I watchlist the discussions I participate in, as should you. There is no need to leave "talkback" templates here.
I don't edit Wikipedia to collect baubles. Please don't leave me "awards" or "barnstars".
This site does not appear to meet WP:RS. There are some documents that are out of copyright and should be linked to Gutenberg or Wikisource, not to this site; there are also essays that qualify as primary self-published sources. In every case we should be using reliable independent secondary sources instead. Just exactly as we should not be using mirrors of libertarian economic texts on the "Library of Econmics and Liberty", a libertarian think-tank. Guy ( Help!) 11:14, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- I disagree that MIA is unreliable—it is, as its name suggests, an archive, and a fairly large (in terms not just of its collection but its staff) and well-established one. But even if it is unreliable, since it is the only source for the claims in the article, it should be replaced, not removed. (This is in line with the recommendations made by the content guideline you linked to.) If you still feel that MIA is so unreliable as to be unsuitable for use as a source for the basic publication data of the Deutsch–Französische Jahrbücher, even on an interim basis, then I invite you to start a discussion at WP:RSN. — Psychonaut ( talk) 11:37, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- @
JzG: I see you're now engaging in mass removal of MIA references from other articles. I've reverted these edits for now. Before making such drastic and wide-ranging edits across the encyclopedia, please first seek consensus on
WP:RSN. —
Psychonaut (
talk) 11:41, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- "Mass" as in seven. Every time anyone says "mass removal" - at least to date -it has been someone supporting a website that we should not be using, such as a quackery site or a predatory journal. Feel free to show that's not the case this time.
Guy (
Help!) 13:02, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- Were you really planning on stopping at seven? (Given the response to your previous RSN post on the matter, I'm a bit taken aback that you thought it was a good idea to remove even these.) — Psychonaut ( talk) 16:36, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- "Mass" as in seven. Every time anyone says "mass removal" - at least to date -it has been someone supporting a website that we should not be using, such as a quackery site or a predatory journal. Feel free to show that's not the case this time.
Guy (
Help!) 13:02, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Langguth Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:34, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you voted on (2 RfCs, actually, one less than six months ago and another a year ago). The new RfC is at:
Specifically, it asks that "religion = none" be allowed in the infobox.
The first RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:
- 15 June 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.
The result of that RfC was "unambiguously in favour of omitting the parameter altogether for 'none' " and despite the RfC title, additionally found that "There's no obvious reason why this would not apply to historical or fictional characters, institutions etc.", and that nonreligions listed in the religion entry should be removed when found "in any article".
The second RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:
- 31 December 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion in infoboxes.
The result of that RfC was that the "in all Wikipedia articles, without exception, nonreligions should not be listed in the Religion= parameter of the infobox.".
Note: I am informing everyone who commented on the above RfCs, whether they supported or opposed the final consensus. -- Guy Macon ( talk) 03:35, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you voted on (2 RfCs, actually, one less than six months ago and another a year ago). The new RfC is at:
Specifically, it asks that "religion = none" be allowed in the infobox.
The first RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:
- 15 June 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.
The result of that RfC was "unambiguously in favour of omitting the parameter altogether for 'none' " and despite the RfC title, additionally found that "There's no obvious reason why this would not apply to historical or fictional characters, institutions etc.", and that nonreligions listed in the religion entry should be removed when found "in any article".
The second RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:
- 31 December 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion in infoboxes.
The result of that RfC was that the "in all Wikipedia articles, without exception, nonreligions should not be listed in the Religion= parameter of the infobox.".
Note: I am informing everyone who commented on the above RfCs, whether they supported or opposed the final consensus. -- Guy Macon ( talk) 03:39, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
Nomination of JoAnn Wilson for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article JoAnn Wilson is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JoAnn Wilson 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. No longer a penguin ( talk) 08:48, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Psychonaut. 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 file File:Parrot cga1h.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Unused, unclear use/purpose
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Zinclithium (
talk) 01:36, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of Chuck Bueche for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chuck Bueche is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chuck Bueche until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article. THE NEW ImmortalWizard (chat) 17:44, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Nomination of Acme Records for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Acme Records is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acme Records until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article. ThatMontrealIP ( talk) 04:20, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Nomination of Wailing Wall (band) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wailing Wall (band) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wailing Wall (band) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article. SL93 ( talk) 02:17, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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 |
The file File:Parrot vic.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:01, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
The file File:Parrot vicii.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:01, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 | Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Dude95 is now complete. Thank you for your assistance in the evaluation of this CCI! |
Believe it or not there's progress being made on all this old stuff again -- Wizardman 03:25, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
Just a puzzled observation, regarding this edit: While it's understandable that you were duped by the deceptive bluelink in the entry for the Shannon McKelden novel, due to not looking closely, the fact that the link to the Seattle band was red was hard to overlook. I can't find any evidence that there was ever an article for the band, so there is no obvious explanation for your mistake. (Moreover, the disambiguator "(U.S. band)" is against MOS, and should be "(US band)", or rather, "(American band)".) I have now removed both. -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 16:57, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Caucuses of the United States Congress by term requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian ( talk) 01:47, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
The article RefTeX has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (software) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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.
