Getting started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library

Getting help New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikipedians Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Conflict resolution Getting technical Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

thank you for help. Is it ok now the copyedit? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ed.ceretti (talk • contribs) 11:58, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The content of your sandbox page outlining additional factors involved in the sinking of RMS Titanic was well written, and outshone much of the material on Wikipedia's main article. I intend to do some work on the page in the near future (I added something about the sea trials), but in the mean time have transferred some of the material from the sandbox page into the main article, in the hope that there it will receive more frequent amendation. Since the sandbox appears to have been unmodified since 2007, I thought this a sensible thing to do.

Parts were removed or rewritten, notably the section on 'ice blink', which seemed to misconstrue the phenomenon slightly.

CharlieRCD (talk) 15:38, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where in Whaley are you from Whaley Tim?

Approximately half way between the Shepherd's and the Board (that's all I would like to say in a public page) WhaleyTim 12:31, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete the article Nitish Srivastava. In a short time, I promise to improve the article to wikipedia`s required standards.

You obviously live in Whaley Bridge, I live in Kett. How long have you been living there for? JFBurton 12:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea on expanding the intro note in Titanic. Hopefully people will read it! Akradecki 14:45, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tim,

I see that you are editting the article on the Titanic in your sandbox. No problem with that as far as I'm concerned, however, I would like to advise you of the fact that the article points to the Lloyd's disambiguation page by use of the link [[Lloyd's]]. I would like to ask you if you could have it point to the Lloyd's of London page instead. I'm trying to clean up unwanted links to the disambiguation page, but since this is on your private space, I thought I'd ask you to do it yourself, rather, than me intruding. Mausy5043 19:17, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I guess you have seen I had to split the list as it was fast approaching 100 kb and even my broadband hi-tech computer was slowing!! Italy has a huge industry but the lists are developing nicely -I guess you saw all the -26,000 bytes etc deep red links on the changes page which is bound to send alarm bells running -its good that you on the alert anyway -keep up the good wiki-guarding!!! Saludos ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 16:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is alos a coincidence as I edited the Titanic article earlier!!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 16:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks a lot for tagging this article as a copyvio. Just for future reference, blatant copy pastes from external websites may be tagged {{db-copyvio}} for speedy deletion if there is no claim that the editor has the authorization to import the text here. Thanks again! -- lucasbfr ^talk 14:42, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Derbyshire Newsletter Issue I - October 2007 Got any suggestions? - Add them here

Editor's Message Hello, and welcome to this first issue! Please keep on contributing here. and keep your comments coming in. If you wish to continue to receive this, then add your name to the list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Derbyshire/Newsletter, otherwise you will not receive it after this issue! Thanks! Bluegoblin7 19:59, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Member news The project currently has 10 members. However, it could increase by YOU telling others about the Project!

This Month's Achievements! We have NO unassessed articles We have a live portal We have lots of project pages There are over 200 tagged articles

Monthly Challenges Create a welcome message for new and prospective members. The Portal is now live, so please keep nominating and voting for the relevant articles! Try to invite more members to this project. As much as a streamlined team is good, the more editors we have the broader the range we can cover. Nominate for next month's collaboration Created by Bluegoblin7

Hi WhaleyTim! Here is this month's newsletter! To continue recieveing it, follow the link within and add your name! Bluegoblin7 19:55, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am rather new to the editing process. Per your request I have made comments on the discussion page of organicgirl

I have read the SPAM information and Guideline # 11 -- I am asking for feedback on what needs to change to make this page encyclopedic. Or, are you saying, it doesn't have merit to be a page?

