User talk:Asggerr

Welcome!
Hello, Asggerr, 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. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

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, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 13:42, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

October 2016
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Germans, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 13:42, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:German ancestry by Country.png


A tag has been placed on File:German ancestry by Country.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

G3. File creaated and uploaded by a new user, based on unsourced/fake numbers they themselves added to Germans, after having waited long enough and made enough pointless edits on other articles (see contribs) to become autoconfirmed.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 13:47, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Your edits on Germans
You may think that what you're doing is new and creative, but it isn't. Creating a new account, waiting a few days, and then making enough pointless edits (as you did on Pages needing attention/Biology) to become autoconfirmed, and then change data in the article to random numbers, as you have done, is neither new nor creative. The only slight new twist is creating an image based on your own data, giving it almost exactly the same name as the previous image, and then adding it to the article. But that has been reverted too. So stop. - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 13:52, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

October 2016
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Germans. - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 13:58, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:German Ancestry bu Country, 2014.png


A tag has been placed on File:German Ancestry bu Country, 2014.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

G3. Reupload of deleted image, see message there.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 14:01, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:German Ancestry by Country.png


A tag has been placed on File:German Ancestry by Country.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

G3; recreation of previously deleted image (based on fake data, see comment on previous image)

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 14:06, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

October 2016
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is only being used for vandalism. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. Katietalk 14:16, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


 * No, you did not provide new sources, but kept the sources that were already in the article. Except for your last edits where you replaced one of the old sources with http://www.infoescola.com/historia/colonizacao-alema-no-sul-do-brasil/, a source (in Portuguese) that does NOT support your edits, and in fact makes no mention at all of how many people of German descent there currently are in Brazil. Which combined with all the rest (see my comment further up) makes this a vandalism only account. - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 14:40, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


 * No, you were blocked because the sum of your edits shows that you, already from the start, intended to vandalise a semi-protected article here (Germans) by deliberately introducing fake data, in an elaborate scheme that even included creating a fake map that, apart from showing your fake data instead of real properly sourced data, was identical to the original image, and even was given a name that was identical to the name of the real image, except for the capitalisation of a single letter in the file name. - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 13:41, 7 October 2016 (UTC)


 * If there is such a source, why not provide it here so others can review it? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:39, 10 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment to Asgerr: Then why did you repeatedly add totally different figures for the number of people of German descent in Brazil (ranging from 750,000 to 2,500,000? Numbers that are totally ridiculous since the number of people of German descent in Brazil who still speak (and actively use) the German language (or to be more precise Riograndenser Hunsrückisch German) is about three million (according to Ethnologue). Five million (which can be found in another article here) is a claim that is sourced only to a blog/personal website, and a quick search on Google yields claims of 12-18 million. Which means that A) the current figure in the article is a reasonable estimate, and B) what you added to the article were just made up numbers, i.e. vandalism. Which is why you were blocked, and with all probability will remain blocked (and no, the source in Portuguese does not support your edits...). (also pinging Boing! said Zebedee) - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 21:53, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Can you show me some examples of vandalism by this "vandalism only account"? I don't see any.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:30, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry I'm late, but I was in airports and on planes all day Monday. In summary:
 * His first three edits with this account were okay, then he did this
 * Then there's a series of edits adding, then deleting, a comma at Pages needing attention/Biology. That's seeking autoconfirmed status, no question.
 * Then he begins a slew of unsourced statistical changes to Germans, a semi-protected article. In one instance, he kept the current source and simply changed the numbers, and now he's claiming the old source supports his new numbers. In another, he uses a source to say there are 1,000,000 native speakers in Brazil, then minutes later uses the same source to say there are 750,000.
 * Then he creates a map that he says is based on the article. He did this by taking the existing map, capitalizing the 'C' in 'country', and populating it with his fake data. correctly nominated it and  correctly deleted it under G3.
 * He goes back to the Germans article and inserts his map, using it to support his edits to the article. It's a big circle of circular goodness. When it's deleted, he's undeterred and keeps changing the numbers until he's blocked.
 * And now he's saying, in his unblock requests, that he wants to change the Brazil number to 5,000,000, his third unsupported change.
 * I call vandalism-only. I also have suspicions that this is not a new user, given his familiarity with markup. Katietalk 14:52, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree that it's most probably not a new user, but someone who has done these things before (writing "on porpoise" instead of "on purpose" in the unblock request makes me believe it's a New Yorker, BTW, in case a repeat vandal from NYC rings a bell somewhere...). - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 15:27, 11 October 2016 (UTC)


 * According to this article on Al Jazeera's web site 12 million people in Brazil (the number given in Germans) claimed to be of German descent in the Brazilian census of 2000, which trumps mere guesstimates like the one you linked to. But it doesn't really matter whether the true number is five million or twelve million, what matters here is that you made several different, and very low, claims in your edits, ranging from 750K to 2.5M, all of them without sources, and obviously just made-up numbers. - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 20:46, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * You're not doing yourself any favors with these duplicate requests. The reviewing administrator has not edited since I replied to him. Stop filling up our queues with your impatience. Katietalk 22:35, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * What kind of edits do you intend to make if unblock? Do you intend to edit Germans article again? Would you agree to a wp:topic ban on Germans if unblocked?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  13:53, 12 October 2016 (UTC)


 * ???? Noone has claimed that there are 12 million people of German descent in South Brazil. There are plenty of people of German descent in other parts of Brazil too (a 1998 survey showed that 5.51% of a random selection of 90,000 people in a number of major cities in Brazil, including Sao Paolo and Rio de Janeiro, were of German descent...). So don't try to change subject, and make this seem as something it isn't. It's a bit odd BTW that you haven't been heard from for several days now, during which time another editor, with an editing style very similar to yours, has made edits roughly similar to yours, i.e. fighting hard to lower the number of German Brazilians (on German Brazilians and Germans), as well as trying to remove content showing a large portion of European genes in Brazil on Brazilians, but now that the other editor has been told that continued disruptive editing might lead to a block you all of a sudden show up again with a new unblock request... - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 19:16, 16 October 2016 (UTC)