Faith is The Ingredient That Spark's Hope in our lives And it's the Assurance Of God's Spirit, With-In. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikecu123 (talk • contribs) 11:19, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your deletion of my well supported and explained explanation to the talk page of "God" crosses a dangerous line. Is "magic" to be the Standard of Research at Wikipedia?

Articulate your views and concerns all you like, but don't cast obvious truth to a scrap pile as "Gibberish". I can assure you that I can prove my definitions where you cannot.

Edtilley4 (talk) 02:09, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for my grammar, so I am sorry that in the edit in "The Ant Bully" was considered euphemism, I edited a contributior's edit, because of the words starting with capitals. I fixed that, but I did not mean to accidentally say euphemism! I am deeply sorry. (End of message) I am also sorry if this is vandalism. 68.149.184.93 (talk) 00:43, 25 December 2014 (UTC) What[reply]

Sorry for my grammar, so I am sorry that in the edit in "The Ant Bully" was considered euphemism, I edited a contributior's edit, because of the words starting with capitals. I fixed that, but I did not mean to accidentally say euphemism! I am deeply sorry. (End of message) I am also sorry if this is vandalism. 68.149.184.93 (talk) 00:43, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited HoneyBaked Ham, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages New York World's Fair and Cheboygan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:58, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Geoffrey Malcolm Copland requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Jinkinson talk to me 02:15, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DB is currently dealing with health issues, so that's why he hasn't responded. The issue is though nobody is searching the rd with all those characters and expecting the generic ham article, which only mentions 'honey' twice. The redirect is proper and correct. Nate • (chatter) 01:29, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to create a well-sourced article regarding the concept of honey ham, nobody is stopping you at all. As it is though, with 'honey' mentioned only twice in the article, a redirect to the brand remains apporpriate. Nate • (chatter) 02:24, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It would be helpful to have a reference for "convicted fraudster". I agree that Rossi has been convicted of offenses, but my understanding is they were environmental. So I don't see how it is correct that the article should say "convicted fraudster". Jra (talk) 13:25, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

see article re Petroldragon, In 1974, Rossi registered a patent for an incineration system. In 1978, he wrote The Incineration of Waste and River Purification, published in Milan by Tecniche Nuove. He then founded Petroldragon, a company for developing oil from waste, which collapsed in the 1990s amidst allegations of dumping toxic waste,[11] and accusations of tax fraud. Its assets were seized, together with Rossi's personal assets, and Rossi was arrested pending trial. Rossi spent four years in prison working on his legal defense in 56 trials, 5 of which ended in convictions related to tax fraud. Unibond (talk) 17:48, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Nymf (talk) 19:53, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the thing. What you submitted was not an article. There was barely any content or context. You didn't say who he was, just that he was convicted. Please read WP:CRIME and WP:BLP1E. If you can create an article with actual content, I'll be glad to let it stand. DS (talk) 04:20, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to restore it and then move it into your userspace for you to work on. Once you think you have it expanded enough, let me know, and then I'll move it back into mainspace. DS (talk) 23:11, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here: user:Unibond/McSweeney. DS (talk) 23:14, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I should also tell you, this is not an unlimited-time offer. If you don't improve the page eventually, it will get deleted again. DS (talk) 13:02, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One more week, then it's gone again. DS (talk) 01:11, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Time up. DS (talk) 21:21, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. You recently uploaded to wikipedia a adapted verion of 1929 Michael Knatchbull.jpg. I uploaded the original version which the NPG allow wikipedia to use under the conditions of the licence. The terms of this licence are detailed via the link in the section Respect for commercial opportunities. The alterations you made are in breach of the section NoDerivatives. I have therefore deleted your version. Graemp (talk) 12:24, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2015 Arras attack is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2015 Arras attack until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. --Non-Dropframe _talk 18:54, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:12, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:49, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Unibond. 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]

Hello, Unibond. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Geoffrey de Wirce, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

2. remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Stifle (talk) 14:28, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Unibond. You have new messages at Stifle's talk page.
Message added 14:32, 12 January 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Stifle (talk) 14:32, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Unibond. 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]

The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

• https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

• Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Please be aware this survey will close Friday, Dec. 8 at 23:00 UTC.