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 06:54, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Daniel Murphy (computer scientist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page TECO. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:18, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 |
The article British Chess Variants Society has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline nor the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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.
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 04:04, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
The article List of users' groups has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Article from 16 years ago that is not being updated. Technology has changed greatly since 2005 and I don't think most of these groups still exist. Most of the recent edits to this page have been to remove groups whose articles have been deleted through AFDs.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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.
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:17, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Georgian National Olympic Committee logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:27, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
Nomination of British Chess Variants Society for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/British Chess Variants Society until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article.
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:14, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
The article Hoover Military Academy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non-notable topic without any references. No substantive improvements for sixteen(!) years.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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.
Andrew
327 13:36, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
"Mole (character)" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
Mole (character). The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 6#Mole (character) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. (
JayPlaysStuff |
talk to me |
What I've been up to) 01:52, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 |
I saw you are one or the main editor behind the "vinpocetin" article here on Wikipedia. I'd like to ask you about this drug. I am under medical supervision and using it combined with methylphenidate (Ritalin, Concerta) to treat some debilitating symptoms I have been struggling for many years (short term memory issues, attention, slow thought speed, etc).
Do you have an email or other form of contact so we can talk better? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clabatmill ( talk • contribs) 15:53, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
- Wikipedia isn't the right place to obtain medical advice, especially since in most cases you have no idea who the editors are and no way of verifying or assessing their medical qualifications. If you have a question about your use of this drug, then please direct it to your doctor. If you just have a general question about the content of the article, you can ask on Talk:Vinpocetine. — Psychonaut ( talk) 17:35, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
Nomination of List of people on the postage stamps of the Soviet Union for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people on the postage stamps of the Soviet Union until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article.
Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 01:06, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of Bankleitzahl for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bankleitzahl until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Qwaiiplayer ( talk) 03:55, 10 October 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) 00:25, 29 November 2022 (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) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
I watchlist the discussions I participate in, as should you. There is no need to leave "talkback" templates here.
I don't edit Wikipedia to collect baubles. Please don't leave me "awards" or "barnstars".
This site does not appear to meet WP:RS. There are some documents that are out of copyright and should be linked to Gutenberg or Wikisource, not to this site; there are also essays that qualify as primary self-published sources. In every case we should be using reliable independent secondary sources instead. Just exactly as we should not be using mirrors of libertarian economic texts on the "Library of Econmics and Liberty", a libertarian think-tank. Guy ( Help!) 11:14, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- I disagree that MIA is unreliable—it is, as its name suggests, an archive, and a fairly large (in terms not just of its collection but its staff) and well-established one. But even if it is unreliable, since it is the only source for the claims in the article, it should be replaced, not removed. (This is in line with the recommendations made by the content guideline you linked to.) If you still feel that MIA is so unreliable as to be unsuitable for use as a source for the basic publication data of the Deutsch–Französische Jahrbücher, even on an interim basis, then I invite you to start a discussion at WP:RSN. — Psychonaut ( talk) 11:37, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- @
JzG: I see you're now engaging in mass removal of MIA references from other articles. I've reverted these edits for now. Before making such drastic and wide-ranging edits across the encyclopedia, please first seek consensus on
WP:RSN. —
Psychonaut (
talk) 11:41, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- "Mass" as in seven. Every time anyone says "mass removal" - at least to date -it has been someone supporting a website that we should not be using, such as a quackery site or a predatory journal. Feel free to show that's not the case this time.
Guy (
Help!) 13:02, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- Were you really planning on stopping at seven? (Given the response to your previous RSN post on the matter, I'm a bit taken aback that you thought it was a good idea to remove even these.) — Psychonaut ( talk) 16:36, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- "Mass" as in seven. Every time anyone says "mass removal" - at least to date -it has been someone supporting a website that we should not be using, such as a quackery site or a predatory journal. Feel free to show that's not the case this time.
Guy (
Help!) 13:02, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Langguth Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:34, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you voted on (2 RfCs, actually, one less than six months ago and another a year ago). The new RfC is at:
Specifically, it asks that "religion = none" be allowed in the infobox.
The first RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:
- 15 June 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.
