visita Fry1989

Notificación de borrado rápido en «Señales de tráfico en Chile»Editar

Hola, Fry1989. Se ha revisado la página «Señales de tráfico en Chile» y esta cumple con los criterios de borrado rápido, por ende se ha marcado con la plantilla {{Destruir}} para que sea eliminado de inmediato por un bibliotecario. A1.1: El artículo solo contiene enlaces externos, listas innecesarias o una galería de imágenes sin texto.

Por favor, revisa la política de borrado y lo que Wikipedia no es; solo si crees que el artículo en cuestión no se ajusta a lo descrito ahí, expón tus argumentos en mi página de discusión, o al bibliotecario que eliminó el artículo. Por favor, menciona de qué artículo debatiremos enlazándolo con corchetes dobles así [[ejemplo]] y recuerda que debes firmar todo mensaje que dejas en una discusión. Para hacerlo, solo añade ~~~~ al final de tu mensaje, se convertirá en tu firma al grabar la página. Si la página la creaste con la finalidad de hacer pruebas, por favor, utiliza la Zona de pruebas.

Gracias por tu comprensión. --Jorge Barrios (discusión) 22:34 15 dic 2012 (UTC)

I don't speak Spanish well, but I want a reason why my article should be deleted, Other articles like this exist for the signs of Spain like Señales de Advertencia de Peligro and Anexo:Señales de Tráfico de Indicación de España, what's wrong with mine from Chile? My files are sourced to the Government of Chile, they're real and valid. On English Wikipedia we have many articles of countries signs, what's wrong with it on the Spanish Wikipedia? Fry1989 (discusión) 22:38 15 dic 2012 (UTC)
La razón por la que propongo el borrado de la página está bien clara en la plantilla: A1.1: Solo contiene enlaces externos, listas innecesarias o galería de imágenes sin texto. Ver lo que Wikipedia no es. Además, carece de referencias (al menos con el formato adecuado). Saludos. Jorge Barrios (discusión) 18:18 16 dic 2012 (UTC)

Se ha abierto una consulta de borrado para Señales de tráfico en ChileEditar

Hola, Fry1989. Se ha abierto una consulta de borrado para un artículo en el que has colaborado, Señales de tráfico en Chile. Una consulta de borrado es un proceso que se inicia para buscar la opinión de más wikipedistas para dirimir el futuro de un artículo. Si estás interesado en participar de la discusión, deja tus comentarios en Wikipedia:Consultas de borrado/Señales de tráfico en Chile. Gracias, Jorge Barrios (discusión) 01:29 17 dic 2012 (UTC)

HELLO!!!!!!Editar

HI FRY!!!!! how are you!!!!! wehave long time without talking!!!! tell me how are you? the article about de traffic signals of chile did not survived..... thats bad...

Well Fry i need your help. Im working improving the article of the dominican flag in the spanish wikipedia. I made five SVG drawings xplainig how the dominican flag must be used. but there is one problem whith the galery... the word luto in the other section is damaged by the galery, how can i fix it?

It looks ok to me, my friend. Fry1989 (discusión) 17:16 2 jun 2013 (UTC)

Re: File:Coat of Arms of Pope Callixtus III.svgEditar

I saw it, but see this image: here, you can see the coat of arms of the pope and the coat of arms of his nephew, Rodrigo Borja (late pope Alexander VI). Where is the tiara in the Ingeram codex image? Also the bull looks like a goat. Best regards, --Echando una mano 05:29 3 nov 2013 (UTC)

The other image does not have a proper source. Fry1989 (discusión) 18:05 3 nov 2013 (UTC)

Aviso de «Wikipedia:Política de bots»Editar

Hola. Me gustaría informarte de que, por medio del bot Fry1989 (disc. · contr. · bloq.), podrías estar incumpliendo los siguientes requisitos de la política titulada «Wikipedia:Política de bots»:

