Archive 1: Jan 2008 – Feb 2009
Archive 2: Mar 2009 – Dec 2013

I added two people to the page and I posted in the tea room and no one posted that I did something bad or wrong and had references. There is no reason to delete those. Its no wonder the list is so thin, if you are deleting entries without any reason given. I will post to the tea room again re this matter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_who_disappeared_mysteriously Apriv40dj (talk) 00:12, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I think you must have me confused with someone else. I've never edited List of people who disappeared mysteriously. See the history of that page. Regards, Qwfp (talk) 10:23, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It has been very strange. I posted in the tea house to see if it was ok to create new sections on that page and add people and I got no replies, so I added them, then it got deleted reason cited as "no article about person", so then I created the article and then it was deleted in about 20 minutes or so I posted all reasons and objections and no one read them as far as I know, and I also followed up on each time I got a message saying this or that person deleted your article or entry and that is how your name came to me. It's not like a picked you at random. Maybe its a bug or maybe the person who did it is pretending to be you? However, my point is only that if no one replies, then how can I know that new people can't be added to that list unless they are on Wikipedia to begin with. I only found that out by going on to chat. I don't see why rules are kept secrets. I don't know why this happened it your case, but I only followed up as each message came to my yahoo email with links for me to follow up on the matter. Apriv40dj (talk) 14:01, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your explanation. That's most odd, I can only think it was a glitch somewhere in the notification system as I've never edited List of people who disappeared mysteriously and I don't have the power to delete articles as I'm not an WP:administrator. The best place to discuss what belongs in that list is Talk:List of people who disappeared mysteriously -- I see you've posted something there. You may need to wait a day or two for replies as not everyone looks at their WP:watchlist every day or has email notifications turned on. Regards, Qwfp (talk) 14:13, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Allen3 ^talk 02:58, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there - you recently approved some pending edits on Paul Johnson (American football coach). Those edits added information about a football season that has not yet occurred and won't even start for another four months. An IP reverted most of it and I cleaned out the rest. I just wanted to let you know and ask that you double-check your approvals in the future. Thanks, and have a good day! --ElHef (Meep?) 13:55, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I know hardly anything about American football or its seasons. I try to review edits in line with the the WP:Pending changes and WP:Reviewing guidelines, viz.: "The purpose of reviewing is to catch and filter out obvious vandalism and obviously inappropriate edits .. Reviewers do not take responsibility for the correctness of edits they accept. A reviewer only ensures that the changes introduced to the article are broadly acceptable for viewing by a casual reader." Regards, Qwfp (talk) 17:11, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I suppose it's obviously inappropriate to me (who knows quite a bit about American football), but I can understand where you're coming from. I just wanted to bring it to your attention. Thanks! --ElHef (Meep?) 18:47, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I will try and find one now! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilred234 (talk • contribs) 17:43, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Editor, Did I violate a wikipedia guideline or what was wrong with my edition on the photon energy? Vsilv (talk) 20:53, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to do with me! (Maybe there was a glitch in the editor notification system.) Looking at the history of the Physical cosmology page, it appears User:David J Johnson reverted your change because it included a reference to another wikipedia article, and Wikipedia's policy on verifiability says 'Do not use articles from Wikipedia as sources'. Regards, Qwfp (talk) 10:02, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. From work at Carnegie Medal-winner Kevin Brooks (writer) I know that you know template {{myspace}}. Perhaps you have judgment or template-knowledge regarding what external sites to list, and how, for Greenaway Medal-winner Jon Klassen. See Talk:Jon Klassen#Dead links, official sites. --P64 (talk) 18:34, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.42.192.105 (talk) 21:22, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, today i was reading the article about musical triangle, i just would like to mention its use in the east javanese music Gandrung where it plays an important roll.

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.230.119.178 (talk) 16:02, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Go on then, I don't know why you're asking my permission. Qwfp (talk) 17:22, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, OK, I get you now. Philroc^{My contribs} 15:28, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... Thank you very much buddy. Now I'll do some more searches about it and will create the article myself. Thanks again.Jacksparrow43 (talk) 06:43, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed earlier that her spouse was incorrectly named he is Gerard Hall not Hill as shown. I changed it but now my change appears to have been removed. As Gerard is my cousin, I think I have some inside knowledge here, could you correct this please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spudman01 (talk • contribs) 22:07, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't change it, you added the name Gerard Hall to the 'partner' field of the infobox. The article did not previously name her spouse, and nor should it without a reliable source. Wikipedia has stricter rules about references for Biographies of living people than about other articles. Qwfp (talk) 22:26, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Qwfp, just thought I'd let you know that i've filled out the Matrix Fitness Pro Cycling article with information from a dummy page I had in my sandbox. Peace XyZAn (talk) 18:58, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks! Happy New Year, Qwfp (talk) 19:13, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Randi. Since you had some involvement with the Randi redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Ceannlann gorm (talk) 21:07, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Did you change diarrhea to diarrhoea?¿ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.51.53.26 (talk) 22:08, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly sure I did no such thing. Qwfp (talk) 21:58, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

• Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
• Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
• Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
• Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
• Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
• Research coordinators: run reference services

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normandy_landings

Please leave the "1944" with the "June" in this page.

In this context, the "June" could be from any year, which makes it ambiguous.

We are writing a timelining system for Wikipedia and in this context, our software has no idea what year this "June" is.

Thanks Jeff — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jroehl (talk • contribs) 18:50, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, Jroehl, I'll leave the "1944" with the "June". Not sure why you feel the need to tell me though, as I've never edited that page. But should decide to do so, I'll be sure to leave the "1944" with the "June". Thanks, Qwfp (talk) 19:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thankyou very much dude! Jroehl (talk) 20:33, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect For crying out loud. Since you had some involvement with the For crying out loud redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 05:37, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, if I'm correct in contacting you, which I may not be, I just wanted to ask where I might be able to find some of the sources used but not listed in the bibliography for the "The Northern Echo" (Newspaper) Article, as I'm writing an essay on it for my university!

Thanks in advance,

T.

PS: this is the link to the article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Northern_Echo — Preceding unsigned comment added by The.history.student (talk • contribs) 12:38, 29 October 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) 13:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Miss Millie's logo.gif. 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) 18:46, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:45, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I find it hard to believe that Škoda Auto isn't the WP:primary topic here, but I can't be bothered to try to make it so. Qwfp (talk) 16:34, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind looking at Category:Statistician stubs and Category:Statistics stubs? If George E. P. Box does not belong in Category:Statistician stubs, then I assume that Hadley Wickham should not be in either Category:Statistician stubs or Category:Statistics stubs -- and there may be many other similar problems waiting for someone like you to correct them. (No good deed goes unpunished ;-) DavidMCEddy (talk) 20:49, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that Hadley Wickham is no longer a stub so I've removed the stub templates from that page. Can I be bothered looking through all the articles in those categories? Er, not just at the moment... Qwfp (talk) 21:23, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I hope everything is great with you :) Could you please take a look at the articles about Elin Rombo and Lena Sundström. Much appreciated.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:05, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello i dont think that content is for Wikipedia. Its more like stupid yellow press and is not good loking on the site like this. Sorry for bad english — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.107.89.146 (talk) 12:44, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

John Tukey's paper can be found in the journal, Annals of Statistics. Yuanfangdelang (talk) 11:14, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That would provide a reliable source for Tukey's criticism of optimization in statistics, but you were going far beyond that. It is original research to apply his criticism of optimization to maximum likelihood estimation, or to include your unpublished opinion that "the property of an optimizer defined for sampling data points is not only a statistical function but also a random variable".

As User:Mgnbar suggested on the Talk page for the Statistics article, if you wish to air your own ideas on the web you should do so on "something like the statistics section of Stack Overflow" ,i.e. http://stats.stackexchange.com, not on Wikipedia. Qwfp (talk) 12:27, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Yuanfangdelang: since you appear to have a much more extreme opinion than Tukey here - why don't you write a new paper in the Annals of Statistics on this matter? So that the scientific community (and not Wikipedia, which is like talking to a bunch of librarians about your math research!) can study your opinion, evaluate it, review it? You are in the wrong place. HelpUsStopSpam (talk) 07:39, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

> Would be correct interpretations of Bayesian credible intervals, but not confidence intervals

Do you mind mentioning this in the article? Link to the "credible intervals" would make it more obvious that it's merely a terminology misunderstanding, and not just plain wrong. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:AA13:F541:3000:597A:A53D:402:C256 (talk) 10:05, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:GenStat logo.gif. 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) 17:39, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm working on the Czech version of the page Philosophy_of_statistics and I'd like to use your image [[1]] to illustrate the given consensus about the 1.96 rule. Do you allow me to upload it on Czech Wikimedia commons and use it in this manner? Thanks! --Chlebashořčicí (talk) 19:16, 8 November 2016 (UTC) Nevermind, I decided for another one[[2]], sorry.--Chlebashořčicí (talk) 19:22, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello i has edited the social democratic part page stating they are centre-left and social democratic but i was removed why was this — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scottish socialist (talk • contribs) 21:29, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Simply because all reliable references in the lead refer to the ideology of the party as "centrism". You are already past the 3RR contributions and could be blocked for edit warring. Please stop now. Also, please sign any comments you make on Talk pages. Thank you. David J Johnson (talk) 21:42, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea why any of this has anything to do with me. Qwfp (talk) 06:35, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Irish tea shop. Since you had some involvement with the Irish tea shop redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. AmaryllisGardener ^talk 00:52, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

