User talk:MonsenorNouel

February 2020
Hello, I'm Binksternet. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Latin trap, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 04:00, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Dominican Americans, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 02:25, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Multiracials in Latin America (February 23)
 Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can 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_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Multiracials_in_Latin_America Articles for creation help desk] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by The Drover's Wife was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Random racist essay. Not encyclopedic in this form or likely any other.

The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 18:13, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Multiracials in Latin America concern
Hi there, I'm MDanielsBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Multiracials in Latin America, 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. MDanielsBot (talk) 01:53, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Multiracials in Latin America


Hello, MonsenorNouel. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Multiracials in Latin America".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, 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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! JMHamo (talk) 08:50, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

September 2020
Hello, I'm MarkH21. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Haiti, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — MarkH21talk 02:23, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

January 2021
Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. Thanks! Sangdeboeuf (talk) 21:21, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Afro–Puerto Ricans, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Congo. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:10, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

April 2022
Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. ... disco spinster   talk  15:07, 4 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Let me add that at least some of the sources you used at Mulatto do not qualify as reliable. See WP:RS. Rsk6400 (talk) 05:53, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

November 2023
Hi MonsenorNouel! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of African Americans several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree&#32;at, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Rsk6400 (talk) 14:12, 22 November 2023 (UTC)


 * MN, you reverted to your preferred version again, without any further engagement at the talk page. You obviously think your content is appropriate, but two editors have opposed it. It is deeply disruptive to keep adding it. Please self-revert. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I understand what you are saying, but all of the information I've added is correct. If you all would just checks the sources, you would see that. MonsenorNouel (talk) 19:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Prove it at the talk page, and convince other editors. This is the basic work of collaboration, and refusing to engage in it leaves us little option except to continue an edit war or seek sanctions. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, isn't adding sources- proving it. What more proof do you need? MonsenorNouel (talk) 19:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I need you to cite sources that actually support the content you are proposing. I've pointed out multiple examples of unsourced content at the talk page that are still unaddressed. And unsourced content is not my only objection. And I am not the only one objecting; I mistakenly said earlier that two editors have opposed your content, when it is in fact three. You will know that your content has gotten consensus because people will tell you so. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:38, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Bringing the discussion here, his additions that included sources aren't wrong, nor was adherence to WP: rules. This should not be a case of 'He Who Has More Edits Wins'. Instead, play by the rules as @MonsenorNouel has, please.
 * The level of scrutiny the 'African Americans' article gets as well as the non-Black editors policing is mind boggling. NotPeterParker (talk) 20:17, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Afro–Latin Americans removal of content
You did not explain in the edit summary why you removed this information. The article states that it is about "Latin Americans of full or mainly sub-Saharan African ancestry." This means that mixed-race Afro-Latins can be included. ... disco spinster   talk  22:21, 6 December 2023 (UTC)


