Talskubilos

Aquitanian language

I can either protect the page, as I just did, block you for edit warring, or you can convince the other editors of the article before you add what appears from my perspective to be unsupported or fringe material. kwami (talk) 11:06, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

The I propose to include a copy of the Iberian-Aquitanian table on this article. And I hope either you or Akerbeltz would restore some deleted stuff which wasn't mine. Talskubilos (talk) 11:20, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Some interesting edition

Hi, Talskubilos. Sometime ago you missunderstood some words between Akerbeltz and me. Maybe some interesting recent edition would interest to you. These have been made by Arnaiz-Villena suporters claiming a conspiracy, censorship, etc etc with their (or his ;-) usual offending comments urbi et orbe: [1], [2], [3] and On_the_translation_of_Iberian_inscriptions_by_Alonso_García_and_Arnaiz-Villena . On the identity of these (or this) contributor you may see Iberian-Guanche_crackpot_theories who even offend other users or tell phantasy libel stories against the authors (t)he(y) do not agree [4]. And (t)he(y) accuse the others of censorship, hidden interests, and libel!. So funny! (or so pityful).

So, maybe now you will understand that we were not criticising you, and that there are problems with the vandal editions on these page that make us to be cautious. Maybe more that we would like to. But so is life, I am afraid.

The problem with your editions is that you seemed not to be aware that the Wikipedia is not a forum and that the data must be non original and from reliable sources. Remember that even if sometime in the future (maybe tomorrow, may be next century) it is proven that there is a close relationship between Basque and Iberian (or that there is not), we must write according to the now (excuse my bad English, this phrase is getting complicated), and that this is an Encyclopedia (well, some kind of...) not a manual, not an essay. Regards. --Dumu Eduba (talk) 22:34, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

On the quote to Menéndez Pidal

Hello Talskubilos. First of all, just to avoid misunderstandings, I have no intention to change your edition on the question (and that is one of the reasons I write the comment here and no in the discussion of the article) but there are some questions:

• the main: would not be better to limit the quote to the book only to the note and not to the General Bibliography?. Some people complained that my version of the bibliography was too large and some scissors have been retouching it, and the interest of the book is just that page. IMHO it should be so.
• the second one. I am not sure on the meaning of the term "ibéricos" in Menéndez Pidal. I understand (or believe? who knows) that at that time the concept was somewhat different from "ancient Iberian language". Of course is only an opinion, but it would be nice if you have the opportunity to see the original book.
• third and very very minor: a caveat: sometimes the visible pages in Google books change.

Regards. --Dumu Eduba (talk) 23:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC) Good idea, I just moved the ref to the inline text.

You're right about Menéndez Pidal's ideas. He meant those linguistic varieties (Iberian being one of them) which left an imprint in Basque and/or Spanish and became extinct in the High Middle Ages. Talskubilos (talk) 18:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

"Macrofamily"

Stop changing "language family" to "macrofamily". This is not a widely used term in historical linguistics. If you think it is appropriate, then participate in a discussion at Talk:Afroasiatic languages and build a consensus for it. Read WP:BRD and follow it. If you make a change and another editor reverts that change, do not revert, but discuss on the Talk page. --Taivo (talk) 14:51, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

3RR warning on Nazi-Maruttash

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Nazi-Maruttash. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 14:48, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 15:16, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule at Nazi-Maruttash. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 15:33, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Formatting

Please stop screwing up the formatting by specifying the font you like best on your computer. If the unicode template does not give you adequate support, the place to go is the template talk page. Customizing articles for your convenience ignores the fact that you aren't the only one to read them. kwami (talk) 19:40, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm afraid *all* computers with Windows XP behave this way. It's a bulit-in OS feature and AFAIK can't be changed. On the other hand, an administrator answered negatively my request to modify the template, as the Segoe UI font isn't a std XP font but it comes with certain MS software such as Windows Live. Talskubilos (talk) 20:15, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Then we have a serious problem with the {{Unicode}} template. Stop being so selfish and work to solve the problem. Also, since you're proposing the change, you need to get consensus. I don't need consensus to revert you. If you continue edit warring, I will report you to 3RR. You just got off a block. Come on, work with others, achieve consensus, and address the actual problem rather that jury-rigging individual pages. — kwami (talk) 20:18, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

As I said before, the problem lies within Windows XP OS, not my computer, and my request to modify the wiki template to use Segoe UI hasn't been yet accepted. I hope you understand this. Talskubilos (talk) 20:55, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Barcelona