On the J.B. Fenby edit history page, it says "Qwfp moved page F. B. Fenby to J. B. Fenby: Joseph Beverley Fenby, per article. See discussion on Talk page re the confusion of intials."

I'm a bit of a Wikipedia newbie (been around a while, but only at a basic level) and cannot find the talk that you reference. I'm doing some research into J.B. Fenby and have come across confusion with E.B. Fenby as well.

Could you give me a link, or repost the details on the confusion re initials?

Thanks! --ElectricFeet (talk) 17:21, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Got it now! Found out about article talk pages and have seen it. Sorry to bother you! --ElectricFeet (talk) 17:26, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good point. If they weren't stubs, we could add it though, couldn't we?Zigzig20s (talk) 10:29, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'd disagree - while I'd consider it appropriate to add to the page about the researcher's university as the body primarily responsible for oversight of the researcher's conduct, I don't see it's appropriate for the journal's page when the journal has acted in accordance with the guidelines at Scientific misconduct#Responsibility of journals, e.g. by retracting the paper in question. As an occasional paper referee myself who once attempted to detect fraud by statistical methods, I know that scientific fraud cannot realistically be detected by the journal at the time of publication in many or even most cases, so I don't think isolated incidents are noteworthy in the context of an article about the journal. Regards, Qwfp (talk) 11:01, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying the history of the group Squeeze on the talk page of the article about this band. Vorbee (talk) 10:52, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop restoring this useless tag - it's not helped the article one bit. Please discuss it on the article's talkpage. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:02, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 1.96 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/1.96 (2nd nomination) 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. CapitalSasha ~ talk 20:35, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hai sir pls give me a chance in musiq — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akhileshkeerthi (talk • contribs) 06:43, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing—Public Space Protection Order—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WPCW (talk • contribs) 12:11, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Common univariate probability distributions has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 03:11, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. What's the problem? The term refers to a group of varieties rather than to one specific variety. Wolfdog (talk) 12:55, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"West Country English is English language varieties and accents" isn't grammatically correct is it, in British English at least? The plurals and singulars don't seem to agree. "West Country English is one of the English language varieties and accents" is at least grammatical. If the term refers to a group of varieties, why not say "West Country English is a group of English language varieties and accents"? --Qwfp (talk) 13:11, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Qwfp I wrote a small article about Draft:Valentin Amrhein. He is a colleague of Sander Greenland and both want to retire statistical significance. Do you want to review the article? Thanks and best wishes, Buerap (talk) 23:31, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it is personal bias coming from my own field, but in econometrics the term "score test" is almost never used even though—curiously—the LM test is usually calculated using Rao's score form rather than the Lagrangean. How are we going to settle this issue though? Citing the main textbooks from different fields? In that case, see Hayashi, Econometrics, Wooldridge, Introductory Econometrics, and Kennedy, Guide to Econometrics. --bender235 (talk) 02:07, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've copied your comment to Talk:Lagrange multiplier test#Article title: LM test vs. score test and replied there, as it seems a more appropriate place to continue the discussion. Hope that's ok with you. --Qwfp (talk) 22:05, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Portal:Chortle. Since you had some involvement with the Portal:Chortle redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 21:02, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Following your advice on User_talk:Sandstein/Archives/2019/August I have added sections on "Covariance mapping" and "Two-dimensional infrared spectroscopy" on the covariance matrix page and corrected some inconsistent typography and notation in "Block matrices", "Covariance matrix as a parameter of a distribution" and "Estimation" sections. My intention was to visualise the mathematical formulae and make the added sections brief but accessible to a non-specialist. I would appreciate your opinion if I have succeeded.

