|
Thank you.
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's
neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at
Talk:2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Please refrain from making such obviously inflammatory and POV remarks.
BUZZLIGHTYEAR99 (
talk) 10:52, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in Uyghurs, Uyghur genocide, or topics that are related to Uyghurs or Uyghur genocide. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose discretionary sanctions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. |
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in Eastern Europe or the Balkans. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{
Ds/aware}}
on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the
guidance on discretionary sanctions and the
Arbitration Committee's decision
here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
— Red-tailed hawk (nest) 17:45, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Euglenos sandara, I would like to share with you this nice song that I have found. Here is the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ot_L_P-_CGw. - 🇺🇦Слава🇺🇦Україні🇺🇦Героям🇺🇦Слава🇺🇦( talk)🇺🇦 22:20, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
User:Euglenos sandara, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for
deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Euglenos sandara and please be sure to
sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of
User:Euglenos sandara during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. —
Prodraxis {
talk •
contribs} (she/her) 02:24, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —
Prodraxis {
talk •
contribs} (she/her) 02:45, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Lourdes 06:21, 12 August 2023 (UTC)Euglenos sandara ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I do not post my personal beliefs on any Wikipedia articles aside from my own userpage. The objectivity of my contributions to this project is independent of my personal beliefs. What I conveyed there did not indicate an intention to disseminate my personal beliefs to others; rather, it asserted my right to maintain my individual viewpoints. I am open to conceding not posting my personal beliefs on my userpage, but I am unwilling to alter my personal opinions merely due to potential offense by certain individuals.
The specific targeting of me as a 'genocide-denialist racist' by the majority of participants in the MfD process is unjust, as I do not promote racial superiority or deny any genocides. If you are confused about my beliefs, kindly request additional information from me instead of resorting to outdated 'Nazi' clichés.
Nowhere on my userpage have I stated explicitly that I believe in racial superiority of any sort. The one cherry-pick you are particularly fixated on, 'preventing miscegenation by federal law,' isn't inherently racist in any way. My perspective is that, in an ideal state, local genetic pools should remain unaffected by non-local pools. Racism, however, involves prejudice and discrimination against individuals based on their membership in a specific racial group. Nowhere in my statement have I singled out or targeted a particular race or endorsed any racial superiority.
As a result, my updated philosophical beliefs on Landian Accelerationism and Universal Antinatalism, which were referred to by users User:Prodraxis and User:Snow_Rise as another form of racism or genocide denial, clearly stem from personal ignorance on the topic. Neither Orthodox Landianism nor Antinatalism advocates for any form of racism or genocide. I'm not willing to engage in further debate on this matter, as it's becoming increasingly absurd.
Regarding the matter of the Uyghur genocide, there is an ongoing discussion on the talk page. I am not denying the possibility of human rights atrocities in Xinjiang; instead, I am advocating for a more comprehensive evaluation of the matter. Specifically, I am seeking a more thorough assessment involving citing more non-Western sources. It is important to consider that there are sources explicitly denying the occurrence of a genocide, which currently lacks substantial representation, potentially contributing to a biased narrative. How is it even a definite reason for imposing a block?
Having addressed the majority of the criticisms in my response, I request a reevaluation of my case with fairness and impartiality. I am prepared to provide additional clarifications if they are deemed necessary.
Euglenos sandara ( talk) 15:58, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I see no cause here to remove the block, and furthermore think that Wikipedia is better off with you blocked. Maybe another admin will see it differently. 331dot ( talk) 23:32, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Euglenos sandara ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
This serves as my second appeal. I will try to keep it brief to ensure the clarity of my concessions. In my original appeal, I committed to abstain from sharing my contentious viewpoints on my userpage or anywhere on Wikipedia for the benefit of all parties. I am open to receiving any critique and am prepared to accept additional compromises, should they be deemed necessary. I respectfully request a reevaluation of my appeal from an unbiased standpoint.
Based on my understanding, the primary reason for this block was my posting of personal beliefs on my userpage that offended some of the users. Now that I understand the potential divisiveness of such content and its potential to create issues for other users, I am committed to refraining from posting such beliefs, both on my userpage and anywhere else.
