Welcome!

Hello, Feudonym, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ ^{walkie-talkie} 07:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Cover-front.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Ashwednesday.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 12:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In a recent edit, you called Betacommand a 'piece of shit'. Just because you used an acronym doesn't change the fact that it's a personal attack, incivil, and has no place on this project. I understand that you're frustrated, but that's an unacceptable way to respond. Please use better judgment in the future and take a moment to review the WP:NPA policy. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 04:09, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images were deleted even though I added two sets of lengthy fair use rationales for each. (also pos could mean anything :)

Thanks for uploading Image:The Kinks-Ultimate collection.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm curious why you arbitrarily changed some but not all of the awards and nominations listed to bold face print. If you intended the bold faced names to represent winners and the remainder to represent nominees, there was no explanation alerting readers to this fact. I have reverted it to the way it was, since there was no confusion with that format. Thank you. MovieMadness (talk) 17:36, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again! I just added data to this article. Because you did such a terrific job cleaning up the Daytime Serials section, I didn't want to delete it, but do you agree it's a little confusing? I can't tell who won and who was a nominee. And I don't think it makes sense to include just two years, in two different formats, one detailed, the other just a list of titles. As I commented on the talk page, there was too much emphasis on soap operas in the original article; what's there now even seems to be more than necessary. Do you think the section should be removed entirely? I did delete the section devoted to As the World Turns nominations, because it seemed to have been added by a rabid fan of the show. It certainly wasn't pertinent to the article. Thanks for your feedback. MovieMadness (talk) 18:40, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thanks for your response. Re: awards and nominations, the Wikipedia Film Project surprisingly has no guidelines re: their format. I adopted the one I used for Pieces of April for all articles I have created or extensively edited, and nobody has commented about the format, so I suspect it's not a major issue with most people who contribute to film articles. I've seen all the formats you've mentioned and found some confusing, others OK. I think if a first-time user of Wikipedia looks at the way I've listed them, there will be no question as to which were nominations and which were winners.

As far as the Writers Guild Awards, since you agree the separate section for Daytime Serials isn't necessary, I'm going to remove it. I didn't want to do so without getting your feedback since you worked so hard on it. Thanks again for writing! MovieMadness (talk) 13:27, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to invite you to join the newly-formed taskforce Queens of the Stone Age|Queens of the Stone Age. There's alot of Queens of the Stone Age-related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this taskforce can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help us get this taskforce off the ground and a few Queens of the Stone Age pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks! --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 10:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The italicized dates aren't dates per se, but indications of the name of a given episode of the show. Since these kind of shows' episodes have no name, they have a specific date that works as a title. The rest, titles of shows are perfectly italicizable!... G.-M. Cupertino (talk) 13:43, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Believe me, the lack of edit summaries, ignoring my summaries, etc has been aggravating me too. But to be fair, you've only seen the polite posts to talk pages and such. You haven't seen the cursing and teeth grinding that has been going on in front of my computer.  :) Dismas|^(talk) 22:31, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I ignore them because guidelines are just that, mere guidelines, they're not absolute rules. At least is how I understand the meaning of the word guidelines. And beside, who would ever read all that, such a long list of mere recomendations? Certainly neither of us, and others, who have other things to do!... Our mistake, I guess. That's why they passed by me!... How could I know? If there is no rule to determine if titles of episodes are to be added, and if they're so rarelly added because of the rubbished job of many editors, how can one know there was a rule for it? Since I've never seen anyone else correcting this kind of stuff, either the tiles or the listing of episodes, if I've almost allways seen them the way I put them and only one or two people complainting without even saying why, if everybody else I've seen do it that way too, it was to be assumed it to be a personal chriteria or a preference rather than an absolute rule, specially since most of people don't even invoke the Manual of Style, and when someone actually does it we barely notice. They should've got another title, rules instead of guidelines. And because it looks awful and there is no distinction between shows and episodes nor any reason to distinguish them. Unless they've changed it at some point, like they (who?, who rules this?) did with dates!... It's harder to read, specially for people who have a hard time to do it. When one starts reading will probably prefer to read the latest works first and then go to the past, I never thought up you had so many uptight rules, how could I even think I couldn't pass without reading them? I knew there were some rules, I generally write as I see it being done, but the absence of information concerning things like titles of episodes make me assume a wrong way of displaying them, and I never thought they had rules for such petty and infime details!... It's not like I don't like rules, I just don't assume there are rules for everything, and that they're more abstract than they actually are, since other kind of rules, such as the rules about notability and sourcing are much more abstract than these, the reason why I supposed they were abstract too, and above that, mere indications. That's why I didn't even get the trouble of reading, since I was previously assuming that you were interpreting an abstract guideline rather than imposing an actual absolute rule. I know now that I was mistaken. G.-M. Cupertino (talk) 12:50, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked upon other articles in order to make mine because since so many people are so quick in altering the smallest mistakes I assumed that, despite knowing that Administrators and Editors don't allways have the time to correct everything everywhere, someone would have corrected it at some point in some given article, and if almost no article is altered in a given way, and sometimes is corrected by Administrators who leave the rest as it is, I assume that things are all right. G.-M. Cupertino (talk) 12:52, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just thought I'd add that I admire your level-headedness and politeness when dealing with GM-Cupertino. I seem to have had the same issues as you with him, and it's all the more frustrating as he(?) doesn't seem to leave any edit summaries, nor explain why he undoes any of my edits, especially as they're mostly against Wikipedia policy anyway, and I've even kindly but specifically asked him to do so.

