User talk:Aleuuhhmsc

Welcome!
Hello, Aleuuhhmsc, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! 99.53.112.186 (talk) 21:51, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

US title
"WWE recognizes Flair's fourth and fifth reigns as being uninterrupted, and considers this a continuation of the fourth." They do? So why do they state it ended on July 26? http://www.wwe.com/classics/titlehistory/unitedstates/3044541222 They just forgot to add the two reigns that happened between July 26 and the January 27 title win by Roddy Piper (same goes for the Blackjack / Jones stuff: http://www.wwe.com/classics/titlehistory/unitedstates/304454113) And we should not put these reigns in grey even if WWE decided to see the reign as a continuation, because the title changes happened in NWA and were recognized at that time.WrestlingLegendAS (talk) 16:43, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Maybe after Flair's reign ended on July 26, they considered the title "vacated" or something like that. The problem is this is the WWE United States Championship. It doesn't matter if the NWA recognizes recognizes reigns or not. It is the WWE United States Championship and it only matters if WWE recognizes reigns or not.
 * hi. Wwe includes contradictory information. In their article about titles won by fathers and sons, WWE describes Flair as six time champion. Legendas is wright, they have black holes in their title history, which are filled with other sources. However, WWE regcognized Flair as six times champion. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 21:35, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Combined reigns
Hi. To include the section "combined reigns", the title must have at least, a wrestler with two reigns. You know, reignS to combine. NXT and NXT Womens titles only have one reign champions. So, the section is unnecessary. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 22:23, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

I get that, but people still like to see it. Aleuuhhmsc (talk) 22:55, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Plus, I highly doubt anyone is going to win the NXT or NXT Women's Championships more than once; former champions will keep passing the baton to newer, up-and-coming wrestlers. So, people would want to see the rankings. --Aleuuhhmsc (talk) 22:59, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The ranking is in the champions list. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:52, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * People like me like to see champions climb the ladder on the leaderboard.--Aleuuhhmsc (talk) 01:57, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Copyright
Please, stop using copyrighted photos in the articles. You can't take a picture from WWE or Twitter and put it into an article. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 19:27, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
 * You took it from WWE.com. All photos by WWE are copyrighted. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 19:54, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The photo is a screen capture from a WWE copyrighted video. Seriously, read some pages about copyright before upload an image. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
 * So what makes Seth Rollins' and John Cena's pics not copyright? I would like the picture of Kevin Owens to be in WWE holding the IC title
 * Cena and Rollins photos were taken by fans. Also, the fans gave their permission to use them in wikipedia. As you can see, Cena photo has proper license. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 13:54, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kevin Owens as Intercontinental Champion.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Kevin Owens as Intercontinental Champion.png. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:32, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:KevinOwensPic.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:KevinOwensPic.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Tabercil (talk) 23:21, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Talkback
Whpq (talk) 20:19, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

ringnames
Please, take a look on FL section All of them include all the names. However, I started a discussion in the talk page. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 02:15, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Which one? Aleuuhhmsc (talk) 02:19, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
 * .The project. Usually, people discuss in the project talk page. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 02:22, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

RE
I've been 8 years. It just takes time to get used to everyone and how to go about the process.-- Will C  04:14, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Because you started with the wrong format. You followed the WWE lists. The WWE lists are wrong. I have considered taking them to FL demotion several times because they are horrid.-- Will C  19:26, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * How are the WWE lists wrong or horrid? Who says that they are wrong? Is there a consensus? Plus, what's the big deal? Aleuuhhmsc (talk) 21:38, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

The big deal is these lists have been peer reviewed and are a specific status. They are FLs. The WWE lists currently fail the FL criteria and the MoS. I could take them to FL and get them demoted from their FL status to prove this.-- Will C  21:48, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Then why don't you get your other "experienced" editors and fix it yourselves. If I could spend as much time as I did trying to fix all the tables, then you sure as hell can, too. One of this project's goals is to establish uniform style as best as possible and that was what I attempted to do. But if my edits are being reverted after I tried to HELP, then FUCKIN FIX IT FOR ME so I don't have to keep bitching at all of you and annoying the hell out of everyone here. Aleuuhhmsc (talk) 21:57, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Well 1) Calm down. 2) You took the time to convert stuff, that is your fault not mine. 3) You could have inquired as to why the lists were different in the first place. 4) I have taken the time to update lists, you can see the stars for every single one of them that I did on my user page. 5) IPs and new users have no idea what they are even doing half the time and I have better things to do than worry about all of their edits. 6) Lets actually have a discussion on a format than just make everything the same without any reason as to why they have some features.-- Will C  06:25, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I just hate being treated like crap cuz I'm a new guy when I'm only trying to help. Aleuuhhmsc (talk) 13:08, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Just stop making edits to lists and come to the project page and actually learn something about the format. I had to revert your edits on the style guide cause they were wrong. Rowspan does not allow a table to sort correctly. Also, there has yet to be an agreed upon format so you can't update lists with something that isn't even official, let allow the style guide.-- Will C  06:18, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
 * What does rowspan do differently then? Aleuuhhmsc (talk) 14:22, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

It won't allow the columns to sort properly in order. They screw up the whole table. That is why they aren't in the articles anymore.-- Will C  16:17, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Like how? Can you explain a little more? Like does it not sort in alphabetical order? Aleuuhhmsc (talk) 17:58, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Each column has a sort function at the top. Whatever you place in a row it will sort the column by the alphabet or numerically. Once you rowspan a column over two rows, it screws that all up. Because now it can't sort as 1, 2, 3, or 6, 5, 4. When it tries to sort a rowspan column it returns all messed up and inaccurate. There is a discussion going on at the project page where we are going to create a new format and update the style guide. Maybe you can educate yourself to some of the functions of the articles that way.-- Will C  20:00, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Read and understand Consensus. This is not about anyone wanting their way. You can't change an article's format because you feel like it unless there is a consensus on that format change. There was never an agreement on this format until the specifics are finalized and the style guide is OFFICIALLY changed. Read the policy. Learn before you act.-- Will C  06:08, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
 * If you want a uniform style then involve yourself in the discussion. Otherwise just because you changed a bunch of articles to fit what you desired without a consensus does not make it a uniformed style. If you want to improve wikipedia then play by the rules of wikipedia. That involves getting a consensus and learning the editing process.-- Will C  14:17, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for fixing the reigns page. I did have a template set but it was somewhat broken. Thanks for the fix! The GRVO fLig htn ing (talk) 01:25, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

WWE Raw Women's Championship
Can you please not do a blind revert with no explanation as you did here? It was one thing that you corrected a couple of things, but you removed and changed other things with no explanation. -- JDC808  ♫  07:41, 19 December 2016 (UTC) I apologize for that. Aleuuhhmsc (talk) 19:22, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey
Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.

Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 19:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Oct 26 Raw Bracket.png


The file File:Oct 26 Raw Bracket.png has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Orphaned image, no context to determine possible future encyclopedic use."

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 notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --TheImaCow (talk) 19:39, 6 December 2020 (UTC)