User talk:Lecen/Archive 11

Merry Christmas!


Fallschirmjäger &#9993; is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Daughters of Pedro IV/I
Why aren't the daughters of Pedro I of Brazil/Pedro IV of Portugal not considered Infantas of Portugal, as granddaughters of the reigning King of Portugal and later daughter of the King of Portugal? --Queen Elizabeth II&#39;s Little Spy (talk) 04:32, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Miguel I of Portugal
I am thinking about proposing a move to Miguel I of Portugal to fit better with Luís I of Portugal and Carlos I of Portugal. Do you know if King Miguel of Portugal ever used a regnal number during his reign as king or afterward? Like is there any documents or strong sources that would support a move to Miguel I? I google book searched it and it seems Miguel without the regnal number would win unless there is prove that he used the regnal number officially. Thanks.--Queen Elizabeth II&#39;s Little Spy (talk) 06:05, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Feliz Ano Novo
Lecen,

Feliz Ano Novo e obrigado pelo todo o seu apoio e ajuda com os artigos sobre Portugal e a sua historia.

p.s.

E desculpe a demora em desejar-lhe boas festas.

Barsa 1987a
In Empire of Brazil: does not link to anything named "Barsa 1987a". There's and I expect 'a' is a different volume. I'm good with citation templates and can probably teach you a few things. You're good at them, too, from what I'm seeing, so I think we can learn off of each other.


 * User:Ucucha/HarvErrors

You should install the above script; it's very helpful with harv/sfn referencing. Alarbus (talk) 00:05, 4 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I think you did this already ;) I mentioned it in an edit summary... Alarbus (talk) 00:07, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Miguel I of Portugal
Lecen. Not to meddle in a subject that I don't understand completely, but: isn't the addition of "de Bragança e Bourbon" correct? I mean, fine, if that is his name, but I thought that the addition of those words implied the treatment of a title, rather then a name? The space in the Infobox is for his name. Appreciate whatever clarification you could provide. Just curious. Ruben JC (Zeorymer) (talk) 15:21, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Dreadnought race
I'm afraid this post will come across as terribly and horribly selfish (please don't take it as such!), but after seeing your recent posts about your imminent departure, I wanted to see if you will still be able to write what I hope will be the last paragraph over at South American dreadnought race. Either way, fair sailing and good luck in your future endeavors. It's been a pleasure to be able to work with you. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Sorry for having to ask. :-) In an effort to get you to stay, why don't you forgo FAC in future articles and write about people somehow connected to military history, allowing you to use the A-class process over there? From my experience, there isn't quite as much or strict review, but the atmosphere is empty of the poison that sometimes engulfs FACs. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:56, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Or alternatively, we could collaborate to improve Brazilian Navy. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:38, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Lecen! Does Martins have anything on his personal assessment of the race? As in, does he think it was beneficial to Brazil to order these ships? Did he condemn the huge cost? Things like that. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:47, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Peter V of Aragon
I assume you know Portuguese. Can you help translate some info about Peter V of Aragon from his Portuguese article? Thanks.--Queen Elizabeth II&#39;s Little Spy (talk) 23:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

I understand your frustration
Meu amigo Lecen, Eu espero que você possa devolver no futuro. Você fez algumas verdadeiras melhorias aqui. Eu entendo sua frustração. Eu espero haverá um dia quando já não serão alienados os editores os tiranos indelicados e perniciosos. Enquanto isso, por favor permita para sua mente ser refrescada. Você merece obrigado de nós. Meu português de um livro de ensino é ridículo, mas talvez você pode entender. &bull; Astynax talk 08:17, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

all Brazilian lawyers so insightful?
Hi. I read wiki a lot. It's a complex dynamic. I've taken a quick look at some of the articles you've worked on and will be giving them full reads and will work on them as I can. I'm not focused on prose as much as on structure; things like navigation and referencing templates. So this is mostly just a hello.

Have you seen Sue Gardner's video? She speaks of the WMF's need to increase participation, specifically in the Global South. There are thing like File:WMF StrategicPlan2011 24pp.pdf, too. Alarbus (talk) 19:38, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

is not necessary. Please take a few days to think on things. I'll tend the FAs you and Astynax have worked on. You've done good work here, and it will survive in some form. Thank you. Alarbus (talk) 03:28, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

fyi, was about you. And I need to know more about: Alarbus (talk) 21:59, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 *  
 * Isabel, Princess Imperial of Brazil[]


 * for finding it. I'd have gone looking for it soon enough. Such omissions are easy to make. And easy to fix. No worries. Alarbus (talk) 23:32, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * You'll like ., and cheer up. Alarbus (talk) 02:42, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to see you retire
Hi Lecen. I guess I didn't get a chance to work with you again (I mean, even if it was just reviewing your FACs), but I was looking forward to getting the chance to do so at some point. I understand you were having some difficult experiences here on Wikipedia, but I'm sorry to see you retire. I wish you the best of luck in all your future endeavors. Take care! Moisejp (talk) 18:00, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I remember ya now. We used to argue over Peter V or Pedro V. -- GoodDay (talk) 01:51, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

João VI
O Senhor Lecen,

Nós ganhamos a luta pelo nome de João VI! Muito obrigado para tudo!

