This is Rhinopias's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1 |
Metridium senile is now considered to be a synonym of Metridium dianthus ( see this link). Your edit here was incorrect because apparently the long-accepted name Metridium senile is no longer considered valid. Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 07:55, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
No need to apologize for placing a request--it's all good, this is why they pay me and Samsara the big bucks. Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 16:14, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Hey there, Rhinopias. Just a slight complaint I guess about your recent edits to The Titan's Curse. Your edit summaries calling the "prophecy" text "obviously from a separate edition" and the "meaning" text "likely OR" indicate that you have not read the rest of the page or viewed other pages related to the series. Now, I'm not asking that you revert your changes - I get that you pulled the sections mostly because they were unreferenced, which is an unforgivable problem. Had I the time right now, I would take care of this issue. However, I do ask that in the future you read more of the relevant pages before deleting so much text. I only bring this up because I am constantly defending these types of sections, and much better referenced ones too. I've found it's more straightforward to ask an editor to read more carefully before blanking entire sections, rather than trying to convince them to allow those sections back in after they're already gone. Please ping me if you respond to this message. Happy editing! -- 2ReinreB2 ( talk) 03:30, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
When a edit is minor I click minor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gyrkin ( talk • contribs) 23:48, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Monterey Bay Aquarium you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Chiswick Chap --
Chiswick Chap (
talk)
15:20, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
The article
Monterey Bay Aquarium you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Monterey Bay Aquarium for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Chiswick Chap --
Chiswick Chap (
talk)
08:21, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for showing me how to improve a gallery! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:55, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Good day, You mentioned a few of my edits on my talk page. Honestly, I don't intend them to be advertisement. The Rubina Kuraoka Audiobook edit was made because I thought that people could find it interesting. It was hardly advertisement to me, since I doubt that any native englisch speaker will get it. And the others... I add books to films that were released YEARS ago. That can mostly only be bought used, so that the publishers wouldn't get any prift from them anyway. And with the audiobooks... I'm just trying to add interesting aspects to articles. Sure, the voice of somebody is very porsenal, I'm happy for everybody who can leave things like that behind. But I'm never about advertisement. Robudor ( talk) 03:11, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Anna Marguerite McCann at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
Yoninah (
talk)
02:56, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
On 7 November 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Monterey Bay Aquarium, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Monterey Bay Aquarium was the first public aquarium to exhibit a living kelp forest (pictured), which is nearly three stories high? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Monterey Bay Aquarium. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Monterey Bay Aquarium), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex Shih ( talk) 00:01, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
aquarium
Thank you for quality articles such as Monterey Bay Aquarium and Anna Marguerite McCann, for helpful collaboration, welcoming new users and fighting vandalism, for giving reasons, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:23, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Wanted to introduce myself and say great job on the Aquarium's WP page. Good use of DYK and GA. Sgerbic ( talk) 04:58, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
I second Sgerbic's kudos, and also for snagging the picture on the DYK. I have been to the aquarium once and did not realize that it was in the last cannery standing before I got there. It was so cool to see that the aquarium is continuing and adding to the history of Cannery Row. I am ecstatic that you brought that out in the article and that the aquarium revitalized the area. And, all the other details that you brought out. Congratulations on a Job Well Done. And thank you for your efforts. Shortsword ( talk) 05:14, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
@ Nikkimaria: I emailed the organization when I posted my comment above and received a reply on February 14 saying I would receive more information soon. I haven't heard from them, so I've removed the two images from the article and would like to nominate it. If they don't get back to me I'll address the issue at Commons. Rhinopias ( talk) 18:02, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, stubby finger on a screen too small! DrKay ( talk) 17:16, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
On 9 November 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Anna Marguerite McCann, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Anna Marguerite McCann, the first female American underwater archaeologist, published the earliest research on deep-sea shipwrecks? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Anna Marguerite McCann. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Anna Marguerite McCann), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:02, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
With all due respect, you could take 5 or 10 minutes to try and find a citation yourself. Best regards.-- Kieronoldham ( talk) 03:28, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
See also:
Alex Shih ( talk) 17:16, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Rhinopias. 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)
The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.
The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:
If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.
Please be aware this survey will close Friday, Dec. 8 at 23:00 UTC.
Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:15, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
On 13 December 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Plagiolepis alluaudi, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that little yellow ant colonies raise the larvae of agricultural pests, including aphids, in their own nest? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Plagiolepis alluaudi. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Plagiolepis alluaudi), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex Shih ( talk) 00:06, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, it is a common knowledge in aquarium fish keeping that both ammonia and nitrite must be 0ppm for fish to stay alive long term. The old text I edited was clearly wrong. It said it must reach a certain concentration for it to be harmful. It is false. Both ammonia and nitrite even at the slightest concentration will harm the fish even if it does not kill the fish outright. Do not quote me on it. Ask on any fish forum to see how experts answer. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ram8349 ( talk • contribs) 01:06, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
Nitrogen waste products become toxic to fish and other aquarium inhabitants above a certain concentrationmight imply to some that it's referring to ammonia, as fish excrete nitrogenous waste in the form of ammonia. As far as I'm aware, the phrase "nitrogenous waste compounds" can also refer to nitrite or even nitrate when discussing the nitrogen cycle in aquarium systems. Unfortunately, I can't find a way online to access the source that's used to check its wording. This should probably be clarified though – maybe I'll get around to it. If not, feel free to be bold and try again! Let me (or Tryptofish! :P) know if you have any questions about the links I left on your talk page. Rhinopias ( talk) 01:24, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
Hey there,
You submitted File:Metasepia pfefferi grabs shrimp with tentacles.webm to the Wiki Science Competition, pointing to this page on Vimeo. Since first publication is important for copyright purposes, and since it looks to have been uploaded to Vimeo first, could you change the license on that version to reflect the CC license you used when uploading it to Commons? I know that you can use CC licenses on Vimeo, though I'm afraid I couldn't tell you how it's done. The alternative is to go through OTRS (if you would prefer not to change the license of the Vimeo upload). (Context: I'm on the jury for the United States branch of the competition, just trying to work through some licensing issues).
Congrats on getting the aquarium article to GA btw. :) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 05:13, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Just to say thanks for the third (fourth!) opinion at Talk:Cogewea#Challenge to “Original Research” claim. I appreciate your efforts to explain the problem, even if the requester of the outside opinion doesn't. Cordless Larry ( talk) 09:23, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi
Sorry I don't get the revision? The page asks for help with improving it, I added a link to the IntensiveInteraction.com website which has a researched articles complete with citations and it gets deleted as promotion or spam. Hmm!! Name: Intensive Interaction : Link: Intensiveinteraction.com ?
Did I miss something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajiinis ( talk • contribs) 21:03, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
The article actually references Wikipedia in its citations yet you say it doesn't have much information? Its an academic article informing people what is Intensive Interaction and how to use it to support people with autism.. I think I made a mistake trying to add to Wikipedia so I'll sign off as you guys clearly know more about topics than the experts do?
A little power hur! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajiinis ( talk • contribs) 22:46, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
In response to your edit I started a discussion on Talk:Octopus. Please join in and improve it. Thanks. Kim9988 ( talk) 17:35, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
Your message: Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Coral. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Rhinopias
Please explain why you think a link to an informational website is promotional or advertising? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel Koepf ( talk • contribs) 04:36, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Rhinopias, it's just that the edits I do keep getting reverted. If I want those lead images to have a full body, what am I supposed to do about it? Esagurton ( talk) 08:41, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
@Rhinopias Thanks for the Third Opinion, your suggestion was followed. Alphatronic ( talk) 13:54, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Is it okay for me to make edit requests for the main image in the speciesbox/taxobox in the talk pages? Esagurton ( talk) 14:28, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
@ Rhinopias:You have required to move Limulidae to horseshoe crab, saying it is a common name, but "horseshoe crab" is the common name of all the xiphosurans. Although to a certain extent I am to blame, for not consulting with anyone. Super Ψ Dro 06:05, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello! Please read this, comment on it. [1] Путеец ( talk) 18:21, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your help sorting out the disagreement on the " Glass Spider" page. I was exhausted trying to talk to the user and I really appreciate you stepping in. I am however confused about one thing - I didn't think that conflicting information was enough to warrant conflict removal. Shouldn't we have noted that the claim was made, but not necessarily 100% confirmed? The statement was made by a reputable source (albeit 30 years ago), and we should have at least noted that it was possibly in error. Thoughts? 87Fan ( talk) 17:30, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Well, Rhinopias, some editors may not agree with my discussions on the talk pages of the animal articles, you know... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esagurton ( talk • contribs) 13:01, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
I swear I don't want to do that disruptive editing again. How am I not going to do it again? Esagurton ( talk) 12:54, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'd need the help of an Englishman: in this section of the page "Universe", knowing that it isn't unlikely (or likely, for that matter, we just don't know) that the Universe is finite, what would be more natural to you, writing "The absence of net charge and momentum would follow from accepted physical laws if the Universe is finite" or "The absence of net charge and momentum would follow from accepted physical laws if the Universe were finite"?
