User talk:Nick.mon/Archive 2

2013

Disambiguation link notification for January 1

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.

Democratic Centre (Italy) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Orange

Italian general election, 2013 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Liberal

Monti's Agenda for Italy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Liberal

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:37, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 15

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.

Historical Right (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Conservator

Project South (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Azure

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:38, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Empire

I wanted to explain why I reverted your edit at Roman Empire. A discussion on the talk page among multiple editors decided that the "vexilloid", being a modern fiction, was not as representative of the Roman state as a symbol chosen by the Roman state itself. Coinage was one of the primary media of Imperial public relations, to avoid the less neutral word "propaganda". A coin image thus functions something like a state seal. Didn't want the revert to seem arbitrary. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:06, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thank you. (User talk:Nick.mon) 10:51, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Historical Right, Nick.mon!

Wikipedia editor GeorgeLouis just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

You need citations in Historical Right. If you don't know how to do them, I will help you or do it for you.

To reply, leave a comment on GeorgeLouis's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Disambiguation link notification for February 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mario Draghi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bank of Italy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:11, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page

Hello Nick.mon,

in case that you disagree with other users' edits, please use the talk page to discuss and to find consensus in order to avoid edit wars. Thank you. Kind regards. --RJFF (talk) 14:34, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Italian general election, 2013, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Libertarian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:01, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Your recent editing history at Italian general election, 2013 and Template:Democratic Party (Italy)/meta/color shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. --RJFF (talk) 15:30, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. --RJFF (talk) 17:35, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ANEW

I've reviewed the report filed against you at WP:ANEW. Your comment there appears to acknowledge that you're edit-warring and that you won't continue to do so. However, I need a more explicit promise from you that you will not edit-war on Italian general election, 2013 or any other page at Wikipedia. If you make that promise, I will not block you. However, even if you make that promise and you break it, you may be blocked without warning and even if your edits do not rise to a breach of WP:3RR. Please respond here before contributing elsewhere at Wikipedia.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:15, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thank you, I promise I will never do another edit-warring. Excuse me if I had caused you some problems, but I wanted to improve Wikipedia not the opposite. .--Nick.mon (talk) 18:21, 23 February 2013 (UTC

This is you very last warning! You pledged to "never do another edit-warring" three days ago. You've done it again: at Lega Nord ([1]). Stop it!

Bersani

You've deleted all my careful punctuation of a couple of quoted lines, here. Brackets – "[" and "]" – enclosed letters (capital or lower case) or words/phrases/first names e.g. that were not in the quoted source material but that I've added to make them read in the context of my sentences. I think I'm correct in my usage and would ask you to undo, please, your edit. The way you've left them, the quotes are not accurate to the sources. You can check the source to find how the original story read and how I've incorporated pieces from it into the Wiki article. I know the brackets make the quotes look more clunky and you're welcome to try to rewrite around or even without the quotes but I think you'll find it's a good deal more work yet. We need to avoid lifting even phrases from sources without quote marks. Cheers. Swliv (talk) 05:21, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Events have overtaken us -- perhaps you intended to respond and were blocked. In any event, I've reverted your edits but am glad to see further edits to the quotes and content; and glad to consult further if you'd like when you are unblocked. From my vantage I saw perhaps a headstrong approach from you to editing but not a malicious approach. "Good faith" may apply. I hope you can work out your problems with other editors -- it's a collaborative medium, this encyclopedia. Please call on me if you'd like further free advice from this corner. Meanwhile, cheers. Swliv (talk) 04:37, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

February 2013

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Bbb23 (talk) 00:08, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On February 23, in exchange for not being blocked, you promised to stop edit-warring. Since your promise, you have been reverting material in multiple articles, including The People of Freedom, Left Ecology Freedom, Five Star Movement, and Democratic Party (Italy). Much of the material you are attempting to add or change looks similar across these articles. As usual, you do not discuss your edits; you do not even bother to use edit summaries. I have therefore blocked you for 48 hours. If after expiration of the block, you return and repeat the same conduct, you may be blocked for a longer period of time, up to and including indefinitely.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:12, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Your recent editing history at Italian general election, 2013 and Pier Luigi Bersani shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. --RJFF (talk) 14:37, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Who decided which of the two pictures is better?? I also write a new discussion in Talk:Italian general election, 2013 but an users also revert my edits saying his photo is better...We use File:Bersani cropped.png for months why now we should change it with a worse one?? Nick.mon (talk) 14:37, 3 March 2013 (UTC

