So please tell us what was your first account? John from Idegon (talk) 21:53, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you also say why you have moved to a new account? Breaking sticks (talk) 22:20, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be interested in knowing that as well. Beyond My Ken (talk) 09:45, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1. wanted to make an anonymous user

2. wanted a fresh start to edit more accurately

I think that the actual question is, does this account meet the criteria for a Clean start? ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:10, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is this new account meeting the criteria for a fresh start, yes. If I was making mistakes and edit warring then perhaps not, but I haven't done these things on this account. I have no outstanding bans, blocks, sanctions or any discussions on my conduct on the previous account, this is all stated on the link provided. Is wanting an anonymous account not good enough for you admin?

Hello, I'm Mélencron. I noticed that you recently removed content from National Front (France) without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Mélencron (talk) 13:57, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, I will provide citations and an explanation in the future.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lega Nord, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Radical right (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) 09:09, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tillerson is the Secretary of State until he actually resigns or is fired. He hasn't yet. Please stop changing the page. Technically, the Senate hasn't seen the documenation for the new nominee, so he's not even nominated yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:630:12:1090:7199:87B2:471E:6F5E (talk) 14:15, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Now please stop editwarring. 2001:630:12:1090:7199:87B2:471E:6F5E (talk) 14:18, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Added Acting Secretary of State.Anticitizen 98 (talk) 14:19, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tillerson is still the Secretary of State until he gets back to the US and tells the President about his trip and the White House puts out something or the Department of State Website is Updated and the President never seid John Sullivan in his Tweet about it Wait untile there's more info about this later today.96.36.68.29 (talk) 15:11, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are you using another IP address or another user.Anticitizen 98 (talk) 17:02, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No I amn a different person. I am from SC and 2001:630:12:1090:7199:87B2:471E:6F5E must be from CA.96.36.68.29 (talk) 18:41, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, it has been resolved now thankyou.Anticitizen 98 (talk) 19:44, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Constructive contributions are appreciated and strongly encouraged, but your recent edit to the userpage of another user may be considered vandalism. Specifically, your edit to User:Harry-Oscar 1812 may be offensive or unwelcome. In general, it is considered polite to avoid substantially editing others' userpages without their permission. Instead, please bring the matter to their talk page and let them edit their user page themselves if they agree on a need to do so. Please refer to Wikipedia:User page for more information on User page etiquette. Thank you. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:59, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please visit the edit history on that userpage for an explanation.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Nick Fuentes, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:01, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That page was created by me, I don't understand what I did wrong on that article. I had 9 citations on that article from different sources, don't understand how that 'relies on a single source,' or fails to meet the guidline for a biography. Anticitizen 98 (talk) 12:46, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Space Gun (album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mojo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Paul Nehlen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Republican (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Your addition to Mike Cernovich has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:09, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Patrick Little (Disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
• disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

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 "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 deleted 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. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 14:55, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ben Bagert, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Democratic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 22:58, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Patrick Little (engineer) 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/Patrick Little (engineer) 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. power~enwiki (π, ν) 21:48, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No reason to delete, completely relevant as he is a candidate for united states senate. - Anticitizen 98

Thanks for uploading File:Democrats and Veterans Party Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:39, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Hurley and Watt, 1993.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 13:03, 21 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. RonBot (talk) 17:51, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Hurley and Watt, 1993.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:12, 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. RonBot (talk) 18:23, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:National Federation of Meat & Food Traders (Logo).jpeg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:26, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ELAM (Cyprus), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Golden Dawn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:19, 2 July 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. RonBot (talk) 17:11, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.  Bishonen | talk 17:11, 3 July 2018 (UTC).[reply]

• I'm giving you this alert because of your editing at Lauren Southern, where you have been persistently removing sourced content against consensus. Please discuss your preferred version on the talkpage, Talk:Lauren Southern. That's the preferred way of editing controversial articles — not attempting to push your text into the article by main force. Indeed, looking at your contributions, I can only see a single contribution to a talkpage, in February 2018. This can be compared with some 450 edits to your own userpage. Please think about it. Bishonen | talk 17:11, 3 July 2018 (UTC).[reply]

