Grillofrances
Welcome! edit
Hello, Grillofrances, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Plezuro, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.
There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
- Starting an article
- Your first article
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- Biographies of living persons
- How to write a great article
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Help pages
- Tutorial
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Boleyn (talk) 17:46, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Plezuro edit
The article Plezuro has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- I couldn't establish that this is a notabile product
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Boleyn (talk) 17:46, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Plezuro is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plezuro until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rwessel (talk) 06:01, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
MfD nomination of Book:Plezuro edit
Book:Plezuro, 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/Book:Plezuro and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Book:Plezuro 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. DexDor (talk) 05:22, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
A page you started (List of monarchy referendums) has been reviewed! edit
Thanks for creating List of monarchy referendums, Grillofrances!
Wikipedia editor Cwmhiraeth just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Some of the references need titles to be added.
To reply, leave a comment on Cwmhiraeth's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:54, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message edit
Hello, Grillofrances. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message edit
| | Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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 |
Your ACE questions edit
The questions that you have asked candidates are concerning and as such I have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2019/Coordination#Questions by Grillofrances. --Rschen7754 04:25, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
Your most recent question at ACE, posted when voting is almost over, clearly demonstrates that you have not made the effort to read neither the candidate statements, nor the answers to similar questions already posed by other other users. In view of your extremely low participation in Wikipedia I am concerned that you fully understand what the Arbitration Committee is, and how the voting process works. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:13, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Kudpung: I've read the statements (though not carefully) and some answers but it's tons of text so reading it all would take a very long time. Before posting that question I searched for "improve" and I didn't find a similar question so I posted my question.
- IMO That's very lazy considering that most candidates have already spent up to 30 hours or more answering a plethora of question in good faith, some of which were totally irrelevant , bad faith, and unreasonable. What were you hoping to achieve by asking questions at all anyway? Please also consider indenting your talk page posts properly, and signing them. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:35, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Kudpung: All of my questions were asked in good faith. Maybe my approach to Wikipedia is incorrect but I treat voting to Arbcom like voting to the national parliament when I want to get some knowledge about the candidates. E.g. asking about the religion is essential for me due to two reasons: 1) Based on the moral values somebody believe, he can be a good or a bad member of parliament or Arbcom. 2) In order to have a neutrality, we should have members representing various points of view. I want to elect a human, not a robot. Grillofrances (talk) 13:17, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- I do not think that is a very fair description - none of us who who run in elections for Admin or Arbcom are robots. We are all unpaid volunteers who have spent hundreds if not thousands, of hours of their free time time compiling and managing this encyclopedia and have made over 100,000 contributions. We rarely get any thanks or recogniion for our work. In my opinion, your first batch of questions was an outrageous infringement of privacy. We are not a political party and the Arbitration Committee is not a parliament. Most editors add something new here, whether constructive or irrelevant, but either English is not your first language, or with only 291 contributions, you do not fully understand what Wikipedia is and how it works. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:16, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Kudpung: I don't have even an idea what significant I could contribute to Wikipedia. For me it's complete and it mostly requires updating e.g. after new parliamentary elections or some championships in a given sport. Second thing to improve is there are very often missing references but IMO existing references aren't too good because if it's a book, not a URL, I cannot easily compare a Wikipedia article with a book, sometimes such a book might be accessible only in some countries or even impossible to buy or find in a library, being printed only about 100 times. Third thing, I'd like to improve is using data defined in one place like a given city population, using wikidata. Fourth thing is fixing sorting tables because in some of them numbers are sorted alphabetically; I don't like a situation when a given dataset is split into many tables like each one for each continent or when the first table has a given value very high, second one less high, third one moderately high etc. because I cannot sort the entire dataset by another field; I'd like to also have an ability to have a very large table with pagination in a single article and be able to write queries limiting some fields to some range. Fifth thing is that I don't