User talk:Gsfelipe94/Archive 6

Cristian Baroni

Sorry, my mistake. I undid your edit to restore the clubs in the opening sentence, so I could change "plays for" to "last played for": I always thought the lead was supposed to give an indication of why the subject was notable. Anyway, I had every intention of restoring your changes to the infobox dates and clearly didn't. Again, sorry for the aggravation. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:57, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

No problem, man. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 18:00, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

223

http://www.ufc.com/event/UFC-223/printFightCard - Alexander Gustafsson (talk) 22:05, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I didn't know it worked that way. Thanks for clarifying. 156.196.253.245 (talk) 01:49, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

No problem. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 01:52, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

UFC 223

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on UFC 223. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. 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; 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.
Please discuss the matter in the existing thread of the article talk page. Dancter (talk) 21:46, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

?????? SMH... Gsfelipe94 (talk) 22:02, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

UFC:AC Result

HERE is the official result from the commission. Although stupid, it is the official result, which we should be using whenever possible. Athough "Technical submission (guillotine choke)" makes more sense, it isn't real. We shouldn't be making up results. TBMNY (talk) 03:17, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alberto Mina, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page João Pessoa (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) 23:03, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

File:UFC Fight Night Thompson vs. Till.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:15, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2018 Sport Club Corinthians Paulista season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Maracanã (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:44, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited UFC 219, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NSAC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

July 2018

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Harry Kane, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:09, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Paulo Costa (fighter), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santa Luzia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

July 2018

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Harry Kane, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Mattythewhite (talk) 16:09, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Marcus Rashford‎

Why would we not link each instance of a term in a *sortable* list? Mattythewhite (talk) 20:59, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

September 2018

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Marco Asensio. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Mattythewhite (talk) 21:04, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Marco Asensio

Olá, from Portugal,

answering your question while reverting me: because it's implied it is a stadium, i believe. But OK i give up, it stays your way.

happy editing, saudações --Quite A Character (talk) 21:06, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Olá, cara. Well, I understand that, but most cases the stadium shares the "Estadio" with it. Anyway, thw biggest problem is the omission of league divisions. Thanks! Gsfelipe94 (talk) 12:21, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

The way you've been editing "The Ultimate Fighter: Heavy Hitters"

Yes, it's annoying how User:Leighton94 keeps messing up the brackets. You should warn him personally (on his own talk page) about that. But if you want to revert his changes, please don't do so by also undoing other (legitimate) edits that other people made inbetween - as you did with my edit. Also, if you want to edit just one particular section - e.g., "Tournament bracket" - it's best to do so by clicking the "[ edit source ]" link that appears beside that section - not the "Edit source" tab that appears at the top of the page. Ross Finlayson (talk) 18:55, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

I'm well aware of that. Since your edit wasn't definitive, I restored the page only. When you complained, I did it properly. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 19:33, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Changes

The actual edit doesn't make sense the way your doing it looks like the one team is winning I understand the semi finals will show who one out of the quater finals but it still looks wrong Leighton94 (talk) 15:56, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Always been like that. The winner is in bold and the article says who won each bout at the Episode description. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 16:41, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Gsfelipe94. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

The Ultimate Fighter: Heavy Hitters Finale

Just a quick question, why did you change it from Juan Espino to Juan Francisco Dieppa? He is known as Juan Espino. WWEFan1926 (talk) 16:59, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Megan Anderson (fighter), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gold Coast (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

UFC Fight Night: dos Santos vs. Volkov

Hi Gsfelipe93, greetings. the event name has yet to change in UFC.com - see [HERE. Kindly wait until the new name is shown in he UFC.com then we change it. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 02:23, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jairzinho Rozenstruik, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oranjestad (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) 07:52, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Missed weight title bouts

Just a question, why do you think we shouldn't include title fights where one fighter missed weight but the other fighter is eligible? It seems, in my view, just as relevant as when fighters fight to a draw or being retroactively stripped after having won the title. What's the difference here? Just wondering. 102.41.88.183 (talk) 02:10, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

There were other times were challengers did not make weight and they were not considered title defenses even though the champion made weight. A draw in a regular title bout (where there were no weight issues) should be included. And the Jon Jones situation you mentioned is also completely different. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 02:18, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

They were not considered title defenses because the title was not on the line. Neither could the challenger win the title, nor could the champion lose the belt. However, in vacant title bouts, the situation is different. The fighter who made weight in this instance has the opportunity to win the title. The fact that he lost the bout should not preclude it's inclusion for being mentioned. If that were the case, then title bouts that resulted in a draw should likewise not be included because neither fighter won, although both had the opportunity. I hope you see where I'm getting at. If the title was not up for grabs (ala Whittaker vs. Romero 2) since it could neither be won or lost, fine don't include it. But in situations where a fighter could have won (i.e., the title was on the line in one way or another) but didn't (as happens in draws or situations where the opponent missed weight), then I fail to logically see why it shouldn't be mentioned. 102.41.88.183 (talk) 02:35, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