And here there's the same problem (last paragraph, it can be read alone): two options are listed ("Universe sufficiently dense" and "Universe insufficiently dense") and we know from observations that both are unlikely, but the reader can't possibly know that because it is stated that the two options are unlikely only at the end of the paragraph, after the two options are mentioned. So what would be the correct writing, "If the Universe were sufficiently dense", "If the Universe were insufficiently dense", or "If the Universe is sufficiently dense", If the Universe is insufficiently dense"?
Thanks in advance. Drow ( talk) 10:47, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Because we cannot observe space beyond the edge of the observable universe, it is unknown whether the size of the Universe in its totality is finite or infinite.
k would equal +1, in which would is also implying we're not certain) is fine. I might be completely wrong, but I think (in sentences like these) the use of "if … were" implies that's not the case (e.g. "If I were blue, people would look at me strangely") while "if … is" implies we do not know whether or not it's true or whether it will be true (e.g. "If my work day today is short, we can grab dinner"). The most helpful thing would be a clarification in the last sentence confirming that the Universe is, in fact, "insufficiently dense", but I'm not qualified to make that claim and the source doesn't seem to have a preview on Google Books. Also, I'm not an Englishman or a grammarian… this is just my American instinct. Rhinopias ( talk) 22:59, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
Why? Bengt Nyman ( talk) 10:51, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi, in
this revision, reading from the start ("Intelligence has been..."), which version is more elegant, understandable and better paced, according to you?
If I'm bothering, I'm sorry, next time I will ask to someone else :-)
Thanks in advance!
Drow (
talk)
12:39, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
Apologies in advance if you perceive this as molesting, but I want to say thanks, because I got the impression that at least you underwent the plight of reading my argumentation on the TP. However, there are two things I want to comment on: first, I tried, but did not find another formulation besides "See TP". I avoided a "please" for already then guessing that it would be received as "passive aggressive", and certainly never wanted to write "according to TP", which you seemed to have perceived. Second, me stating "flowery abundance of details" was intended to describe the status of this sentence, with or without the DOW, but where the DOW fits in nicely, and not to give a reason for inserting the DOW. In the end, as said there, I do not really care if the DOW is kept or not, but I simply prefer to have it.
Please, tolerate my non-native English and feel free to delete this. Regards, Purgy ( talk) 07:46, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
I do think the peer review should be closed. I’m not really using it anymore and it seems to be old so if you would like to close it feel free to do so. LovelyGirl7 talk 05:39, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
Hey, i noticed you removed some content on the Fur-bearing trout page, deeming it not noteworthy. What exactly is the parameter used to judge which popular culture cases are worthy of inclusion in an article?
Thanks, hope to hear from you soon YuriNikolai ( talk) 15:59, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Rhinopias, thanks for your messages. So, as you can tell, I'm very new to Wikipedia. And I'm trying to learn as I go.
I really only have interest in updating the one page (Navajo Nation Zoological and Botanical Park - /info/en/?search=Navajo_Nation_Zoological_and_Botanical_Park) at this time; this is because this page was terribly out-of-date with many broken reference links. I suspect that it was the previous manager of the Navajo Zoo that created the page around 2008-2010, but he no longer has regular contact with us to continue to keep the information current.
So, while I may have conflict of interest by being the current manager, I have tried to represent the updated information as impartially as possible. And I cannot think of anyone else closely associated with the Zoo to be making these edits on our behalf. I have made sure to provided viable references for everything possible, and remove links that are no longer web-accessible. I tried to be as fair and neutral with the information is possible, but if you see wording that should be changed/edited/removed, please let me know. It would be great if the page could remain as mostly edited to allow for the most current information to be presented.
