Benvenuto Benvenuto/a su Wikipedia, Sb008!
Guida essenziale
Con i tuoi interessi e le tue conoscenze puoi far crescere il sapere libero e l'enciclopedia. Scrivi nuove voci o amplia quelle già esistenti: il tuo contributo è prezioso!

Wikipedia ha solo alcune regole inderogabili, i cinque pilastri. Per un primo orientamento, puoi guardare la WikiGuida, leggere la Guida essenziale o consultare la pagina di aiuto.

Se contribuisci a Wikipedia su commissione si applicano condizioni d'uso particolari.

Ricorda di non copiare testi né immagini da libri o siti internet poiché NON è consentito inserire materiale protetto da copyright (nel caso sia tu l'autore/autrice, devi seguire l'apposita procedura), e di scrivere seguendo un punto di vista neutrale, citando le fonti utilizzate.
Buon lavoro e buon divertimento da parte di tutti i wikipediani!
Altre informazioni
Apponi la firma nei tuoi interventi
  • Visualizza l'elenco dei progetti collaborativi riguardanti specifiche aree tematiche dell'enciclopedia: puoi partecipare liberamente a quelli di tuo interesse o chiedere suggerimenti.
  • Identificati nelle pagine di discussione: firma i tuoi interventi con il tasto che vedi nell'immagine.
  • Una volta consultata la Guida essenziale, prova ad ampliare le tue conoscenze sul funzionamento di Wikipedia con il Tour guidato.
  • Hai già un altro account oppure qualcun altro contribuisce dal tuo stesso computer? Leggi Wikipedia:Utenze multiple.
Serve aiuto?

Se hai bisogno di aiuto, chiedi allo sportello informazioni (e non dimenticare che la risposta ti verrà data in quella stessa pagina). Se avessi bisogno di un aiuto continuativo, puoi richiedere di farti affidare un "tutor".

Hello and welcome to the Italian Wikipedia! We appreciate your contributions. If your Italian skills are not good enough, that’s no problem. We have an embassy where you can inquire for further information in your native language or you can contact directly a user in your language. We hope you enjoy your time here!
Tour guidato
Raccomandazioni e linee guida
Progetti tematici

Naturalmente un benvenuto anche da parte mia! Se avessi bisogno di qualcosa non esitare a contattarmi.

Bramfab Parlami 23:30, 24 apr 2017 (CEST)Rispondi[rispondi]

Olandese - NeerlandeseModifica

Goede avond, you're a little bit confused about wikipedia rules. In wikipedia all is referred to what sources say (in our case what Italian sources say because we are in Italian wikipedia); it means that if we use "olandese" instead of "neerlandese" it's just because the majority of Italian sources use this adjective to indicate what comes from the Netherlands and it happens also in academic publishing. We use "neerlandese" in just one case: when we have to indicate the Dutch language; anyway it happens really rare because the word "neerlandese" is considered obsolete. --The Crawler(Ce ne siamo andati di nuovo...) 22:07, 26 set 2017 (CEST)Rispondi[rispondi]

