User talk:Arthur Brum

Welcome!

Hello, DarthRazorBrum, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Princess Maria Gabriela of Orléans-Braganza, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! DrKay (talk) 07:24, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Princess Maria Gabriela of Orléans-Braganza

The article Princess Maria Gabriela of Orléans-Braganza has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. DrKay (talk) 07:24, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Usuário(a):Arthur Brum

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Usuário(a):Arthur Brum requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Amortias (T)(C) 23:48, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 16 December

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

On the Brazil page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

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) 00:23, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Annoying editions in articles related to imperial Brazil

Arthur, sometimes I wonder whether you just want to leave your mark in one of the Featured Articles related to imperial Brazil. There is a reason why they are featured articles: they reached their pinnacle as encyclopedic articles, they have matured just to the right point. Adding or removing "of Brazil" here and there won't change that. If you want to make yourself useful, grab a few books and start working on any other related article. --Lecen (talk) 16:40, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Latest edits

Your latest edits in several articles related to Brazilian history can be regarded as disruptive. You need to stop and focus on other articles that requires actual improvements. --Lecen (talk) 14:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 23 January

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

On the Fortaleza page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

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) 00:22, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References for South America

Hi, I've noticed you have been adding a lot of material to South America, but have not included citations for your additions, in violation of Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Please rectify this, or your contributions may be removed. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 17:25, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 26 January

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

On the South America page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

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) 00:18, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you made a change to an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Please note that the verifiability policy mandates that unsourced material that has been challenged, such as by a "fact" tag, or by its removal, may not be added back without a reliable, published source being cited for the content, using an inline citation. The cited source must clearly support the material as presented in the article, and the burden is on the person wishing to keep in the disputed material. So if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so, following these requirements! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 03:24, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

March 2017

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Prince Luís of Orléans-Braganza (1878–1920)‎ while logged out. Making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. DrKay (talk) 18:03, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry. I will remeber to be logged in my next edits. Thank you for your advice.

Arthur Brum (talk) 19:29, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Prince Luís of Orléans-Braganza (1878–1920) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. DrKay (talk) 22:24, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am currently engaged in facilitating interpretation and historical research on the article in question as well as others. Putting more data in its history, I was demanded sources that prove the historical truth and I put them more and more varied, one of them of a book that I read myself. But I added numerous public sources now and even then, again, the added has been deleted. Forgive me if it may seem the beginning of an editing war, but it is that often in issues of the most varied subjects, adding both story and sources, some editors, which fortunately is not your case, go and simply undo what was Placed by their own free will, do not accept to discuss the subject and are still very aggressive, always treating the edited page as if it were his personal property and his exclusive edition. But now I must insist that I have added at least three different sources that give the basis for the edition I have made and which I believe should remain.

Arthur Brum (talk) 19:33, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Princess Eleanora of Orléans-Braganza.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Princess Eleanora of Orléans-Braganza.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. DrKay (talk) 17:52, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Prince Antônio of Orléans-Braganza.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Prince Antônio of Orléans-Braganza.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. DrKay (talk) 17:52, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article

If you see a featured article, it means that it has achieved the highest point, and there is no need to change, unless scholarship has changed. To become featured article, it's a difficult process. I'd suggest that you stop going from article to article merely adding pictures you like and try to actually add content. That is what many need. Good luck. --Lecen (talk) 00:09, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rio de Janeiro, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Santa Cruz, Sugar Loaf and Passeio Público. 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, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Novo Metro Rio.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Novo Metro Rio.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Train2104 (t • c) 14:28, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Table in South American dreadnought race

Hey Arthur! Thanks a lot for reading through South American dreadnought race and adding the table on Brazilian ships. However, I hid it within the article for now. We need to be careful about how we're putting these dates in. First, Brazil didn't purchase any of these ships off the stocks (like the Argentine ARA Buenos Aires (1895)), so we shouldn't have "purchases" in the header. Second, these are orders we're talking about, not launching dates. That means, for example, that Minas Geraes and São Paulo would be listed under 1907. :-) I'll try to get back and work on this in the next few days. It may be that launch dates will be more easily understood in this case. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 00:40, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, I understand. I can fix this now, and if you have any more confusion, could you let me know? By the way, thanks for the warning and the education. Well different from what I'm used to dealing with on wikipedia. Arthur Brum ^[talk] 21:48, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, there's still a few issues with dates. Can we leave the table out for the moment until I can circle back? The article is on the main page right now in the "on this day" section, so I'm trying to be careful with what we're presenting. :-) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 16:24, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've finally been able to circle back on this! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 19

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.

