User talk:MateoSag

Your submission at Articles for creation: Treasure of Gazteluberri has been accepted
 Treasure of Gazteluberri, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer. Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Bkissin (talk) 23:22, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Treasure_of_Gazteluberri help desk] .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Murillo de Calahorra moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Murillo de Calahorra, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.  Onel 5969  TT me 18:10, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi - I've moved all of your stub village articles into draftspace for the time being, since they were all completely unsourced. Please provide sourcing from a reliable independent reference, and then they can simply be moved back into mainspace.  If you ping me by using , I can do those moves for you after you provide the references.  Thanks.  Onel 5969  TT me 18:16, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Nice job on getting the refs for those articles.  Onel 5969  TT me 22:40, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Pulpo a la gallega


Hello, MateoSag. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, Draft:Pulpo a la gallega.

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 02:59, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Draft:San Andrés del Valle concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:San Andrés del Valle, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. 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) 01:31, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Castañares de las Cuevas has been accepted
 Castañares de las Cuevas, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Casta%C3%B1ares_de_las_Cuevas help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! Cerebellum (talk) 01:52, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

November 2020
Hi MateoSag! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Thank you.--Asqueladd (talk) 17:44, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi. may does not mean should. And all the arguments laid out before against using the flags may still apply also in that case (to all of them, to some of them: that is open to discussion). Besides, another thing: the collage. There may be some tension in using a plethora of landmarks. A city is not a collection of facades of religious landmarks. Insofar that is the case, using that approach for the infobox may be dubious as well as lazy. Another thing: the map. Think that two approaches may be valid, and different approaches may be chosen when using for a small municipality and a bigger city (for example). WP:BOLD is nice and all that, but devoting yourself only to changes barely related to actual content (yet not minor/copy edit et. al. WikiGnome changes) that you may consider to be improvements but they may be not considered as such by others and thus they may be easily undone may be not the most productive thing to do in Wikipedia and particularly if your efforts aim toward achieving a wider consistency across articles not fully backed up by actual policies and conventions, failing to get them across in every article you edit may be frustrating. Regards.--Asqueladd (talk) 18:52, 15 November 2020 (UTC)