[@ The Crawler] With all respect, just because the majority does, we can keep using an insulting name? Let me give a very extreme example to show my point. There was a time, the majority of sources referred to black people as n*ggers. Just because of that, we should have continued doing so? I don't think so!!! You? Like I said, an extreme example, but essentially the same. The part of the country I'm from, anything with Holland in it which is not a reference to the region but the country is considered a very strong insult. We even use the word Hollander (someone from Holland) as a curse word. Are you sure the Wikipedia rules say, you can insult if the majority of sources does? I'm pretty sure the Wikipedia rules say, you should avoid insults, and official government statements take preference above the majority. If you don't start a change somewhere, things will never change and stay forever as they are. We still would be running around in some animal skin and drag our wife by the hair into some cave. Majority is no argument compared to an insult.--Sb008 (msg) 22:51, 26 set 2017 (CEST)Rispondi[rispondi]
I'm a sorry if for you, the Dutch people, "olandese" is an insult, but as I just explained these are the Italian wikipedia rules; I imagine in Dutch wikipedia you have similar. Wikipedia is not "The Crawler & his friends", wikipedia is a community, I did not make these rules myself. --The Crawler(Ce ne siamo andati di nuovo...) 23:16, 26 set 2017 (CEST)Rispondi[rispondi]
[@ The Crawler] I don't consider you personally responsible. But maybe you can point me where the rule is which says; "if the majority if sources insults and insults, you can do so as well on Wikipedia".
Something different, need some help on proper Italian wording. Will give as example the English page: en:2017–18_Eredivisie#Results. See immediate below the "Results table". What is the correct translation for "home team win", "draw" and "away team win" in Italian?. Something like "vittoria della squadra di casa", "pareggio" and "vittoria della squadra in trasferta"?
Your translation from English to Italian are all good. Anyway why do you insist too much? Here the rule that says: "In generale, la scelta del titolo di una voce dovrebbe dare la priorità a cosa la maggior parte della popolazione italofona riconoscerebbe facilmente (dizione più diffusa)", in English is: "In general, the title of a voice have to be something that the majority of people that speaks Italian can easily understand (more common diction)". As I said you before "neerlandese" is an obsolete word that the majority of population cannot understand (less than 10% of people that speaks Italian can) that's why we use "olandese" (me too I use this word when I write or speak), I am really sorry if for the Dutch people "olandese" is considered offensive but in Italian it's not: it's a word as an other. --The Crawler(Ce ne siamo andati di nuovo...) 01:30, 27 set 2017 (CEST)Rispondi[rispondi]
[@ The Crawler] I insist so much because it's an important issue to me. And I ask about the rule, because of my lack of Italian, it's hard to find it myself. I'll not bother you any more about it and will address it elsewhere. Just one more thing to clarify, it's only in certain parts of the country where people do mind. I don't blame you personally for something, so don't worry. And thanks for confirming the translation is correct. I appreciate it. If I have more translation questions in the future, can I send you a message? Ciao --Sb008 (msg) 01:43, 27 set 2017 (CEST)Rispondi[rispondi]
You can write to anyone you want, but I'm sure the other will answer as I did. Anyway, yes you can write me if you need something :-). Goede avond! --The Crawler(Ce ne siamo andati di nuovo...) 01:51, 27 set 2017 (CEST)Rispondi[rispondi]

[@ Sb008] The Crawler said it right. Unfortunatly the Italian language doesn't use neederlandese (except sometime for the Dutch language, but is neither unfrequently). We have a similar problem with the US: their inhabitants are often named americani instead of statunitensi. Anyway, I agree with you: olandese is wrong and I am sorry that it could sound offensive for the other inhabitants of Nederland. But this is it, languages are not perfect :( --Ombra 03:54, 2 ott 2017 (CEST)Rispondi[rispondi]


--Ombra 17:09, 7 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]

Where and how can I file a complaint against an admin?Modifica

A formal complaint should be written here, however I suggest you to write a query with your comment there, less formal, maybe more effective. Let's me add, reading in this page, it seems to me that you don't know or you don't accept the rules of italian wikipedia (i.e. wikipedia written in italian language) and the italian language too. I would like also to add that every time I'm landing in the Amsterdam airport I found souvenirs with Holland stamped over, no one with Nederland or similar names. The supporters of your national football team, i.e. the oranges, are used the be dressed with clothes having Holland written in their shirts and other gadgets. [1] [2] [3]

Your action here looks more as partisan activity of a minority group even in your nation, engaged in regional fights. Regards, --Bramfab Discorriamo 15:11, 16 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]

[@ Bramfab] Thanks for your reply. However, the complaint is not about the Holland/Netherlands issue. But since you address the issue. For most souvenirs Holland would be correct. Tulips, windmills, wooden shoes etc are basically all from Holland. I'm pretty sure you never seen Bossche bollen [4] from Holland, Limburgse vlaai [5] from Holland or Friese noren [6] from Holland. The ignorance of fans is their responsibility, the KNVB (Dutch football association) will not speak about the national team of Holland. You will not find an official document where the country is referred to as Holland. An official statement [7] from the Dutch embassy in Sweden is quite clear about the issue. It's not a partisan activity of a minority and we aren't involved in regional fights. It might be if our government would claim the country is Holland. It's about what is correct and what isn't. And I think the official representatives of my country, the government, knows best what our country is called. And they most certainly don't call it Holland. Go to Scotland or Wales and call it England. Let us see how they appreciate it over there. Or a few decades ago, to Kazakhstan or the Ukraine, and had called it Russia instead of the Soviet Union. Due to historical events now most people know the difference between Russia and the Soviet Union. It's not the ignorance of people what decides what's correct or wrong, but the facts. And it's fact that my country is the Netherlands and not Holland. And it's fact that a substantial part of the country considers Holland as country name offending and insulting. And about the Wikipedia rules, one of the most important rules is not to offend and insult. Habits and ignorance are no excuse, even if other sources do it incorrect. Or should we also call African Americans still n*ggers? Plenty of ignorant people and sources still do. I don't think so! Or should we refer to Italians as mafiosi because the term is so well known? I don't think so! The Italian language does know the word "neerlandese". So why not choose to do it correct and not to offend/insult people? You can't blame people for being ignorant, but you certainly can blame people for choosing to remain ignorant. Anyway, enough about this, thanks again for your help. --Sb008 (msg) 17:05, 16 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]

