I recommend you withdraw your nomination given the recent bombings : 4 April 2010 Baghdad bombings, 3 April 2010 Baghdad shootings, 5 April 2010 Peshawar Bombing, 5 April 2010 Timergarah bombings. Marcus Aurelius Antoninus ( talk) 20:47, 5 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:30, 12 July 2010 (UTC) reply

I'd beg you to reconsidere your vote... You voted oppose due to the articles size, i've been working on it today and it has been considerably expanded. If this helps, please vote support for its inclusion. -- TIAYN ( talk) 22:18, 25 September 2010 (UTC) reply

Expanded YellowMonkey ( new photo poll) 02:51, 4 November 2010 (UTC) reply

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010 Shanghai fire until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Shirik ( Questions or Comments?) 18:19, 16 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi, I've undone your non-admin "keep" closure of this AfD per WP:NACD: "Close calls and controversial decisions are better left to an administrator." If you wish to close such AfDs, I encourage you to apply to WP:RFA. Regards,  Sandstein  08:13, 20 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello, per your request, I've granted you Rollback rights! Just remember:

• Rollback gives you access to certain scripts, including Huggle and Igloo, some of which can be very powerful, so exercise caution
• Rollback is only for blatant vandalism
• Having Rollback rights does not give you any special status or authority
• Misuse of Rollback can lead to its removal by any administrator
• Please read Help:Reverting and Wikipedia:Rollback feature to get to know the workings of the feature
• You can test Rollback at Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback
• You may wish to display the {{ User wikipedia/rollback}} userbox and/or the {{ Rollback}} top icon on your user page

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:30, 19 January 2011 (UTC) reply

Nope - I was able to access the main page as well as most articles on Wikipedia for the several week span when I was there. I have never seen the main page blocked but it likely has several times by now due to posting of entries and images that could be deemed 'sensitive'. Some individual articles were blocked as expected but several articles at the time (2009) were surprisingly unblocked. ~ A H 1^{( T C U)} 00:40, 15 March 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello. You have a new message at WP:ERRORS's talk page. -- Eraserhead1 < talk> 08:40, 3 April 2011 (UTC) reply

I did before you did and you added the sections before discussing without anyone's opinion. Qampunen ( talk) 14:00, 23 April 2011 (UTC) reply

Take a chill pill with all the hyperbole buddy user:DC —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.82.64.32 ( talk) 16:42, 19 May 2011 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on 2010 Barack Obama visit to India, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Mtking ( talk) 08:49, 4 July 2011 (UTC) reply

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010 Barack Obama visit to India until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Mtking ( talk) 12:24, 4 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Wikireader41 ( talk) 18:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC) reply

The article Frank Dikötter has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{ prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Eeekster ( talk) 03:17, 8 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. You are welcome to rephrase your comment as a civil criticism of the article. Thank you. This was not called for. Mtking ( talk) 03:56, 10 July 2011 (UTC) reply

I stand by my comment.-- Johnsemlak ( talk) 04:01, 10 July 2011 (UTC) reply

As someone who regularly contributes to election articles: Due to recurrent discussions that lead nowhere, an open-ended discussion and proposals are invited Wikipedia talk:In the news/Recurring items/Elections for ITN on the main page as to what should be recurrent without ITNC discussions Lihaas ( talk) 07:24, 19 April 2012 (UTC) reply

The article Russia vs Ukraine (1999) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable match, no citations of notability, fails WP:EVENT.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. WWGB ( talk) 13:05, 11 June 2012 (UTC) reply

The article Russia vs Ukraine (1999) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't appear to meet the notability guideline for individual sports events

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. –  Arms & Hearts ( talk) 15:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC) reply

–  Arms & Hearts ( talk) 21:24, 6 July 2012 (UTC) reply

Now, please explain exactly why you make changes that deviate from the source. Sources should be respected, not changed by editors at will. So you need to conform to what the sources say. If you keep deviating from sources, in the end you will get blocked. It will take a few discussions, but you already know that the deviation train goes to blockland. History2007 ( talk) 18:07, 24 October 2012 (UTC) reply

Several historians are cited as disagreeing with this in the article.-- Johnsemlak ( talk) 19:16, 24 October 2012 (UTC) reply

There are not several, and as stated there none can get an academic position, and Wikipedia needs to follow sources - as discussed there. History2007 ( talk) 20:10, 24 October 2012 (UTC) reply

In this edit you have either crossed WP:3RR or are just about to. I did not count that carefully. But you are clearly due for a block if you perform another revert, so please read WP:3RR and note that it is a "bright line rule" which always results in a block, once you have been informed of it. The issue is being discussed, you must stop reverting, or be blocked. History2007 ( talk) 21:01, 24 October 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi, I'm Rosscoolguy. Johnsemlak, thanks for creating Addisleigh Park!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Good work making an article. Please add some more references and expand the article.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Just checking, did you look for sources for the claim/have reason to believe it was false, or did you just remove it because it was unsourced? (Trying to decide whether to look for a source or not)  Ryan  Vesey 16:03, 4 February 2013 (UTC) reply

• I did make a simple quick google search to try to find a source and failed; I felt at that point that it was better to remove the claim. I don't find it a particularly notable event anyway--I'm not sure it needs to be in the article at all. But that's my opinion.-- Johnsemlak ( talk) 16:07, 4 February 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Old Grapevine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 6th Avenue ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:01, 7 February 2014 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the note. I fixed the link to Sixth Avenue (Manhattan). Cheers.-- Johnsemlak ( talk) 14:36, 7 February 2014 (UTC) reply

Hey John, great work in the updates to the Garner article. Much appreciated considering the pressure applied to post a weak and under-referenced article to the main page, right now we have a seriously improved article because of your efforts and the fact we didn't just give up at the first hurdle. The Rambling Man ( talk) 20:59, 21 July 2014 (UTC) reply

A couple years back when we were discussing the death of Phyllis Diller for ITN, you said that "if Robin Williams or Joan Rivers dies, that would be notable enough." Two years later, both of these people are dead within less than a month of one another.

Funny how that works out sometimes, isn't it? Kurtis ^(talk) 12:21, 5 September 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 13:06, 23 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cosmopolitan Hotel (New York), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gothic. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:25, 16 March 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

2010 Shanghai fire has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 23:33, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply