SegataSanshiro1

Pagador Blindado PE-1

Hello! Given your interest in the railway, I decided to ask. No Do you have a desire to write an article about the Argentine armored draisin Pagador Blindado PE-1? It would be great! --Лукас Фокс (talk) 15:29, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

There's lot's of articles I want to do, but usually it's a case of insufficient sources or images. The "MTF-3000" article you requested is another which I want to do, but there are no free images and don't like writing articles with no images (in this case I even wrote to Materfer and asked if they could send pictures, but no reply).

I'll add the draisin to the list, and then if I find more information on it I'll do it. I'm in Argentina now and I believe there's one of these at Ferroclub Lynch, so if I visit one of these days, then I'll get some pictures and ask for more information/resources to do an article. SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 17:30, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

I do not like to write articles without images. ))) Thank you! I hope you will find and take photos. Best Regards, --Лукас Фокс (talk) 15:24, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

Hello, SegataSanshiro1. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Paul Singer. Thank you. --FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 19:16, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Somisa

Hello there! I've noticed there's no en. article on SOMISA. Would you like to create one together? Best, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 03:30, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

I'd be happy to, but if you're feeling collaborative then I would much rather try and bring the Subte article up to GA standards - something I've been meaning on doing for a while but can't do alone since I have no prior experience in that. SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 14:48, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Sounds great! I've never brought an article up to GA either, but am aware of the criteria and have copy editing experience. Let me assess the article and draw up a plan - we can start from there. As for Somisa, I'll add it to my to-do list. Cheers, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 16:06, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

It should be a good experience for both of us then. Likewise, I would be interested in doing the SOMISA article as well, and that should be pretty straightforward since it's one of the rare occasions where eswiki is somewhat referenced. I'll ping Fma12 since he may be interested in collaborating on one or both - though I know he prefers railways to mass transit. SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 17:19, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi SegataSanshiro1, as you said, I prefer railways but I have been also working on some mass transit of my interest, mainly bridges (like New Pueyrredón) that had not their corresponding en.wiki articles. Regards !. - Fma12 (talk) 16:53, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

OK, thanks anyway! I'll give those a check over when I can. SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 00:23, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

As far as GA criteria go, I have come up with the following points we need to approach:

• Concerning prose and MOS, I think we're in a good position already; lists and sections are compliant. I would expand the Cultural stations subsection, as that could use more information instead of just short summaries. I'd also expand the popular culture section, as that is certainly too short. The lede could also use further work, particularly regarding its contents as compared to the article's.
  • Another observation I'd make is that the binary history section, mainly a general history vs. privatisation seems both inappropriate, simplistic and inaccurate. There is plenty of information missing, particularly between the 40s and 90s, and then between the 90s and now - we need to also think about breaking down the history section into smaller pieces (this actually helps with expansion). Apart from that, content overall seems good enough, including the use of photographs and other graphical representations.
• I believe sourcing is one of our main problems. We have some bare URLs, which might in reality be due to the fact many sources are primary. A thorough search for good quality reliable sources is a priority. The good thing is, in my opinion, that when sourcing is improved it usually leads to better content being added in the process, so focusing on this point would bring about improvements in the previous points.
• Criteria 3, 4, 5 and 6 seem to be met, at least at first glance.

If we start working on these, then we might eventually sumbit it for review (this can be a very long process) and get some initial feedback which we could use to work on the article farther down the road. What do you guys think? FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 19:19, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

I've started a sandbox running for our use. Feel free to edit at will. We can also communicate through its talk page. Cheers, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 23:27, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

I fully agree. I'll respond on the talk page in that case, thanks for setting up the sandbox! SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 00:23, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Segata, I think this is as good a moment as any to move what we have to mainspace and submit that nomination. We can work on improving the new mainspace version henceforth. What are your thoughts? Best, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 19:02, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

FoCuS, sure! There's some cleaning up to do first and I need to fill in the missing cultural stations parts. If you can give me a few hours then we should be good to go. It might also be worth posting on Wikiproject:Argentina and messaging a couple of past editors to see if they want to get involved, though I have a feeling that might be a little fruitless but it's worth a shot. SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 19:23, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Excellent! I couldn't find a sources for a few bits in that part either...but it's not bad overall. No problem in posting that; I'm on it. As for former editors, you've pretty much dominated edits for the past year or so. Cheers, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 19:30, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Ok, I've gone ahead and synced the articles. We should probably work quickly to solve the "citation needed" parts and in particular the culture section which still needs the most work. With the former editors, I realise that's the case, but I'll have a quick scan to see if there's any past active editors who made substantial edits and message them anyway. SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 20:43, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