  • R1: Crear y utilizar una cuenta propia para llevar a cabo las ediciones, como paso previo y fundamental. El nombre del bot deberá respetar «Wikipedia:Nombres de usuario», y es aconsejable que contenga la partícula «bot» en cualquier combinación de mayúsculas o minúsculas. Opcionalmente, la página de discusión del bot podrá ser redirigida a la de su operador, si este así lo desea.
  • R5: Tener una autorización otorgada por la comunidad en «Wikipedia:Bot/Autorizaciones».
  • R7: Si un bot no posee flag, nunca deberá exceder la frecuencia de 5 ediciones por minuto —o lo que es lo mismo, deberá ser ejecutado con un tiempo de espera entre ediciones de al menos 12 segundos—. En caso contrario, podrá ser bloqueado (detenido) indefinidamente por un bibliotecario, especialmente si dificulta el trabajo de los usuarios que revisen los cambios recientes. Los bots que posean flag no tendrán ninguna limitación de frecuencia.
  • R9: Los controladores se responsabilizan de que las tareas que sus bots lleven a cabo hayan sido aprobadas y autorizadas por la comunidad o, en su defecto, de que no sean propensas a generar polémica, y tengan una utilidad clara y positiva para la enciclopedia. En caso contrario, se podrían tomar medidas como la desautorización y la retirada del flag —si se posee—, o incluso el bloqueo del bot o de su controlador, en casos más puntuales.

Si es posible, me encantaría que pudieras seguir editando con tu bot en este proyecto, tratando de solucionar estas cuestiones relativas al mismo. Muchas gracias por tu interés en mejorar Wikipedia con un bot, y buena suerte en tus ediciones.--Mi Guillén   (mensajes) 13:59 14 abr 2014 (UTC)

