User talk:Thum Fel

Rio de Janeiro
Hi, thanks for your edits in Rio de Janeiro, but I am reverting some of them for the following reasons: you have removed the only photo of a favela from the article, something difficult to explain in a piece about that city; you have included another photo of Ipanema, and now there are three photos of this neighbourhood in the article, which is clearly too much (the North zone, for instance, is underrepresented); also, you have replaced a photo showing the profile of Barra da Tijuca for a photo showing... just water! In fact, now the article has got too many photos. Please fell free to discuss this and other issues in the discussion page of the article. Fsouza 01:33, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

São Paulo
Hi Thum Fel, I've reverted the changes you have recently done to the São Paulo article and I would like to discuss them with you. The "Economy" and "Demographics" were very poorly written and difficult to understand. The sections "History" and "Sites of interest" had too many images, something which is against better practice in Wikipedia as stated in Guide to layout. Please let me know what you think. Regards, Fsouza 21:41, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Paris
Hi, I realise you have made a lot of edits to this article but you are making a lot of changes without discussing whether these changes need to be made. Please try to use the talk page for this purpose. Green Giant 23:11, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Please use edit summaries
Hi there. When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:  The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field - please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you. Korg (talk) 09:55, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Miami reversion
Just wanted to let you know that you were not the target of my recent revert on Miami, Florida. While you were editing, a vandal snuck in and tore up the history section. I simply reverted to the last version prior to the vandalization, which nuked your last two edits. Sorry about that... Horologium t-c 23:16, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:L3-1-.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:L3-1-.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 23:03, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:MiamiSkyline1-1-.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:MiamiSkyline1-1-.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 01:12, 7 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  Carbon Monoxide  01:12, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Miamipic-1-.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Miamipic-1-.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 01:24, 7 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 01:24, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:MiamiSkyline1-1-.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:MiamiSkyline1-1-.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. VegitaU 15:47, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Paris edits
Why did you revert the Paris article back to the last version you edited before I changed the references and removed whitespace? I could understand if you had made gradual edits but instead you restored redundant text like the "commenting" at the start of the article. The references were made simpler and clearer but you have restored extra fields where they were not needed. You even restored the (en icon)'s which should not be needed in the English wikipedia. All in all it just seems to be a blind revert without any consideration given to why other people have made edits. It would help if you actually read your talk page and made some comments on talkpages. In your 1000+ edits, you have not left a single comment on an article talkpage or your own user talkpage. What is even more annoying is that you have not once used the edit summary for any of your edits, even though Korg kindly provided you with a quick guide on edit summaries. In future please do not blindly revert articles, or I will be forced to report your actions. Green Giant 19:10, 7 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Obviously you do not understand simple gestures. This edit you made just now is your second wholesale reversion in one day - which makes it an act of deliberate vandalism because you are restoring corrected mistakes. Please learn to read and use talkpages and edit summaries so you do not make wholesale blind reverts and have to end up being banned from editing Wikipedia articles. Green Giant 21:34, 7 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Please do not remove talkpage edits by other editors like this. It counts as your third act of vandalism today. Do not keep up this behaviour because it will end in you being banned from editing Wikipedia. Green Giant 22:43, 7 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Perhaps we have a communication barrier here. Let me assure you that I am not "crazy" as you insinuate on my talkpage. What you did on October 6th, was vandalism because you reverted (undid) eighteen edits by other editors. What you restored was the last version when you had edited on October 4th. This suggests that you are unwilling to tolerate anybody else editing this article, which is unacceptable behaviour on Wikipedia. If you had checked what the eighteen edits had done, you would have noticed that several spelling mistakes had been corrected and the method of references had been simplified. What is also unacceptable is that you have replaced several images with ones you have uploaded, without even one talkpage edit on Talk:Paris or offering even one edit summary, to inform other editors that you were going to do this. You can't claim to be ignorant of how to use talkpages or edit summaries when you seem quite capable of carrying out reversions and Korg explained about edit summaries further up this page.


 * Basically, we would all appreciate it very much if you would discuss such major changes on Talk:Paris. All of us who are involved in editing the Paris article want to make it the best article possible. Believe me, nobody wants to label you as a vandal but your behaviour over the past week has been quite unbelievable. I hope this clarifies things. Green Giant 14:06, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Nice
Again, stop the idiotic behaviour. You are not allowed to simply remove the Unreferenced tag until there are several references in the references section at the bottom. Read this page because it will explain it a bit better than me. Green Giant 23:04, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

You is crazy. because it changes articles? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thum Fel (talk • contribs)


 * No the tag you keep removing, allows other editors to note that there is a lack of references and maybe someone will add some. If there are no references, then the whole article could be lies and fiction. Green Giant 23:31, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

this page is not mine as you can move? oh my god you is fatigant — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thum Fel (talk • contribs)


 * Actually you are the tiresome one. You are getting carried away with extensive changes without listening to anyone else at all. Take the time to read all the messages here to understand what the problem is. Green Giant 23:40, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:800px-Nice panorama2-1-.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:800px-Nice panorama2-1-.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 23:18, 7 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Genisock2 23:18, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

your image uploads
Did you personally take the photos you uploaded?Genisock2 23:42, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I have listed all your image uploads for deletion. debate can be found at Possibly_unfree_images/2007_October_10.Genisock2 13:12, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

La Turbie
Can you cleanup the section you wrote about Tete de Chien? It's quite incomprehensible. Wai Hong 23:58, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey plagiarist
It is a violation of Wiki policy to copy articles and steal photos from websites.

I've reported your 2 accounts for deletion - Marc Averette 02:52, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Poor English
Can you brush up your English? I've seen several articles which you contributed too. Those articles were quite incomprehensible and looked like direct translations from French without any knowledge of English grammar. Maybe you should stop contributing to articles until your English gets better. Why don't you try the French wikipedia?Wai Hong 06:02, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:35, 24 November 2015 (UTC)