Archives This template
March 8, 2004 – Jan 8 2006 Jan 11 2006 – Apr 17 2006 April 18, 2006 – June 15, 2006 June 16, 2006 – Sept 3, 2006 current

User:Salix alba is planning to move Ordinal number to another name. Please stop him. JRSpriggs 03:44, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see that Jack Sarfatti is once again leaving legal threats for Calton, yourself, and Jimmy Wales:

• 68.121.151.244 (talk · contribs)
  1. 08:53, 25 August 2006 leaves implicit legal threat in Talk:Jimmy Wales
  2. 08:50, 25 August 2006 ditto, in User talk:Lethe/archive4
  3. 08:45, 25 August 2006 adds explicit legal threat in User:Calton/Watchlist
  4. 20:35, 24 August 2006 vio of WP:HAR (note posted email address)

I have reported this to WP:AN/I. ---CH 19:33, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

I've replaced your redirect definition for Meet (mathematics) with a full article, and I plan to do the same with join, if you don't mind. This is of course partly duplicating information you may find at other places (e.g., Lattice (order), Semilattice, Infimum), but in general I think that it is a good idea not to identify operations and sets with these operations, and the infimum article contained too much theory of infima in real number and too little in posets to be a good redirect alternative. JoergenB 19:03, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - Please do me the kindness of visiting and sharing your views at Wikipedia:Editor review/Rama's Arrow 2. I need your advice and criticism, and I would be immensely grateful if you could spare a little time on this. Thank you, Rama's arrow 15:46, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, Lethe has not made any contributions since 6 September 2006. So I think that no one reading this page should expect to receive any more replies from him. JRSpriggs 05:03, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed Lethe from the "spamlist" for Signpost because he appears to no longer be with us. He still has not made any contributions since 6 September 2006. JRSpriggs 10:49, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

lethe come baaaaackkkk... wiki needs youuuuu if it helps i brought you chrysanthemum tea — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.22.82.174 (talk • contribs)

I'm still on extended leave from Wikipedia, but I think it may not be much longer. Stay tuned. -lethe ^talk 20:57, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I'm available to be a wikipedian again. So... what did I miss? -lethe ^talk 20:39, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back; that was a much longer gap than expected! Naturally Wikipedia has degenerated into chaos without you, and we will all be looking to you to restore order. ;-)

Paul August took a month's absence in protest of various Wikipedia events, but is now back and volunteering for ArbCom. You can catch up a little by reading the few remarks I left for him on his return. --KSmrq^T 05:13, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One additional item of some importance is that Wikipedia's texvc has been improved in some very helpful ways. See the two entries here for more details. One example:

Much easier now! --KSmrq^T 22:50, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to have you back Lethe. We finished the encyclopedia while you were gone, so we've all got more time on our hands to cause trouble. Seemed wise to offer my services as referee. Paul August ☎ 05:33, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see above, I un-subscribed you from Signpost during your absence. So you may want to re-subscribe. I hope that you were not counting on having a lot of them on this page to fill you in. JRSpriggs 07:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcomes. I was looking forward to getting some work done again, so I'm a little disappointed that you guys finished the encyclopedia without me. Maybe I can be a vandal! Seriously though, how's my reference desk doing? I am looking forward to becoming a regular there again. I think I have to do some things for CSTAR and Trovatore too, so I hope they're still around. Cheers! -lethe ^talk 15:43, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, indeed. :) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 16:19, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He's been edit-warring over this for months, was blocked several times in the past week over it, and used sockpuppeting to get around his blocks. And no one needs special warnings to avoid the other nasty stuff he was doing. I would strongly object to any shortening of the block. Jayjg ^(talk) 10:15, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You a Stephen Baxter fan? — Rickyrab | Talk 13:59, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 03:21, 4 March 2007 (UTC)^{talk to me}[reply]

Hi, I have a question regarding your article Invariant basis number: when you say "R^m is isomorphic to Rⁿ" do you mean "as left-R modules" or "as right-R modules" or "as both left and right R-modules", or "as R-R bimodules", or does that not make a difference? Thanks and cheers, AxelBoldt 02:44, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Axel. Actually, the article already has a sentence addressing that question. It says:

"If a ring has invariant basis number with respect to left R-modules, it also has IBN with respect to right R-modules. For this reason, the choice between left and right R-modules is left unspecified."

