Archives

1: August–October 2008 2: November 2008 3: December 2008 4: January–February 2009 5: March–April 2009 6: May–July 2009 7: August–December 2009 8: January–May 2010 9: June 2010 – present

"A 2012 analysis of data on individual participants in acupuncture studies looked at migraine and tension headaches. The analysis showed that actual acupuncture was more effective than either no acupuncture or simulated acupuncture in reducing headache frequency or severity."[1][84] See Acupuncture#Headaches and migraines. This is a cut and paste from the source.

"A 2014 Australian clinical study involving 282 men and women showed that needle and laser acupuncture were modestly better at relieving knee pain from osteoarthritis than no treatment, but not better than simulated (sham) laser acupuncture."[2][84] This is a cut and paste from the source. See Acupuncture#Extremity conditions.

According to NCCAM, "results of a systematic review that combined data from 11 clinical trials with more than 1,200 participants suggested that acupuncture (and acupuncture point stimulation) may help with certain symptoms associated with cancer treatments."[3][84] This is a cut and paste from the article. See Acupuncture#Cancer-related conditions.

Is it a weight violation to use an article that is not a review when there are way better references already in the article or is it plagiarism? The TCM page is a different situation when there are not plenty of sources for the drug research section on pseudoscience. QuackGuru (talk) 02:12, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's not really clear to me what you're asking, and since you aren't using quotation marks or italics or anything else in this message it's not even clear to me what parts of your message are your comments and what are pasted from articles. Also keep in mind that I'm not familiar with these articles, I only just stumbled across them recently, so I don't have much context for the issues you're raising. If you have a question for me please present it a little more clearly so I don't have to spend time deciphering it. Thanks, rʨanaɢ (talk) 03:01, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I edited my previous comment and added the source to make it more clear. You brought up the issue of plag on my talk page with a related article. The text in the quotes are a cut and paste but with the acupuncture article the text is not in quotation marks. Let's start with one question. Is that WP:PLAG? QuackGuru (talk) 06:29, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Let me stop you right there. There is no rule saying that if there is other plagiarism (or any other sort of problem) in one article, then it's OK for you to add more. There is no rule saying that if I report one instance of plagiarism (or any other sort of problem) then I have to read the entire article and report every other one. I happened to glance at just that one sentence of the article and its source (that is literally the only source in the article that I opened up and read) and saw that it was obviously plagiarized, so I dealt with it and alerted you to the issue. I am under no obligation to devote myself to scanning the entire article for it, so I'm not sure what you're trying to get at here. If you legitimately don't understand what plagiarism is then I can try to explain it more, but if you're trying to suggest that my notification to you was somehow "wrong" because there are other instances of plagiarism that I didn't report, then you are wasting your time. rʨanaɢ (talk) 13:10, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Rjanag! I've opened a discussion at Talk:Acupuncture#Citation_out_of_context about the use of the Nature editorial. I've concluded my opinion into four points. Would you care to take a look?

What's substantially different from the usage of the source at Traditional Chinese Medicine, is that when the context of the quote is restored, the whole source is solely about TCM, not about acupuncture. A mere "TCM as mainly pseudoscience, with no logical mechanism of action for the majority of its treatments." alone is undue weight, but if we include the rest of the paragraph in the article, it'd say: "Advocates respond by claiming that researchers are missing aspects of the art, notably the interactions between different ingredients in traditional therapies.". IMHO, it clearly doesn't fit to Acupuncture.

I have suggested removing the unfit entries, and finding for better sources. Administrator Kww, however, replied to me that: " I would like to suggest that the next time you want to misrepresent the contents of a source, you should refrain from doing so.". I'd appreciate if you could have a look. Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 14:32, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No thanks, I do not wish to continue in the discussions within this topic area. It's like herding cats. rʨanaɢ (talk) 22:41, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I understand you perfectly. Thanks anyway! :-) Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 18:18, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

support for ease and transparency
Thank you for your (seemingly) tireless effort to make the DYK process easy to understand, user-friendly and transparent to follow, willing to try suggestions and drop them if not wanted. Thank you also for patiently explaining again and again, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:53, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Three years, you were the 72nd recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:54, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Eight years ago, you were recipient no. 72 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:36, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have had previous involvement with the editor Hijiri88. I would welcome any input you might see fit to offer at WP:ANI#Ongoing gross incivility of Hijiri88. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 18:26, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to invite you to join the WikiProject R&B and Soul Music. We are currently on demand for new members, the project was dying, but with your help we can revive it and make it one of the best WikiProjects. Make me sure that you'll think about this and remember cooperative works can do amazing things. Regards Dfrr (talk) 22:55, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Rjanag. Way back in 2009, you participated in an AfD discussion for Forever Oeuvre, and voted to delete it. The article was deleted, but was subsequently recreated. The new article did not address any of the concerns whatsoever and is in the same bad state it was in before. Thusly, I have relisted it at AfD, and would very much appreciate it if you gave your input. It has passed the initial 7 day period and has been relisted again at AfD to establish a clearer consensus, so I'm now reaching out to you. There has thusfar only been one other vote, and that is for deletion. Thanks, Jacedc (talk) 18:29, 2 May 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) 13:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:JephJacques.JPG. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 07:00, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect T:DYK/NN. Since you had some involvement with the T:DYK/NN redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Pppery (talk) 22:01, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rjanag. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

• Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
• A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rjanag.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rjanag. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Questionable content 1158-4.JPG. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:44, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

• A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
• Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news

• When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
• Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
• The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

• JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

13:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Template:Mergesomewhere has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 06:13, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

i was working on the jhosse y su grupo lora page. i takes time translating since he's a "latin artist". this was also a project in which i needed help from the latin music group Mccoolarge (talk) 04:12, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you need time, you can work on the page in a personal sandbox (e.g., User:Mccoolarge/Jhoose Y Su Grupo Lora) and then once it's ready you can move the page to a real article.