Anyway, thankfully I think an admin has gotten through and the article concerned has finally been returned to the correct wikipedia format. Keep up the good work! Feudonym (talk) 21:31, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did read the summaries, I just didn't read the indications like per MOS. When I saw them, and since I don't have the time to check it out, I assumed it was something else rather than the mention to the Manual of Style or anything else. As I said once before, I don't write summaries because they often correspond to minor edits or to self-explanatory ones. Since I didn't knew they were referred to actual rules - per MOS is Chinese to me and I didn't even read what the hell was it - I never justified my unedits, and for that very reason I never "learned" before to accept what I thought to be a personal preference as the actual rule, but I do now!... I just ask, please, not to alter rules so frequently as they're doing here!... G.-M. Cupertino (talk) 12:52, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, you were the first to use capital letters, I used them to answer that in an ironic way!... By the way, my English is better on longer texts because I'm not good on smaller talk, thank you very much!... Beside, your justifications to edits were so far behind the dozens of other edits that I didn't even notice who the hell did them, if it was the same person, and much less why!... G.-M. Cupertino (talk) 13:16, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About the linking of common English words: when it comes to a film or television character without a name it is most likely that a page about that character won't ever be created for lack of notability. However, the linking of common English words that define that character will allow to illustrate the page and the information over the film or show. It's not like I've ever linked most of those words outside that context. Except, of course, for such words as professions which apparently are absurdly seen as non relevant!... G.-M. Cupertino (talk) 13:57, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted several changes you made to the disambiguation page Spaceman, in keeping with the style guide MOS:DAB. Firstly, piping should usually be avoided on dab pages, and should only be used to format titles, while keeping any disambiguating phrases like (film) or (song) visible. Secondly, entries should generally only be added if there is an existing article with an ambiguous title (e.g., if the Killers song you added had its own article). Red links (articles which don't yet exist) may sometimes be included, but only if they are likely to be created in the future (typically, this means that multiple articles link to the nonexistent article. You can check this by clicking on the redlink and then clicking the "what links here" link.) — Swpb^{τ • c} 19:07, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that disambiguation pages should only have one navigable link per entry, unlike articles. This is established consensus - you can read more at WP:MOSDAB. Thanks, — Swpb^{τ • c} 21:09, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The common standard to determine whether a non-existent article is likely to be created is whether other articles, besides the disambiguation page, link to it. There are a few articles that link to Spacemen (magazine), which is why I left it. I've removed the link to D'yer Wanna Be a Spaceman?, because the redirect has no other links to it. As far as the other entries, MOS:D allows for linking to sections within articles: "If a topic does not have an article of its own, but is mentioned within another article, then a link can be included to that article...It is often useful to link to the relevant section of that page (using the #anchor notation) and conceal that by making it a piped link." These links are helpful, because the target has actual content on the ambiguous term, unlike an album track listing. — Swpb^{τ • c} 14:38, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you had made a comment on my article Timeline of 2008 U.S. Election Day. Sorry if you feel that way. I only started the article yesterday evening so that people could add information on events. 03md (talk) 07:14, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting it into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other articles that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. Radiant chains (talk) 08:42, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Blood Red Shoes, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blood Red Shoes. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Cheers, Jonomacdrones _(talk) 03:40, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, AfD's typically last 7 days; the reason why no one's said anything is probably because the page was not transcluded on the daily log. Tim Song (talk) 18:11, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you able to get a picture of Stephen Gately for the article? This could be a great opportunity to improve his article's quality. Cheers.--Sky Attacker Here comes the bird! 06:20, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That seems fine, good stuff. SGGH ^ping! 21:48, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What do you thank about this? The intro to the article will be place under 2009 to his main page!BLUE_DOG^TN 15:36, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have raised some issues on the talk page of the 2010 World Snooker Championship article. As an editor who was recently involved in these issues you are invited to contribute your thoughts on that page [1]. Leaky Caldron 17:37, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted this edit as the reference definitely quotes Will Butler. Please don't introduce factual errors. Thanks, --JD554 (talk) 08:02, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heh no problem. It doesn't help that they have such similar names too! --JD554 (talk) 08:41, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This was a topic of extended discussion at WikiProject Autos, and we ended up formally adding text to the infobox image standards at WP:CARPIX that makes it clear that no particular generation needs to be illustrated in the top infobox. Note that that infobox lists production as 2000-2006 and 2010-present -- that means that anything in that time span is appropriate for that infobox. In other words, the Wikipedia article is about the life of the vehicle, not just the most recent version.