Please advise.

monte

{x:

MonteShaffer 17:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am still at a loss on how to proceed. I am not fully understanding the process of editorial decisions at Wikipedia, and am aware that you are very experienced. So, is the company information valid if I provide a newspaper article. I don't understand fully the logic of allowing some companies and products and not others. I guess I haven't been fully baptized into the Wiki Community of Practice.

monte

{x:

MonteShaffer 19:59, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WhaleyTim,

Thanks for taking the time to mentor me. I believe in the goals of Wikipedia, and do understand the implications associated with determining notability, references, etc. I also understand the implications to prevent spam at Wikipedia, which makes your job as an editor even more difficult. This discussion has opened my eyes to a lot of issues you deal with on a daily basis. Like mentioned, the Whole Foods article is generally edited and maintained by someone at their company - in the print world, this would be no different than someone at Whole Foods calling up EB and asking how the article is going to be worded etc. [1]

Based on your feedback, and Pigman's I am going to rework the article. It still may not be considered notable at this time (or ever), which is your discretion (and can be respected); I actually was teaching an Internet Marketing class today where we discussed this issue in detail. So there is a lot of learning going on by me personally and by those I influence. In this Internet course, I am considering requiring the students to write an article about a business and try and get it approved through Wikipedia. The awareness issue is both good and bad. This would requiring them contact a company get key information, and write an article that fits the guidelines. I am attempting to model such behavior with organicgirl.

I do realize the dilemna that may be created for you [Great, this guy is training students to exploit Wikipedia]. By no means is that my intention. It is clear that Wikipedia is effects awareness. Managing a company's identity is important, that is why someone at Whole Foods monitors the page. I can hope you recognize that my goal is to learn from this activity and encourage my students to learn. All of my contributions I have made have been intended to contribute. I have strong "open source beliefs."

For example, I am a great grandson of Alexander Ruthven, who was killed on 5 Aug 1600 by King James of England, in the Gowrie house conspiracy. I also created a Web color tool [2] with categorical colors mentioned specifically in the Web colors Wiki page. I have one footnote in the article which links to the tool. As a future marketing professor, I am using that information almost as a metric on Information Diffusion.

There may be a fine line between tricking or gaming the system and using white magic within the system. My intentions are to teach techniques that fit under the latter, so I do appreciate the time you have devoted to increasing my awareness. If there was a central message you would want me to share with those I teach and influence, what would it be? Don't even try to create business articles? Or, if you try, please follow the following guidelines?

In terms of copy strategy, please realize that I am trying to follow the rules. I have created two pages in the past, and was attempting to model organicgirl based on different specific pages (which I earlier mentioned). By no means am I trying to justify myself. As editors, you are deeply involved in many activities, so the copy strategy you use (e.g., encyclopedic writing) has become tacitly engrained in your way of thinking. Most learners learn informally, by copying good examples. I have read all of the suggested materials, and will continue to read, but we do learn best by doing. I am trying to understand and become a legitimate participant in your Community of Practice. A model example of good "encyclopedic copy" would be very helpful, especially in the context I am currently working on.

So I will work on a new version, and give it back to you [post it as my user page].

Thanks again for being so responsive, and helping me to understand. Editors have a challenging job, and the dilemma of providing appropriate content without allowing the promotional is a difficult balance indeed.

monte

{x: —Preceding unsigned comment added by MonteShaffer (talk • contribs) 02:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...is back, and still looks spammy to me; but as I see you've been trying to educate them, perhaps you should look at it. JohnCD (talk) 20:28, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

why would you want to delete marvin whitehurst from wikipedia. He has done more for humanity than you and your wikipedia deletions. do you even know who he is. I wrote some crap up there right now but i am going to actually put up stuff. (don't answer if you know who he is or not because if you don't, i don't want to know. I would probably die laughing at you.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scottyg17 (talk • contribs) 17:30, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your comments and I'm currently looking into the history of the company etc however there isn't a lot out there. I'll update as soon as I find something

Townender —Preceding unsigned comment added by Townender07 (talk • contribs) 10:37, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for getting her name out of a redirect. Now it's up to us editors to find out whether she meets notability criteria, etc. Thinking wishfully, it's very likely that she will, even of it's over the years, and her article will grow accordingly. --AVM (talk) 02:59, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just seen your note on the Christian Bale page regarding the above user's request to have an article for Sibi Blazic. I have just made a comment on that talk page and would like your opinion. My comment copied from talk page;

