Don't add the image of Ryu to places where it doesn't belong, please. Further edits in this vein will be considered vandalism. JuJube (talk) 21:52, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Population figures
I have undone the changes you made to Aruba, Suriname, and Cape Verde. You seem to be randomly changing figures without regard to sources. The figures quoted in an article and the source quoted in an article must always agree. If you have a better source with different figures, you have to include the new source when you change figures.—Kww(talk) 23:20, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, there are several people watching those pages and everytime an edit is done, if it is vandalism it is reverted very quickly. If we protect the page that means that we keep vandals away but also editors in good faith who want to fix or add information to the article. Protection is a measure that is justified only when there is serious vandalism problems with an article. By the way, make sure to sign your posts when you write a message to someone, by using four tildes (~~~~) after the message. Regards, Waldirtalk01:22, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dutch Empire
Hi. I'm not sure why you were taking out the in-page link to the Dutch Empire article and the map of the Dutch Empire here, but I didn't think it helped the article to get rid of them, so I undid your edit. In the future, you way wish to discuss changes on the article's Talk page first. Please also leave edit summaries; it helps everyone figure out why you're doing what you're doing. Thanks. --Dynaflowbabble20:56, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Things that are old are the whole point of History sections in articles. Also, the goal of the Netherlands article is to make it as complete and comprehensive as possible, given the format. That goal has nothing whatsoever to do with keeping even with the Italians. --Dynaflowbabble21:32, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
January 2009
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Netherlands. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. --Dynaflowbabble21:39, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It would help if you provided the links instead of just the filenames :) To link an image, use the code [[:File:Example.jpg]], and [[Link title]] for a regular page. Also, please don't remove the "unsigned" code from the messages you send. If you want that not to be added, sign your messages yourself, by adding four tildes (~~~~) in the end. --Waldirtalk10:42, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
re: prostitutes
Hi, Questchect, Michael, Mikai (how do you prefer being called afterall?) I am here, I just didn't know how to respond to "could you write in a story about this empty page hhahahahaaahaaha mikai againProstitution in Cape Verde better for the girlies of cape verde discussion". It seems to me you are joking around. If that's not the case, please explain what you meant by that. And please, stop erasing stuff from your previous messages! --Waldirtalk09:27, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I read the addition again, and I don't think it needs any copyedit. It looks fine to me. You're free to make any improvements yourself though, if you wish. --Waldirtalk16:21, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on User talk:NiciVampireHeart. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 20:20, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, First of all, you should refrain from using words such as "bullshit", as you did on my talk page. That is uncivil, especially if you're talking about other people's edits.
Secondly, what you called "faults" were merely red links. They are welcome and are one of the driving forces behind Wikipedia's growth. Please read WP:RED, it's all explained there.
Finally, you don't have to notify me (or any other editors, for the matter) of what is going on on the Cape Verde-related pages. You can just be bold and take matters on your own hand. Just make sure you don't insult anyone in the edit summaries by calling their edits "faults".
I'm sorry, I'll be kinda busy for the next few days and won't be able to keep an eye on the articles. I'm sure you and other editors will be able to take care of them meanwhile ;-) --Waldirtalk23:12, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I noticed that. Thanks for the note, but as I said before, you don't have to notify me of everything you find on the Cape Verde article and the other related ones! Cheers, Waldirtalk22:50, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for pointing out the external links issue on the CV main page. You were right that it was too much for that position. My original thinking after looking at the Brazil, Mozambique and lots of other main pages was to give the General public an initial overview of top-level external links - then go into detail on the specific pages (ie. Economy, Politics, Culture, etc). But you're right, a framework does exist to facilitate access to all these things and more! So thank you.
I've nearly finished the CV Portal (the workload was enormous!) and would greatly appreciate your opinion on your home country's Portal. The good news is that I've thoroughly read Wikipedia's guidelines on Portal creation and I've checked out the very best Wikipedia has to offer in Portals. I hope I've done a good job by you and your countrymen - after all, over time, millions of people will see it!