It is never justified to engage in an edit-war, no matter if your edit has merit or not. Please use the talk page to discuss and find consensus. Kind regards. --RJFF (talk) 15:21, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thank you..we are talk it in the talk page...but he dont' want to change the image...and I don't understand why I have been reported as edit warring and he did not...(talk) 15:24, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I reported you first, because you have edit-warred in many other articles before, while User:EeuHP attracted my attention for the first time. But, of course, there are always two sides responsible for an edit war. --RJFF (talk) 15:38, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok excuse me..but I also started the discussion on the talk page some days ago...and in my edits I tried to mantain the page as it was before his edits.talk) 15:40, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. --RJFF (talk) 15:24, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

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 could also click on the signature button or 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 they said it. Thank you. --RJFF (talk) 15:52, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Latest edit-warring

Nick.mon, you are very lucky not to have been blocked for your latest behavior. You have now been warned over and over again about edit-warring. Yet, you persist, and your excuses are no longer credible. Consider this a final warning. If you ever edit-war again, you risk being blocked indefinitely.

In addition, try to be more disciplined about your edits. Don't post messages without signing. Do NOT edit without being logged in. When you edit as an IP, you are warned that you are doing so. If you forgot to log in, then just don't edit when you see that warning; log in, and then edit. It's better for Wikipedia, and it's better for you.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:13, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I agree with you...I had been stupid. Nick.mon ((talk) 16:16, 3 March 2013 (UTC

Updated version needed for Italian Senate seat file

Thanks for your recent upload of the graphical . When I compare the dots with the final results it however currently still urgently needs to be corrected, both in regards of distributed dots and their color. In example, I searched in vain for a black color for SVP+PATT+UTP (which I think would be okay to combine into the same color group). Please fix the dot+color issues, and upload a new correct version of the file. Danish Expert (talk) 08:11, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok no problem, I do it immediatly. Nick.mon (talk) 13:22, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of UserNick.mon

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.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page that you created was tagged as a test page and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that your page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to 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, you can place a request here. GILO A&E⇑ 19:41, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Italian general election, 1865

I see you have added a graph showing the distribution of seats in this election. What is your source for the seat numbers? The percentage in the results table is for the % of seats, not the % of votes, so needs to be removed from the infobox. I have the same concerns about the infoboxes on Italian general election, 1867 and Italian general election, 1870. Cheers, Number 5 7 20:41, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have used the percentage of seats that are in the box. Nick.mon User talk:Nick.mon 13:58, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, In that case, I will remove the graphs and the seat numbers, as they are original research - we can't assume that X% = X seats. Cheers, Number 5 7 16:10, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, but I converted the percentage in seats. I did not left the percentage. I think it is the right thing to do. Nick.mon User talk:Nick.mon 16:24, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is original research - we don't know how many seats each faction had and we can't assume based on percentages. Number 5 7 17:03, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have added the graphs again to two of the articles. I'm not really sure how I can explain this differently, but what you are doing is WP:Original research. You cannot calculate the number of seats yourself based on percentages. If you have a source which states the number of seats, then that's aboslutely fine, and I'd appreciate it if you could share it with me too, but until then, we cannot have this in the article. Number 5 7 16:18, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okok excuse me. But then how do we know which are the exact percentages? Nick.mon User talk:Nick.mon 16:22, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The % of the vote or % of the seats? The source I have (Nohlen & Stöver) only gives % of seats, which is what I added to the results table. Number 5 7 16:27, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We know the % of seats not the one of the votes, and so I thought that we could know the numbers of seats. We haven't the % of vote which can be different. Nick.mon User talk:Nick.mon 16:29, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that we cannot do the calculation of the seats ourselves - this is WP:Original research. Number 5 7 17:42, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Five Star Movement, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Parliamentarians and Senators (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 13:08, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-warring again

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. --RJFF (talk) 19:40, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why in the Italian Wikipedia there are all the seats also of the Regional Council and in english one we can't insert them. And where I could talk about it? In which talk page? Anyway I think they were correct edits but if you think the opposite, ok, I'm wrong. Nick.mon (talk) 14:00, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Nick.mon, we already discussed about this issue before, here in your talk page (see talk), and your proposal did not reach any consensus. I consider your a very knowledgeable and your contribution to Wikipedia very valuable, but please refrain from edit wars and go-alone behavior. --Checco (talk) 16:01, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