But perhaps you think something should be mentioned of this earlier in the article? -lethe ^talk 18:05, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On Talk:Cofinality#How_can_.7Cx.7C_.3D_c_have_cofinality_.5Comega.3F I questioned one of your edits--if you could give me any insight into the topic there it would be much appreciated!  :)

Nevermind--I figured out what I was missing on my own and removed the comment from discussion. I didn't understand how cofinality applied to non well-ordered sets.

--65.60.222.126 17:48, 20 April 2007 (UTC) (Anna)[reply]

What's the meaning of the Vergil quote? --euyyn 16:31, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Loodog 19:56, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Lethe, every time I come to your page I am frightened, but anyway... I am writing you to let you know that the Mathematics Collaboration of the week(soon to "of the month") is getting an overhaul of sorts and I would encourage you to participate in whatever way you can, i.e. nominate an article, contribute to an article, or sign up to be part of the project. Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks--Cronholm144 23:08, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to be frightened of, nowadays Lethe is just a lazy bum, who edits only to delete the signpost from his talk page. :) Oh, you mean the picture on the user page? :) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 01:53, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I miss the more active Lethe. I'm hoping the minor participation in Wikipedia is balanced by major good things in the real world. --KSmrq^T 15:02, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys. I miss the Wikipedian Lethe too! I hope he comes back soon. -lethe ^talk 21:45, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I used to know a Lethe, but I seem to have forgotten. Paul August ☎ 23:52, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're a general relativity custodian at wikipedia, right? When you copyedit, rather than revert, vandalisms like this one, it's almost like a stamp of approval. Tsk tsk. -lethe ^talk 05:15, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so I missed that. We're not all perfect (not even you). I have no real interest in the LIGO article, as I was in the process of listing articles that should be included in WProject Relativity (and I was just occassionally editing articles along the way), as you can see from my contributions. MP ^{(talk•contribs)} 11:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to make a suggestion. In the future, when you come across an article that has been vandalized (as this article had been), you should consider reverting the vandalism, rather than "fixing" the vandalism to have better formatting. If you don't like this suggestion, please feel free to disregard it. Thank you. -lethe ^talk 17:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi lethe, noticed at User_talk:Fropuff/Archive2#commutative_diagrams that you were interested in making commutative diagrams. I've figured out how and documented at: meta:Help:Displaying a formula#Commutative_diagrams; hope you enjoy!

Nbarth (talk) 22:18, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for fixing them, I would do it myself by I don't think I know how to erase the double redirect, could you explain me really quickly how to do it, so I can do it next time, regards. Supaman89 (talk) 16:33, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ok that was really confusing, I clicked on this link User:Supaman89/Double_redirect and then cleaned the page but the page still exists, sso from what I understood if you put the ending "/double redirect" at the end of any article, you'll see how many redirects it has? is that right? Supaman89 (talk) 04:13, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:M fisa logo.gif. 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) 22:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Please be aware that a request for arbitration naming you has been placed on WP:RFA on behalf of Harry59b (talk · contribs) who had originally posted it on AN/I. — Coren ^(talk) for the Arbitration Committee 14:18, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Coren. I got a message from you about being a party to an ArbCom case. I didn't recognize any of the other names listed, and I also didn't see my own name in the ArbCom listing, so I was pretty confused as to why I was there.

So then I looked through your history a bit and found the original post to WP:ANI by User:Harry59b / User:Harry59. I saw there a description by Harry that User:Lethe (that's me) was blocked User:Archtransit. It was then determined that Lethe was a sockpuppet of Archtransit. Archtransit was desysopped for it. This part was redacted from your submission, which is why I didn't see it. But this is getting stranger. I have never heard of Archtransit, nor was I ever blocked by him, nor by anyone else. I am, in fact, an admin myself, though I'm mostly inactive on Wikipedia these days.

