Hi Boneso! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 00:33, Wednesday, January 11, 2017 (UTC)

Hi Boneso! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 01:58, Friday, January 13, 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for helping to improve SkeptiCamp. Don't forget to chime in and mention your improvements at the AFD currently underway. Cheers. --Krelnik (talk) 20:02, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks for the advice Krelnik. 8==8 Boneso (talk) 00:39, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Anthony Pratkanis at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! TonyBallioni (talk) 22:12, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Brodie's Law (act), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the .
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Sulfurboy (talk) 15:39, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Boneso! good day... but iam still thinking if what you said was real. Is there an actual blue whale game?... i think so. According to my opinion this game is like a bad game which kills weak people, but who knows.... might be one of the later geniuses. But i'm thinking that yours maybe better.... the game might not even exist but what about all the things in the internet? Plzz reply.

-many thanks- from Arepticous — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arepticous (talk • contribs) 11:56, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Arepticous Thanks for the comment. I can't see anything in the citations that confirms the game. Only that there are investigations into the suicide and connections to the game. Budekin pleaded guilty to 15 deaths and was convicted to 2 and there was no mention of the game being connected, If he's admitted to 15 but only connected to 2 there are some issues with his story. I think he's lying for some reason. 8==8 Boneso (talk) 23:15, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying Good day, But the game is in our countries new!!!! Are they lying? Anyway i do not tend to investigate this game further! Good day friend Arepticous (talk) 01:42, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Boneso. 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]

Especially when the other editor did such a good job, and I rode in to stomp all over it! Enjoy your 3-dayer.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 22:25, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for joining the WikiProject, and welcome! —PaleoNeonate – 01:28, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome PaleoNeonate. I've been around for just over 12 months and would like to get more involved. 8==8 Boneso (talk) 02:03, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's completely off-topic for the AFD (why I'm posting it here), but saying that something that happened four hours ago is an "error made in the past" comes across as facilitating WP:POLEMIC. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 01:39, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Hijiri88: 4 hours ago is in the past, and the error you refer to has no relevance to the discussion at hand. I have no beef with either of you. I am interested in the task at hand which is whether or not this article should be deleted. I agree with you that the article should be deleted due to its lack of notability. What I would like to see is that both of you give the closing admin something to consider. Frame your arguments around WP policy and guidelines, and to not argue about matters related to other topics or base your arguments on errors made in the past, whether the past is 5 minutes ago or 5 years ago. Be the better person and don't get drawn into off topic discussions that turn into slanging matches. 8==8 Boneso (talk) 02:08, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That argument still doesn't make sense to me: at the time I wrote the stuff you called me out for, that edit from four (now more like five) hours ago was in the future, not the past, whereas what you called me out for was in the past. And anyway: you can guarantee that once the page is deleted, the POLEMIC page in question will be updated to call you out for calling the sources promotional; this will be no more or less acceptable than when it was made to claim that I was unjustified in blanking the plagiarism in the Mottainai Grandma article. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 02:28, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, Boneso, and thanks for becoming a member of Women in Red. I see you have already written a well-prepared article on Connie Johnson (fundraiser). I hope there will be many more. Please let me know if you run into any difficulties or need any help. Happy edting!--Ipigott (talk) 09:21, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		Hello again from Women in Red! July 2018 worldwide online editathons: New: Sub-Saharan Africa Film + stage 20th-century Women Rock Continuing: Notable women, broadly-construed! Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): Are we losing momentum? London calling (the Mayor of London!) Publication about Wikipedia's coverage of women mathematicians Women in Red is featured in Toolhub
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:04, 28 June 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

--Ipigott (talk) 09:21, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome Ipigott. I wrote Connie Johnson (fundraiser) for my wife, who has survived breast cancer. Connie and her brother Samuel were an inspiration to her when she was having chemo. Please take a look at my page on Margaret Battin, I think you'll enjoy it. She wasn't in red, but she had a 2 line stub. I hate stubs. 8==8 Boneso (talk) 21:30, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Boneso: You've done a great job with Margaret Battin too. Destubbing is important. Keep up the good work.--Ipigott (talk) 07:40, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

	The Special Barnstar
	Hi! Thank you for your recent contributions to Wikipedia. Great job at Brodie's Law. Look forward to reading more from you. MX (✉ • ✎) 18:26, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I am E. Whittaker, I am working with Wikimedia’s Scoring Team to create a labeled dataset, and potentially a tool, to help editors deal with incivility when they encounter it on talk pages. A full write-up of the study can be found here: m:Research:Civil_Behavior_Interviews. We are currently recruiting editors to be interviewed about their experiences with incivility on talk pages. Would you be interested in being interviewed? I am contacting you because of your involvement in Wikipedia’s Women in Red project. The interviews should take ~1 hour, and will be conducted over BlueJeans (which does allow interviews to be recorded). If, so, please email me at ewhit@umich.edu in order to schedule an interview.

Thank you Ewitch51 (talk) 19:29, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Boneso. 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]

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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:52, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]