While my interests on Wikipedia are quite extensive, my primary focus revolves around theoretical sciences and philosophy. However, in practice, I mostly contribute to articles related to Baltic countries and their history, with a special emphasis on Yotvingia-related topics.
Update: As noted in the ANI thread, an additional reason for my block was my interactions with users who were in favor of the MfD. I did indeed accuse some users of supporting the allegations due to personal bias. In my perspective, certain comments seemed to focus on matters that, in my view, didn't warrant a block, but rather reflected their personal offense towards my openly expressed opinions on my userpage. While I recognize that my viewpoints aren't widely shared, I believe that the entire process should have maintained the same level of transparency as observed in other cases. Furthermore, I recognize that certain comments I made could have been perceived as rude by the majority of participants. This includes my remarks about 'majority privilege' and referring to the MfD participants as 'likeminded justice warriors'. It is worth noting that these comments did not accurately represent my personal attitude or an intention to provoke any users. Instead, they were a manifestation of my frustration regarding the absence of impartial discourse on the subject matter by other users. Considering the additional criticism regarding the insensitivity of my responses, I intend to make an effort to ensure that my comments are clear and straightforward for the majority moving forward.
Decline reason:
With language such as "I believe that the entire process should have maintained the same level of transparency as observed in other cases." and "could have been perceived as rude" gives me the impression that they are apoligising for how others feel, rather than apoligising for their behaviour. I am concerned that the user plans to "ensure that my comments are clear and straightforward for the majority moving forward." This does not address how they will avoid WP:BATTLEGROUND behaviour. Z1720 ( talk) 15:05, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Euglenos sandara ( talk) 15:32, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Euglenos sandara, please outline why the edits that led to this block were wrong, what you will do in the future to avoid these mistakes again, and which specific articles do you intend to edit if unblocked. Z1720 ( talk) 01:42, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Euglenos sandara ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
This marks my third appeal, and I genuinely wish it to be my last. The arguments I presented in my prior appeals remain unchanged. For the sake of clarity, I won't reiterate everything but will proceed from the point I raised in my second appeal. In the update, I was never apologising for how others feel. I apologize for the ambiguity of my message; it has never been my strong suit. The thing I wanted to convey is that I acknowledge the potential rudeness of my comments, and by confirming to being more careful with language was my way of aplogizing and the acknowledgement not to make the same mistake. If you'd like my message to be paraphrased in an exceptionally clear manner regarding how I will avoid WP:BATTLEGROUND behavior, here you go: I will engage with others in a civil, composed, and cooperative manner. I will refrain from using insults, harassment, or intimidation when disagreeing with someone. Instead, I will approach the situation thoughtfully and engage in respectful discussions. Even if another user acts uncivilly, uncooperatively, or resorts to insults or intimidation, I will not use that as an excuse to respond in a similar manner. I will focus solely on addressing the factual aspects presented and will disregard inappropriate comments or the user altogether. If needed, I will kindly point out my perception that certain comments may be seen as uncivil, and emphasize my intention to move forward and concentrate on the topic at hand. If you feel that the message is insufficient or if you believe that further clarification is necessary, I would appreciate any suggestions you might have. My goal is to ensure that my message is easily understood by anyone reviewing the appeal. Euglenos sandara ( talk) 16:00, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Accept reason:
Euglenos, thank you for your message. I am going on a good faith assumption and hope that you keep your word on this. Wikipedia is supposed to be a project where contributors can interact productively (and in peace, for the lack of a better word). What Wikipedia is NOT, is something you should take time to read. This is not a place where one has limitless freedom of expression (this is not the free world space, this is a regulated, protected, deeply curated community, which is not a democracy; not saying this negatively, but to impress the point that we have to go strictly by the rules, and the civil nature of inclusivity). That said, I hope you've understood our one-minded effort to ensure happy interactions between fellow editors. Thank you for not crossing this line again. Best, Lourdes 04:53, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:52, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Template:TLE has been
nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the entry on the Templates for discussion page. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 14:06, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
|
Thank you.