Please feel free to contact me and make editorial suggestions as needed. Thanks
Dmikesic ( talk) 17:27, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you Rhinopias for your assistance in my attempts to contribute within Wikipedia, and for understanding the situation well. I have followed your suggestion to create a user page with clear identification of conflict-of-interest for the Navajo Nation Zoo wiki-page, and have done the same in the Zoo's Talk Page. I will be restoring the broken-link reference tags, as directed, as well. Dmikesic ( talk) 15:45, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
i was the one who added a disambiguation to the flounder article.
Flounder has the same name as flounder, so i thought a disambiguation hatnote would be a good idea.
i thought keeping all the similarly named articles together would also be a good idea, so i MOVED The Flounder from See also to the hatnote. i wouldn't just erase it for no reason!
i thought i explained this all well enough in my edit summary, but clearly i'm floundering.
i tried to add a winking emoticon here, but i guess Wikipedia doesn't like lines starting with a semicolon. ;-)
Do you still think the hatnote is a bad idea? If so, what do you think about adding the Disney character named Flounder to the See also section?
Do you have any advice to help me write a good edit summary?
Please reply here on your talk page or on the Talk:Flounder page. (Easier than trying to remember "what's my IP address this time?")
Thanks!
-- 71.121.143.54 ( talk) 06:49, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
{{About|the paraphyletic group of flatfishes}}
could be placed on the article to point readers to that disambiguation page.
Rhinopias (
talk)
20:15, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello! Hu7210968 ( talk) 17:16, 22 July 2018 (UTC) |
Hello, Rhinopias. 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)
Hello, just a note to say that User:Lingzhi2/reviewsourcecheck has been update to add the option to toggle it on or off.
The installed script will add a tab to the drop-down tab at the top, located between the 'watchlist star' and the search box (using the vector.js skin). The tab toggles between "Hide ref check" and "Show ref check" with displaying the errors as the default option. You may need to edit Special:MyPage/common.js and change User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck to User:Lingzhi2/reviewsourcecheck (add the "2" after User:Lingzhi). Please do drop me a line if you have any problems or suggestions. Tks. ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 16:00, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello Rhinopias, and thank you for the comment. I have been trying to keep the spelling appropriate with the subject of any given page, as is the custom of Wikipedia, as I have read MOS:ENGVAR I feel that this should apply to species as much as anything else, and the species distribution should be the guide to the most suitable variety of english. In the case of the Penguin page, penguins are native to Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Namibia, The Falkland Islands and South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, all of which are a part of the Commonwealth. Now, the current Penguin page was using some American English, America however has no native species of penguin. I was changing 'color' to 'colour' as 'colour' was already present on the page, and still is. Thank you for your time. BernardFox1595 ( talk) 04:22, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
On 31 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Julie Packard, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the deep-sea coral species Gersemia juliepackardae was named for Julie Packard (pictured), executive director of Monterey Bay Aquarium, for her work as an ocean conservationist? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Julie Packard. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Julie Packard), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:01, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
![]() | |
Rapeseed | |
---|---|
... with thanks from QAI |
Thank you, another good one! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:12, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi,
I would like a change to be made to Marsha P. Johnson's page and I don't know how to do this myself!
/info/en/?search=Marsha_P._Johnson
Firstly, when you search for her page, the Wikipedia entry identifies her as "An American Drag Queen"! This could not be more offensive and wrong in my opinion! I would call her an American, LGBTQ+ Activist! Marsha was not a Drag Queen, though she may have identified herself as so at times for lack of a better term to use for people to understand her! Drag implies costume for performance purposes! I am unaware whether she actually participated in any Drag shows, but I do know that she dressed in feminine clothing, wore flower crowns, and identified herself as a woman! If you must include the descriptor, Transgender or Transgender Woman, then fine, but She MUST be recognized first and foremost as an American LGBTQ+ Activist! You do not generally include a person's identified gender or sex on any cis person's information page!
Please CORRECT this ASAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
For Example, here is the description for Isaac Newton:
Sir Isaac Newton PRS (25 December 1642 – 20 March 1726/27[a]) was an English mathematician, physicist, astronomer, theologian, and author (described in his own day as a "natural philosopher") who is widely recognised as one of the most influential scientists of all time and as a key figure in the scientific revolution. His book Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy), first published in 1687, laid the foundations of classical mechanics. Newton also made seminal contributions to optics, and shares credit with Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz for developing the infinitesimal calculus.
It describes what he did, not whether he was male or female, straight, gay, etc!!!