 * That's exactly why I removed those mentioned people, they are mixed-race. Mixed-race people can NOT be of full or predominantly black African blood if they are mixed-race, that is a oxymoron. The term mixed-race literally means to NOT be full or predominantly of any race. MonsenorNouel (talk) 12:20, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Mixed race means exactly that. Even if one race is predominant, they are still mixed. ... disco spinster   talk  17:34, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, VISIBLY mixed race people who exhibit a multiracial phenotype (usually mulatto in this case, many times even appearing to have slightly stronger Euro blood)— are NOT of predominantly African blood, they are obviously EVENLY mixed race and it's visible in their appearance.
 * A person of predominantly black African blood would have 75% African blood in their DNA minimum and a physical phenotype that more closely matches a subsaharan African (especially that of west Africa where majority of enslaved ancestors of the Africa diaspora come from). 50/50 or 60/40 of 2 (or more) races is not predominantly of one race, it's evenly mixed to the point that it's visible.
 * People who are predominantly black with slight admixture are NOT the same as people who are evenly mixed, nor do they look the same most the time. MonsenorNouel (talk) 21:42, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Can you provider a reliable source (or perhaps a DNA test to be completely sure) to show that these people are less than 75% African (and justify why it should be 75%)? If not, then there is no good reason to remove them from the list. Meanwhile here are some reliable sources where individuals are called Afro-Latin*: Dascha Polanco ; Zoe Saldana ; Dania Ramirez ; Immortal Technique ; etc. ... disco spinster   talk  20:44, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
 * People of predominant African blood with slight admixture, can be considered black because that is their predominant race and it is obvious in their physical appearance.
 * People who are evenly mixed are not black just like they are not white, and are usually visually mixed.
 * People who are predominantly black with slight admixture are NOT the same as people who are evenly mixed, nor do they look the same most the time.
 * Zoe Saldana, Sascha Polanco, Dania Ramirez are visually mixed appearance wise (and usually as a result probably evenly mixed DNA wise). If these people are "black" then they are also "white". Evenly mixed people who are included in these black African diaspora pages should also be included in white European diaspora pages, either that or exclude them from both.
 * Immortal Technique is mostly of indigenous ancestry, that's notable in his facial features, his self identity is not his race. MonsenorNouel (talk) 23:02, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Your opinion about someone's appearance is not their race either, so please do not remove information from articles on this basis. ... disco spinster   talk  01:01, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
 * You asked me to provide "DNA tests" to prove that these visually mixed race people are not of predominant African blood, but where is your proof (or the sources) proving that they are in fact predominantly African. Whoever put that up, just did it with no proof backing it, then asking to be proved wrong when someone takes it down, why should it be there in the first place??
 * Secondly in none of the sources you linked of Polanco, Saldana, Ramirez, Technique, none of them identified as "black", they were just talking about differences between blacks and latinos in Hollywood etc, but not that they themselves identified as such, provide better sources. MonsenorNouel (talk) 16:10, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
 * All of the sources I provided identify them as Afro-Latin*:
 * ... disco spinster   talk  17:57, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
 * , if the article really defines its topic as "Latin Americans of full or mainly sub-Saharan African ancestry", you might want to look into if that definition is supported by sources and consensus. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:00, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't know where that definition came from. I'm more concerned about User:MonsenorNouel taking it upon themselves to decide who is "African enough" to be Afro-Latin* based on an individual's appearance. ... disco spinster   talk  15:58, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * ... disco spinster   talk  17:57, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
 * , if the article really defines its topic as "Latin Americans of full or mainly sub-Saharan African ancestry", you might want to look into if that definition is supported by sources and consensus. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:00, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't know where that definition came from. I'm more concerned about User:MonsenorNouel taking it upon themselves to decide who is "African enough" to be Afro-Latin* based on an individual's appearance. ... disco spinster   talk  15:58, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't know where that definition came from. I'm more concerned about User:MonsenorNouel taking it upon themselves to decide who is "African enough" to be Afro-Latin* based on an individual's appearance. ... disco spinster   talk  15:58, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

December 2023
Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Afro–Latin Americans, you may be blocked from editing. ... disco spinster   talk  16:13, 12 December 2023 (UTC)


 * I think you are the one who needs to be blocked for adding unsourced information. There's no valid sources saying these people are "black". And you keep on engaging in a edit war with me. MonsenorNouel (talk) 16:15, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I have literally provided reliable sources that say they are Afro-Latin*. You have yet to provide reliable sources that refute this, and you continue to remove names or add your personal commentary. ... disco spinster   talk  17:13, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Those sources are invalid and do NOT prove they're"Afro Latino". So if the commentary is necessary if visual mixed race people with no valid proof of being predominantly African— are added. MonsenorNouel (talk) 19:36, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Notice of No Original Research Noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at No original research/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User imposing personal opinion in Afro–Latin Americans. Thank you. ... disco spinster   talk  21:10, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

May 2024
Your recent editing history at Mulatto shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. :Jay8g [ V•T•E ] 02:46, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 5
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Puerto Ricans, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Guanche.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:58, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

June 2024
Your edit to Mulatto has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Copying text from other sources for more information. This edit included content copied and pasted from this source. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:39, 25 June 2024 (UTC)