Eredivisie 2017-2018Modifica

As you well known from previous discussions, the page Eredivisie 2017-2018 is not formatted according to the related template. Thus, please, be collaborative and do not remove the W notice if the page is not correctly formatted. Thanks. --GC85 (msg) 10:02, 17 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]

[@ GC85] there are 2 options:
  • Show me your model is mandatory.
  • if it's not, you are welcome to discuss matters and try to reach a consensus.
Otherwise stop removing information and adding inapplicable notices.
--Sb008 (msg) 13:17, 17 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]
WP:IGNORA --Sb008 (msg) 13:36, 17 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]
In the top of the Wikipedia:Modello di voce/Stagione di una divisione di un campionato di calcio it's written what the template is; in Aiuto:Manuale_di_stile#La_struttura_di_una_voce it's written that the template for pages of specific topics are discussed and released by the related project. As you well known from previous discussions, the Football Project in has discussed and released the model as it is. As other users already wrote to you, if there are specific points to change, we are open for discussions, but before doing it check if those points were already thoroughly discussed in the past. Why don't you want to accept what the community in has decided?
Wikipedia:Non fare il finto tonto --GC85 (msg) 13:46, 17 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]
[@ GC85] You avoid the most essential question. Is it mandatory? Further, the first sentence "È molto più importante che una voce sia chiara e ricca di informazioni, piuttosto che stilisticamente perfetta: su Wikipedia la sostanza è ben più preziosa della forma" says it all. --Sb008 (msg) 14:19, 17 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]
Wikipedia is not mandatory, but is not an anarchy. There are rules and guidelines that contributors discuss, decide to use and use as reference. If there are points that can be improved, they are proposed, discussed, consensus is reached and upgraded model is released. What you are doing is refuse the model and guidelines coming from these steps and impose your model. If you think that some parts of the model can be improved, open a discussion in Discussioni_progetto:Sport/Calcio and see if the community agree on it. --GC85 (msg) 14:47, 17 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]
[@ GC85]Thank you, now that it's clear we are not dealing with something mandatory, we can have a discussion as equals. You don't tell me what to do, I don't tell you what to do. And we can try to find a common ground.
Next, did I change any of the pages you been maintaining according to how I think they should look, or was the page I maintained being changed based on how you think it should look? So who has been imposing? As Corsaiolo indicated clearly, I was initially more than cooperative and willing to make changes. I strongly believe in consensus. But that process was not ended by me. I didn't stop the discussion and started to change the work of others without consultation. So again, who has been imposing?
As indicated earlier. Do I think it's desirable to have a model? Yes, I do. Do I think such a model, whatever it may look like, defined by either you or me, creates a right for some to tell others what to do? No, I don't, because it ends all equality and creates an upper class. If I wanted others to use my model, I would talk to them, and certainly not start to change the pages they maintained. That's trying to establish consensus. --Sb008 (msg) 15:43, 17 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]
Dear Sb008, just to be clear: I've always appreciate your work on Ere 17-18 (and for example I like your "Class.marcatori" table more than the one in the model), but the simple fact you are the "main maintainer" of Ere 17-18 doesn't give you ANY right nor priority on it. And this is a FACT. So it's only a matter of personal respect having you informed or not upon the changes that other users made or are planning to make on that (or any other) page. About this I see you're carrying forward the farce of bad guys who "imposed" you a model without your consensus, although I told you plenty of times that it was just a mistake made by me (you've anyway put things in equal under this aspect by reverting to your model without tellin' anyone).
You said that you "strongly believe in consensus", but 12 days have passed since I indicate you the place where the consensus must be obtained in order to make the changes, but yet I'm not able to find a single discussion started by you.
The point is: the football community worked hard to define that model (that maybe it's not the perfection itself, but that's another point), and if you impose on that page your own model without the necessary consensus it's like you're consciously spitting on their 10 years long work, and this is a thing I can't stand, if only because that's a behaviour that makes YOU something like "more equal than others".
So this time I tell you before: I'm going to re-establish the pre-approved model, at least until a new community consensus will be reached, while remaining nevertheless willing to help you translate your proposals, in order to reach (here) a wider audience. Bye. --╰CORSA╮ 01:44, 18 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]
[@ Corsaiolo] Well, we clearly disagree. The page didn't contain incorrect information. There is no mandatory style nor model on Wikipedia, not in the English Wikipedia, the Dutch Wikipedia, the Italian Wikipedia or any other Wikipedia. It seems you don't understand the word impose, so let me quote the Merriam Webster dictionary: "a : to establish or apply by authority - impose a tax - impose new restrictions - impose penalties, b : to establish or bring about as if by force". Did I claim my model is mandatory (by authority) or did others claim their model is mandatory? The only rules are the 5 pillars, read the 5th pillar WP:IGNORA. It says "I pilastri sono gli unici principi inderogabili e immodificabili su cui si basa questa enciclopedia." Did I go and change (by force) pages maintained by others, or did others come and change the page maintained by me? I would be imposing if I would tell you to use "my" model and come and change the pages you maintain according to my model. Did I do anything of that? Can you say the same? We disagree on layout, not on the actual information. As much as you can disaqree with me, I can disagree with you. Disagreeing is not imposing. Disagreeing is just disagreeing and nothing more, When you disagree you discuss and try to find consensus. Consensus is, we talk first and try to work out a solution. Consensus is not, you do as we want and then you can talk and we will see if we like it. When someone starts changing things, without reaching consensus with those involved, he/she crosses the line and disagreeing becomes imposing! You did not see me do that. As long as only 1 person is working on a page, there's consensus by definition, except maybe when someone has a split personality and cannot agree with him/herself. As soon as you came to work on the page too, I didn't tell you what to do. I didn't tell you to go and do something else. I had an open mind for what you proposed and didn't say: no, here it's done by my standards. I didn't stop discussing and started to force my way. So don't tell me I been imposing. If you don't see the essential difference, I don't know what to say any more. I'm still open for reaching a consensus, but that requires we talk first. It's the fundamental requirement for consensus. --Sb008 (msg) 03:13, 18 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── No no Sb008, I perfectly understand the word "impose". You imposed your personal model on that particular page and no one can be able to modify it. Why? Just because you landed for first on that abandoned league-page* and therefore you apparently believe that this gave to you some "special rights" on it (but it clearly didn't).
* (the very same thing occurred to me with the Liga 17-18 and Bundes 17-18 pages, so, according to your statements, I should have been free to conform their layout to my personal tastes, which obviously I didn't)

