Wikipedia:Utenti problematici/ZH8000: differenze tra le versioni

Versione delle 17:37, 27 gen 2017

Versione delle 04:08, 28 gen 2017

Riga 11:

:::::::Thanks for changing into English. Of course, my personal estimation is totally irrelevant. I just wanted to pronounce that the listed wrestler is really unknown for Lucerne, or Switzerland in general. – Well, if you think – here on Italian WP – that the list of ''prominent'' people from Lucerne ("Persone legate a Lucerna") is open to "everybody", then it may be so. But on the German, English, French articles, we usually only list people with quite a strong contribution to the city they are listed in; at least they need some public prominent appearance in order to be legitimately listed. And to be born there (and have a WP entry) is usually not a sufficiant criteria, really not. But I see, you seem to handle this differently here. And finally, it seems that this wrestler is being actively <u>promoted</u> over several WP languages despite being totally unknown in Lucerne or Switzerland. At least on English WP this is frowned upon: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox_or_means_of_promotion SOAP]. -- [[Utente:ZH8000|ZH8000]] ([[Discussioni utente:ZH8000|msg]]) 16:25, 27 gen 2017 (CET)

:::I see. Yes probably is because of this reason, generally speaking we include on those lists people that have an article on wikipedia and that are linked, in one way or another, to the city. Being born in the city usually is enough to be included in that list. About the promotion, he already has an article on WP so it's just a link from one wikipedia page to another, for us this is not promotion. Having an article while not deserving one, that would be a promotion for us.--[[Utente:Quandary|Quandary]] ([[Discussioni utente:Quandary|msg]]) 16:37, 27 gen 2017 (CET)

::::[[Utente:ZH8000|ZH8000]], whatever the reason, the [https://it.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lucerna&action=history article's history] tells us about an edit-war, and if there is anything really common through all Wikipedia Communities, it is the 3-R rule; this is why you have been called here, together with the fact that the most we could be able to read about your edits is all described within a few words inside the editlines, too little for a removal of contents. This won't really be a problem as long as I'm right in believing that this has now been clearly understood; "Wiki" means "quick", but "pedia" means, in Wikipedia, that we need to reach a consensus through discussion. You mentioned a user that is not registered here (hence he never edited anything here) and no discussion at all has been started about this topic. Ok, there is no reason at all not to close it here, since it's something that will not happen again. Please, always give explanations in the edit summary, and be ready to open a discussion in the article's talk page when you realize that some other users disagree. As you can see, we are communicating: language won't be a critical obstacle.<br />About the sense of your edits, nobody here is in favour of a promotion, nobody is against any particular subject of an article: we fight against spamming, but we have nothing against the persons ''per se''. Fighting spam doesn't mean [[:de:Damnatio memoriae|damnatio memoriae]], there's always a fair measure in the middle and neutrality is better served with a reasonable distance from the matter. Other Projects might behave differently in front of this issue, this is simply the way it goes in it.wiki, and we are writing here, where we don't like soapboxes and don't like excesses in the fight.

::::I'm closing this procedure with no effects, at the moment. I'm looking forward to be reading less controversial edits in the future and I'm thanking you in advance for your further contribution. --&nbsp;[[Utente:Gianfranco|g]]&nbsp;&middot;&nbsp;ℵ&nbsp;([[Discussioni utente:Gianfranco|msg]]) 03:07, 28 gen 2017 (CET)

Non ci sono al momento problematicità in vista, dato che il problema è stato spiegato e non pare si debba temere che vi siano reiterazioni. Non ho gradito molto la chiamata in causa dell'utente che qui non ha rilievo, non avendo mai editato, e sto omettendo di verificare come stiano le cose su Progetti fratelli, ma quello che ci interessa qui è che la questione dovrebbe essersi chiarita a sufficienza, perciò non vedo ragioni per proseguire.<br />'''Segnalazione chiusa senza effetto, utente... lievemente ammonito'''. --&nbsp;[[Utente:Gianfranco|g]]&nbsp;&middot;&nbsp;ℵ&nbsp;([[Discussioni utente:Gianfranco|msg]]) 03:07, 28 gen 2017 (CET)