South America

added links pointing to Portuguese, Indigenous, Salvador and Oca

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:55, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 26

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.

Brazil

added links pointing to Neoclassical, Santa Catarina and Realism

Proclamation of the Republic (Brazil)

added links pointing to Santa Catarina and Power

First Brazilian Republic

added a link pointing to Federal

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:07, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Prime Minister of Brazil into Politics of the Empire of Brazil. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:57, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rio de Janeiro, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Guanabara. 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) 10:37, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fortaleza, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Salvador and Beach Park. 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) 10:23, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox royalty

Please adhere to the template guidance at Template:Infobox royalty. The "title" parameter should not be used for titles held by all cadets. It should only be used for substantive titles, that is a title held generally by one person at a time. I have pointed this out multiple times in edit summaries. Continuing to perform the same edits, despite being asked not to, is disruptive: see point 4 of Wikipedia:Disruptive editing#Examples of disruptive editing. DrKay (talk) 07:30, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Prince Pedro Henrique of Orléans-Braganza. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. DrKay (talk) 16:53, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making disruptive edits, as you did at Prince Antônio Gastão of Orléans-Braganza.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. DrKay (talk) 06:24, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Dom Luiz de Orléans e Bragança.png

Thanks for uploading File:Dom Luiz de Orléans e Bragança.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 00:30, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the advice! And it's done. Arthur Brum (talk) 21:42, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Prince Luiz of Orléans-Braganza.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Prince Luiz of Orléans-Braganza.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. DrKay (talk) 06:59, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ThmPedro (talk · contribs)

It has been found that you have been using one or more accounts abusively or have edited logged out to avoid scrutiny. Please review the policy on acceptable alternate accounts. In short, alternate accounts or people to support you should not be used for the purposes of deceiving others into seeing more support for your position. It is not acceptable to use two accounts on the same article, or the same topic area, unless they are publicly and plainly disclosed on both your and the other account's userpage.

Your other account(s) have been blocked indefinitely. This is your only warning. If you repeat this behaviour you will blocked from editing without further notice. Thank you. DrKay (talk) 20:13, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have another account and I don't know from wherever you have this ideia. You can check my IP if you want and will see. Arthur Brum (talk) 17:49, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You've just created another account Sar-real (talk · contribs) despite the warning. I can't block you on this wiki because you've not made any edits from your new account here but you need to understand that you must not upload copyrighted files and you must not create additional accounts. You are heading towards an indefinite block if you continue this behavior. DrKay (talk) 21:02, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You need to understand that I DID NOT DO THIS. And I'm not even aware of those random accounts. You must check my IP before accusing me of did something I didn't. I know what you trying to do here. Arthur Brum (talk) 23:32, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Prince Luiz of Orléans-Braganza.png

Thank you for uploading File:Prince Luiz of Orléans-Braganza.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. DrKay (talk) 16:22, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image uploads

Please do not upload images that violate non-free content guidelines on Wikipedia. If you continue to do so, despite the multiple warning notices above, you may be blocked from editing. DrKay (talk) 16:35, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Prince Luiz of Orléans-Braganza.png

Thanks for uploading File:Prince Luiz of Orléans-Braganza.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Train2104 (t • c) 18:06, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove file deletion tags from file description pages on Wikipedia, as you did to File:Prince Luiz of Orléans-Braganza.png, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. DrKay (talk) 18:24, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Prince Luiz of Orléans-Braganza.png