And no, we don't disagree on layout (I always said that I like some of your style choices more than some that are on the model). We disagree just on this: I am saying that all the league pages have to conform to a community-accepted standard (because an "harlequin wiki" it's not a possibility), while you're saying that you have to be free to conform your page (which, again, it's not yours at all) to your tastes, and no one can change it without your consensus. We disagree just on that.

But let me quote you again: "Consensus is, we talk first and try to work out a solution.". That's a fair rule. Yet the community-approved model was indubitably here before you starting to update the Ere 17-18 page, so why you consciously and deliberately chose to ignore it and follow your own rules, without talking first? So, Wikipedia:Non fare il finto tonto.

And: WP:IGNORA doesn't certainly mean "do wathever you want in spite of pre-existing community consensus or guidelines", but something like "if you find that some rules are disturbing your work, just forget them, and do what you can at the best of your possibilities, delaying the compliance of your contributions with the rules to a second time, or leaving it to another user". So, again, Wikipedia:Non fare il finto tonto.

Anyway I'm opening right now a discussion in Tribuna asking the reasons behind some style or color choices that you decide not to follow, so you'll finally have the opportunity to discuss them with and within the football community, explaining your points of view. (and again: I'm fully disposed to translate your proposals in italian, to reach a wider audience). Bye. --╰CORSA╮ 18:09, 18 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]

[@ Corsaiolo] I'll answer asap, probably on Wednesday. I've take care of some other matters first. --Sb008 (msg) 00:13, 19 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]
Hello Sb008, here there are the discussions that you want read. In this page, you can use the box at the right. Bye and good Christmas, brother. ;-) --Fidia 82 (msg) 15:19, 19 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]
[@ Corsaiolo] Sorry for the late reply. So I imposed my model? Which one would you say is my "personal" model, this one: Eredivisie 2017/18Eredivisie 2017/18, this one: Eredivisie 2017-18, this one: Ολλανδικό πρωτάθλημα ποδοσφαίρου ανδρών 2017-18, this one: Чемпионат Нидерландов по футболу 2017/2018 or this one: Ередивізі 2017—2018? If it was up to me, all these pages would look different. No one can edit "my" page? Did I ever tell you, you can't? You know all too well, I didn't make any problem when you first discussed matters! I think I have special rights? Am I telling others what to do or are others telling me what to do? I consciously and deliberately chose to ignore the model? Was it in any way indicated on the page there's a model? As you stated to yourself, at first you didn't even know there was a model. Who was I supposed to talk to? No one was maintaining the page! If there had been someone, I would most likely not have touched the page at all, and if I wanted something to be changed I would have talked to the person maintaining the page first. That is not imposing and but trying to get things changed by consensus. The model representatives however think, it's change first and talk next. That's imposing. Again, did I interfere on any of the pages maintained by you? So don't tell me I'm imposing. I told no one what to do. Pre-existing community consensus? A select group isn't something I would call the community. Furthermore, the consensus only exists within that group. Let me ask you again, if I gather a few people and we define a new model, you and all others have to go by that model? And indeed, WP:IGNORA doesn't mean "do wathever you want" but it also doesn't mean you're obligated to do what a model says. No model is mandatory!!! And people just changing my work, based on a false claim that their model is mandatory, does disturb my work. So the only option is talk and discuss, and not on the bases "you first do as we want and then we talk". You talk first and change next based on what you agreed on. That is consensus. And as far as the discussion is concerned, I think I raised enough questions of which so far none has been answered.--Sb008 (msg) 23:44, 22 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]
Question. So I imposed my model? Answer. Yes you did.
[@ Corsaiolo] Wrong the model was imposed
You imposed your model on Ere 17-18 page. And that's a fact.
Q. Which one would you say is my "personal" model? A. The one you imposed on Ere 17-18 page. I obviously called it your personal because it's different from the community-approved one and you implemented it. Don't play games.