So I went to Wikipedia:Requests for de-adminship and found Archtransit's RfC, and all was made clear. It was User:Lethte whom Archtransit blocked and who was ruled a sock of Archtransit. I am User:Lethe. Harry must have made a mistake in typing the name. -lethe ^talk 21:29, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bhah. Whoh cares aboutu a fwew extrta lettrers?  :-) Will fix accordingly. — Coren ^(talk) 21:32, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem. I guess it doesn't even matter. Lethte's permabanned, so he's not gonna take part. And anyway, his involvement was redacted from the submission to ArbCom. -lethe ^talk 21:43, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate you fixing them. A newbie editor (with presumably good intentions) had moved the Primary topic article to another name. And consequent DAB pages. I tried to fix -but when trying to restore original name I ran into "that name is in use so you cannot move an article to it" type alerts. At which point I left a message on the Nirvana Talk Page asking for an Admin to help fix it. Pleased that you fixed it. Thanks Davidpatrick (talk) 13:37, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Lethe, I have seen you are an expert of functional analysis and in particular you created Function space which I found interesting for the effort of completeness. It raised me a curiosity: is there a Normed space or better a Banach space to which the function 1/x (or even worst 1/|x|) defined on {R - {0}} belongs? And which will be the norm in this space? 1/x is a fundamental elementary function but, among the others I could imagine, I wasn't able to figure out where, in which function space to classify it. All the best --EMajor (talk) 22:05, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Diesel Sweeties. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diesel Sweeties. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:12, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dates are not linked per MOS:UNLINKDATES. NerdyScienceDude :) (✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 04:19, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{fn}} is up for deletion and the tagging has caused it to stop working. I've adjusted your [User talk:Lethe/archive1 talk page]. Hope you don't mind.something lame from CBW 10:56, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Lethe, this is a message from an automated bot to inform you that the page you created on December 19 2008, Majel Barrett-Rodenberry, has been marked for speedy deletion by User:HairyWombat (note: page has no mainspace links, and 2 edits). This has been done because the page is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer (see CSD). If you think the tag was placed in error, please add "{{hangon}}" to the page text, and edit the talk page to explain why the page should not be deleted. If you have a question about this bot, please ask it at User talk:SDPatrolBot II. If you have a question for the user who tagged the article, see User talk:HairyWombat. Thanks, - SDPatrolBot II (talk) on behalf of HairyWombat (talk · contribs) 09:59, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here is what happened. I went to read the page on Gene Roddenberry, but misspelt it "Rodenberry". Surprisingly, I got back a list of nine articles all referring to "Gene Rodenberry". These pages were all wrong, so I fixed them. I then looked for a #REDIRECT from Gene Rodenberry but, as you can see, there isn't one. I decided the reason for this was because the misspelling was obscure so, when I fell cross your #REDIRECT page, I (wrongly) assumed that this was probably a mistake. I have no problem with it being kept. (If you wish to respond, please do so here.) HairyWombat (talk) 22:01, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As a contributor to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luboš Motl back in 2005, you may be interested to know it has been re-nominated for deletion. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luboš Motl (3rd nomination). Robofish (talk) 16:41, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Lethe. I've noticed that you are creating capitalisation redirects for person's names. Just a note that afaict these redirects are not useful in any way, since on the hand for searches, MediaWiki automagically forwards between capitalisations for simple cases of the form Aa bb cc -> Aa Bb Cc, and on the other hand, they are not necessary because writing the person's name with different capitalisation is a simple error to be corrected.