March 2013

Please stop adding nonfree images back to articles from which they have been removed. Improving the aesthetics or balance of infoboxes is not a policy-based justification for the use of nonfree images. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 17:08, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Which image? Excuse me I don't understand...maybe I don't remember can you tell me which image is? Nick.mon (talk) 17:13, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are not free images! If are not free images why don't you delate them?? Nick.mon (talk) 12:36, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Like this this one, which I've just reverted[2]. You should review WP:NFCC and WP:NFLIST, in particular, carefully. Just because a nonfree image can be properly used in one article does not mean it may be used in any article mentioning that subject. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 12:41, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But if in the article speaks about Nenni and Berlinguer we must use their image! Nick.mon (talk) 12:44, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No. All image use must comply with WP:NFCC and WP:NFC, which are not only consensus policy on en-wiki but also implement directives from the WMF, which ultimately controls Wikipedia. You are now clearly edit warring to continue improper use of nonfree images, and are likely to be sanctioned, including suspension of your editing privileges, if you do not stop. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 13:15, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I'm wrong doing edit-warring, but if the image are nonfree why are still in Wikipedia? Nick.mon (talk) 13:18, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because nonfree images can be used under very limited circumstances under the policies I've pointed out several times. However, just because an image is allowed in a biography does not mean it can be used in any other article where that person is mentioned. 99% of the time (or more) it can't. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 13:27, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh okok I didn't understand it. Excuse me for the edit-warring. Kind regards. Nick.mon (talk) 13:28, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Preview

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In the future, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. --RJFF (talk) 18:29, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thank you. Nick.mon (talk) 12:11, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Last edition

Of course, we can talk. I talked with you during months. And you still insist on removing "Bersani.JPG". Can you tell me what I use to talk with you? Although I believe that the two photographs of the PD's article are better than those you defend, I am willing to not put them back if you stop trying to eliminate "Bersani.JPG" whenever you have time.--EeuHP (talk) 13:44, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't eliminate Bersani.JPG you eliminate the two photo that there were to insert new photo uploaded by you. The one of Renzi, who dates in 2009 and the one of Bersani...I've just put things back as before...until someone decide, we must edit as before. User:Nick.mon 13:47, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How about use the your one of Bersani, and the other one of Renzi? And I am not against your image, I simply said that it is not a goog image, in my opinion... User:Nick.mon 13:48, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I refer to the article of the Italian editions, you know. A month later, returning the alternatives photos (seven) and "Bersani.JPG" disapears. "Bersani.JPG" is a good photo and I do not understand why you not leave it quiet. With respect to the PD's article, any combination of the four photos will be fine.--EeuHP (talk) 14:04, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Presidents of Italy, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Washington and Rai (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 00:46, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bersani

Excuse me, Nick.monn. You and I have two months of conversation. When we finally reached an agreement, none of the pictures that you have uploaded is licensed. And "Bersani.cropped" is in the article of the general secretaries of PD and in the article of PD's primary elections. Why do not you stop?--EeuHP (talk) 18:43, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why do not stop to edit Bersani cropped.png even when I do not posted it? Nick.mon 18:55 25 April 2013

What is falut?--EeuHP (talk) 18:57, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If I don't understand you, I can't respond. I did not know it was not you. Wait an hour and I make a new proposal.--EeuHP (talk) 19:14, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would propose that we put the photograph of the Italian wikipedia article, but I just saw that you replaced this image and you put "Bersani cropped.png". Listen, I'm tired, tired. This situation has lasted two months and I can not anymore. "Bersani cropped.png" is in eight articles on en.wikipedia and "Bersani.JPG" only three. I think that's enough.--EeuHP (talk) 20:51, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I also regret to have reached this point. Regards.--EeuHP (talk) 15:00, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Guglielmo Epifani

If you don't add some content to this article quickly, I'm going to have to delete it.Deb (talk) 12:35, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Marina Sereni

Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Marina Sereni. The community has decided that all new biographies of living persons must contain a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article as per our verifiability policy. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:12, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lega Nord

Are you looking for a new block? If not, better stop it. --RJFF (talk) 14:54, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is not the first time that you have added "Padanian nationalism". You have added it several times and it has been reverted every time, because it is not sourced. Wikipedia's policies and guidelines have been explained to you many times. If you still do not know or understand them, please make sure to look them up again and make yourself acquinted with them, before you resume editing. Every edit, every addition to Wikipedia has to be backed up by WP:reliable sources. This is Wikipedia's core policy of WP:Verifiability. Never add any information that is not backed by reliable sources. If you are not sure which sources are reliable, please consult WP:Identifying reliable sources or ask and let them be checked at the WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Alternatively, you might ask an experienced user to help you. Kind regards. --RJFF (talk) 15:05, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. If "Padanian nationalism" was "obviusly" Lega Nord's ideology, other users would not dispute it. Obviously it is not obvious. If other users disagree with you, it is your obligation to provide adequate sources to support your addition. --RJFF (talk) 15:05, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of pre-modern great powers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fascist Italy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 15:10, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Radical Party (Italy, 1877–1922), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Radicalism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:07, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

next italian elections!