Indeed, I implemented something different, something better, but not even close to what I would call my personal model
Something better in your opinion. And without the community consensus, even when it was clear.
Q. No one can edit "my" page? A. No. You proved it by reverting the changes made in order to conform that to the model, and by deleting 4 times the "W" template.
You made several edits which I didn't revert, when information gets lost it becomes a different story
At least you admit it.
Q. Am I telling others what to do or are others telling me what to do? A. You are either (explanation above). The difference is: the model the community imposed to you is consensus-based, the model you imposed to the community is just yours.
consensus between a select few gives no additional rights.
This is your opinion, and frankly is bullshit, because there is no "selected few". I even opened a discussion and offered to translate, but you always refuse to join in, which means that you just don't care to discuss. Period.
Q. I consciously and deliberately chose to ignore the model? A. Yes, right after you became aware that a model exist.
You are aware of the fact that I think people should talk and not impose. Yet, you keep imposing based on a model which isn't mandatory
So why you didn't talk and keeping (until a few days ago) impose your own model?
Q. Did I interfere on any of the pages maintained by you? A. Again: maintaining is not property. You're talking like that page is/was yours.
It's not about who owns what, since neither of us does. It's about when you're imposing
Q. If I gather a few people and we define a new model, you and all others have to go by that model? A. Most likely not, because it would be one group against another group, a situation pretty far from community consensus.
So the size of the group matters? Or your select group speaks on behalf of the whole community?
There is no selected group. Read the 10 years discussions.
Statement. No model is mandatory!!! Reply. There are no mandatory models within the wiki. But there can be mandatory models within the wiki communities.
a wiki community is a subset of the wiki. So if it isn't mandatory within the wiki it isn't mandatory in a subset. If a letter is not a number, it's certainly not an odd number
Wrong. It means that anyone is free until a community chooses freely to follow certain rules in order to uniformate certain kinds of pages.
S. I think I raised enough questions of which so far none has been answered. R. I think you're wrong.
So which one was answered?
I thought you were capable to read.
My questions:
  1. Have you read the 10 years long discussions about the model before starting to accuse? Maybe your proposals were already on the table some years ago. Did you check before?
    I'm in the process, not something that's done in 5 minutes, especially when you depend on poor google translations. But so fat not seen a single answer.
  2. Or you really think that threads closed for years must be re-opened every time that the second-last arrived (the last one it's me) raises an objection?
    build proper modules and there's no need. If a change is needed you change the module and all pages change automatically
Well apparently they're not at that point so far.
  1. And, in the same way you're disposed to change the model, would you be equally disposed to help conform the hundreds of league pages to the new model you (help to) redact? (At this moment they're just in two, and they say they're nearly 60% done)
    If it would be a model I agree on and are partly responsible for, I would have no problem to help out on the 100s of pages. But for sure I wouldn't force it on people who worked hard to maintain a page. I would use reason and no "force". I have never been known as avoiding responsibility and to be lazy.
But since there isn't a model...? (And, for the record, you're actually forcing other people to accept your own model, obviously only in the Ere 17-18 page. I keep tellin' you but you seem just don't wanna listen)
Now please answer frankly. --╰CORSA╮ 02:08, 23 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]
frankly, I totally detest people who think they have more rights and think they can wipe out the work of others based on a false claim of something being mandatory.--Sb008 (msg) 03:00, 23 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]
Then apparently you're detesting yourself for your behaviour on Ere 17-18 page. Bye. --╰CORSA╮ 12:30, 23 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]