Please do not get the impression I reverted your edit. I was already working on the section before your change. Berkserker (talk) 07:30, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

BTW, Where did you get that Barcelona's climate is strongly influenced by BSh? This is completely nonsense. Talskubilos (talk) 08:00, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

According to the current classification system, BS limit is very high. For Barcelona it is 505 mm. It is very close but not borderline. The BS border is about 50 km down the coast. This is why I stated it isn't borderline but influenced. The increase of precipitation during late spring is the result of this influence. I had already written my explanation in the first edit "relatively dry winters, precipitation increasing during spring months, close to threshold, as well as geographically very close to semi-arid zone". Berkserker (talk) 08:37, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

I see you have reverted the edit.. Please first explain your reasons and discuss before changing. I had already provided the reasons for it. Berkserker (talk) 08:39, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

According to that map, the BSh zone is located in the SE of the Iberian Peninsula, stretching between Alicante and Cabo de Gata, with some patches of BSk and BW between, with Almeria lying on the latter. Although there's some controversy about the relative extension of BSk and Csa zones (sources?), the climate of Barcelona is definitively closer to Cfa than to BSh. Possibly the area of Tarragona could be considered to be near or influenced by BSh, but certainly not Barcelona. I also should add that summer is often sultry, especially at night, due to the high relative humidity. Talskubilos (talk) 13:18, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Since we continue the discussion on the article talk page I have mostly replied there. However since you deleted one of your comments there, I will reply to that specific content here. Climate-data.org is not my source to classify climates, I just put it there to eliminate possibly questions by amateur editors, because they think climate classification needs to be sourced, while in actuality it is simple arithmetics that doesn't need citations according to Wikipedia regulations. Berkserker (talk) 13:47, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Mapa-climas-koppen.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Mapa-climas-koppen.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, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:25, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Mapa-climas-koppen.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mapa-climas-koppen.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:11, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Commercial use in Wikipedia sucks! :-( Talskubilos (talk) 09:46, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Definition of climatic half-year

Hi, I noticed you changed the half-year definition back to Nov-April for winter and May-Nov for summer. I also found many more academic sources for the Oct-March definition for the winter-half year and April-November. Since there appear to be two opposing definitions quoted in the climatology literature, would you support listing both definitions for the summer and winter half-years? A similar situation currently exists between using the 0°C and the -3°C isotherm to separate C and D climate types. Redtitan (talk) 22:30, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, but I think we should indicate which ones were from Köppen's original work. For example, the -3ºC isotherm between C and D or the 40 mm rainfall threshold for Cs and Ds. As for "summer" and "winter" definition he said (C42 on his article): unter "Sommer" und "Winter" die Jahreszeit des höheren und niedrigeren Sonnenstandes der betr. Erdhalbkugel. That is, the semesters of highest and lowest sun altitudes in each hemisfere. Talskubilos (talk) 22:53, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Agreed - I think Köppen's original definitions should be listed and specifically noted as the original boundaries, along with other modifications made since. I've been meaning to make a table showing the original definitions from Köppen, along with the changes made in different versions developed since Köppen's original work.

If we go strictly by Köppen's definition, then that would precisely mean two half-year periods split up by:

March 20-22 to Sep 20-22 and then Sep 21-23 to March 19-21 (not entirely sure on the dates for solstices)

Unfortunately, climate data is formatted monthly in many cases, so it'd be very difficult to find climate data that would allow us to use his original definition. I guess that's why academic sources go with whole-month definitions instead of going by the day of the solstice. Redtitan (talk) 23:08, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Precisely so. As tempeature goes behind the sun by aprox. one month (seasonal lag), some authors think it's more reasonable to get May-Oct/Nov-Apr instead of Apr-Sep/Oct-Mar, and for some climates this difference is noticeable. Talskubilos (talk) 12:44, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

I just saw you made an edit so that the May-Oct/Nov-April half-year definitions are followed by (higher average temperature) and (lower average temperature). I'm not planning on editing that, and that is true for the vast majority of cities. However, interestingly enough, seasonal lag can vary quite a bit. I wish I could find an example for the whole world, but this is a great map showing the huge differences in seasonal lag across the US:

http://spacecityweather.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/longestdayofyear.jpg

In same cases, particularly just off the west coast of continents, the warmest six month period (if you go by mean monthly temperatures) is actually June-November. Hilo, Hawaii and the Canary Islands are two good examples of that.Redtitan (talk) 16:27, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