'As far as I know, she's not actually an actress. She was Winona Ryder's assistant and that is the information that is on IMDB, she is on the crew list as an assistant on various films. This isn't a 'degrading, "macho" attitude', it's just that she has not done that much work in the public sphere. What other star's PAs have their own Wikipedia article? The reason she does not have an entry is because she is merely not notable enough for an encyclopedia, there's no judgement on her or her work, she is just not known for her work by the general public. I understand that she is now a freelance producer and if she becomes successful in that field then it might be time to consider making an article for her but at the moment she is only widely known for being Christian Bale's spouse.'

Do you think she is notable enough for her own article? I find it a bit disconcerting to have an article on someone in the hope that she will become notable 'over the years' and considering that both her and Mr. Bale want to keep their personal life private. In my opinion if she is not notable now, then we should not have an article on her at all. On top of this, she doesn't even appear to be actively seeking fame or public recognition of any sort so it seems a bit intrusive to have an entire article on her. Your thoughts? She'sGotSpies (talk) 16:56, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well spotted for a hoax. I think it's blatant enough that it shouldn't be allowed to linger on - I have tagged it {{db-g3}} which covers "blatant and obvious misinformation". Something has gone wrong with your AfD listing, I'm not sure what, so that it doesn't actually appear in the day's list. If it doesn't get speedied, I'll try and sort the AfD out, but I expect it will. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:57, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Highball Bouncing Bomb at Abbotsbury Swannery Dorset UK.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 23:44, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I enjoyed your comment on the revert for the RMS Titanic article. :) Since your interests include Titanic, how does the article changes made so far look? Shinerunner (talk) 12:20, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whaley, I don't think I removed any content you posted on the RMS Titanic Talk page. If you really think I did please substantiate it. But, yes I'll post new entries at the bottom of talk pages. I don't know if you were just tick off by me wanting to add some much needed suspicious material about the deliberate sinking of the Olympic. WillardWorsley (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:25, 26 February 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Oh, yes that I thought was benign given it was part of the post of mine based on a typo. So I deleted it and naturally other post were deleted with it, is that a problem? WillardWorsley (talk) 03:17, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On 19 February, 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article French battleship Danton (1909), which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 18:45, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. When you patrol new pages, acceptable articles or articles which have been tagged for deletion should be marked as "patrolled" using the link at the bottom right of the article. This saves time and work by informing fellow patrollers of your review of the page so that they do not duplicate efforts. Thank you. Skomorokh 13:03, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I took the liberty of moving your comment to iFaqeer from his user page to his talk page. Guettarda (talk) 18:13, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oops - Bit of a slip-up there. Thanks WhaleyTim (talk) 09:28, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Robley Rex, 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/Robley Rex. 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. Fol de rol troll (talk) 14:10, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello WhaleyTim, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Roberto Barilli - a page you tagged - because: it makes claims as to notability. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:47, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you put wolves and wormhill into ggogle then you will find alot about the hall and a claim to fame for halloween! Victuallers (talk) 09:23, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WhaleyTim, thanks for tagging Jaguares FC (Fake) for deletion. I've just deleted it but as {{db-author}} instead of {{db-blank}}, as it was the sole author of the article who had blanked it, and we encourage newbies to do this when they want their own work deleted. ϢereSpielChequers 17:50, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All I have is this piece, http://www.stevelewis.me.uk/page28.php which contains a press clipping- and I have fixed the reference --ClemRutter (talk) 17:17, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm rewriting it us we speak... Just needed some base text (CONFIQ (talk) 01:30, 11 December 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 01:08, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:57, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello WhaleyTim, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Witchcraft and Spiritualism, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not a test page. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:12, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding the new information and great references. Please be aware of our guideline on WP:PEACOCK words. The encyclopedia should be neutral in tone and not promotional, like an advertisement. The opera house's or festival's official website, for instance, should be taken with a grain of salt. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm - Ok, so maybe acclaim was a bit strong, but how do we say that the operas used to suck but are now pretty good? Critical reaction has become considerably and consistently more positive over the last few years - and I was using reviews by recognised opera critics in major national newpaper as a source, not the festival or opera house websites.WhaleyTim (talk) 21:47, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for the message. I think the first draft considerably overstated what the news sources said. They said that the quality of the festival was quite bad (really a scathing account of how bad the festival used to be, by journalistic standards), but that in the last decade it is much improved. The news sources are not wildly effusive about the quality of the shows even now. So, I'm just saying that we need to be careful about overstating what the references say. Also, the references don't say that the festival is "improving" - they just say that it has improved from its dismal situation many years ago, and that it has grown larger in recent years, but I don't think they say that "2010 was better than 2009, which was better than 2008", etc. So, I think the jury is still out on whether it is "improving". Also, I would note that the festival has its own article, so we don't need to go into too much detail in the Buxton article, since people can click on the blue link for more information. Nevertheless, as I said before, I thought you did a good job in adding information about the cultural events and institutions in Buxton, and so thanks. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter how their publicity describes it. They could call it their "most fabulous" auditorium. The word "main" doesn't add any information we didn't already know, since we are very clear that the other space is smaller. Our job is to edit out irrelevant details like this and convert the marketing talk into encyclopedic description. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:09, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for checking and editing Derbyshire Bus Route The Se7ens, WhaleyTim. I would not have noticed it if it wasn't for you. RCSprinter123 (talk) 18:11, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. WhaleyTim (talk) 19:30, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Tim - do you know about this. Last chance for some time to record the history in the silk mill and the 95,000 items they don't show? Victuallers (talk) 00:08, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