Um admirador de seu trabalho, Cristiano Tomás (talk) 02:50, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * You drew my contention to posts concenting the move on João VI. I do not think the ANI comments relate very much to me.  Peterkingiron (talk) 12:17, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

You have mail

 * No problemo; the text generally gets a bit of reshuffle anyways. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:16, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Retired?
Just curious, aren't you suppose to be retired? GoodDay (talk) 01:13, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Your updated status, answers my curiousity. GoodDay (talk) 18:04, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Welcome
Welcome back ;-) Alarbus (talk) 18:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

A request
Howdy Lecen. Would you please stop accusing me of being xenophobic & prejudice? The english language covers multiple countries & multiple cultures. This isn't a Canadian vs Portuguese argument. GoodDay (talk) 21:26, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Estou contente
Meu Senhor Lecen, Estou contente que não estás retirado! Obrigado, Cristiano Tomás (talk) 22:58, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Re: Thinking of it
Lecen, (não senhor, lol)

Why is it you say that my making ammends with Walrasiad only benefits his will? The little time I have been here on the wikipedia, I have seen how personal feuds create obsticles when trying to edit, that is why I find that I must not be at odds with anyone, no? Also, why is it that these people would vote on the article's name and not care about the article of El-Rei D. João VI? That makes no sense to me.

Obrigado,

Cristiano Tomás (talk) 00:04, 14 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Lecen,


 * If what you say is true, that what hope is there for progress? If they dont care for the article, then why do they come in? When I first signed up for the wikipedia, I thought everyone would be working together to get full and correct articles done for the public. I see now that all that comes second to "wikipedia politics". I must ask how you get anything done, with so many who either dont care or push dont articles like El-Rei D. João VI. Troubling, quite troubling.

Obrigado,

Cristiano Tomás (talk) 00:56, 14 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Lecen,


 * Espero that things do change. But enough with this talk of how bad things are, it is upsetting and not good for our morale. If I may be of help, let me know. Otherwise, I wish you good luck on your arguements with the others on the talk pages, you will need it.


 * Obrigado,
 * Cristiano Tomás (talk) 01:14, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Comment on the Joao/John move discussion
Hi Lecen, first I wanted to get back to regarding your post there saying you felt I wasn't working with you. I replied there, but I wasn't sure if you've read it. I noticed again you said you explained your reasons for the page title being Joao on my talk page here. I did see that, but you should make sure your comment on the RfC explains it too, so that other editors can see (and perhaps agree) with your decision. I wasn't aware there was anything I could assist you in particular with, if you have any requests please do let me know about them, and I'll see what I can do. Secondly, I have a few minor things to say about a couple of your comments to the discussion. Some of the things you've said have seemed a bit confrontational, particularly parts of these edits:. If you could make sure to assume good faith in your comments, hopefully things will go much more smoothly, and it will be easier to identify troublemakers on the page. Thanks for the help! Prodego talk  22:23, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The comments like At least try to pretend you know something about Portuguese/Brazilian history really do need to stop though, they will make things more difficult for everyone. Prodego  talk  23:13, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Lecen, you are showing clear signs of having a battleground mentality, with comments about the true enemy, or claiming that other editors are trying to defeat you. Walrasiad is not your enemy, and you cannot keep making comments like this. Treating content disputes as a battle to be fought and won is completely contrary to the consensus based model Wikipedia uses for decision making. If you continue to espouse it you are likely to end up blocked, which I am sure would be to the detriment of a lot of work you've done. Prodego  talk  02:14, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * To be clear, that will be your final warning on the matter. Prodego  <sup style="color:darkgreen;">talk  02:18, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Pedro IV
Senhor Lecen,

I hope you dont mind if I do a little bit of help with you one Pedro IV de Portugal, I just created pages on the Imperial ordem of Aviz and Sant'Iago. Let me if what I do is destructive at all.

Obrigado, Cristiano Tomás (talk) 23:40, 11 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Haha, ok, I will not call you senhor, lol. Cristiano Tomás (talk) 00:01, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the image caption on El-Rei D. Pedro IV's article. Thank you, Cristiano Tomás (talk) 10:37, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost interview
I'm not sure whether Crisco is in transit yet. I've made a few edits to your direct quotations, hoping you wouldn't mind. Please revert if you do mind. diff Tony   (talk)  04:50, 16 January 2012 (UTC)