You are clearly aware of having this talkpage, your own, as you have edited it previously. Since you have ignored my warning above and continued editing Lauren Southern against consensus, still without using the article talkpage, I have blocked you for 31 hours. You should really consider engaging with people who post here, as well as with other editors on Talk:Lauren Southern. Wikipedia is a collaborative project. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bishonen | talk 22:11, 3 July 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. RonBot (talk) 17:18, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please stop edit warring?[1][2][3][4][5][6][7] This issue has been discussed on the article talk page for months. If you want to change consensus, fine. Propose your changes on the article talk page and we can discuss them. But if you continue to edit-war, you may be blocked. Consider this a formal warning. Thanks. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 22:05, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you should leave the article left correct with my edits then.Anticitizen 98 (talk) 22:12, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please follow WP:BRD. You boldly made your change. You've been reverted. The burden of proof is on you to convince your fellow editors that your change improves the article. The fact that multiple editors have reverted your changes indicates that you've failed to meet that burden. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 23:23, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No they just don't have any idea of how the electoral laws work in the state. Pretty simple, I even provided an example and they completely ignored it. There are 50 pages of these elections and none of them list third parties as major parties except alaska.

You've already been asked to stop edit-warring yet you just did it again.[8] Edit-warring is no way to win a content dispute. Can you please self-revert and try to gain consensus for your changes on the article talk page? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 17:24, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 21:07, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Right...if you want an article to be edited wrong then fine. Every other gubernatorial page backs me up.Anticitizen 98 (talk) 21:16, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There may still be time for you to respond to the report. Unless you reply and promise to stop warring, a block seems possible. You have reverted six times since July 9. EdJohnston (talk) 22:41, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The complaint was closed with no block, but with this advice. If you intend to apply this 5% rule to the infoboxes of other election articles, you might consider finding a some past discussion where editors agreed to establish this as a rule. If there was no such discussion, consider opening an WP:RFC. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 18:45, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Very well, if they want to include minor parties then that's their decision and will refrain from editing that page anymore.Anticitizen 98 (talk) 19:19, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@EdJohnston:Anticitizen 98 has broken their promise not to edit the page and has resumed edit-warring.[9][10][11] A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 15:53, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Richard B Spencer. 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. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:07, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Anticitizen. You recently reverted [12] a candidate from the infobox in the article Ohio gubernatorial election, 2018. It appears you made the revert despite a recent edit war and administrator warning [13] about this very action in Illinois gubernatorial election, 2018, and the kind suggestion to find consensus on the talk page before citing the 5% rule. There was already a discussion and consensus before you made your revert on the talk page. So again, as A Quest For Knowledge suggested, propose your changes on the talk page for discussion rather than edit warring. If you continue to engage in edit warring in this article, you will be reported at the administrator noticeboard and may be blocked. --Elephanthunter (talk) 23:00, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not this again...that rule applies to most if not all United States election pages. Illinois may be a special case, but for this election there was no explanation as to why the greens were the only listed party as none of the parties polled high enough to be considered major contenders. All countries elections have a cut off point between major and minor party status and 5% is completely fair. Additionally, the people who edit these pages do it to support these parties and have no reasonable reason to include them other than that they have an obvious bias towards them. Anticitizen 98 (talk) 23:15, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Anticitizen 98, it looks like you are continuing the war for which you were were reported at WP:AN3 previously. Can you explain why you should not be blocked for long-term edit warring? EdJohnston (talk) 17:40, 10 August 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. RonBot (talk) 17:14, 28 July 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. RonBot (talk) 17:27, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:TruNews screenshot.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:29, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Cropped to portrait.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:13, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Anticitizen98. If you are planning to continue changing election tables while making no response to the recent complaint about your long term edit warring I'm planning to go ahead with an edit warring block. Your own confidence that you are right doesn't permit you to ignore feedback from others. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 01:24, 11 August 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. RonBot (talk) 17:16, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rain Tree Crow, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ambient (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 12 August 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. RonBot (talk) 17:19, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To enforce an arbitration decision and for blatantly violating the 'prior consensus' restriction on the page Sarah Jeong, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. Swarm ♠ 05:27, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

---

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

A tag has been placed on Irexit Freedom Party 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 company, corporation or organization that does not credibly 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 "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 deleted 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, then please contact the deleting administrator.
Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 11:56, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Irexit Freedom 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/Irexit Freedom 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.
Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 12:33, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article - which part of this don't you understand? Spleodrach (talk) 12:39, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article does not need to be removed.