Hello Michael, read your message and I'm not quite sure what you're saying...I take it what I said re the CV page "suxx" and that you want me to "go check out fill out" Cape Verdean American? Is there something to fix there? I notice the figures re population numbers differ from the articles I've drawn from, so I will check that out. Enjoy your Sunday Wiki User 68Blah Stuff13:00, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is by no means meant to insult you but I could not understand half of the things you said. Now, the List of reigns section of the PWI article was removed because it was deemed redundant and trivial by WP:PW. The reason for this is because PWI now only recognizes one WWE Championship as a world title as of 2008. Therefore only 2 championships in professional wrestling are currently recognized by the magazine (1 from TNA and 1 from WWE). That is why the list was removed. Now as for the names used in the article for each championship, PWI names the WWE Championship as the WWE Heavyweight Championship, the World Heavyweight Championship (WWE) as the WWE World Championship, the ECW Championship as the ECW Heavyweight Championship, the TNA World Heavyweight Championship as the TNA World Championship, and the NWA World Heavyweight Championship as the NWA Heavyweight Championship. It is for this reason that these names are used in the article. I hope this clarified your concerns.--UnquestionableTruth--20:58, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Are you asking how to become an administrator? You have to be nominated or nominate yourself at WP:RFA and the community will discuss whether you should be one or not. Generally you have to have a lot of experience and a good reputation in order to become one. Killiondude (talk) 23:23, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly don't think you're ready to become an administrator. If you could show some structure in your language (namely, correct grammar) it would help determine the orderliness of your thoughts. That should be the first step, in my opinion. People won't take much effort into dialogging with you if you don't seem to put enough effort into making your ideas clear. Also, as Killiondude said, administrators should generally have lots of experience editing. You have only 142 edits (as of right now), and while there is no minimum limit, candidates with fewer than 2,000 edits rarely succeed. Look at what the instructions for self-nomination say:
Wait. We have 48,605,810 registered users, but only 848 administrators - this process is not taken lightly by the community. Take a moment for self-evaluation. Try to consider your contributions to Wikipedia the way that others will see them. Look at recent successful RfAs and unsuccessful RfAs. How do your contributions compare to those of candidates who passed but had notable opposition, or failed but had strong support? Check your edit count (line four of your my preferences tab). While there is no minimum requirement, self-nominated candidates with fewer than 2,000 edits and three months of active editing often see their RfAs closed per WP:SNOW or Wikipedia:Not Now shortly after adding them. More importantly, candidates should have contributed substantially to different areas of Wikipedia and should demonstrate a thorough understanding of Wikipedia policies (e.g., deletion policy, blocking policy, etc.).
Hiya Micheal, your absolutetly right. The additions to the above page are, basically, unverified and it's a big problem. The project (I'd like you to be a member of) wants more info and members but needs qualified info on various subjects. Could you check on the Military info supplied by the other person for accuracy? Personaly, I would like more Islander contributions to the project for, well, obvious reasons really. For example: What Island do you come from? What language do you speak, and, really importantly, what's your family history on the Islands? Anyone, from the Islands that can tell us this info, is a major event for the REAL history of the Islands, and the rest, as you can imagine, is history! Wiki User 68 (talk) 22:56, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Having re-read my repy to your original message, I think it mignt seem ambiguous (no good). We really need authorititive info on the respective subject. If you have any chance of gathering info on this subject it would be great Michael. Regards Wiki User 68 (talk) 20:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Having re-read your question - Are you unsure as to the term Navy as opposed to Coast Guard? I was under the impression Cape Verde had a limited Navy and a Coast Guard. I'll check out the facts. Wiki User 68 (talk) 16:49, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm so sorry Micheal. I should've have gone straight to the article to check exactly what you said. You were completely right. The section had been added by the editor incorrectly as Navy and not Coast Guard, as it should've been. I was completely in the wrong and you were perfectly correct in your advice to me. Again, many apologies. I have corrected it as you instructed. Wiki User 68 (talk) 22:35, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Micheal, no problem and glad you liked it. If you see anything that you feel is important that should be fixed on Wikipedia - then by all means do the job. Just remember, it's very difficult to find the truth on the Internet, which is why I like Wikipedia - Info on Wiki is checked thoroughly! We're are all faced with the same problem - finding the truth. What makes you special is that you speak several languages (including Kriolu) and that enables you to ask direct questions to folks back home over the truth to put into Wikipedia. Happy hunting my friend :-) Wiki User 68 (talk) 00:08, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Cape Verdean American
Sorry, I'm afraid I don't follow. Could you please provide a link to the article in question? Thanks, 17:15, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Deletion of infobox entries from Cape Verdean Dutch
Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Cape Verdean Dutch, 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. cab (talk) 06:12, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on Cape verde military police requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. James Brian Ellis (talk) 15:55, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, with regard to the above article, and Law enforcement in Cape Verde, it's best to write the article before you create the page because if you just create pages with links and photos but no writing, they are likely to get deleted very quickly. You can always practice on your userpage, or in the sandbox. Regards, --BelovedFreak16:04, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button 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 useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 16:28, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Questchest. I have a request. Your English is very hard to understand, especially since you barely use any punctuation. Could you write to me in Dutch from now on? I think I might be able to help you better that way. Thanks! :) --Waldirtalk20:51, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you would care to explain why you keep deleting verifiable information from the Cape Verdeans in the Netherlands page? I have no idea how you think this contributes to making the page better. When such a large proportion of the population live in a certain place, this gets pointed out. cab (call) 07:42, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm asking about the population number in the infobox, not the link you deleted. How did the population go from 20,961 (2010) to 39,405 (2011). That's almost double. It doesn't seem very likely. Where do you get the number 39,405? cab (call) 01:34, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you are well and thriving!! WikiAfrica has just put out a call for two Wikipedians in Residence. One in Cape Town at WikiAfrica, at the Africa Centre; and the other for WikiAfrica Cameroon in Douala, at doual’art. If you are interested, please contact either Marilyn [marilyn.doualabelldoualart.org] for the WikiAfrica Cameroon call or Isla [islahfafricacentre.net] for the WikiAfrica position in Cape Town.
If you are not interested in applying, I would be very grateful if you could spread this call far and wide among your networks to ensure that both projects get excellent candidates. Here is the link for the information page: http://www.wikiafrica.net/two-wikipedians-in-residence-for-africa/