Hi,

i saw that u are editing the opinion polls, but you had some problems with the citation! I'm thankful that you're helping but please try to get it right the next time :) Olliyeah (talk) 10:18, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Beppe Grillo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Populist (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:45, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited G-20 major economies, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page President of China (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:27, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Racism in Italy may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

of the racist and populist party [[Lega Nord]], who said that whenever he saw Minister Kyenge]], who is an [[African Italian]], an [[orangutan]] came to his mind. After few days, during a speech

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:20, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Roman unification of Italy

Ciao Nick
and no problem about your English, mine is not that better. :-) As a matter of fact, it is universally recognized that the roman republic and empire are totally "uncoupled" from the italian kingdom and republic. Between roman and modern Italy there are about 1300 years (a time abyss) of political "intermezzo", where the peninsula was split. This article deals with the Italian Republic, and its only predecessor is the kingdom of Italy born in 1861. There is no political continuity between modern and roman Italy. About Egypt, basically on Wikipedia I don't care about what people write on other articles. The main reason about my choice is that, as you maybe know, this project is plagued by nationalists, chauvinists, and the like. In the case of Egypt, modern Egyptian love to identify themselves with the people of the Pharaohs time, exactly as the modern Greeks think that they derive directly from the Greeks of Pericles. This happens because each state needs a foundation myth to "justify" its existence. for this reason the duce (possibly influenced by Margherita Sarfatti) chose to "forget" the 1300 years intermezzo and pretended that the new Italy was direct daughter of the roman one, but this concept is refused by the modern historiography. And here, I repeat, we are talking about a state predecessor, not a cultural influence, that in Italy do exist. Ciao, Alex2006 (talk) 09:24, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem Nick! You can have a look for example at the articles about Germany and France. There the first predecessors are the roman Germanic Empire (a.k.a. First Reich) respectively the Kingdom of the Merovingians, because from this point on one can recognize a certain (albeit imperfect) continuity among the different state organisms of the 2 countries. About Egypt, what they wrote is a "puttanata" (sorry for the Italianism :-)) but I am not going into an edit war about a subject which neither I know well nor I am interested into. Ciao, Alex2006 (talk) 09:39, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

:-) Thanks God Egyptians don't see our Talk page and don't understand Italian (and at any case right now they have something else to do...) Alex2006 (talk) 09:53, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Regional Council of Lombardy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pensioners' Party (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:35, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Soccia!

Another Wikipedian from Bologna on en.wiki? Nice to meet you! Are you aware of others from the neighbourhood? -- cyclopia^speak! 17:19, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(We can talk here if you don't mind, I have put your talk page on my watchlist) - Well, I am in Germany right now but I'll be back at the Due Torri in September. Suppose we can get a beer? Cheers. -- cyclopia^speak! 17:31, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I must tell you that I am 17 years old and I don't met people who I don't know even if this people are Bolognese :) But of course you didn't know this and so don't worry. -- Nick.mon, 17:36, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Sorry, I fully understand -you're perfectly right in not trusting random Internet strangers. No problem!

Keep up the good work! -- cyclopia^speak! 17:49, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry you could not know. Thank you and good work too! And of course, Forza Bologna! -- Nick.mon, 17:51, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 13

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.

Christian Democracy (Italy) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Traditionalism

Pope (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Francis

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:57, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/President of Emilia-Romagna concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/President of Emilia-Romagna, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 20:55, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

September 2013

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article, specifically List of mayors of Bologna, may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Werieth (talk) 16:17, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Landtag of Bavaria, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Regionalist (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:17, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited New Force (Italy), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MEP (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 12:11, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve List of Federal Secretaries of Lega Nord

Hi, I'm Sulfurboy. Nick.mon, thanks for creating List of Federal Secretaries of Lega Nord!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. ..

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Sulfurboy (talk) 03:48, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 8

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.