Then you have to argue that at AfD. You can only remove a PROD notice, if it goes to AfD, then there must be a full discussion on it, a closing admin will then decide the outcome. Please don't remove the AfD notice again. Make you arguments at the AfD page for the article. Spleodrach (talk) 12:46, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, I had 8 references until people kept removing it. More than enough infomation to keep the article.

You should be making your case at this page: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Irexit Freedom. This is where a discussion has been opened on whether the page should be kept or deleted. The admin that decides this won't be looking at your user talk page for your argument, they'll expect it to be on that page. Iffy★Chat -- 13:04, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Probably be deleted anyway.

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. RonBot (talk) 18:26, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hickok45, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page High definition (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Irexit Freedom Party Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:36, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dave Navarro, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page AMC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited New York State Democratic Committee, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Center (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:27, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Anticitizen 98. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 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, Anticitizen 98. 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]

This editor claims that this account is a clean start, but a clean start is expected to stay away from subject areas which caused them to seek a clean start in the first place. I see a lot of warnings on this page, for edit warring, disruptive editing and so on. I think we need to know what the old account was to determine if they are following the rules for a clean start. Beyond My Ken (talk) 09:49, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps @DoRD: might look into this, given their comment above. Beyond My Ken (talk) 09:51, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Beyond My Ken: This user just made two blatantly POV edits on Antifa (United States): [14] [15]. I'll go issue user warnings. Tsumikiria (T/C) 10:18, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Beyond My Ken: I was on wikibreak most of the last quarter last year, so I missed your message, unfortunately. It took a while, but after a recent question from another editor, I have taken action. Cheers —DoRD (talk)​ 15:04, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, better late than never. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:21, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Antifa (United States), you may be blocked from editing. Tsumikiria (T/C) 10:20, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Antifa (United States). ―Susmuffin ^Talk 13:42, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Prosper UK (political Party) 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 company, corporation or organization that does not credibly 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 "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 deleted 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, then please contact the deleting administrator. Tagishsimon (talk) 14:03, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Prosper UK (political Party) 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/Prosper UK (political Party) 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. Tagishsimon (talk) 14:16, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Proud Boys, you may be blocked from editing. Tsumikiria (T/C) 21:15, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll stop when you do.

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Finding Beauty in Chaos, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Heavy metal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Legend of the Seagullmen requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a musical recording which does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, and where the artist's article does not exist or is eligible for deletion itself. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for music.

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 "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 deleted 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, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Mjs1991 (talk) 23:27, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Proud Boys, you may be blocked from editing. Tsumikiria⧸ 🌹🌉 22:26, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am being neutral, they are not a fascist group and it is dishonest to say so. Your page isn't exactly neutral political either.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 10:14, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violating the terms of WP:Clean start. I asked you last January whether this account met the terms of the policy, and you replied that it did. You have amassed an impressive collection of warnings on this talk page, and comparing them to your old account's talk page, I see that you have repeated the same behavior that were warned about there.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  —DoRD (talk)​ 14:55, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Belaya Rus.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:25, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Anticitizen 98 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Apparently I had violated a 'clean start' which I was not previously aware was a crime here on wikipedia. Furthermore, any contention with my attitude towards other users I hope can be explained or at least corrected if any of you believed I acted inappropriately. I hope I can get back to using this account soon, as I have been locked out for quite some time now and have never intentionally violated or wronged any wiki pages with intention only trying to make them more balanced or to correct any percieved misinformation on my end.

Decline reason:

This appeal completely fails to address the excessive disruption from this account. Your first sentence alone is reason enough to decline the appeal outright. The fact that you, yourself, state you had no intention of editing disruptively is proof enough that it is vert likely the same disruption would continue if you were to be unblocked resulting in another time sink for the community. I strongly suggest you review WP:GAB if you will be making further appeals. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:31, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

The file File:Nikolaos Michaloliakos.jpg 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, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Nikolaos Michaloliakos.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

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, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Alt-right politicians in the United States has been nominated for deletion. 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. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:16, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Serve America Movement - Party Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 22:14, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Arizona State Republican Party Logo.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused. Superseded by File:Arizona Republican Party logo 2019.svg.

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. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 03:07, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Thurrock Independents party logo.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:30, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Alt-right politicians in the United Kingdom has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it 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. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:27, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]