And it appears there are some examples of April-September being the warmest six-month period, in more highland locations in the subtropics. See Durango_City#Climate Redtitan (talk) 16:51, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. :-) Talskubilos (talk) 00:02, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Controversial changes

Your changes are controversial. Arouse great emotions and discussions. You have problems with respect for the principles and standards of Wikipedia. Please stop, slow down. Subtropical-man (talk / en-2) 23:36, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

I think you've got some problems with your English, because "discussion" doesn't mean the same than Spanish discusión. In English, that would be argument. Please feel free to use talk pages to discuss controversial matters instead of making disruptive edits. Talskubilos (talk) 23:43, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

What's the problem? I added descriptions of changes and/or posts in talk page of article. Please stop trolling with this. If you do not understand something then write accurately with a link. PS. Please stop accusing others of "disruptive edits" like [5][6], this is a personal attacks (per Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Subtropical-man (talk / en-2) 00:49, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

The problem is you made changes to several articles without achieving consensus with other editors about climate topics, e.g. links to climate descriptions or climate classifications. Please read Wikipedia:Consensus and Wikipedia:Civility Talskubilos (talk) 13:36, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

@Talskubilos: you are the one which has made changes to several articles without achieving consensus. Like in the climate paragraph of Valencia, no one has done any consensus with you and you are doing bad edits changing trustworthy sources with unuseful and untrustworthy sources like "climate-data.org", which is a fan based website. Please stop doing bad edits or I'll warn a librarian about your attitude and changes. Thanks --TechnicianGB (talk) 15:50, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Here you have 3 trustworthy and authoritative sources which say that the climate of the city of Valencia is mediterranean Csa. 2 of those sources are the most authoritative and useful which you can find on the whole internet for the climate of the city of Valencia. I've seeked information about "climate-data.org" and they don't even mentione the source of their averages/climate info and even they don't mentione where are their climate stations, obviously because it's all invented. You can't superimpose a fan based website as a source above the climate guide of Köppen climate classification and the official atlas of the climate of Spain maded by AEMET. Thanks! --TechnicianGB (talk) 16:16, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

@TechnicianGB: You should know it wasn't me who classified Valencia climate as semi-arid but User:Berkserker. Please read the discussion at Talk:Köppen climate classification#Definition of summer and winter months Talskubilos (talk) 17:11, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

@Talskubilos: then sorry for my accusation to you. It was that user's fault. As you can see, that is totally untrue. Valencia has a Csa climate. It's not dry enough to be a semi-arid climate. Kind regards! --TechnicianGB (talk) 18:20, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Again, why do you still persist in categorize it as a BSk climate if the 1981-2010 average of the official weather station has an average of 18.4 ºC placing it 0.4 ºC above 18 ºC which enters on the HOT categorization of the semi-arid climate? How many people has to tell you the same? As I can see, I'm not the only one. A 2001 map with dubious trustworthy/reliability can't replace an actual official AEMET climate guide, nor an official Köppen climate classification, both with quite more actual averages than that map which you put, which is completely unuseful as it talks from data placed 15 years ago. Did you know that Valencia has about 100mm of more rain per year in the 1981-2010 average than in the one from 1971-2000? Obviously you didn't know it, and that map just shows data from 2001, when the 1981-2010 period was inexistent. So please, keep doing good editions on wikipedia, but not trashy editions like this one which don't follow us to any good path. There isn't any trustworthy nor reliable source which puts Valencia inside a climate which is not Csa. And there isn't any kind of categorization of any city which places it under their average temperature just because of their Urban heat phenomenon.

As I told you before, the meteorological station of Valencia is located outside the downtown. And nevermind, it's a Csa climate. Just for your information I tell you this thing about the meteo station. I hope you will understand it after all of this. Please stop doing bad edits on Wikipedia, as you can check, the official and trustworthy sources don't agree with that unuseful semi-arid categorization. Maybe in the 1971-2010 period or 1961-1990 period (the map which you put talks about 1971-2000 period, there are Köppen maps which talk about 1961-1990 periods) it was a Bsk/Bsh climate. But nowadays, it surpasses the mean annual average of 18 ºC and the rain amount is quite superior than in older periods, if the authentic climate guide of Spain maded by AEMET (the most trustworthy source about climate in Spain) places it as a Csa climate and also it has an average of 18.4 ºC according to that official weather station, any other website or map can say whatever they want as the most important source is the most reliable source, please check Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. And as you can see 2 of the most reliable sources say that it's a Csa climate. I hope you will understand it at this point. Regards --TechnicianGB (talk) 18:41, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of bridge failures, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charles III (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:17, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)