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:15, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--Joseph Newman-- Why do you continue to undo my addition to Newman's Energy Machine? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BRJ-PE (talk • contribs) 00:56, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The recent changes should be discussed, not the original versionScepticismOfPopularisation (talk) 01:32, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention, the content you removed was actually decided by consensus on the talk page, and you can't just remove it.ScepticismOfPopularisation (talk) 01:35, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And please don't put back the removed material without at the very least explaining them yourself first. But you must get consensus.ScepticismOfPopularisation (talk) 01:41, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Unibond. I reverted your edit which restored disputed content currently under discussion to a BLP, which you made without an edit summary or discussion. I suggest you discuss it on the article talk page, be sure to identify verifying sources, and be sure to use edit summaries in the future. --Ronz (talk) 16:24, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 21:46, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Unibond. 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 Pale, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fencepost (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) 09:43, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In a recent edit to the page Gasoline, 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. Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:56, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! — MusenInvincible (talk) 12:22, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted your edit on the article Monotheism. If you feel that the articles Monotheist (band) and Monotheist (album) are not notable then please nominate them for deletion. Tassedethe (talk) 02:38, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Can you explain this edit? —Emufarmers^(T/C) 06:33, 16 November 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) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you keep undoing my work? And without any explanation at that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kfarren23 (talk • contribs) 14:18, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of most common surnames in Europe, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Cobbler and Smith (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) 14:57, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sangster, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page English.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:15, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Broderick, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bridgewater.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:53, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Unibond. Have you actually read my argument, given in the section Summary of the name issue on the talk page, that the De Witt spelling is historically correct? What do you find wrong with this argument? I sincerely hope that you don't think that the mass of evidence I gave can be overridden by a few images, showing the he didn't lift his pen when signing his name. That makes absolutely no sense. Eleuther (talk) 13:18, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Unibond. You left a message under the title "De Witt" on my talk page. I assume this was intended to be a reply to the above message from me, so I will take the liberty of reproducing it here:

• "Both signatures so far found had no space in them, where are the counter examples ? Unibond (talk) 17:18, 26 September 2020 (UTC)"

The counterexamples are given in the section Summary of the name issue on the article's talk page. May I ask for a second time, have you read this section? What do you find wrong with it? Thanks, Eleuther (talk) 16:37, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The talk section only refers to 2 signatures and both have no space in them Unibond (talk) 21:28, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I take this to mean that you don't intend to respond to my question about the Summary of the name issue section, perhaps because you have reading difficulties, or just because you are functioning as a troll here. Eleuther (talk) 22:42, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Summary of the name issue contains no primary evidence just a collection of variant printed spellings, all the primary evidence ie his signatures so far presented contain no space Unibond (talk) 00:19, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So are you establishing a new standard now, that the "primary evidence" for a Wikipedia article must be hand-written? That would be a bit of a revolution. I think, instead, that you are functioning more like a troll here, i.e., that you are creating contention just to make yourself feel important, and because you like yelling. Such contributions are not welcome. Eleuther (talk) 02:02, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Surely it is not controversial to say that in the spelling of a name the person's signature is a primary source and a printed document a secondary source Unibond (talk) 15:14, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What a ridiculous idea. The correct spelling of my name is found on my birth certificate and in my school records and so forth. My signature is a scrawl. Are you saying we should look at your example and refer to this governor in the future as "DeMu Chuln" or something like that? Ridiculous. Eleuther (talk) 16:40, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am saying exactly that, there are plenty of examples of misspellings in newspapers, on birth certificates, passports etc. The fact is on both signatures we have so far he has spelled his own name without the space. Unibond (talk) 17:47, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, fine. Please go edit the article to say that his name should be spelled as "DeMu Chuln", and see how far that will getcha. Idiot. Eleuther (talk) 23:19, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Corriere d'America, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 20:04, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Stasys Kalvaitis has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Can't find enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG. Does not meet WP:MUSICBIO.

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}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:52, 23 November 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) 01:41, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Unibond. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Corriere d'America, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:01, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Andrea Rossi (entrepreneur) . Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Hipal (talk) 16:20, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. --Hipal (talk) 17:04, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your editing is being discussed at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Unibond_reported_by_User:Hipal_(Result:_). Please consider joining the discussion. --Hipal (talk) 17:31, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Andrea Rossi (entrepreneur) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello Unibond. You've been warned per a complaint at the edit warring noticeboard. You may be blocked if you again restore the word 'fraudster' to the article unless you obtain a prior consensus in your favor on the article talk page. Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 14:15, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ed,

sorry but I am really confused, since was convicted in a court of fraud doesn't that make him a fraudster ? 86.168.70.20 (talk) 15:51, 7 July 2022 (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) 00:19, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Catholic priests convicted of child sexual abuse has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 16:36, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hieronymus Schlick is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hieronymus Schlick until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 08:33, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]