User talk:Cristiano Tomás/Archive 7

Campaignbox Spanish colonial campaigns
Hello Cristiano Tomás!!!

the one who does think that the conquest of Canaries or the conquest of Melilla are colonial wars? The conquest of Granada is later to the Conquest of the Canary Islands. Is the conquest of Granada a colonial war? It might say that the whole Reconquista is a colonial war....

A greeting.--Tucídides (talk) 19:39, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

!Hola Cristiano Tomás!

Hace un tiempo te escribí, pero no me has contestado. Según leo en las indicaciones que pones sobre las discusiones aceptas que te escriban en español. Mejor así, puesto que me expreso mejor en castellano que es mi lengua materna.

Vuelvo a repetir el mismo argumento no se puede colocar las batallas desarrolladas en Canarias, en ceuta o Melilla en una caja donde estén todas las batallas coloniales de España. No hay ninguna fuentes que acredite eso, primero por lo que tu mismo dijiste que no se consideran colonias y segundo porque esa caja está hecha en wikipedia, no procede de ninguna tradición o publicación de autores acreditados en la materia. ¿Podríamos incluir la reconquista como campañas coloniales?. Si se alude a un criterio cronológico la conquista de Granada debería ser una guerra colonial puesto que es posterior a la conquista de canarias. Si se emplea un criterio continental, se está faltando a la verdad, pues aunque eso territorios están en África son parte de España como los son los territorios españoles europeos.

Por tanto deben retirarse las batallas desarrolladas en estos lugares ya que es incorrecto incluirlos en la categoría de coloniales.

¡Un saludo! Tucídides (talk) 01:24, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited House of Bourbon-Braganza, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Iberian (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) 10:54, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

About the Brazilian empire and ....
Hey, Cristiano. I am as cool as cucumber! But it is tiresome when you get the feeling that other are not even bothering with what one says. I am perfectly fine with being wrong and I admit it if I am, but being stonewalled is irksome. But I am cool, don't worry - in fact, just decided I need to recharge my batteries in Lisbon. If I get a chance, I'll drop you a line for the cerveja we agreed on a while back. Enlighten me: I often see here in the WP "send message by email" - how does that work? Does the have to activate it for others to use it? Cheers! Rui &#39;&#39;Gabriel&#39;&#39; Correia (talk) 15:13, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Let's map the future, pave the road forward
Hi Cristiano. I would appreciate if you could take the time to read through my lengthy post at Talk:Empire of Brazil. Thank you and best regards, Rui &#39;&#39;Gabriel&#39;&#39; Correia (talk) 12:23, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Salazar e Bragança
Once a PROD has been removed, you should not re-add it under any circumstances. You need to use WP:AFD as the next step. GiantSnowman 10:06, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * As I have already told you, once a PROD has been removed it should never be re-added. Why have you therefore re-added to all these articles? If you re-add a PROD tag again then I will block you for disruptive behaviour. GiantSnowman 08:29, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Please actually read WP:PROD before tying to use it; you cannot add a PROD tag to an article where a PROD tag has already been removed, that is basic stuff. GiantSnowman 08:34, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vímara Peres, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Iberian (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) 09:00, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Cabrillo/Catalina edit
So now I'm confused by yr latest edit ("...Portuguese explorer Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo, who sailed in the name of the Spanish crown..."). It doesn't seem to be supported by the citation provided, where the quote essentially suggests some doubt on the matter ( "Many historians originally believed he was Portuguese and not Spanish...This assertion, however, has been basically debunked..."). If there is reliable evidence somewhere else that he really was Portuguese, then shouldn't we try to cite that instead and drop this one? Thoughts? jxm (talk) 05:28, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Portuguese people
The user VirtualTyper has been removing Eusebio from Portuguese people over and over. Would you please post to the talk page to back me up that he should be included? Thanks!Goodsdrew (talk) 18:00, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

portuguese people
I would like to know why the article that i edited ( portuguese people) was reverted by you today 20th if you compare as i suppose that you did ,you will see that i dindt change the fundamental ideas i rephrase them so they can be acceptable as an article in an Encyclopedia!! cant understand the issue... if you can talk in portuguese i would like to talk to you about the issue. thanks otherwise i will edit it again. Roman catholicism is not a RELIGION --> "Roman Catholicism, Christian church that has been the decisive spiritual force in the history of Western civilization. Along with Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestantism, it is one of the three major branches of Christianity." Encyclopedia Britannica ... so are you just a troll? also " Most famous Portuguese people outside Portugal are/were?? Navigators, footballers, writer,singers???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.103.100.139 (talk) 18:46, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Captaincy Colonies of Brazil
You've previously un-done a redirect of this page to Captaincies of Brazil. All of the information on this page is replicated in Captaincies of Brazil. You've also stated in the un-do edit comment that there is a reason for this article to exist, but you did not state the reason, on the talk page of either the article or the talk page of Captaincies of Brazil. What is that reason? I'd prefer you take this discussion to the talk page of Captaincy Colonies of Brazil, so the community can join in on it.Sbalfour (talk) 23:06, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Prince Royal of Portugal shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;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&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;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. DrKiernan (talk) 11:06, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Template:User Portuguese nobility
Template:User Portuguese nobility, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User Portuguese nobility and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Template:User Portuguese nobility during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. BDD (talk) 23:20, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Editing behaviour
What is up Cristiano? Your recent editing behavior seems almost contrary to your past behaviour. In the past we have discussed Geoboxes, the naming conventions, and you seemed receptive. All of a sudden you are doing moves without discussion. I mentioned the "guerilla-editing" in passing, and your "retired" status almost belies the type of activity on Wikipedia recently. Could you please parlay on this subject? ruben jc ZEORYMER  (talk) 22:01, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Cristiano, while I disagree with you on the naming of "o Castelo de São Jorge", I am willing to concede, as naming issues is a bottomless pit of antagonisms. Meanwhile on the Geoboxes, I believe we will be disagreeing adnauseum. I must bring up the point, that you should not have reverted my addition of the Geobox in the talkpage. If, there is to be a consensus on this subject, then lets see community input. I am willing to argue my side, and you will likely argue on yours. But, in order to do so, I believe that a comparison is warranted. So that we can note and debate points. ruben jc ZEORYMER  (talk) 22:23, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah. My bad. I got confused. It was purely my error, and have apologized on the talk page. It was not intentional: I am not trying to get into a quarrel. ruben jc ZEORYMER  (talk) 22:57, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Shall I assume, therefore, that you would be challenging me on all Geobox uses? Then, if that is the case, why not take this conversation to WikiProject Portuguese geography? Provide an example, such as Lisbon, and lets get to it. I also request that you provide counter arguments to my statements made on that site (Lisbon), since your challenges seem more like personal preference, rather then debate. I am bemused that your return from "Retired" status seems more like personal antagonism: do you see a consensus in any debate? ruben jc ZEORYMER  (talk) 01:01, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John V of Portugal, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Vatican and State of Maranhão (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) 08:52, 15 June 2014 (UTC)