The covariance matrix page is getting long. It may be worth splitting "Covariance mapping" or all "Applications" to a separate page. What do you think? FizykLJF (talk) 14:39, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing the image syntax - I was making the change on the bus and the wifi kept crashing - I wasn't even sure it was uploaded, so thanks v much! (Lajmmoore (talk) 08:21, 29 October 2019 (UTC))[reply]

You're welcome Lajmmoore, in fact I started editing it to fix the categories that had her as male (not the one you added) then noticed a red warning about the infobox image syntax when I previewed it. Qwfp (talk) 12:43, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i questioned how to look up whether the subject was a listed building at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yew Tree Manor and you kindly replied, thanks, including your finding a nearby house. I wonder if you could also look at "Cray House, Henley-on-Thames". This was formerly an article, was deleted by a PROD back in 2010 which I assume was not much noticed, with comment by deleter who is U.S.-based like me: "01:31, 26 July 2010 Nyttend talk contribs deleted page Cray House, Henley-on-Thames (Expired PROD, concern was: I'm unable to find treatment in reliable, independent sources that would satisfy the GNG. Does not appear to be a listed building.)"

I haven't seen the original article which was deleted, and it is not included in List of country houses in the United Kingdom, but it looks to me that the house is or was substantial:

• There is this Ebay item, a 1922 photo that makes it appear quite substantial to me
• There exists this book coverage about it which continues here, so making seven pages out of the book "Small Country Houses of To-Day", perhaps published around 1922? Pages 172-177 or so.
  • There's info about that book here: its author is Lawrence Weaver; it was reprinted or made available in PDF by "Forgotten Books" in 2015. I presume it is out of copyright. Or maybe it is a magazine?
  • A full text in ASCII, poorly scanned, of Small Country Houses of To-Day available at here at archive.org, but I can't find the house in that.

Searching at https://historicengland.org.uk/ as you suggested brings me to a Cray House or two which appear to be completely different based on photos. But I wonder if the Henley-on-Thames one is included in a historic district/area listing, and/or if there are other obvious sources which might be available to develop an article about it. Could you possibly please take a look about it? sincerely, --Doncram (talk) 04:50, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Could you help me translating the statement in the source? It says: "[...]"One Day in September" written from the documentary film of the same name[...]". So, the film came first and the book is based upon the film, right? Or is it more like the interview suggests, that the book continues the story where the film ends? (I ask this in details, because it is wrongly stated in the german WP too, suggesting the film is based upon the book, which seems totally wrong. Also I didn't find any sources explaining the (or even mentioning any) relation of the film and the book.) Thx, Amtiss, SNAFU ? 21:14, 29 January 2020 (UTC) It is about these edits. -- Amtiss, SNAFU ? 21:15, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good questions... After some more searching I've found a letter in The Guardian by Kevin Macdonald, the film's director, in which he says "... the book accompanying the film (written by Simon Reeve and published by Faber ) ... was undertaken because we realised there were many aspects of the story we could not include in a 90-minute film." That seems pretty definitive. I'll add it as an additional reference in Simon Reeve (British TV presenter)#One Day in September. --Qwfp (talk) 22:39, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your research! -- Amtiss, SNAFU ? 23:52, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for your valuable feedback! Purplefishy (talk) 07:48, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Contagious cerebrophagia. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 19#Contagious cerebrophagia until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 03:36, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chomsky says no, and that it simply changes and that evolution is a very different process. It seems you disagree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SamPepys (talk • contribs) 21:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I'm afraid I've only just seen your message and I have absolutely no idea what you're referring to. --Qwfp (talk) 15:41, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gordon said: “It was a ruptured splenic artery aneurysm which was the official term. I was about to perform a concert in Orillia and was airlifted to the hospital near Ontario where I was in a coma for six weeks. I was –for all purposes – dead. It took 28 pints of blood to get me through, and to celebrate I did have a glass of red wine afterward…only one glass, mind!” 2001:56A:7E20:7D00:70ED:5B86:570C:64E9 (talk) 13:00, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.beat-magazine.co.uk/2020/gordon-lightfoot-canadian-national-treasure/ 2001:56A:7E20:7D00:70ED:5B86:570C:64E9 (talk) 13:03, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Josie Lawrence, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jim Sweeney.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Draft:Bodyform, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 01:37, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@NmWTfs85lXusaybq I see from the edit history that I created a redirect from this title almost 14 years ago, but can honestly say I have no memory of doing so. I do not consider it is worthy of a separate article myself. I do not wish to participate in the deletion discussion, however. Qwfp (talk) 05:43, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, this notification was sent automatically by Twinkle. Now I learn that this draft was created by an IP editor. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 10:04, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:GiroRosaLogo.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) 17:17, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § Category:WikiProject X members on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Qwerfjkltalk 09:33, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Qwfp. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bodyform, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 11:05, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]