RE: PEC Zwolle 2017-2018Modifica

Hello Sb008, thanks for you cooperation. I corrected wrong numbers, but didn't add the players of the second list because they are not formally first team's players. (as you can see from the official website) --Alexdevil (msg) 08:30, 19 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]

Avviso: è consigliata una contribuzione collaborativaModifica

Ciao, credo sia necessario chiarire un paio di punti prima che tu prosegua nella contribuzione qui.

1. Il modello di voce che ti è stato illustrato dagli altri utenti sopra non è obbligatorio. Molto semplicemente, si consiglia di usarlo.
2. È consigliata una contribuzione collaborativa. Non è consigliato fare di testa propria.
3. Ogni tuo singolo edit va giustificato nell'oggetto. Questo è obbligatorio.
4. Le rimozioni di contenuti e/o di avvisi vanno giustificate nell'oggetto. Anche questo è obbligatorio.
5. Ogni tua altra rimozione non giustificata di testo e/o di avvisi, vandalismo, modifica senza senso o pseudo-patriottica (come, ad esempio, «mettere van Ginkel prima di Lozano tra i marcatori solo perché uno olandese e l'altro no») verrà sanzionata con un blocco nei confronti di questa utenza, se necessario anche a tempo non determinato.

Spero di essere stato chiaro, saluti. --Dimitrij Kášëv 20:42, 19 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]