Tbh though, the reason I'm dropping you this line is a different one. I just ocd a bit over those notices "(Redirected from Mark wahlberg)" and their uselessness. No biggie, but capitalisation redirects for personal names serve no actual purpose. --78.35.203.74 (talk) 03:39, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. If you enter a search for "mark wahlberg", then yes, MediaWiki software search is not case sensitive and will take you straight to the article Mark Wahlberg. But if you follow a wikilink to [[mark wahlberg]], or a hyperlink to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/mark_wahlberg, then MediaWiki fails, and you get a blank page. It is a constant source of frustration for me, and I fix it whenever I see it. -lethe ^talk 03:54, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As I pointed out, mark wahlberg is a simple capitalisation error. In fact, it would be a lot better if it was red and alerted the user to the fact that it's an error. What you do in my mind amounts to a form of vandalism. I'd indef you for it. Just saying. --87.79.115.203 (talk) 08:23, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you enter a search for "mark wahlberg", then yes, MediaWiki software search is not case sensitive .. But if you follow a wikilink to mark wahlberg, or a hyperlink to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/mark_wahlberg, then MediaWiki fails..

Could either the MediaWiki software or the webserver software be modified to make this correction? At least in the second case, where the HTTP link is coming from some non-MediaWiki source? (not a link from inside another MediaWiki page) Jimw338 (talk) 00:09, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Probably. -lethe ^talk 04:32, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I was in the process of creating my first article on a renowned (in the UK anyway) music producer. I was following instructions, and creating the article in my user space. The instructions said that the article would not be reviewed until it was published. As I was in the process of rewriting the history of the artist from biog material, it was by no means finished, didn't contain most of the material I have now collected for it. It was speedy deleted by RHaworth. To be honest, this is a little disheartening, and I think you will attract many new contributors with someone such as RHaworth rampaging through Wikipedia.

My question is, is he likely to do this again if I try to recreate the article including the new material?

Thanks for any help

Matt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattgallop (talk • contribs) 08:24, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Lethe! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Hello Lethe!

I am looking for an experienced Wikipedian to contribute an article for our band Mr. Meeble. I have checked and we meet the Wikipedia "notability" guidelines for a band. We have a very basic Wikipedia article written already, but I know that someone like yourself may be able to point out our formatting errors and critical omissions. You can hear our music and see our videos here:

http : //youtube.com/mrmeeble
http : //soundcloud.com/meeble

Let me know if you would be willing to help!

Regards,
Devin
mm @ meeble.com

Devbot (talk) 02:49, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted your edit because the left superscript for the h of the homogenization was intended: A right superscript could be confusing with exponentiation, and, mainly, is not compatible with the prime of the derivative. The \mbox{} is for a correct spacing after "=" (otherwise "h" appears as an exponent of the "=". D.Lazard (talk) 11:05, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious, what exactly did you mean when you said that contributions can be 'mercilessly edited and redistributed'? introduced May 2005. I'm particularly curious about the word 'mercilessly'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by El srettiws (talk • contribs) 15:13, 23 April 2013 (UTC) Forgot to sign, my bad. El srettiws (talk) 15:55, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you're asking... -lethe ^talk 20:34, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the word 'mercilessly' is your edit. It's my view that the word merciless is inappropriate to this context. Can you explain in what sense did you mean that content could be 'mercilessly edited and redistributed'? There is a discussion here: Wikipedia talk:Five pillars Thank you. El srettiws (talk) 07:03, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Content in wikipedia articles may be edited without any mercy toward the intent of previous authors. -lethe ^talk 22:06, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

His choice of words is probably related to the fact that he is an un[?]diagnosed sociopath (or gets off on pretending to be one), per his goose story. 70.7.145.133 (talk) 10:54, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, how did you year about the goose incident? -lethe ^talk 02:03, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody had a boring childhood... expensivehat (talk) 23:29, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your upload of File:3d square root.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:12, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Another one of your uploads, File:Center for Hellenic Studies.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:14, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Category-theoretic categories, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 18:51, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (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) 22:13, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lethe.

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]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Papier machet. Since you had some involvement with the Papier machet redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Si Trew (talk) 14:33, 10 December 2016 (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)

Hello,

Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.

The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.

To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.

We really appreciate your input!