But a draw is not the same situation as the one you mentioned. You can see that nobody else added them before due to thinking the same thing. If a champion misses weight and wins the bout, it would only be added that he was stripped due to missing weight (the title would be up for grabs only for the challenger). That's the same thing here. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 02:41, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Your reply began by saying "a draw is not the same situation" and then didn't offer an actual relevant reason to support that. To simplify things, the fundamental point I'm making is that anytime the title is on the line it should be mentioned. So yes, if a champion misses weight, the title is on the line for the challenger, and it'll be mentioned in the article regardless of who won (the stripped champ or challenger). Same thing in draws and missed weight where a fighter was eligible for the title. Both cases, the title was on the line. 102.41.88.183 (talk) 03:01, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

A no contest or a draw are regular results just like a win or a loss, it's not the same thing. Anyway I get your point, but we'll have to add all cases for now on. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 17:09, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Why did you undid my edit on UFC 249?

I just added the link towards "TBD", nothing more Viotrix (talk) 17:30, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

You messed with the layout of the fight card. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 18:38, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I did this by accident, it was a mistake Viotrix (talk) 06:55, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

BMF revert

I owe you an apology. I reverted your edit without realizing that you were changing it from "honorary" to "symbolic." I thought you were removing it in its entirety. @Cassiopeia: brought that to my attention. Sorry about that. Platonic Love (talk) 20:38, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Platonic Love, You good will of taking the step above is encouraging. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:09, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

No problem, man. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 11:49, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

UFC 249 - splitting/move the page

Hi Gsfelipe 94, Greetings. UFC 249 page does not need to splitting or move to another title as the event will be still taking page as per recent news. The changing of date and veneu or fight cards are part of the event itself and info can be recorded in the body text. The current size of the page is small, even if it triple the content of current size is still does not consider large. Suggest to wait until the event has taken place and see if splitting is need (which I double so). Stay safe and best Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:21, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

The thing is, they just renamed the original UFC 250 as UFC 249 and will move some of those fights from the first event to the new one. It makes more sense for the timeline to have the April 18 date as a canceled event and the May 9 as a new one, including what happened to the fights on the Brazilian card and everything else. It will likely look better this way than mixing it all on the original article. I've seen/edited bigger articles years ago, so I do agree that size is not the problem here. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 13:00, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Gsfelipe94, I havent seen the new UFC 249 card yet, but if the above reason stated by you then I could understand your reason behind the changes. Once I have the info I will create the new UFC 249 with the date for the article name. Thank you and stay safe. Best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:26, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Just notice new ufc 249 article has been created. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:46, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, I wanted to create another discussion here regarding something similar: UFN 175 and 176 will very likely have the same main events as UFN 172 and 173. Obviously they are different events and we will link the new ones on the canceled events' page to avoid confusion. But when it comes to title of the articles, we already have UFC Fight Night: Smith vs. Teixeira and UFC Fight Night: Overeem vs. Harris. I was thinking about adding the number of the UFN (e.g. UFC Fight Night 172: Overeem vs. Harris for the canceled one and UFC Fight Night 176: Overeem vs. Harris for the new one). We can make it easier with the order for disambiguation and adjust the redirect for each one. What do you think? Gsfelipe94 (talk) 13:29, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

I want to make an addendum to this. I noticed you made two attempts at a cut&paste move from UFC 251 to UFC 250. A move like this should be brought up at WP:RM/TR. Jalen Folf (talk) 15:50, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Gsfelipe, Somehow I didnt receive you ping for such I just notice the message above. Pls note I have changed my name to sentence last month. I saw you have recreated UFC 250 after the redirect and I have reviewed it and should be searchable in Google soon. I also saw your renumbering to UFC on ESPN xxxxx as well so all should work out well for this stage until see would know what happen on UFC 250 and UFC 251. I will update all the fighters pages for the upcoming event. Good to know we are collaborating on this... best and stay safe. Cassiopeia^(talk) 05:14, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. You too. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 00:39, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of UFC on ESPN: Woodley vs. Burns

Hello Gsfelipe94,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Fbdave and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged an article that you started, UFC on ESPN: Woodley vs. Burns for deletion, because it appears to duplicate an existing Wikipedia article, UFC Fight Night 176.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Fbdave}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Fbdave (talk) 00:57, 25 May 2020 (UTC)