User talk:Alejojojo6

July 2020

Your recent editing history at Basques shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Austronesier (talk) 15:26, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am giving coherence to the data shown in the same Basque article and the articles of the Basque Diaspora and Basque descent in other countries. Its contradictory to see figures of 3 to 3,5 million people of Basque descent in Argentina or 1,6 million to 2.7 million in Chile and this numbers not being reflected on the Basques ethnicity article.

Indent

Can you please learn to indent (see wp:indent).Slatersteven (talk) 14:21, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No need to be rude, thank you.

How to approach incoherence between pages? If there are big discrepancies between several pages but the author of the main page doesnt want to change/refuse to change the data according to his/her own subjective ideas to suit the rest of the data shown in several related pages, what can be done? Example: The "Basque people" page doesnt include Basques-descendants abroad while the rest of pages related to etnicity do count them as such. Even the same page contradicts its own data. Alejojojo6 (talk) 16:09, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Talk

Please note wP:talk, you should not alter a comment after it has been replied to.Slatersteven (talk) 16:08, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022

Your recent editing history at Mozarabic language shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Largoplazo (talk) 09:50, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Incomprehension of academic publishing

I was actually trying to be helpful to you by explaining that your false assumptions about academic publishing are inimical to your purposes. Repeating those falsehoods after the objects of your confusion have been explained to you makes your case even more difficult. Re Cenname's paper at issue: neither her academic affiliation (U Almería) nor the institution whose journal published her paper (U Valencia) endorsed, approved or otherwise passed judgement on her paper. That's simply not the way it's done. Universities trust their journals to the editor and the editorial board and do not participate in any way other than financing. "This has passed a filter from collegues and the university before even beeing able to be admisive for publication, thus endorsing the article." No. Again, that's not the way it works. No one endorses. The paper is accepted or not for publication by the journal's editor and editorial board. Acceptance does not mean "endorsement". Reviewers may even disagree with the contents and opine that they are wrong. If the paper is accepted in that circumstance, it is normally because the paper is deemed to be of interest to an ongoing debate. Once published, the paper is judged on its merits, not on counter-to-reality alternative-fact notions about previous "endorsement". We cannot "say that Miss Cennane work is a very valid conclusion" merely because it was published. That will be decided in time, by experts in the field. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 01:51, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The claims I have publish are completely valid. The idea that they arent comes solenly due to the fact that you dont like the ideas I'm providing. Universities in Spain do have to pass a check before being admitted to publish. Its done this way because I myself have worked personaly in said filters. If you dont know how it works in Spain its fine, but dont assumed they dont do it simply because you dont like the answer of the paper. Of course, since this is a publication based on publications and analysis of historical facts, there isnt a proper scientific endorsmeent that proves it as objectively wrong or not. But if the author reaches conclusions that are not properly endorse by archeological or historical facts or/and findings, the Univserity would not "endorse" or "accept" the publication to be published. So Cennane's publication are very valid and do not prove that what she said is wrong. You cannot put something on an article when there is bibliography out there disproving it. Alejojojo6 (talk) 15:03, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Ötzi. - FlightTime (open channel) 13:10, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why? If i provide proper sourcing which is what I am going to do. Alejojojo6 (talk) 13:23, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has many rules beyond requiring a source. In this case the content you are adding is considered original research because it introduces a claim that is not in the source. You cannot combine information from multiple sources to reach a new conclusion on Wikipedia.

More importantly, you can't just edit war when others disagree, you need to discuss on the talk page and reach a consensus. You've already made 3 reverts in the last 24 hours, please take this to the talk page instead of reverting again. Jamedeus (talk) 22:29, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Ötzi. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Jamedeus (talk) 22:19, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]