The bot I am using is indiscriminate (it does not ignore talk pages or user pages) and therefore it may some times replace images on pages where that is not desired, however I am using this bot within the rules of the project and it is no different than the use of Commons:Delinker for the same purposes. I would like to have an explanation for you why you have reverted this bot's replacements of File:Flag of the Isle of Man.svg with File:Flag of the Isle of Mann.svg? File:Flag of the Isle of Man.svg was recently changed on Commons and that change is under dispute, therefore I have the support on Commons to replace it with the previous version of the image which is File:Flag of the Isle of Mann.svg. Do not revert if you do not have a proper reason to, you just revert anything I do because you and I do not trust each other. Fry1989 (discusión) 17:09 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Fry1989! Miguillen (disc. · contr. · bloq.) has already pointed out the issues with your bot (R1, R5, R7 and R9). I suggest you to invest some time into google-translating those 4 points of the BOT policy of Spanish Wikipedia. Then, if you can't get a grasp of it I promise to translate it for you as best as I can. Cheers.--Asqueladd (En arameo no, que me enamoro) 17:22 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
Mi Guillén opposes my use of this bot not for any valid reason but because they do not trust me, we have a previous history of disagreement with each other. This is a Commons bot that was specifically designed for the purpose I am using it, it was designed by a Commons administrator, I have their permission to use it this way, I have reasons for why I am replacing certain images, and Mi Guillén is reverting these replacements without a proper reasoning as I have explained above. It is them who is causing a problem, reverting whatever I do because they do not like it or do not trust me. Fry1989 (discusión) 17:27 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
No tienes autorización para usar ningún procedimiento de edición automático en la Wikipedia en español y aunque fuera la edición legítima de lo cual solo me estás citando un caso muy puntual no puede llevarlo a cabo de acuerdo a las normas. El procedimiento es revertir dichos cambios y advertir al usuario. Tenga en cuenta que has sustituido además de imágenes en páginas de discusión imagens de galería de creaciones de usuarios, y armoriales del Taller de Heráldica y Vexilología cuyos colores están consensuados. CommonsDelinker tiene flag de bot aunque solo está autorizado a reemplazar cuando se ha cambiado el nombre del archivo o este a sido borrado. Saludos.--Mi Guillén   (mensajes) 17:33 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
Commons Delinker replaces images on this project all the time, for many different reasons not limited to just files that have been renamed or deleted. It often replaces images with different ones, and I do not see you complaining about that. You are only complaining about this bot because I am using it and you do not trust me. Fry1989 (discusión) 17:35 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
  • R1: The first step is to create an own account to carry out these kind of editions. The bot name will observe the username policy. It is also recommendable to insert the particle 'bot' in whatever lower-upper case combination you chose. Aditionally you have the option to redirect its talk page to your own.
  • R5: Bot accounts require an authorization delivered by the community.
  • R7: When the bot does not have a "flag", it can never exceed the 5 edits per min rate (12 seconds between edits). Otherwise, the bot account could be blocked indefinitely by a sysop, particularly if the bot account gives trouble to the recent changes patrollers. In the other hand, it should be noted that flagged bot accounts don't have a rate limit.
  • R9: Bot operators take charge of the authorization by the community of editions carried out by their bots. Otherwise, bot edits should not be controversial. If BOT edits don't meet those conditions, measures could be taken, such as flag removal (if already owned), or even the block of the bot account or the operator.--Asqueladd (En arameo no, que me enamoro) 17:39 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
And of course, I suggest you to remain calm and presume good faith. Cheers.--Asqueladd (En arameo no, que me enamoro) 17:50 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
CommonDelinker have a flag of bot and use a user account of bot so you can perform automatic editions. You are not authorized. --Mi Guillén   (mensajes) 17:59 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
Asqueladd, how am I supposed to assume good faith when Mi Guillén is not assuming good faith in me? The two of us have had serious disagreements on several differerent projects, Mi Guillén has called me insane, a liar, an abuser, and various other attacks. Mi Guillén reverts me wherever I go if they do not like my edits, they have tried to get me blocked, they have edit warred, they have reverted other users who also make the same edit. Mi Guillén is not doing this in good faith. As for the replacement of File:Flag of the Isle of Man.svg with File:Flag of the Isle of Mann.svg, that is not a controversial replacement under R9, I have explained why that replacement is being done and I have the permission on Commons to do so. Why is Mi Guillén reverting it? They don't even have a reason, they're just reverting it because I am the user who put the replacement through the bot. If it was any other user, Mi Guillén wouldn't even care. Fry1989 (discusión) 18:08 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia Commons is a proyect and Spanish Wikipedia other proyect an authorization in Commons is not valid in other projects.Each project has its own norms.--Mi Guillén   (mensajes) 18:48 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
Unless you can explain what is controversial about replacing File:Flag of the Isle of Man.svg with File:Flag of the Isle of Mann.svg, do not undo the replacement! Reverting without an explanation is not valid. Fry1989 (discusión) 18:58 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
Do not bring the topic of your site. Is a case that you can undo without using any automatic procedure and nobody will reverse if you do manually unless one disagrees that it is not my case.--Mi Guillén   (mensajes) 19:20 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
So you have no reason to revert the replacement? That's what I thought. Don't revert things if you do not have a reason or do not understand why it was replaced. Fry1989 (discusión) 19:34 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
Yo hablo sobre esa imagen File:Flag of the Isle of Man.svg en la que yo no te he revertido. En los otros casos si hay controversia y si no intentas llegar a un consenso no debes revertir. --Mi Guillén   (mensajes) 19:40 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
There is no controversy with File:Flag of the Isle of Mann.svg, and you just said if I can do it myself you won't have a problem. Make up your mind!
No me vuelvas loco. Yo solo digo que esa imagen no tiene nada que ver con el asunto. El escudo del rey de España y el del principe de Asturias si está establecido por consenso y los colores está consensuados por el Taller de heráldica y vexilología. --Mi Guillén   (mensajes) 19:44 14 abr 2014 (UTC)

This don't is File:Flag of the Isle of Mann.svg [1]. --Mi Guillén   (mensajes) 19:48 14 abr 2014 (UTC)

And you don't have a reason to revert the coat of arms either, other than because you "don't like it". Fry1989 (discusión) 19:49 14 abr 2014 (UTC)

You have carried out mass unflagged editions with your bot account (which it is not a proper bot account either: see R1). Apparently quite a number of them are wrong and/or controversial. As Miguillen has already told you, it is not the job of anyone (if detected anormal behaviour) to discern if one or two of them are right. I mean, a number of rightdoings does not mend the wrongdoings of your bot account. If you re-revert somes edits manually, and it is right to do so, nobody will re-re-revert you again. Anyway, you must ask for a flagged bot account in this wikipedia (here «Wikipedia:Bot/Autorizaciones»). It has nothing to do with Commons or whatsoever.--Asqueladd (En arameo no, que me enamoro) 19:59 14 abr 2014 (UTC)