understand how CheckUser works - I guess it detects edits by IP but sometimes an entire company can share the same external IP address and nowadays a user can edit Wikipedia, using his phone, connecting to a plenty of WiFi networks, obtaining each time a distinct IP address. Sixth thing is I consider paid Wikipedia contributions, maybe in such a way that a user who wants to earn money, sets his account to some special status and when people (no matter whether logged in or anonymous) read an article which was edited by a user earning money, they see a message encouraging them to pay how much they want so they can evaluate the value of a given contribution; of course such a message would be shown not always but randomly, having the probability of being displayed dependent on edited text length, time elapsed after that edit (higher probability for recent edits but zero probability if the edit was made less than 48 hours ago) and zero probability if a given edit was reverted or its text has been fully replaced/ removed by another edit. Grillofrances (talk) 05:22, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- And the seventh thing is it would be great to have a bot detecting typos, grammar errors and usage of non-British spelling. I see a large part of your contributions is about fixing such issues so it could save your time. I found this bot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/TypoBot but I see it stopped being used in 2008. Grillofrances (talk) 06:08, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Kudpung: I don't have even an idea what significant I could contribute to Wikipedia. For me it's complete and it mostly requires updating e.g. after new parliamentary elections or some championships in a given sport. Second thing to improve is there are very often missing references but IMO existing references aren't too good because if it's a book, not a URL, I cannot easily compare a Wikipedia article with a book, sometimes such a book might be accessible only in some countries or even impossible to buy or find in a library, being printed only about 100 times. Third thing, I'd like to improve is using data defined in one place like a given city population, using wikidata. Fourth thing is fixing sorting tables because in some of them numbers are sorted alphabetically; I don't like a situation when a given dataset is split into many tables like each one for each continent or when the first table has a given value very high, second one less high, third one moderately high etc. because I cannot sort the entire dataset by another field; I'd like to also have an ability to have a very large table with pagination in a single article and be able to write queries limiting some fields to some range. Fifth thing is that I don't understand how CheckUser works - I guess it detects edits by IP but sometimes an entire company can share the same external IP address and nowadays a user can edit Wikipedia, using his phone, connecting to a plenty of WiFi networks, obtaining each time a distinct IP address. Sixth thing is I consider paid Wikipedia contributions, maybe in such a way that a user who wants to earn money, sets his account to some special status and when people (no matter whether logged in or anonymous) read an article which was edited by a user earning money, they see a message encouraging them to pay how much they want so they can evaluate the value of a given contribution; of course such a message would be shown not always but randomly, having the probability of being displayed dependent on edited text length, time elapsed after that edit (higher probability for recent edits but zero probability if the edit was made less than 48 hours ago) and zero probability if a given edit was reverted or its text has been fully replaced/ removed by another edit. Grillofrances (talk) 05:22, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- I do not think that is a very fair description - none of us who who run in elections for Admin or Arbcom are robots. We are all unpaid volunteers who have spent hundreds if not thousands, of hours of their free time time compiling and managing this encyclopedia and have made over 100,000 contributions. We rarely get any thanks or recogniion for our work. In my opinion, your first batch of questions was an outrageous infringement of privacy. We are not a political party and the Arbitration Committee is not a parliament. Most editors add something new here, whether constructive or irrelevant, but either English is not your first language, or with only 291 contributions, you do not fully understand what Wikipedia is and how it works. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:16, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Kudpung: All of my questions were asked in good faith. Maybe my approach to Wikipedia is incorrect but I treat voting to Arbcom like voting to the national parliament when I want to get some knowledge about the candidates. E.g. asking about the religion is essential for me due to two reasons: 1) Based on the moral values somebody believe, he can be a good or a bad member of parliament or Arbcom. 2) In order to have a neutrality, we should have members representing various points of view. I want to elect a human, not a robot. Grillofrances (talk) 13:17, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- IMO That's very lazy considering that most candidates have already spent up to 30 hours or more answering a plethora of question in good faith, some of which were totally irrelevant , bad faith, and unreasonable. What were you hoping to achieve by asking questions at all anyway? Please also consider indenting your talk page posts properly, and signing them. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:35, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message edit
| | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 |
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message edit
| | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 |
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message edit
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message edit
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)