User talk:XGustaX

Hispanophone

Hello, please considere than neither Alaska, neither USA are "Spanish speaker". They only have minority around 10% for USA, really less for Alaska, so really not like and far from Belize and its 40 or 50% of spanish speakers . I will restaure the other map, which is an improvement of your map, more correct, and on commons so sharable by all the wikipedias.

see here

Yug (talk) 18:49, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I and a majority of others people just think the new map of Hispanophone is more expressive and true. I know than spanish speaker are everywhere in USA, but Belize is trully bilanguage, and south of the USA have truly important spanish comunities, but that stay, in the full country, a minority of 10%. The level is not the same, this map try to show that. You are welcome to find a solution and improve the map, not to put your opinion, in that case you will fail. Yug (talk) 17:55, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil

Dear Sir,

Regardless of what CIA FactBook says, there is no Spanish-speaking community in Brazil. Brazilians speak Spanish as they speak English: as a foreign language.

Please, read the arguments in the discussion page of Spanish language and don't change the page without stating your arguments.

If you think Brazil should be included, then many countries in the world would have to be included in an English language map. For instances, 40% of Portuguese people speak English. Is Portugal an English-speaking country in the same way as you say Brazil speaks Spanish?

In a nutshell, your are confusing foreign language speakers with first or second language speakers. In Brazil, people speak Spanish only as a foreign language (excepting a few immigrants, of course, as in any country in the world).

Best regards, Marco Neves 21:25, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking messages

Please do not post blocking messages on other user pages unless you are an administrator. Thank you. --HappyCamper 18:24, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't gone through the entire edit history yet, but is there a particular urgency to block User talk:66.146.157.211 that you noticed? --HappyCamper 18:26, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, it just makes it a bit less confusing...have you seen WP:AIV? If you ever need to request a block, you can add an entry there. It works quite quickly. --HappyCamper 18:27, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, well, I went through some of the edits and they didn't look too bad. Perhaps I am missing something, but it seems like the IP is just rewording. This is probably better dealt with on the talk page. Normally, fast blocks are given for "blatant" vandalism, such as repeated insertion of shock material into articles. As for the blocking, only administrators can do that. This is your block log here: [1]. --HappyCamper 18:32, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vandals can't actually block you...only an administrator can. It looks like Bcorr blocked you for vandalism, and 4 days later, another administrator MacGyverMagic unblocked you. If you felt that the block was in error, you might want to ask Bcorr about it. However, since you are unblocked now there should be no problems with editing. --HappyCamper 18:41, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

I informed you about the 3RR rule as a courtesy to a new editor, but I now will assume you know it. There was no need to tell me I was in potential violation as I am an experienced editor and the admins know I know the rules, ie I could be blocked for doing 4RR without warning, and from now on so could you, SqueakBox 20:44, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

\No I haven't nor have I threatened you. Please calm down, SqueakBox 20:51, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Three-revert rule

You have been blocked for 24 hours for a violation of the three revert rule on Costa Rica. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. Izehar 21:27, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I understand I broke the Rules.

I've unblocked everyone involved, and instead protected Costa Rica. I cannot work infinitely fast, so please, please, please everyone calm down and check back in a little bit when I have finished writing up everything. I will do this extremely thoroughly on Talk:Costa Rica. --HappyCamper 21:49, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you are happy with the current version? Anyway have a happy new year! SqueakBox 22:05, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I am. You have a Happy New Year also. =) User:XGustaX

Costa Rica

Well...I guess I did get involved after all! I wrote about 8 paragraphs offline until I noticed [2] and [3] -- I think these speak for themselves :-) Let's enjoy the rest of 2005 as we welcome 2006! --HappyCamper 22:38, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I was trying to file an extensive 3RR report, basically giving my rationale for why I felt it was appropriate not to block in this instance. There isn't a reason to block if everyone is happy, right? I'm glad you were able to make the article better :-) --HappyCamper 23:22, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I should apologize to you as well; I had an inclination that you were a "vandal" because of your previous blocks. Now I understand what you were trying to explain to me earlier. I'm sorry. --HappyCamper 23:24, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In the future, please feel free to come to me if you run into such "unjust" blocks. I cannot guarantee that I will unblock you, but I will spend the time to look into it on your behalf. Sound good? --HappyCamper 23:31, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Language boxes

Oh, those things? You can get them here: Wikipedia:Babel -- just follow the instructions and pick out all the ones you like. --HappyCamper 02:22, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]