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's
neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at
Talk:2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Please refrain from making such obviously inflammatory and POV remarks.
BUZZLIGHTYEAR99 (
talk) 10:52, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in Uyghurs, Uyghur genocide, or topics that are related to Uyghurs or Uyghur genocide. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose discretionary sanctions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. |
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in Eastern Europe or the Balkans. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{
Ds/aware}}
on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the
guidance on discretionary sanctions and the
Arbitration Committee's decision
here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
— Red-tailed hawk (nest) 17:45, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Euglenos sandara, I would like to share with you this nice song that I have found. Here is the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ot_L_P-_CGw. - 🇺🇦Слава🇺🇦Україні🇺🇦Героям🇺🇦Слава🇺🇦( talk)🇺🇦 22:20, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
User:Euglenos sandara, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for
deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Euglenos sandara and please be sure to
sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of
User:Euglenos sandara during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. —
Prodraxis {
talk •
contribs} (she/her) 02:24, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —
Prodraxis {
talk •
contribs} (she/her) 02:45, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Lourdes 06:21, 12 August 2023 (UTC)Euglenos sandara ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I do not post my personal beliefs on any Wikipedia articles aside from my own userpage. The objectivity of my contributions to this project is independent of my personal beliefs. What I conveyed there did not indicate an intention to disseminate my personal beliefs to others; rather, it asserted my right to maintain my individual viewpoints. I am open to conceding not posting my personal beliefs on my userpage, but I am unwilling to alter my personal opinions merely due to potential offense by certain individuals.
The specific targeting of me as a 'genocide-denialist racist' by the majority of participants in the MfD process is unjust, as I do not promote racial superiority or deny any genocides. If you are confused about my beliefs, kindly request additional information from me instead of resorting to outdated 'Nazi' clichés.
Nowhere on my userpage have I stated explicitly that I believe in racial superiority of any sort. The one cherry-pick you are particularly fixated on, 'preventing miscegenation by federal law,' isn't inherently racist in any way. My perspective is that, in an ideal state, local genetic pools should remain unaffected by non-local pools. Racism, however, involves prejudice and discrimination against individuals based on their membership in a specific racial group. Nowhere in my statement have I singled out or targeted a particular race or endorsed any racial superiority.
As a result, my updated philosophical beliefs on Landian Accelerationism and Universal Antinatalism, which were referred to by users User:Prodraxis and User:Snow_Rise as another form of racism or genocide denial, clearly stem from personal ignorance on the topic. Neither Orthodox Landianism nor Antinatalism advocates for any form of racism or genocide. I'm not willing to engage in further debate on this matter, as it's becoming increasingly absurd.
Regarding the matter of the Uyghur genocide, there is an ongoing discussion on the talk page. I am not denying the possibility of human rights atrocities in Xinjiang; instead, I am advocating for a more comprehensive evaluation of the matter. Specifically, I am seeking a more thorough assessment involving citing more non-Western sources. It is important to consider that there are sources explicitly denying the occurrence of a genocide, which currently lacks substantial representation, potentially contributing to a biased narrative. How is it even a definite reason for imposing a block?
Having addressed the majority of the criticisms in my response, I request a reevaluation of my case with fairness and impartiality. I am prepared to provide additional clarifications if they are deemed necessary.
Euglenos sandara ( talk) 15:58, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I see no cause here to remove the block, and furthermore think that Wikipedia is better off with you blocked. Maybe another admin will see it differently. 331dot ( talk) 23:32, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Euglenos sandara ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
This serves as my second appeal. I will try to keep it brief to ensure the clarity of my concessions. In my original appeal, I committed to abstain from sharing my contentious viewpoints on my userpage or anywhere on Wikipedia for the benefit of all parties. I am open to receiving any critique and am prepared to accept additional compromises, should they be deemed necessary. I respectfully request a reevaluation of my appeal from an unbiased standpoint.
Based on my understanding, the primary reason for this block was my posting of personal beliefs on my userpage that offended some of the users. Now that I understand the potential divisiveness of such content and its potential to create issues for other users, I am committed to refraining from posting such beliefs, both on my userpage and anywhere else.