FoCuS, I'll go ahead and post to Wikiproject:Trains as well considering the page comes under its scope. It might be good to have someone from there since they should have experience editing similar articles. SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 19:30, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Fantastic. I still can't find a reference for the General San Martín station bit, which seems to be the only missing bit. I've gone ahead and placed the nomination template to the article's talk page. FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 21:00, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	For your admirable proposal to improve the Subte article and the progress we've made so far! I can now say I'm more knowledgeable on the matter. I look forward to further collaborations down the road. FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 00:10, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! That's my first barnstar. SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 03:52, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

The first of many, to be sure! FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 22:03, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is about the topic Paul Singer. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! — FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 19:49, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 3 February

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Buenos Aires Underground page, your edit caused a URL error (help) and a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Autopatrolled granted

Hi SegataSanshiro1, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! — Earwig ^talk 01:25, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks! SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 01:36, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

RfC, etc.

Hello there! I just wanted to let you know I've made the edits we agreed on. Please let me know if I missed anything. I've also closed the RfC given the former. To reiterate, I'm open to further work on the article if you want to collaborate on that too. On another note, it's a shame the Subte article hasn't been reviewed yet, isn't it? I trust it'll be just fine once someone finally picks it up. It looks pretty decent nowadays! Wishing you a fantastic week, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 01:17, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Moved request

I moved your request for community review of an RFC close to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Possible_improper_RfC_close; traditionally that's the preferred place for that type of request. NE Ent 22:41, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks, I think I was after a more general overview but the RfC is a good place to start. SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 02:59, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

A page you started (Belgrano Cargas y Logística) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Belgrano Cargas y Logística, SegataSanshiro1!

Wikipedia editor NearEMPTiness just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Write a helpful note for SegataSanshiro1. It will be posted on their talk page.

To reply, leave a comment on NearEMPTiness's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Paul Singer (businessman)". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 7 June 2016.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 20:26, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Paul Singer (businessman), to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 09:05, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	if you have been doing this a while and are still patiently showing up to comment without calling names then you really deserve one of these :) I can't do this any more myself though, heh. I am feeling quite uncivil at the moment. Elinruby (talk) 01:34, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

meanwhile Suggestion

If you feel ever an urge to look at a different set of problems, come help me with the Spanish-language stuff on Panama Papers. There were some really nice stories that I couldn't do justice to or be not sure I would get get right, because ya, the whole article ALL dealt with derogtory information about living people and we had a lot of BLP deletionists through there at first. I got a lot of experience pointing out that public person exception.

I just noticed when I was looking up Singer (cause I knew I had seen him in the Cong but couldn't remember where.) that a couple dozen new Panama Papers stories were recently published so I'll probably be reworking the mining history of Africa again or something. Anyway, be well and thanks for your kind words. Elinruby (talk) 01:47, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Map of Argentina

As I can see in CIA's factbook, the official map of Argentina, has no claims. It's sad that we use territorial claims map as the official map of a country... P.S. I do not come from a country which has to gain anything from Argentina's territorial claims, I'm just a user who tries to find logic in things around him! :) Texniths (talk) 15:17, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Texniths, no problem! Territories change depending on which country you're in and who recognises them. If you were in Latin America or Spain, that is what Argentina would look like on a map (and maybe a few other places, not sure). The CIA source you cite is simply how the US views it, it isn't a de-facto source of map information nor is it objective in this case - it IS NOT "the official map" of Argentina. When I said "official" map of Argentina in the revert, perhaps I was being flippant - there is no official map of anything if we're being neutral about things. The UN would mark or territorial disputes as disputes and not as belonging to either one country or another, hence the distinction here since a neutral encyclopedia should also not takes sides like countries do (at least, I think this is the reason for the map being like that there).