If replacing the flag manually is fine, then why am I being reported for vandalism??? Fry1989 (discusión) 20:01 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
I am not aware of the details. Maybe 'cause you have used an unauthorized bot account involved with disrupting editions? I dunno, that's a wild guess.--Asqueladd (En arameo no, que me enamoro) 20:11 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
Don't be ridiculous. If you can not show any actual vandalism I have done, or any disruption I have done, and if I had made the edit manually myself you wouldn't have any problem with it, you can't call it vandalism just because I used a bot instead. Fry1989 (discusión) 20:13 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
I did not report the case. But I think these kind of editions should be thoroughly stopped. You should comply to the rules. What I see in the Isle of Man flag case is your criteria being reverted in Commons in the main file and then you created an alternative file according to your point of view. Good. It's a thing of Commons. But imposing that personal criteria with an unflagged bot account in this wikipedia is bad (it might sound like a POV warrior). If this is the selected good edition, I prepare for the worse with the wrong editions. Massive changes in wikipedia require a consensus. Be bold is a principle. But it's not valid with bot editions, because such changes are, in essence, disruptive. Your next step should be acknowledge the fact that you can't come here and impose your personal likings with the mentioned unflagged bot account. Vandalism or not.--Asqueladd (En arameo no, que me enamoro) 20:35 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
No, I uploaded the original version of the file because the change that was made to it is disputed and currently under discussion. Because of that, I am restoring the original image on Wikipedia projects until the discussion has been closed with a resolution. I'm not doing it to force my point of view. So don't try and preach to me about consensus, I already know about that. I also know that if you revert another user's edit, you are supposed to give a reason for it, such as the edit was a mistake or it was a bad edit. You do not just blindly revert. You also do not use bots as an excuse to revert the edit when you wouldn't have reverted it if the user had made it manually. You need a real reason to revert edits, not easy excuses. Fry1989 (discusión) 20:44 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
I have nothing more to tell you. I have already told you why your behaviour was wrong in every way imaginable and the reason behind the reversions. You don't like the rules here or you don't undestand them. And despite that you have a thingy for speaking loudly. Fine, your customs. A sysop will take care of this case. Have a nice day!--Asqueladd (En arameo no, que me enamoro) 20:52 14 abr 2014 (UTC)
I understand the rules fine, what I disagree with is the hypocritical application of them. When I don't follow them I'm a vandal, when others don't follow them it's perfectly fine. When you revert someone, you are supposed to give a reason why. Fry1989 (discusión) 21:03 14 abr 2014 (UTC)

Escudo del Rey de España (Plantilla:Familia real española)Editar

 
Correcto con el blasón de Borbón-Anjou corregido
 
Incorrecto heráldicamente

Hola! Fry1989, primero que todo estoy de acuerdo contigo en usar los escudos con heráldica moderna. Solo que en la plantilla de la Familia real española, insertaste uno incorrecto heráldicamente, te dejo el los archivos adjuntados para que los veas.

--Camilo I (discusión) 20:06 14 abr 2014 (UTC)

File:Coat of Arms of Spanish Monarch.svg is wrong according to traditional heraldic rules, but it is not the incorrect image because that is how the Spanish Royal Family uses it. But I am not replacing File:File-Coat of Arms of Spanish Monarch (corrections of heraldist requests).svg with File:Coat of Arms of Spanish Monarch.svg, I was replacing File:Escudo de armas de Juan Carlos I de España.svg with File:Coat of Arms of Spanish Monarch.svg. That was reverted by Miguillen without any explanation, and now they are reporting me for vandalism. Fry1989 (discusión) 20:12 14 abr 2014 (UTC)

Re: RevisiónEditar

Hola: La razón (que ya conoces) es que no muestras ninguna fuente para hacer tales modificaciones. Echa un vistazo aquí, donde se indica claramente la colocación del Trisquelion en la bandera. Y antes de modificar, busca consensos. Un saludo. --Echando una mano 22:34 6 jun 2014 (UTC)