While my interests on Wikipedia are quite extensive, my primary focus revolves around theoretical sciences and philosophy. However, in practice, I mostly contribute to articles related to Baltic countries and their history, with a special emphasis on Yotvingia-related topics.
Update: As noted in the ANI thread, an additional reason for my block was my interactions with users who were in favor of the MfD. I did indeed accuse some users of supporting the allegations due to personal bias. In my perspective, certain comments seemed to focus on matters that, in my view, didn't warrant a block, but rather reflected their personal offense towards my openly expressed opinions on my userpage. While I recognize that my viewpoints aren't widely shared, I believe that the entire process should have maintained the same level of transparency as observed in other cases. Furthermore, I recognize that certain comments I made could have been perceived as rude by the majority of participants. This includes my remarks about 'majority privilege' and referring to the MfD participants as 'likeminded justice warriors'. It is worth noting that these comments did not accurately represent my personal attitude or an intention to provoke any users. Instead, they were a manifestation of my frustration regarding the absence of impartial discourse on the subject matter by other users. Considering the additional criticism regarding the insensitivity of my responses, I intend to make an effort to ensure that my comments are clear and straightforward for the majority moving forward.
Decline reason:
With language such as "I believe that the entire process should have maintained the same level of transparency as observed in other cases." and "could have been perceived as rude" gives me the impression that they are apoligising for how others feel, rather than apoligising for their behaviour. I am concerned that the user plans to "ensure that my comments are clear and straightforward for the majority moving forward." This does not address how they will avoid WP:BATTLEGROUND behaviour. Z1720 ( talk) 15:05, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Euglenos sandara ( talk) 15:32, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Euglenos sandara, please outline why the edits that led to this block were wrong, what you will do in the future to avoid these mistakes again, and which specific articles do you intend to edit if unblocked. Z1720 ( talk) 01:42, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Euglenos sandara ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
This marks my third appeal, and I genuinely wish it to be my last. The arguments I presented in my prior appeals remain unchanged. For the sake of clarity, I won't reiterate everything but will proceed from the point I raised in my second appeal. In the update, I was never apologising for how others feel. I apologize for the ambiguity of my message; it has never been my strong suit. The thing I wanted to convey is that I acknowledge the potential rudeness of my comments, and by confirming to being more careful with language was my way of aplogizing and the acknowledgement not to make the same mistake. If you'd like my message to be paraphrased in an exceptionally clear manner regarding how I will avoid WP:BATTLEGROUND behavior, here you go: I will engage with others in a civil, composed, and cooperative manner. I will refrain from using insults, harassment, or intimidation when disagreeing with someone. Instead, I will approach the situation thoughtfully and engage in respectful discussions. Even if another user acts uncivilly, uncooperatively, or resorts to insults or intimidation, I will not use that as an excuse to respond in a similar manner. I will focus solely on addressing the factual aspects presented and will disregard inappropriate comments or the user altogether. If needed, I will kindly point out my perception that certain comments may be seen as uncivil, and emphasize my intention to move forward and concentrate on the topic at hand. If you feel that the message is insufficient or if you believe that further clarification is necessary, I would appreciate any suggestions you might have. My goal is to ensure that my message is easily understood by anyone reviewing the appeal. Euglenos sandara ( talk) 16:00, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Accept reason:
Euglenos, thank you for your message. I am going on a good faith assumption and hope that you keep your word on this. Wikipedia is supposed to be a project where contributors can interact productively (and in peace, for the lack of a better word). What Wikipedia is NOT, is something you should take time to read. This is not a place where one has limitless freedom of expression (this is not the free world space, this is a regulated, protected, deeply curated community, which is not a democracy; not saying this negatively, but to impress the point that we have to go strictly by the rules, and the civil nature of inclusivity). That said, I hope you've understood our one-minded effort to ensure happy interactions between fellow editors. Thank you for not crossing this line again. Best, Lourdes 04:53, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:52, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Template:TLE has been
nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the entry on the Templates for discussion page. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 14:06, 25 December 2023 (UTC)