Il consenso è già presente, in questo caso è rappresentato dal modello di voce per le stagioni calcistiche. Possono essere create e modificate pagine senza seguire il modello di voce, senza quindi rispettare il modello di voce stesso (e di conseguenza, il consenso raggiunto in precedenza), così come un utente può inserire un avviso in questo tipo di voci indicando che va seguito il modello di voce al fine di ottenere una omogeneità in tutte le voci simili.
Ti ho scritto sopra che questo tipo di rimozione non può essere fatta se non è adeguatamente giustificata in quanto costituisce vandalismo.
Infine: puoi certamente aggiungere o togliere testo a piacimento (sempre giustificando nell'oggetto le modifiche), ma se non lo fai rispettando il consenso ottenuto con gli altri utenti, che è già presente - rappresentato dal modello di voce - allora intralci il lavoro di tutti gli altri e invece di aiutarci ci fai perdere tempo. Se sei qui per aiutarci, sei il benvenuto e puoi iniziare una contribuzione costruttiva e collaborativa al fine di migliorare le voci.
Ma se sei qui solo per farci perdere tempo, la tua contribuzione può anche terminare subito. Spero di non essere risultato offensivo, non-neutrale o sarcastico, non è stata mia intenzione. Grazie per la comprensione, buon proseguimento. --Dimitrij Kášëv 13:42, 20 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]
Cerco di spiegarti per bene come stanno le cose in senso pratico: puoi fare le cose "quasi" come vuoi, ma se qualcuno viene a mettere degli avvisi alle "tue" voci o a correggerle utilizzando il modello, essendo "giustificato" dal consenso è lui che ha ragione e quindi "è sbagliato" cancellare la modalità applicata da lui, avvisi compresi. Poi i dettagli meno rilevanti come la lista numerata che hai esemplificato a Dimitrij dubito che qualcuno mai verrà a modificartela oppure se qualcuno dovesse farlo ritengo che sarebbero già dettagli meno rilevanti. Poi se vuoi fare proposte hai sempre le discussioni per poterlo fare (e comunque le tue opinioni vengono analizzate criticamente, non le accantoniamo a priori) ma posso dirti che dopo 3 anni e più di discussioni non stiamo certo a cambiare il modello già ora, anche perché la collaborazione esterna per lavorare alle modifiche adesso è scarsa rispetto a 5-6 anni fa. Per esperienza, poi, posso dirti che la tua maniera di rapportarti, giuste o sbagliate che siano le tue rivendicazioni, in passato ha portato al blocco infinito altre utenze; se vuoi posso farti qualche esempio. Mi spiace essere "troppo franco" ma credo che finora i tentativi di spiegarti bene come stanno le cose siano stati molteplici (come, tra l'altro, pare che tu non abbia letto neanche 2 righe delle corpose discussioni che abbiamo fatto per approvare il modello). Di più non posso dirti.....saluti. --Fidia 82 (msg) 09:57, 21 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]
1. Se ti sei accorto d'aver sbagliato su Van Ginkel/Lozano bastava ripristinare il tuo intervento al fine di riportare correttamente le informazioni (sorvolo su "campionato neerlandese di calcio" che, in lingua italiana, non esiste!).
2. La situazione paradossalmente è questa. Vedo che hai capito, non c'è da discutere ulteriormente su questo punto.
3. Non ho contestato la rimozione dell'avviso. Ho contestato la rimozione dell'avviso senza giustificazione nell'oggetto, perché è considerata vandalismo.
4. Devi sapere tu cosa inserire nell'oggetto. Se rimuovi un avviso scrivi "rimuovo questo avviso X" se togli del testo scrivi "tolgo questa parte di testo / tutto il testo" se lo aggiungi scrivi "aggiungo testo" ecc.
5. Non so dove tu abbia preso i dati, che senza un link restano una tua invenzione, ma non mi pare di essere il secondo maggior contributore nelle discussioni di Wikipedia:Modello di voce/Stagione di una divisione di un campionato di calcio. È innegabile che io sia stato tra i maggiori contributori negli ultimi anni a tutta la serie di discussioni per portare il modello di voce da "semplice bozza" a "modello di voce vero e proprio", ma per questo motivo dovrei avere degli interessi nel "far rispettare" questo modello di voce? E gli altri riguardanti il resto dell'enciclopedia no? Non mi sento parte in causa né giudice della questione, ma se vuoi chiedere un altro parere a un amministratore terzo puoi prenderne uno a caso dalla lista di 113 che abbiamo qui.
Saluti. --Dimitrij Kášëv 17:27, 23 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]

--Bramfab Discorriamo 18:02, 23 dic 2017 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]

Un grazie e un libro sulla conoscenza libera per teModifica

Wikimedia Italia

Gentile Sb008,

oggi ti scrivo a nome dell'associazione Wikimedia Italia per ringraziarti del tempo che hai dedicato ai progetti Wikimedia.

Come piccolo omaggio avremmo piacere di spedirti una copia (tutta in carta riciclata) del libro di Carlo Piana, Open source, software libero e altre libertà. Fornisci un recapito per ricevere una copia del libro.

Pochi giorni fa il mondo ha festeggiato la giornata dell'amore per il software libero, ma ogni giorno è buono per ricordare le garanzie delle licenze libere e le centinaia di migliaia di persone che si sono unite per costruire questo bene comune della conoscenza. Speriamo che questo libro ti sia utile per apprezzare quanto hai fatto e per trasmettere la passione della conoscenza libera a una persona a te vicina.

Se desideri una copia ma non puoi fornirci un indirizzo a cui spedirla, contatta la segreteria Wikimedia Italia e troviamo una soluzione insieme.

Grazie ancora e a presto,

Lorenzo Losa (msg) 11:27, 26 feb 2020 (CET)Rispondi[rispondi]

Hello and thank you for writing me. I apologize for my English. You did a great job; as soon as I can check the template Bascharage and I'll let you know.

Bye and have a good day.--China1977 (msg) 08:56, 18 mag 2020 (CEST)Rispondi[rispondi]