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

 Diako ^{«  Talk »} 00:20, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Smux. Since you had some involvement with the Smux redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. 84.250.17.211 (talk) 17:01, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:37, 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 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Rangediagram-01.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:P-cat01.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 19 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) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Welldefined.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Count to 10 in many languages wikipedia. Since you had some involvement with the Count to 10 in many languages wikipedia redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Regards, SONIC678 17:50, 14 April 2020 (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) 01:15, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm sending you this note because you need to update your signature. You have a custom signature set in your account preferences. Your signature does not link to your account. This is usually because your account has been renamed.

To fix your signature, you need to find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences and either blank it or change the link to your current account name. More information is available at Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing how everyone sees your signature. mw:New requirements for user signatures/Help#Wrong user links. If you have followed these instructions and still want help, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Signatures.

Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 23:46, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In my case, it's intentional. my sig links to a redirect to my user page, rather than a broken link. -lethe ^talk 02:50, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that complies with the mw:New requirements for user signatures. If it does not, then eventually your custom signature will be ignored and the default signature automatically substituted.

I'm curious, though: What's your goal in linking to a redirect, rather than straight to the page? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So that I can distinguish links to my page from my own discussion comments. I can already see my own comments in my contributions. This allows me to see all other comments about me as well.

If I'm reading the requirements correctly, then I could keep my functionality via links to redirects instead of userpage/talkpage, while still complying with new rules, if I added a link to contributions, which don't populate the "what links here". Alternatively, if I do nothing, my existing sig will be grandfathered in. -lethe ^talk 18:00, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited my signature to include a link to my contributions page, which I believe makes it comport with the rules. I'll note that the existence of subst'ed signatures makes the software-imposed compliance check circumventable even for users who are not grandfathered in, like I would've been. If you want a noncompliant signature, simply save your signature preferences with a compliant template, and then edit the template afterwards. Why anyone should want to do this is beyond me, so it may not be worthwhile to make the software check rule it out. -lethe ^{talk contribs} 16:10, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The "grandfather" rules are temporary, and subst:ing a template doesn't get people past the requirements. But, yes, a link to contributions is sufficient. I don't think it even matters if the link to contribs is visible, so long as the software thinks it's there. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 01:02, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Subst'ing does appear to be a loophole to the requirements. I have tested it. Are you saying you don't believe me? -lethe ^{talk contribs} 03:38, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm saying that I talked to the dev who wrote the code about how it's going to work in the end. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:03, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So the feature is not completely finished and in the future it will work differently than it currently works? -lethe ^{talk contribs} 21:52, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. That is the nature of a "grandfather clause". Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:36, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The grandfather clause is already in effect. The preferences page doesn't force anyone to change their signature, but it doesn't allow anyone to edit their signature to save a noncompliant signature. Anyone who had a noncompliant signature gets to keep noncompliant sigs. Any new signatures do not. That's the nature of a grandfather clause.

And what I'm saying to you is that the new policy has no teeth. Anyone, including new users who are not grandfathered, can have a noncompliant signature. Unless you know of some future change in the MediaWiki software which will block the workaround I described. Something other than "the nature of the a grandfather clause". -lethe ^{talk contribs} 18:42, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Users who are 'grandfathered' can have a non-compliant signature for now. This is a temporary, interim state. During this temporary, interim state, existing non-compliant signatures will be used. During this temporary, interim state, you can still change the signature template to a non-compliant signature. Later, neither of these will be true. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:09, 7 February 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) 00:02, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Hrwiki and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 10#hrwiki until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. —2d37 (talk) 03:02, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Wii kart and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 November 7#Wii kart until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 18:04, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a reminder that established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. You are receiving this annual reminder since you have averaged less than 50 edits per year over the last 5 years.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to reengage with 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 be engaged with 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 00:21, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a reminder that established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. You are receiving this annual reminder since you have averaged less than 50 edits per year over the last 5 years.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to reengage with 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 be engaged with 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 00:31, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Fractal sine.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused image, no context to determine possible future use.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --TheImaCow (talk) 08:16, 5 March 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) 19:21, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Established policy provides for the removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. Your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to the required activity level before the beginning of February 2025.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to engage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for re-engaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to re-engage with 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 00:21, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC) [reply]

yeah i did it. -lethe ^{talk contribs} 15:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]