Euroscepticism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Regionalist

Next Italian general election (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Regionalism

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced addition

Hello Nick.mon,

you have been explained many times that it is important to provide a source for every contentual addition or change you make. Yet, with this edit to the article Five Star Movement you again make an unsourced edit, which had to be reverted. You do not even give an explanation in the edit summary. Please try to always provide an edit summary which is very helpful to make your edits understandable to other users. Thank you, kind regards. --RJFF (talk) 20:47, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

IP edits

Hello Nick.mon,

is there any chance that these IP edits: Special:Contributions/95.233.33.20 are in fact yours? In case they are, please be reminded to always log in to make edits, to avoid coming under the suspiscion of deliberately hiding (possibly controversial) edits. In case they are not, just ignore this message. Kind regards. --RJFF (talk) 14:34, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, sorry, maybe sometimes I forgot to log in, but this happens rarely now. I don't know who he/she is. Bye! -- Nick.mon (talk) 17:59, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Then I am sorry for having bothered you. No offense meant. Kind regards. --RJFF (talk) 22:28, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dont' worry, it is ok, no problem. Kind regards. -- Nick.mon (talk) 14:04, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: List of Prime Ministers of Italy

Hi, Nick.mon. I don't understand why you wanted to put Letta's picture instead of Italian politics template, and why you wanted to make the same colors for Socialist Party and Olive coalition. Those are your edits which I reverted. Cheers! --Sundostund (talk) 19:22, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Map of the Italian Empire

Hallo Nick,
the problem with this map is that the shown territories were not under Italian control at the same time. Italy lost AOI in 1941, and acquired Tunisia only in late 1942 (and at that time the Italian lost already Cyrenaica). Putting both in the map is misleading. If you want to do it, you need a dynamic map, or you should at least write near each territory the period of the occupation. Moreover, the map is incomplete, since it does not show territories like southwest Anatolia, which Italy occupied after WWI. What we need here is a "maximum extent map". Bye, Alex2006 (talk) 13:41, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually we could elegantly solve the problem writing such a caption: "Territories which were at one time part of the fascist Italian Empire" (otherwise one should add southwest Anatolia, etc.). Alex2006 (talk) 15:15, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New Centre-Right

Hello Nick.mon,

please stop move-warring. "New Centre-Right" with a capital 'R' is supported by several high-quality English-language news media (The Independent, Financial Times, Reuters). I find it surprising that you, who is obviously not a native speaker, claim to know better what is "correct English" than well-established and reputable English-language publications. Moreover, it is very uncooperative to move a page back and forth without discussing with the user who disagrees with you (that would be me) and without even answering my argument and the source I provided.

Kind regards. --RJFF (talk) 15:59, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk back

I have answered you at my talk page. Kind regards. --RJFF (talk) 19:08, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Chamber of Deputies (Italy) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:55, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced and unexplained edits

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

This is a minor edit Watch this page

By publishing changes, you agree to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC BY-SA 4.0 License and the GFDL. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.

Publish changes Show preview Show changes Cancel

The edit summary field appears above the "Save page" button

Hello Nick.mon,

why are you doing this? You have been kindly told so many times that every non-trivial edit on Wikipedia has to be supported by a reliable source, because users' original research is not accepted (this is one of WP's three core content policies!). And you have been asked so many times to please provide edit summaries in which you explain your edits to other users, because on Wikipedia users co-operate which each other and base their work on each other's. Sometimes you give the impression of being incorrigible. This makes me really tired. Please start accepting our fundamental guidelines and conventions in order to make your edits useful instead of annoying. Thank you. Kind regards. --RJFF (talk) 18:24, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Prime Ministers of Italy, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Roadblocks and Demonstrations (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:07, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 27

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.

President of Emilia-Romagna (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Regional Council

Silvio Berlusconi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Mafioso

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Historically inaccurate map of Italian Empire

Hello. I have reverted your re-addition of the historically inaccurate map (see Talk:Italian Empire). You have been informed many times that the map isn't correct, yet you continue to add it. So the next time you do it you will get a formal warning for deliberate introduction of factual errors. Thomas.W ^{talk to me} 13:44, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at File:Italy and Posessions September 1939.png. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators can block users from editing if they repeatedly vandalize. Thank you. Caution for manipulating image, adding territories that were not formally Italian. With a deliberately misleading edit summary to boot. Thomas.W ^{talk to me} 13:56, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism? Which vandalism? The image was exactly the same, I just deleted the borders in the Dodecanesus, and I used another red. -- Nick.mon 14:07, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, you did not just change the color. You also "painted" San Marino and the Vatican State red, including them in Italy, which both was and is factually incorrect. And is easy to spot when comparing your version to the other one. Thomas.W ^{talk to me} 14:09, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you are right, excuse me. -- Nick.mon 14:13, 29 December 2013 (UTC