![]() | |
Six years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:37, 7 November 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)
00:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
This is Rhinopias's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1 |
Metridium senile is now considered to be a synonym of Metridium dianthus ( see this link). Your edit here was incorrect because apparently the long-accepted name Metridium senile is no longer considered valid. Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 07:55, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
No need to apologize for placing a request--it's all good, this is why they pay me and Samsara the big bucks. Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 16:14, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Hey there, Rhinopias. Just a slight complaint I guess about your recent edits to The Titan's Curse. Your edit summaries calling the "prophecy" text "obviously from a separate edition" and the "meaning" text "likely OR" indicate that you have not read the rest of the page or viewed other pages related to the series. Now, I'm not asking that you revert your changes - I get that you pulled the sections mostly because they were unreferenced, which is an unforgivable problem. Had I the time right now, I would take care of this issue. However, I do ask that in the future you read more of the relevant pages before deleting so much text. I only bring this up because I am constantly defending these types of sections, and much better referenced ones too. I've found it's more straightforward to ask an editor to read more carefully before blanking entire sections, rather than trying to convince them to allow those sections back in after they're already gone. Please ping me if you respond to this message. Happy editing! -- 2ReinreB2 ( talk) 03:30, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
When a edit is minor I click minor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gyrkin ( talk • contribs) 23:48, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Monterey Bay Aquarium you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Chiswick Chap --
Chiswick Chap (
talk)
15:20, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
The article
Monterey Bay Aquarium you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Monterey Bay Aquarium for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Chiswick Chap --
Chiswick Chap (
talk)
08:21, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for showing me how to improve a gallery! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:55, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Good day, You mentioned a few of my edits on my talk page. Honestly, I don't intend them to be advertisement. The Rubina Kuraoka Audiobook edit was made because I thought that people could find it interesting. It was hardly advertisement to me, since I doubt that any native englisch speaker will get it. And the others... I add books to films that were released YEARS ago. That can mostly only be bought used, so that the publishers wouldn't get any prift from them anyway. And with the audiobooks... I'm just trying to add interesting aspects to articles. Sure, the voice of somebody is very porsenal, I'm happy for everybody who can leave things like that behind. But I'm never about advertisement. Robudor ( talk) 03:11, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Anna Marguerite McCann at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
Yoninah (
talk)
02:56, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
On 7 November 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Monterey Bay Aquarium, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Monterey Bay Aquarium was the first public aquarium to exhibit a living kelp forest (pictured), which is nearly three stories high? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Monterey Bay Aquarium. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Monterey Bay Aquarium), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex Shih ( talk) 00:01, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
aquarium
Thank you for quality articles such as Monterey Bay Aquarium and Anna Marguerite McCann, for helpful collaboration, welcoming new users and fighting vandalism, for giving reasons, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:23, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Wanted to introduce myself and say great job on the Aquarium's WP page. Good use of DYK and GA. Sgerbic ( talk) 04:58, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
I second Sgerbic's kudos, and also for snagging the picture on the DYK. I have been to the aquarium once and did not realize that it was in the last cannery standing before I got there. It was so cool to see that the aquarium is continuing and adding to the history of Cannery Row. I am ecstatic that you brought that out in the article and that the aquarium revitalized the area. And, all the other details that you brought out. Congratulations on a Job Well Done. And thank you for your efforts. Shortsword ( talk) 05:14, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
@ Nikkimaria: I emailed the organization when I posted my comment above and received a reply on February 14 saying I would receive more information soon. I haven't heard from them, so I've removed the two images from the article and would like to nominate it. If they don't get back to me I'll address the issue at Commons. Rhinopias ( talk) 18:02, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, stubby finger on a screen too small! DrKay ( talk) 17:16, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
On 9 November 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Anna Marguerite McCann, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Anna Marguerite McCann, the first female American underwater archaeologist, published the earliest research on deep-sea shipwrecks? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Anna Marguerite McCann. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Anna Marguerite McCann), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:02, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
With all due respect, you could take 5 or 10 minutes to try and find a citation yourself. Best regards.-- Kieronoldham ( talk) 03:28, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
See also:
Alex Shih ( talk) 17:16, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Rhinopias. 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)
The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.
The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:
If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.
Please be aware this survey will close Friday, Dec. 8 at 23:00 UTC.
Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:15, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
On 13 December 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Plagiolepis alluaudi, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that little yellow ant colonies raise the larvae of agricultural pests, including aphids, in their own nest? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Plagiolepis alluaudi. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Plagiolepis alluaudi), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex Shih ( talk) 00:06, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, it is a common knowledge in aquarium fish keeping that both ammonia and nitrite must be 0ppm for fish to stay alive long term. The old text I edited was clearly wrong. It said it must reach a certain concentration for it to be harmful. It is false. Both ammonia and nitrite even at the slightest concentration will harm the fish even if it does not kill the fish outright. Do not quote me on it. Ask on any fish forum to see how experts answer. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ram8349 ( talk • contribs) 01:06, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
Nitrogen waste products become toxic to fish and other aquarium inhabitants above a certain concentrationmight imply to some that it's referring to ammonia, as fish excrete nitrogenous waste in the form of ammonia. As far as I'm aware, the phrase "nitrogenous waste compounds" can also refer to nitrite or even nitrate when discussing the nitrogen cycle in aquarium systems. Unfortunately, I can't find a way online to access the source that's used to check its wording. This should probably be clarified though – maybe I'll get around to it. If not, feel free to be bold and try again! Let me (or Tryptofish! :P) know if you have any questions about the links I left on your talk page. Rhinopias ( talk) 01:24, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
Hey there,
You submitted File:Metasepia pfefferi grabs shrimp with tentacles.webm to the Wiki Science Competition, pointing to this page on Vimeo. Since first publication is important for copyright purposes, and since it looks to have been uploaded to Vimeo first, could you change the license on that version to reflect the CC license you used when uploading it to Commons? I know that you can use CC licenses on Vimeo, though I'm afraid I couldn't tell you how it's done. The alternative is to go through OTRS (if you would prefer not to change the license of the Vimeo upload). (Context: I'm on the jury for the United States branch of the competition, just trying to work through some licensing issues).
Congrats on getting the aquarium article to GA btw. :) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 05:13, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Just to say thanks for the third (fourth!) opinion at Talk:Cogewea#Challenge to “Original Research” claim. I appreciate your efforts to explain the problem, even if the requester of the outside opinion doesn't. Cordless Larry ( talk) 09:23, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi
Sorry I don't get the revision? The page asks for help with improving it, I added a link to the IntensiveInteraction.com website which has a researched articles complete with citations and it gets deleted as promotion or spam. Hmm!! Name: Intensive Interaction : Link: Intensiveinteraction.com ?
Did I miss something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajiinis ( talk • contribs) 21:03, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
The article actually references Wikipedia in its citations yet you say it doesn't have much information? Its an academic article informing people what is Intensive Interaction and how to use it to support people with autism.. I think I made a mistake trying to add to Wikipedia so I'll sign off as you guys clearly know more about topics than the experts do?
A little power hur! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajiinis ( talk • contribs) 22:46, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
In response to your edit I started a discussion on Talk:Octopus. Please join in and improve it. Thanks. Kim9988 ( talk) 17:35, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
Your message: Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Coral. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Rhinopias
Please explain why you think a link to an informational website is promotional or advertising? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel Koepf ( talk • contribs) 04:36, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Rhinopias, it's just that the edits I do keep getting reverted. If I want those lead images to have a full body, what am I supposed to do about it? Esagurton ( talk) 08:41, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
@Rhinopias Thanks for the Third Opinion, your suggestion was followed. Alphatronic ( talk) 13:54, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Is it okay for me to make edit requests for the main image in the speciesbox/taxobox in the talk pages? Esagurton ( talk) 14:28, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
@ Rhinopias:You have required to move Limulidae to horseshoe crab, saying it is a common name, but "horseshoe crab" is the common name of all the xiphosurans. Although to a certain extent I am to blame, for not consulting with anyone. Super Ψ Dro 06:05, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello! Please read this, comment on it. [1] Путеец ( talk) 18:21, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your help sorting out the disagreement on the " Glass Spider" page. I was exhausted trying to talk to the user and I really appreciate you stepping in. I am however confused about one thing - I didn't think that conflicting information was enough to warrant conflict removal. Shouldn't we have noted that the claim was made, but not necessarily 100% confirmed? The statement was made by a reputable source (albeit 30 years ago), and we should have at least noted that it was possibly in error. Thoughts? 87Fan ( talk) 17:30, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Well, Rhinopias, some editors may not agree with my discussions on the talk pages of the animal articles, you know... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esagurton ( talk • contribs) 13:01, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
I swear I don't want to do that disruptive editing again. How am I not going to do it again? Esagurton ( talk) 12:54, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'd need the help of an Englishman: in this section of the page "Universe", knowing that it isn't unlikely (or likely, for that matter, we just don't know) that the Universe is finite, what would be more natural to you, writing "The absence of net charge and momentum would follow from accepted physical laws if the Universe is finite" or "The absence of net charge and momentum would follow from accepted physical laws if the Universe were finite"?
