0
Hello, Josegacel29. The changes you’ve made in Article Cristiano Ronaldo are perfectly valid. However, they are inadequate to the model convention is handled by the respective style manual on football items. Moreover, direct pathway link does not imply benefits beyond a wasteof resources to make disambiguations links. The changes are not adequate simply because you will look, but must conform to the conventions already established de facto. Regards, Diego (dialogue) 20:46 12 Jan 2009 (UTC) I did not say that their changes were bad. I have done much less proprietary notices. I only said it must conform to the conventions (though not like). Common sense should be used when you bring benefits in exchange for the omission of any agreement / policy. However, this is not the case because as I said, is a waste of resources. For something linking through redirects invention. A greeting.Diego (dialogue) 20:54 12 Jan 2009 (UTC) Would you please discuss the changes at issue in the discussion of the article, outlining the benefits of your change, saving this type of comment. – BetoCG – saying 21:01 12 Jan 2009 (UTC) use has given the coffee is inadequate to redirect the discussion of the relevant article. In any case, I returned the contribution. Changes in the bonds are reversed. I ask that you remain calm and discuss why it is not appropriate (or is) doing so. Diego (dialogue) 21:16 12 Jan 2009 (UTC) As well Beto says further up, the discussion of the article is precisely for that. If talks with other users in a calm tone and arguing the changes proposed will discover that the only way they can stay in the article. A greeting. ENSAD! “Digamel n 21:42 12 Jan 2009 (UTC) I simply give general advice on ing articles from the label.Informal mediation may take time, I know from experience, so it is best avoided where possible. I know nothing of football, not the least interest me, sorry, so it would be best to seek help from other libraries. Either way, it is worth remembering that the wiki is in no hurry and do a large number of users willing to current articles, so the issue must always be full consensus on the discussion page. Greetings. ENSAD! “Digamel n 21:55 12 Jan 2009 (UTC) Because it is for the discussion of the article … that’s just what you should do from the beginning, ask the opinion of others and reach consensus to touch the item. I hope there and please attend the information put forward and follow the proper channels. Netito777 21:52 12 Jan 2009 (UTC) Worst you put me, unless they understand technique Pay attention to football and Leete Netito good policies give you the link, that these things are usually well-studied techniques. A greeting.ENSAD! “Digamel n 22:11 12 Jan 2009 (UTC)
