User talk:GiordanoBishop

Page Editing

Hi everyone,

I have created this page with the person who the page is about so therefore no information needs to be edited because it is 100% accurate. I will always undo your edits back to the original text because all the information is correct.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GiordanoBishop (talk • contribs) 18:17, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. However, please remember that editors do not own articles and should respect the work of their fellow contributors on Frank Buglioni. If you create or edit an article, remember that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Please also remember to remain Civil when interacting with other editors as your comments to GB fan on his talk page we not.

If you have any questions feel free to leave a message below and or drop me a line on my talk page. Regards MisterShiney ✉ 19:36, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Frank Buglioni. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. GB fan 20:13, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

fine but let me tell you this, i will know straightaway if any information you add on isnt true. --GiordanoBishop (talk) 00:13, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

If any information gets added to the article that isn't true, you can revert it without any problems. If you disagree with any of the changes I have made, please discuss them on the talk page and explain why the changes are wrong. GB fan 00:25, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Buglioni 2013.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Buglioni 2013.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. – Wdchk (talk) 21:30, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Removal of maintenance templates

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Frank Buglioni, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of these templates has been reverted. Since you are affiliated with the subject of the article, it would be better to wait for neutral editors to decide when these templates may be removed. You might find it useful to read WP:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Thank you. – Wdchk (talk) 22:14, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Professional Career Section

Hi guys,

I have listened to your comments and decided to do intensive research to find sources that backs up the text, however can you please help me with the "Professional Career" section, you have asked me to include more citations but how can i prove this? Can a reference be BoxRec which has all his results and method of his results?

Thanks --GiordanoBishop (talk) 17:14, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Buglioni Walk in.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Buglioni Walk in.jpg, which you've attributed to http://frankbuglioni.co.uk/media/. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Wdchk (talk) 01:14, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, GiordanoBishop. I added the above notice about the image currently used in the article Frank Buglioni, but I just wanted to emphasize that this information is very worthwhile reading, and it is not a case of someone trying to make it unnecessarily difficult for you to add an image to the article. I am with you in believing that a good quality, appropriately-licensed photo would be a great thing to have in that article. The fact is, however, that the image has been previously published on the web with a copyright notice "© Frank Buglioni 2013". This means that Wikipedia must obtain definite confirmation from the copyright holder that he releases the image under a free license. Unfortunately, your own confirmation as uploader of the image is not sufficient. This is nothing personal against you: we have to be careful, because very often when an uploader copies an image from the web and claims it as their own work, they are not authorized to do so.

In this case, if you are representing the copyright holder, you can go through the steps documented above, and this image can be used on Wikipedia. The copyright holder should be aware that releasing this image under a free license will mean it can be used by anybody, for any purpose, subject to the terms of the license. Once the image is issued under a free license, that license cannot be revoked.

Of course, if you are the photographer, you also have the option of uploading a new photo that has never been published elsewhere under copyright. That would work just fine.

I hope this helps, and please follow the links above for more authoritative information. – Wdchk (talk) 01:14, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Frank Buglioni, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George Groves (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:09, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

yes im sorry about that, i will amend that link immediately

thanks

--GiordanoBishop (talk) 11:20, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Continued removal of maintenance templates

Please stop. Continuing to remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia without resolving the problem that the template refers to, may be considered disruptive editing. Further edits of this type may result in your account being blocked from editing. GB fan 17:10, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you remove the maintenance templates from Wikipedia articles without resolving the problem that the template refers to, as you did at Frank Buglioni, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. – Wdchk (talk) 02:52, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

THERE IS NOTHING TO EDIT - GiordanoBishop — Preceding undated comment added 19:31, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

You are entitled to your opinion, but clearly other editors feel differently about this article. I really don't want to come across as condescending, but two inescapable facts come into play here: (1) you are affiliated with the subject of the article, and (2) you have little or no experience of contributing to articles other than this one. So you are not a neutral judge of the article's quality, and you don't necessarily have the same benchmark to measure it against as other editors do. I'm sure we can all agree that the desired end result is an article that is up to Wikipedia's standards. So the best way to achieve that is to leave those tags there to attract the attention of other editors. It may take some time, and in the meantime I want to stress that being tagged does not put this article on some naughty list – all we're saying is it needs improvement, just like hundreds of thousands of other articles. – Wdchk (talk) 04:52, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Frank Buglioni, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages O2 and Excel. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:57, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, GiordanoBishop. 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)