(en inglés)Hello: The reason (and you know it) is that you don't show any source to make those modifications. Take a look here, where you can see the location of the Trisquelion in the flag. And before modifying, search consensus. Greetings. --Echando una mano 22:34 6 jun 2014 (UTC)

Emblema Armada EspañolaEditar

En el emblema oficial de la Armada, la corona no tiene ese tamaño; es más grande. Sólo tenéis que consultar la colección de reglamentos de la Armada. Si se trata de ser fiel, el tamaño es otro. Adjunto un enlace donde se recoge el reglamento de divisas y distintivos de la Armada http://www.coleccionesmilitares.com/emblemas/arm/darm.htm. Saludos.Wallace CT (discusión) 15:45 11 nov 2014 (UTC)

This is the second time you have uploaded a PNG to replace the SVG because you think there is a problem with it. All you need to do is request someone to change the SVG to your specifications. You don't need to replace the SVG with an inferior-format PNG. Fry1989 (discusión) 17:31 11 nov 2014 (UTC)

Flag of Venezuelan StateEditar

jajaja, are you crazy or what??? is not personal. The flag uploaded by me was true and was right, your flag was false and wrong. That wasn´t the reason to change it, the real reason is because the current file of the user Zscout370 is better that yours, but is false too. The spikes of the coat of arms must be 24, and has 22. The cornucopias are wrong too. False information again.--Ilianovich1986 (discusión) 22:42 10 abr 2016 (UTC)

I am very sorry, i didn't read fine. I was thinking you wrote "your image is false", i didn´t read "your image is false svg" . But the coat of arms still is wrong--Ilianovich1986 (discusión) 00:59 11 abr 2016 (UTC)

Roundel of RuAFEditar

The roundel you have have put in the Spanish page of Russian Air Force forcé is absolutely outdated. The roundel with blue was a nonsense of the chief Aleksandr Zelin, between 2010 and 2013, that It was abolished by Viktor Bondarev (of course)

Before to change something better you use the talk page. There are spanish people working in this page. I invite you to work on the English-language page of the RuAF, which is totally obsolete. You can copy and translate the Spanish page and also the russian page of the RuAF using this source in the talk page:

@AMCXXL:, I'm sorry but that isn't the case. As I discussed on the English Wikipedia, the tri-colour roundel was supposedly retired in 2013, but is still in wide use. Please see the official website of the Russia Air Force. Not only does the tri-colour roundel appear as the primary version on top of the former red star, if we look through the photo gallery, there are photos taken as recently as a few months ago with the tri-colour roundel on aircraft. 4 years is more than long enough to change a website, and certainly a long enough time period to re-paint aircraft with the correct markings. Fry1989 (discusión) 18:29 1 dic 2017 (UTC)
@AMCXXL:, will you respond? Fry1989 (discusión) 18:31 12 dic 2017 (UTC)


I already answered, the question is if you read the page of the Russian Air Force, Spanish version or Russian versión. Apparently not.

I also can see the roundel of the Tsarist Empire in the web of the press service of the Armed Forces. This means is still in use? of course not

There are planes even with roundel of Aeroflot with the sickle and hammer on the fuselaje in the case of transport planes A plane can go to repair plant each 8-10 tears in active service, or can be grounded for 20 years in reserve


The tricolor roundel was abolished by the Minister of Defense Sergei Shoigu in January 2013. This is a fact and have not discussion. You would be better informed, but anyway , in both pages, russian and spanish there are references of this fact https://www.aex.ru/news/2013/1/25/102119/

The first you need to understand is that Wikipedia is a enciclopedy, you cannot change nothing based on your beliefs or your opinions. In addition there are already people working in the Spanish pages and if you believe that there is something that should be modified with specific, realiable and verificable data, then the first thing you have to do is ask in the discussion page of the articles before to change nothing. In other case you could be reported and your account locked temporarily or permanently. If you are doctor, physicist, mathematician or historian I invite you to write about your field in the Wikipedia of your country --AMCXXL (discusión) 02:42 13 dic 2017 (UTC)