You should check out Wikipedia's map policy if you can find it and check out Wikipedia:Systemic bias. Personally though, I don't think the Antarctic claims should be on there, even if there is a permanent population, considering the Antarctic Treaty actually forbids any country from really owning it anyway. Anyway, I notice you're farily new here, so welcome to Wikipedia! 15:43, 27 August 2016 (UTC)SegataSanshiro1 (talk)

Thank you very much, for your response! Keep being creative here! :) P.S. fairly new in English Wikipedia to be accurate! :) Texniths (talk) 15:49, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Oh sorry, I didn't bother to check if you had been active in other languages! No problem, and sorry if my revert was a bit abrupt. It's often the case with Argentina-related articles where someone comes on fresh from reading The Sun or The Daily Mail and makes some nationalist edit, so I just took it to be one of those and didn't realise it actually had some looking and good intentions behind it. So sorry for not assuming good faith. SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 15:55, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

No worries! :) Texniths (talk) 15:58, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, SegataSanshiro1. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, SegataSanshiro1. You have new messages at Kiteinthewind's talk page.
Message added 21:36, 6 November 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Kiteinthewind ^{Leave a message!} 21:36, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, SegataSanshiro1. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ARA "San Juan" cleanup

Thanks for summarizing and cleaning up the disapppearence section in the boat's article. In your last cleanup I think that some of the removed info is useful and should have been kept, especially the map. Unless you have any concerns I'll manually reintroduce some of it. Regards, DPdH (talk) 22:26, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Sure, if you think I've been to brash, feel free to re-add. Regarding the map, I've left comments on the talk page of the article - it has some issues. SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 22:36, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Edit war warning

Your recent editing history at Calvin Cheng shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jytdog (talk) 20:17, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

What edit war are you on about? You reverted my edit, not the other way around. I was making edits removing language which clearly doesn't belong in a BLP which are even tagged as "vague" and "opinion" along with removing the WP:PUFF which has been discussed extensively. I've even been encouraged to be WP:BOLD by other editors on that page, though I don't see that edit as being that bold or remotely controversial. If it's been discussed before (there's no way I'm reading through all that mess of a talk page), then fine, revert but maybe try and AGF before spamming my page with crap next time, it's way over the top and pretty uncalled for. SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 21:50, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Jytdog, I have no issue with you reverting my edits if you have a good rationale for doing so, but slapping notices on my page for edit warring when I haven't even reverted a single edit (or even intended to) seems a bit much. Having looked at your user page, we're on the same side here and the article in question was brought to my attention after having seen a tonne of COI editing on other Singapore-related pages. I strongly advise against this kind of incivility considering our position is much the same. SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 22:06, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Much of what you have done and said at the article is poor editing (there is no way the picture is going to be deleted, for example, with the license granted via OTRS). You are fairly new so this is understandable, but please be more careful and less slash-and-burning. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 22:52, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

I had no idea what OTRS was until after I nominated the image for deletion, you're right there. I don't see how the irrelevant edit war messages and condescending tone have anything to do with that though, it's hardly a constructive attitude and reeks of the typical hostility on Wikipedia which puts people off editing since the community here is completely cancerous. I'm done with editing that page and other controversial topics. Thanks. SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 23:28, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Notice of discretionary sanctions

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Jytdog (talk) 20:18, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Aerolíneas Argentinas recent changes

Regarding your edit summary for this [1] edit, yes, it is now, but it wasn't today in the morning when I reverted the changes as unsourced.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 23:18, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

@Jetstreamer:, I appologise, it wasn't supposed to be an aggressive revert - when I checked the source and it was there, so I changed it back. I also wanted to ask if you know where I might find the financial information for the company since what's on the page is four years out of date. Does the company release a yearly financial report? I see a lot of information about increasing passenger numbers and decreased subsidies, but not things like turnover. It would be good to update that kind of information on the page. SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 02:02, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Never mind about the revert, I know it was done in good faith. Regarding the financial information of the company, it should be found at the airline's website. However, key information is sometimes hard to find, or directly missing.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 13:07, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

CNR CKD8 & CDD3

Hi Segata, thank you for your message.

Yes, you are right, I didn't notice the CDD3 serial on the locomotive, but sure it looks identical to the CKD8. I also wanted to write something about the DMUs of the Belgrano Sur, but I'm well aware of the lack of information. I only have this article and this one, if you don't understand spanish let me know, I can help you.

Have a nice day.--BugWarp (talk) 00:26, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, SegataSanshiro1. 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)

Vulture capitalist Singer

Hi Segata, I saw your good work to make sure that Paul Singer is exposed as vulture capitalist. I tried to add this important detail in other articles too. But they blocked me. Can you help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by S2dHa Moo (talk • contribs) 18:19, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Listing of Template:Line P (BA)/Stations at templates for discussion

Template:Line P (BA)/Stations has been listed at templates for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 10:22, 24 December 2021 (UTC)