Also, it's almost never helpful to have the same photo appear twice at the expense of another. IFCAR (talk) 12:02, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your edits of The Illusionist (2010 film). It would be helpful when you entered a summary of your edits: especially when the diff does not clearly highlight them because they are only added/removed spaces, and the topic is debated as this one. Again, thanks. Superp (talk) 06:47, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, appreciate it. Superp (talk) 10:04, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I noticed that you had recently edited the Park 51 article, and I hoped that you could help out on another collaborative community edited project.

I run quippd, a collaboratively edited social news site, which mixes elements of Wikis, social networking, and social news sites. You can get some more information about what we are doing at: http://quippd.com/about/intro

Basically, we want to get good coverage on news stories, collaboratively edited, like Wikipedia. We are trying to take the ideas of WikiFactCheck -- to make news less biased and speedier (unlike something like Wikinews).

I hope you check us out -- and feel free to contact me with any questions, comments, or concerns.

--Yoasif (talk) 02:02, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion, guidelines for use at WP:MINOR). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and all users will still be able to manually mark their edits as being minor in the usual way.

For well-established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 20:47, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your nice proofreading at Major General's Song. Happy editing! -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:48, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Elvis Perkins Ash Wednesday Cover.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 18:13, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would be interested to know what it is, that you don't like about my naming "the lead", Prologue?

Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 13:46, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your prompt reply. I understand perfectly. Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 14:04, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! All the best from the UK for 2012 from,

Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 11:09, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Stacie Monroe, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. SaveATreeEatAVegan 22:46, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:LG GW620 image.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 17:06, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen this paragraph being added to Vintage TV's entry:

"In March 2012, during a series of UK press interviews, a number of former staff members, including some of its presenters announced that they had retained a high profile firm of media lawyers and were joining forces to issue a number of both high court and county court proceedings against the owner of Vintage TV."

What does it mean? what presenters? this is a great channel and i love it. I've checked with some friends in the press and they don't know anything about it. why don't you identify yourself if this is true? SO verify it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cleveld (talk • contribs) 13:05, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please note, I have undone your change of "backup dancer" to "back-up dancer". This was done for a few reasons: first, WP:ENGVAR, but most importantly the article Backup dancer is spelled without the hyphen (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:10, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think at present either way is fine. If over time there are a lot of links to Jose Villarreal then maybe it can be changed as appropriate. Chanheigeorge (talk) 05:52, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for helping to make MMA articles on wikipedia better! In September 168 people made a total of 956 edits to MMA articles. I noticed you havn't listed yourself on the WikiProject Mixed martial arts Participants page. Take a look, sign up, and don't forget to say hi on the talk page. Kevlar (talk) 03:40, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there FEUDONYM, AL from Portugal here,

i am sorry for my reversions in this player's article, now i'll "defend" myself: 1 - i thought that after mentioning "goal" a few inches to the left, we wouldn't need the word again; 2 - i try not to overuse in the comma department.

Obviously, i don't have the idea i speak better than a native speaker of English, so i won't reinstate my version. Sorry for any inconvenience, keep up the good work --AL (talk) 14:04, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

...Basically, can you please stop doing it already? :)

I'm not sure how familiar you are with Wiki's copyright policy, but short version: it is--understandably--hyper-sensitive about even the hint of plagiarism, let alone anything as blatant as what you've been doing, and thus the directive on encountering same is instant removal. (Doesn't help that blurbs of this type by their nature take a highly promotional, informal tone that's inappropriate for any encyclopedia entry.) Simply leaving the material in place on the assumption that "Ehhh, somebody'll come along and rewrite it" just isn't going to cut it, I'm afraid. If you're that anxious to fill in the gap, you're going to have to put it in your own words--not, nota bene, a slightly rejiggered version of a press release's words--to begin with. Thanks, Shoebox2 talk 16:12, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't edit against the guideline WP:THECAPS which represents a difficult consensus achieved after a long debate about which set of manuals of style to follow in capitalizing the Beatles. Lower case 'the' in running prose is now Wikipedia's house style. Binksternet (talk) 08:47, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the List of human stampedes page, your edit caused an unsupported parameter error (help). ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Marks Gate, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Plan B. 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) 09:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing—List of sons of King Abdulaziz ibn Saud by seniority—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. 62.64.152.154 (talk) 14:20, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Feudonym. 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]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:28, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Feudonym. 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]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited British Independent Film Awards, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Selfish Giant (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 18:14, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I saw that you edited the article Black Mirror and thought maybe you would be interested in this new user category I created?-🐦Do☭torWho42 (⭐) 05:24, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Feudonym. 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]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Game of Thrones episodes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hodor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:12, 7 May 2019 (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) 00:09, 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) 01:39, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In a recent edit to the page Vinita Nair, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 04:14, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. Thanks!

Agreed - thanks for pointing out and will do so in future. Feudonym (talk) 23:41, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :-) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 00:48, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Super League, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page European Super League.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:50, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for correcting my edit – I completely misread your diff. – DarkGlow • 18:05, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:15, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited McLaren 720S, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Top Gear.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 5 September 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) 00:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Beccaynr (talk) 03:57, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Inheritance (TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Channel 5.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]