Newbie did not know this: Pipe mark and wikilinks Hi RjCan, You may already know this, but you can change the text that is displayed for a link by using the pipe ( | ) mark. For example Edward Smith will be displayed as Edward Smith instead of Edward Smith (sea captain), but will link to the same article. Cheers. WhaleyTim (talk) 23:30, 29 July 2012 (UTC) From Canada Listen at: http://www.youtube.com/user/rjcanadadotca#p/u/3/Z0F9LTzlVMQ . RJCan 18:36, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks RJCan, and thanks for the link WhaleyTim (talk) 19:59, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Remove peacockery??? What on earth do you mean?

1. AmazingAmble is simply a descriptor/tagline for a website - why didn't you also remove the descriptors for the other external source websites?

(86.184.222.22 (talk) 13:56, 19 January 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Your upload of File:ASHFORD IN THE WATER DERBYSHIRE UK PARISH CHURCH.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) 12:23, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Another one of your uploads, File:Ashby Canal Near Congerstone UK.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) 12:21, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, WhaleyTim,

The Editing team is asking for your help with VisualEditor. I am contacting you because you were one of the very first testers of VisualEditor, back in 2012 or early 2013. Please tell them what they need to change to make VisualEditor work better for you. The team has a list of top-priority problems, but they also want to hear about small problems. These problems may make editing less fun, take too much of your time, or be as annoying as a paper cut. The Editing team wants to hear about and try to fix these small things, too. 

You can share your thoughts by clicking this link. You may respond to this quick, simple, anonymous survey in your own language. If you take the survey, then you agree your responses may be used in accordance with these terms. This survey is powered by Qualtrics and their use of your information is governed by their privacy policy.

More information (including a translateable list of the questions) is posted on wiki at mw:VisualEditor/Survey 2015. If you have questions, or prefer to respond on-wiki, then please leave a message on the survey's talk page.

Unsubscribe from this list • Sign up for VisualEditor's multilingual newsletter • Translate the user guide

Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:13, 23 March 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) 13:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Windgather above Whaley Bridge - where many get their first taste of rock climbing.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 20:15, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, WhaleyTim. 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, WhaleyTim. 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]

Hello, WhaleyTim. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 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) 01:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]