You will need to make sure, though, that your page meets Wikipedia's content criteria, particularly regarding notability. If the page doesn't meet these criteria, it is likely that it will be deleted again. rʨanaɢ (talk) 04:15, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rjanag. 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)[reply]

You are a great guy! Thanks for being so excellent. Wow, I was stopping by to thank you for making my first solo effort at managing a DYK nom so much easier, and now you've even found a way to make thanking you easier! A remarkable Wikipedian! Innisfree987 (talk) 03:35, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

00:35, 12 September 2009 Rjanag (talk | contribs) deleted page Pet Protection Agreement (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement: nearly word-for-word)

It has come to my knowledge that you have flagged my article page for Pet Protection Agreement. This Agreement was created and authored by myself, Rachel Hirschfeld. I am the owner of www.pettrustattorney.com, www.petprotectionagreement.com, and authored two books on pet trusts. I am the nations leading lawyer on this subject of pet trusts. I founded the Animal Law Committee at the New York County Bar Association and presently Co-Chair. I also teach pet trusts at New York University. Please undelete the article page for Pet Protection Agreement.

Rachel Hirschfeld — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soupboneh (talk • contribs) 18:54, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Chinese word "weiji". Since you had some involvement with the Chinese word "weiji" redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:29, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Tian'anmen West Statioonn. Since you had some involvement with the Tian'anmen West Statioonn redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. PRehse (talk) 08:21, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I noticed the Ürümqi barnstar you made, and since that page is easily the best Uyghur-related article on here, I thought I might as well mention that there's an ongoing RfC on the Xinjiang conflict page if that sounds interesting. ─ ReconditeRodent « talk · contribs » 19:02, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rjanag. 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)[reply]

Administrators must secure their accounts The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised. Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:50, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have not made any edits or logged actions in the preceding twelve months. Because you have been inactive, your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to activity within the next month.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to rejoin the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to rejoin the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:01, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have not made any edits or logged actions in the preceding twelve months. Because you have been inactive, your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to activity within the next several days.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to rejoin the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to rejoin the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:00, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have not made any edits or logged actions in the preceding twelve months. Because you have been inactive, your administrative permissions have been removed.

Subject to certain time limits and other restrictions, your administrative permissions may be returned upon request at WP:BN.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — xaosflux ^Talk 00:14, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of re-education through labor camps in China 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/List of re-education through labor camps in China 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. Khu'hamgaba Kitap ^talk 23:52, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:HoboNews.jpg. 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) 18:35, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:DYK userboxes has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page. —⁠andrybak (talk) 21:33, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Uw-ew has been nominated for merging with Template:Uw-3rr. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:09, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Uw-3rr has been nominated for merging with Template:Uw-ew. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Adam9007 (talk) 18:00, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Wikipedia:NLIST. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 4#Wikipedia:NLIST until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:23, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome

Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:48, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

... and again today! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I read your first nomination to delete Jason Lau and I couldn’t understand how it wasn’t deleted so I’ve nominated him again, please vote and join the discussion. Thanks Australianblackbelt (talk) 19:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, you contributed significantly to Chopsticks. I thought I would check with you. I think the article can use a holistic revision. I posted a proposal on the talk page. It would be great to have your feedback before or while the revision takes place. Fred Hsu (talk) 20:23, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Lists of English words with uncommon properties 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:26, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Nine years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:03, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:DYKsuggestion has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 08:53, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:DYKre has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 08:56, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:DYKX has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 21:43, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:DYKY has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 21:43, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:DYKfile has been nominated for merging with Template:DYK talk. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Gonnym (talk) 22:01, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rjanag! You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed at Wikipedia:Local Embassy, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over 6 months.

Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to resubscribe, you can do so at any time by visiting Wikipedia:Local Embassy.

Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:00, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:DYK archive editintro has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. User:GKFX^talk 13:17, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always - miss you --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:46, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive

On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? Sign up here!

You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. (t · c) buidhe 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I see you’re a member of the WikiProject China - I’ve made some proposals to update the article about Pinduoduo, posted here Pinduoduo#Suggestions for article improvements to resolve NPOV and Advertising issues.I have a conflict of interest and can’t do the edits myself. Would you have time to look at these and weigh in? Gratitude. Snowy2000 (talk) 20:01, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Wikipedia:PUFFERY has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 27 § Wikipedia:PUFFERY until a consensus is reached. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:17, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sinhala script 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. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:35, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Wikipedia:PUFFERY has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 25 § Wikipedia:PUFFERY until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 02:00, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Lang-zh/editintro has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 22:01, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:27, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]