:45, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am not trying to amend anything. Make no mistake, there was no implied apology there. I responded to your filing, but refrained from reporting you in return despite my clear grounds for doing so (particularly your two bad-faith accusations that are wholly responsible for escalating this). The fact is that on the initial point of dispute, I am objectively correct. I look forward to administrative input. Suerte. --Wilford Nusser (talk) 01:58, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I still see your effort into make things better, so is an apology in my book. Thanks and no hard feelings. Wilford Nusser. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 02:04, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Está bien. Tampoco me gusta hacer problemas para nadie. No sé porque eso me provocó tanta ira. Sí le pido perdón a usted por eso. Wilford Nusser (talk) 02:24, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Igual de mi parte. A veces se caldean los animos. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 02:38, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I'm a bit irritated by all this, because you misrepresented me from the beginning. When I made the edit, I sent you a message here informing you, pointing you to my reasons on the Talk Page of the article, and inviting your input in the discussion. I was under no obligation to do this. Your response? Did you respond to my comment on the talk page? Did you return the courtesy of explaining your revert? No. You immediately reverted the edit with a note accusing me of WP:Vandalism and WP:BLANK. Clearly, it was neither of these things. How dare you accuse me of being the uncivil one here? I started civilly, and even after your first revert, I remained civil. Your unfounded accusations were the sole cause of all of this, and your attempt to recruit your little collective against me is rather pathetic and obvious. --Wilford Nusser (talk) 03:15, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever, just apply the policies and don't get emotional. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 03:16, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

re AN/I report - only warning

Your conduct regarding the dispute at Costa Rican general election, 2018, which you reported at AN/I, is shockingly inappropriate. I've a mind to block you right now. Unsubstantiated accusations of vandalism and sockpuppetry, making threats, personal commentary, complete dismissal of your role in creating a flame war, this is truly bizarre, disruptive behavior and I've half a mind to WP:BOOMERANG you right now. If I see you causing any more of this disruption, I will block you without further warning. Swarm ♠ 15:53, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]