 * This looks interesting ;-) And has prompted me to start on Pedro Álvares Cabral. Best, Alarbus (talk) 05:24, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Braganza-Saxe-Coburg and Gotha
I just started a move request on Talk:House of Braganza-Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. I would appreciate your imput. The move concerns changing the article from "House of" to "Branch of" Thank you, Cristiano Tomás (talk) 20:20, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, thank you for telling me. Cristiano Tomás (talk) 22:45, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Look at the bright side
Lecen, I know the RfC hasn't gone as you hoped. However, the director and delegates are on fair notice of what at least part of the community expects of them, and I think that will have its effect, especially if over time we keep to that position. This is a conservative institution. Brasilia wasn't built in a day. (I have never been, the closest I got was Goiania) :) --Wehwalt (talk) 21:24, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Meetup in March

 * User talk:Maryana (WMF)
 * User talk:Maryana (WMF)

Not me, User:Maryana (WMF). She's WMF staff, a researcher, who did the Editor Trends study:


 * March 2011 Update
 * Editor Trends Study
 * Editor Trends Study/Results

I think this is a special trip that's part of the outreach initiative. They're going to be visiting various cities and are open to suggestion. If you're interested, drop her a note.

She and 'Doronina' also wrote this as WMF fellows; The SiberianWikipedia section is a funny story. Alarbus (talk) 08:38, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * RuWiki History (Doronina and Pinchuk)/English


 * I believe a meeting in São Paulo or Rio de Janeiro would be better. If not, in one of the three capital of southern Brazil. I have my doubts if a meeting in Brazil would be good at all since I don't remember having seen many Brazilians here. Unless, of course, you're talking about the Portuguese Wikipedia. But I hardly believe that most of them speak English.


 * I'm not able to see any redeeming path to Wikipedia. Did you see that Walrasiad has appeared on the Paraguayan War's talk page? People can use sock puppets and their votes will still count (not kidding, go see there, Ilhador's vote is there), canvass, vote against the other side solely for personal enmity (Walrasiad's case), etc... There are no rules. There is no one in charge. You see, I'm not really surprised to see that the FAC is a dictatorship. Perhaps it's indeed better. I don't know... --Lecen (talk) 11:53, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Let's keep this here. I don't know what their plan is, just what I read on her talk. But they are going to visit and it would be good if they hooked up with the right people. You're one of them, and you can point them at other that they should have talks with. I think they know that online communication is one of the wikis problems and that's why they're willing to make the trip. Oh, and the lush tropical weather.


 * Maryana was featured in one of the fundraising banners:


 * Ignore the part about the fundraiser. She cares; she believes. That's why she does it. Why she's visiting Brasil. You write about things you want the world to know about, that the world should know about. Don't let the dysfunctional nature of parts of the project deter you from that. Edit around them, leave them behind. See the foolishness about my editing Carousel? They don't get it, don't like it, and the upshot is they're retarding that bit of the project. It only reflects poorly on them and those that enable it.


 * Don't sweat the users on that RM discussion. The blocked account's "vote" will be ignored by whomever closes that. Zero weight. It's not a vote. The disruption and badgering don't help their 'cause' either.


 * One of wiki's strengths and weaknesses is that you can edit the rules. In the end this means there are no rules except Ignore all rules. That's policy. So please get on with improving Wikipedia ;-)
 * Alarbus (talk) 12:27, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't see a point anymore. Why should I bother helping Wikipedia with the high level of xenophobia and cultural prejudice toward Brazilians? Take a look at the last comments on Paraguayan War's talk page. They can say whatever they want, do anything they want and nothing happens. Sock puppets, open canvassing, lies, false accusations, etc... why should I bother helping this place? --Lecen (talk) 19:08, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Lecen – I'm sorry to hear you're so dejected by bad-faith editing practices these days. I wish I could say that this is an edge-case, but I've been hearing the same story from lots of folks who edit on particular national topics. One of the most common reasons people give for leaving Wikipedia is bullying and abusive behavior from other editors, and national rivalries really seem to bring out the worst in people at times. But English Wikipedia is actually still pretty friendly as compared to some of the other language projects – on Portuguese Wikipedia, these kinds of stories aren't just common, they're practically the status quo. That's why Steven and I are headed to Brazil to gather together as many active pt.wiki editors as we can and try to talk about how to solve this and other problems we all know about but can't seem to find solutions for. We hope this will be the start of a lot of conversations in a lot of different communities, too, including English. I think the kind of behavior you're describing thrives on anonymity, decentralization, and the tyranny of an abusive minority. By gathering people together and letting them talk face-to-face, I think editors like you will realize that they're not up against some insurmountable obstacle, and that actually the majority of editors are perfectly reasonable human beings who want to help, not harm.


 * Anyway, the meetups we'll be having in Brazil will be very pt.wiki-centric, so I'm not sure they would interest you. But if you're anywhere in the vicinity of São Paulo, Rio, Salvador, Natal, or Curitiba in the first week of March, I'd love to grab a coffee with you and throw around some ideas about how we can make some of this stuff better. If nothing else, I can try to conquer you with my indomitable optimism :) Maryana (WMF) (talk) 19:24, 27 January 2012 (UTC)