Thanks for uploading File:Prince Luiz of Orléans-Braganza.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:17, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How many times are you going to keep uploading this file as non-free content even though you have been repeatedly told that is does not satisfy Wikipedia's non-free content use policy? The file has been deleted numerous times from Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons for one reason or another. You moved into "I did not hear that" territory quite a while back with your continued uploading of this file, and you're not helping yourself by continuing to do so. If you continue to upload this file, you run the risk of having an administrator block your account. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:23, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As many times as necessary, in different ways. The image can not be replaced by a freely licensed alternative content simply because there is not, or do not accept when placed in wikipedia. I read and re-read the code, the image follows all the terms required for content of the genre: it is in diminished size, with lower quality, the photo is cut, I have provided the source, the date of publication of the photo, the company responsible for the authorship, as well as other, sometimes I have provided other sources that prove the free use of this image, and yet, continually you continue deleting and deleting and deleting, without explanation even when you follow all the requirements. Be clearer at least and tell what requirement this content is violating. I tried to talk about this and other matters with administrators, I tried, but I was summarily ignored, slandered (a guy pointed out that I supposedly owns two accounts fakes), etc. That's when there are no editors who think that articles are their unique properties they can edit at their pleasure and no one else can touch. Arthur Brum (talk) 02:34, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You've been indefinitely blocked, but as a courtesy I will reply. This file cannot be used because its use does not meet WP:NFCC#1. A non-free image of a living individual is simply not allowed to be used for primary indentification purposes except in some very limited cases, as explained in item 1 of WP:NFC#UUI, which do not apply in this case. As long as the Prince is still living, it is going to be assumed that a free equivalent can be created or found by anyone, including the Prince himself. It doesn't have to be the same exact image; it only has to be one sufficient for indentification purposes. As for image resolution, etc., all 10 non-free content crieria need to be met, not 9 out of 10 per WP:JUSTONE; so, as long as the NFCC#1 is not satisfied, this type of non-free use is simply not going to be allowed. I'm not sure how many times you need to have the same image nominated for deletion for the same reason by multiple editors and then subsequently deleted by different administrators for you to understand this essential fact.

Regarding your block, I suggest you carefully read through Wikipedia:Appealing a block as well as Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks and Wikipedia:Standard offer. "Indefinite" does not necessarily mean forever, but it can if you're not careful. I recommend you keep your comments limited to discussing your block because you may find your ability to edit this talk page revoked if you don't. In order to be unblocked, you're going to have to convince an administrator that you truly understand why you were blocked and that you do not intend to make the same mistakes again. So, be careful with what you post because it could just make it that much easier for an administrator to not unblock your account if you're not. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:44, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for continuing to breach wikipedia's policies and guidelines despite multiple warnings, requests and explanations, and stating (above) that you will continue to do so. You compound this by falsely claiming that no-one has explained why your uploads have been deleted multiple times, and by denying obvious sock puppetry. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. DrKay (talk) 07:22, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of totalitarian regimes

The article List of totalitarian regimes has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Violates WP:NPOV. Some have different views of what makes a country totalitarian. While North Korea may be a seemingly obvious example, others are not so obvious and really come down to personal opinion.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. The Ninja5 Empire (Talk) 13:14, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of totalitarian regimes

The article List of totalitarian regimes has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This article only sources one of these on the list and I'm not even sure you can even consider that sourced country totalitarian (not saying Venezuela isn't a dictatorship though). The problem is that it violates WP:NPOV and there are no other sources. Yes, some of them may seem obvious but others are a matter of opinion and we shouldn't just label countries as "totalitarian" unless used with caution which this article fails to do. I requested this be deleted before but the deletion template was removed. I am still not seeing why this page should continue to be on Wikipedia so I am requesting its deletion on accounts of violating WP:NPOV, WP:V and WP:AD.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. The Ninja5 Empire (Talk) 06:15, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of totalitarian regimes for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of totalitarian regimes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of totalitarian regimes until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. The Ninja5 Empire (Talk) 06:18, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of totalitarian regimes for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of totalitarian regimes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of totalitarian regimes (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Heliotom (talk) 04:57, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Block evasion

This user has engaged in block evasion as of May, 2018. --Yamla (talk) 18:54, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of totalitarian regimes for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of totalitarian regimes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of totalitarian regimes (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. The Ninja5 Empire (Talk) 04:47, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Prince Pedro Henrique of Orléans-Braganza.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Prince Pedro Henrique of Orléans-Braganza.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:04, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Maria-Elizabeth-de-Orleans-e-Bragança.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Maria-Elizabeth-de-Orleans-e-Bragança.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:28, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of countries by GDP (PPP) in the nineteenth century for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of countries by GDP (PPP) in the nineteenth century is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of countries by GDP (PPP) in the nineteenth century until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

R Prazeres (talk) 18:22, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Largest urban centers of South America

Template:Largest urban centers of South America has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:03, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]