The result of that RfC was "unambiguously in favour of omitting the parameter altogether for 'none' " and despite the RfC title, additionally found that "There's no obvious reason why this would not apply to historical or fictional characters, institutions etc.", and that nonreligions listed in the religion entry should be removed when found "in any article".
The second RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:
- 31 December 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion in infoboxes.
The result of that RfC was that the "in all Wikipedia articles, without exception, nonreligions should not be listed in the Religion= parameter of the infobox.".
Note: I am informing everyone who commented on the above RfCs, whether they supported or opposed the final consensus. -- Guy Macon ( talk) 03:35, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you voted on (2 RfCs, actually, one less than six months ago and another a year ago). The new RfC is at:
Specifically, it asks that "religion = none" be allowed in the infobox.
The first RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:
- 15 June 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.
The result of that RfC was "unambiguously in favour of omitting the parameter altogether for 'none' " and despite the RfC title, additionally found that "There's no obvious reason why this would not apply to historical or fictional characters, institutions etc.", and that nonreligions listed in the religion entry should be removed when found "in any article".
The second RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:
- 31 December 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion in infoboxes.
The result of that RfC was that the "in all Wikipedia articles, without exception, nonreligions should not be listed in the Religion= parameter of the infobox.".
Note: I am informing everyone who commented on the above RfCs, whether they supported or opposed the final consensus. -- Guy Macon ( talk) 03:39, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
Nomination of JoAnn Wilson for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article JoAnn Wilson is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JoAnn Wilson 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. No longer a penguin ( talk) 08:48, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Psychonaut. 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 file File:Parrot cga1h.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Unused, unclear use/purpose
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Zinclithium (
talk) 01:36, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of Chuck Bueche for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chuck Bueche is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chuck Bueche until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article. THE NEW ImmortalWizard (chat) 17:44, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Nomination of Acme Records for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Acme Records is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acme Records until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article. ThatMontrealIP ( talk) 04:20, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Nomination of Wailing Wall (band) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wailing Wall (band) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wailing Wall (band) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article. SL93 ( talk) 02:17, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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 |
The file File:Parrot vic.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:01, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
The file File:Parrot vicii.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:01, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
|
| Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Dude95 is now complete. Thank you for your assistance in the evaluation of this CCI! |
Believe it or not there's progress being made on all this old stuff again -- Wizardman 03:25, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
Just a puzzled observation, regarding this edit: While it's understandable that you were duped by the deceptive bluelink in the entry for the Shannon McKelden novel, due to not looking closely, the fact that the link to the Seattle band was red was hard to overlook. I can't find any evidence that there was ever an article for the band, so there is no obvious explanation for your mistake. (Moreover, the disambiguator "(U.S. band)" is against MOS, and should be "(US band)", or rather, "(American band)".) I have now removed both. -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 16:57, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Caucuses of the United States Congress by term requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian ( talk) 01:47, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
The article RefTeX has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (software) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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.
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 06:54, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Daniel Murphy (computer scientist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page TECO. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:18, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 |
The article British Chess Variants Society has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline nor the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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.
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 04:04, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
The article List of users' groups has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Article from 16 years ago that is not being updated. Technology has changed greatly since 2005 and I don't think most of these groups still exist. Most of the recent edits to this page have been to remove groups whose articles have been deleted through AFDs.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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.
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:17, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Georgian National Olympic Committee logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:27, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
Nomination of British Chess Variants Society for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/British Chess Variants Society until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article.
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:14, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
The article Hoover Military Academy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non-notable topic without any references. No substantive improvements for sixteen(!) years.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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.
Andrew
327 13:36, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
"Mole (character)" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
Mole (character). The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 6#Mole (character) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. (
JayPlaysStuff |
talk to me |
What I've been up to) 01:52, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 |
I saw you are one or the main editor behind the "vinpocetin" article here on Wikipedia. I'd like to ask you about this drug. I am under medical supervision and using it combined with methylphenidate (Ritalin, Concerta) to treat some debilitating symptoms I have been struggling for many years (short term memory issues, attention, slow thought speed, etc).
Do you have an email or other form of contact so we can talk better? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clabatmill ( talk • contribs) 15:53, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
- Wikipedia isn't the right place to obtain medical advice, especially since in most cases you have no idea who the editors are and no way of verifying or assessing their medical qualifications. If you have a question about your use of this drug, then please direct it to your doctor. If you just have a general question about the content of the article, you can ask on Talk:Vinpocetine. — Psychonaut ( talk) 17:35, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
Nomination of List of people on the postage stamps of the Soviet Union for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people on the postage stamps of the Soviet Union until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article.
Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 01:06, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of Bankleitzahl for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bankleitzahl until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Qwaiiplayer ( talk) 03:55, 10 October 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) 00:25, 29 November 2022 (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) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)