And here there's the same problem (last paragraph, it can be read alone): two options are listed ("Universe sufficiently dense" and "Universe insufficiently dense") and we know from observations that both are unlikely, but the reader can't possibly know that because it is stated that the two options are unlikely only at the end of the paragraph, after the two options are mentioned. So what would be the correct writing, "If the Universe were sufficiently dense", "If the Universe were insufficiently dense", or "If the Universe is sufficiently dense", If the Universe is insufficiently dense"?
Thanks in advance. Drow ( talk) 10:47, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Because we cannot observe space beyond the edge of the observable universe, it is unknown whether the size of the Universe in its totality is finite or infinite.
k would equal +1, in which would is also implying we're not certain) is fine. I might be completely wrong, but I think (in sentences like these) the use of "if … were" implies that's not the case (e.g. "If I were blue, people would look at me strangely") while "if … is" implies we do not know whether or not it's true or whether it will be true (e.g. "If my work day today is short, we can grab dinner"). The most helpful thing would be a clarification in the last sentence confirming that the Universe is, in fact, "insufficiently dense", but I'm not qualified to make that claim and the source doesn't seem to have a preview on Google Books. Also, I'm not an Englishman or a grammarian… this is just my American instinct. Rhinopias ( talk) 22:59, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
Why? Bengt Nyman ( talk) 10:51, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi, in
this revision, reading from the start ("Intelligence has been..."), which version is more elegant, understandable and better paced, according to you?
If I'm bothering, I'm sorry, next time I will ask to someone else :-)
Thanks in advance!
Drow (
talk)
12:39, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
Apologies in advance if you perceive this as molesting, but I want to say thanks, because I got the impression that at least you underwent the plight of reading my argumentation on the TP. However, there are two things I want to comment on: first, I tried, but did not find another formulation besides "See TP". I avoided a "please" for already then guessing that it would be received as "passive aggressive", and certainly never wanted to write "according to TP", which you seemed to have perceived. Second, me stating "flowery abundance of details" was intended to describe the status of this sentence, with or without the DOW, but where the DOW fits in nicely, and not to give a reason for inserting the DOW. In the end, as said there, I do not really care if the DOW is kept or not, but I simply prefer to have it.
Please, tolerate my non-native English and feel free to delete this. Regards, Purgy ( talk) 07:46, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
I do think the peer review should be closed. I’m not really using it anymore and it seems to be old so if you would like to close it feel free to do so. LovelyGirl7 talk 05:39, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
Hey, i noticed you removed some content on the Fur-bearing trout page, deeming it not noteworthy. What exactly is the parameter used to judge which popular culture cases are worthy of inclusion in an article?
Thanks, hope to hear from you soon YuriNikolai ( talk) 15:59, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Rhinopias, thanks for your messages. So, as you can tell, I'm very new to Wikipedia. And I'm trying to learn as I go.
I really only have interest in updating the one page (Navajo Nation Zoological and Botanical Park - /info/en/?search=Navajo_Nation_Zoological_and_Botanical_Park) at this time; this is because this page was terribly out-of-date with many broken reference links. I suspect that it was the previous manager of the Navajo Zoo that created the page around 2008-2010, but he no longer has regular contact with us to continue to keep the information current.
So, while I may have conflict of interest by being the current manager, I have tried to represent the updated information as impartially as possible. And I cannot think of anyone else closely associated with the Zoo to be making these edits on our behalf. I have made sure to provided viable references for everything possible, and remove links that are no longer web-accessible. I tried to be as fair and neutral with the information is possible, but if you see wording that should be changed/edited/removed, please let me know. It would be great if the page could remain as mostly edited to allow for the most current information to be presented.
Please feel free to contact me and make editorial suggestions as needed. Thanks
Dmikesic ( talk) 17:27, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you Rhinopias for your assistance in my attempts to contribute within Wikipedia, and for understanding the situation well. I have followed your suggestion to create a user page with clear identification of conflict-of-interest for the Navajo Nation Zoo wiki-page, and have done the same in the Zoo's Talk Page. I will be restoring the broken-link reference tags, as directed, as well. Dmikesic ( talk) 15:45, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
i was the one who added a disambiguation to the flounder article.
Flounder has the same name as flounder, so i thought a disambiguation hatnote would be a good idea.
i thought keeping all the similarly named articles together would also be a good idea, so i MOVED The Flounder from See also to the hatnote. i wouldn't just erase it for no reason!
i thought i explained this all well enough in my edit summary, but clearly i'm floundering.
i tried to add a winking emoticon here, but i guess Wikipedia doesn't like lines starting with a semicolon. ;-)
Do you still think the hatnote is a bad idea? If so, what do you think about adding the Disney character named Flounder to the See also section?
Do you have any advice to help me write a good edit summary?
Please reply here on your talk page or on the Talk:Flounder page. (Easier than trying to remember "what's my IP address this time?")
Thanks!
-- 71.121.143.54 ( talk) 06:49, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
{{About|the paraphyletic group of flatfishes}}
could be placed on the article to point readers to that disambiguation page.
Rhinopias (
talk)
20:15, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello! Hu7210968 ( talk) 17:16, 22 July 2018 (UTC) |
Hello, Rhinopias. 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)
Hello, just a note to say that User:Lingzhi2/reviewsourcecheck has been update to add the option to toggle it on or off.
The installed script will add a tab to the drop-down tab at the top, located between the 'watchlist star' and the search box (using the vector.js skin). The tab toggles between "Hide ref check" and "Show ref check" with displaying the errors as the default option. You may need to edit Special:MyPage/common.js and change User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck to User:Lingzhi2/reviewsourcecheck (add the "2" after User:Lingzhi). Please do drop me a line if you have any problems or suggestions. Tks. ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 16:00, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello Rhinopias, and thank you for the comment. I have been trying to keep the spelling appropriate with the subject of any given page, as is the custom of Wikipedia, as I have read MOS:ENGVAR I feel that this should apply to species as much as anything else, and the species distribution should be the guide to the most suitable variety of english. In the case of the Penguin page, penguins are native to Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Namibia, The Falkland Islands and South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, all of which are a part of the Commonwealth. Now, the current Penguin page was using some American English, America however has no native species of penguin. I was changing 'color' to 'colour' as 'colour' was already present on the page, and still is. Thank you for your time. BernardFox1595 ( talk) 04:22, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
On 31 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Julie Packard, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the deep-sea coral species Gersemia juliepackardae was named for Julie Packard (pictured), executive director of Monterey Bay Aquarium, for her work as an ocean conservationist? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Julie Packard. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Julie Packard), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:01, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
![]() | |
Rapeseed | |
---|---|
... with thanks from QAI |
Thank you, another good one! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:12, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi,
I would like a change to be made to Marsha P. Johnson's page and I don't know how to do this myself!
/info/en/?search=Marsha_P._Johnson
Firstly, when you search for her page, the Wikipedia entry identifies her as "An American Drag Queen"! This could not be more offensive and wrong in my opinion! I would call her an American, LGBTQ+ Activist! Marsha was not a Drag Queen, though she may have identified herself as so at times for lack of a better term to use for people to understand her! Drag implies costume for performance purposes! I am unaware whether she actually participated in any Drag shows, but I do know that she dressed in feminine clothing, wore flower crowns, and identified herself as a woman! If you must include the descriptor, Transgender or Transgender Woman, then fine, but She MUST be recognized first and foremost as an American LGBTQ+ Activist! You do not generally include a person's identified gender or sex on any cis person's information page!
Please CORRECT this ASAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
For Example, here is the description for Isaac Newton:
Sir Isaac Newton PRS (25 December 1642 – 20 March 1726/27[a]) was an English mathematician, physicist, astronomer, theologian, and author (described in his own day as a "natural philosopher") who is widely recognised as one of the most influential scientists of all time and as a key figure in the scientific revolution. His book Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy), first published in 1687, laid the foundations of classical mechanics. Newton also made seminal contributions to optics, and shares credit with Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz for developing the infinitesimal calculus.
It describes what he did, not whether he was male or female, straight, gay, etc!!!
![]() | |
Six years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:37, 7 November 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)
00:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)