Hello, Azuredivay, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Nicky mathew (talk) 22:06, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Azuredivay, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 07:08, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please follow WP:OVERLINK. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 22:34, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have time to fix all the problems. We don't need links to countries. We do need links to organisations and my revert removed some of those, but we should not have their names in quotes. If there's no article, the name is all we need. I don't want you to think that all of your links were wrong. But just insert them, don't revert please. Hindu saints is a good one too. I see that my revert reinstated a link to guerilla which I don't think you should have removed. Doug Weller talk 11:23, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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 India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. 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.

— Newslinger talk 06:39, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make disruptive edits to Wikipedia contrary to the Manual of Style, as you did at HAL Tejas. You've been asked/warned about adding duplicate links to articles and adding links to common terms. You need to pay attention to this. BilCat (talk) 05:25, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Azuredivay (talk) 09:23, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pakistani nationalism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jammu and Kashmir (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:51, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have initiated a discussion at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard about some of your edits. The thread is Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Azuredivay. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:19, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the effort to introduce Indian currency formatting, however refrain from doing so in the infobox by removing the INRConvert template. This brings about a lack of standardization across articles about Indian companies. If you wish to bring about a lasting change in this matter I reccomend putting in a message on the talk page of the INRConvert template. Debitpixie 💬 13:52, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Azuredivay thank you for your contributions. I would like you to inform that the logo you uploaded on commons File:Serum-institute-of-india-logo.png does not have proper licencing, so its liable to be deleted. I have updated the image that has proper copyright licence tag. See File:Serum-Institute-of-India-logo.png. Please go through/read Wikipedia:Logos policy and to avoid such mistakes in future. Thank you. ~ Amkgp 💬 14:29, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Dear Azuredivay, thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia, especially your recent efforts in helping to form a consensus at the Urdu article. Keep up the good work! You are making a difference here! With regards, AnupamTalk 16:34, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

		The Pakistan Star
		Great work on Pakistan related articles! You do fantastic work. Zakaria1978 ښه راغلاست (talk) 23:53, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please read wp:minor a recent edit of yours was marked as minor and was not.Slatersteven (talk) 12:15, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like we are nearing a consensus. Won't you make a comment now? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 05:17, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Points to note:

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

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Prolix 💬 17:56, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make disruptive edits to Wikipedia contrary to the Manual of Style, as you did at Jio. Prolix 💬 18:08, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Vikram Vincent 19:47, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Stan Swamy, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Vikram Vincent 20:01, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Points to note:

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

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

You have been told to stop editing pages contrary to the manual of style multiple times. You have been warned multiple times but you continue to edit war and ignore attempts to gain consensus. This is your final opportunity to explain your actions. Prolix 💬 06:17, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Prolix: User:Azuredivay is indulging in disruptive editing across multiple pages and refuses to stop despite multiple requests. Vikram Vincent 11:59, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vincentvikram, thanks for letting me know. The user has been reported on ANEW kindly add your comments on the page under the appropriate section. Prolix 💬 12:40, 15 October 2020 (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. Prolix 💬 12:38, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Vikram Vincent 08:44, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You've been blocked 48 hours for continuing to impose your own style preference on numbers in articles, contrary to the guideline at MOS:DIGITS. This follows my previous warning at WP:AN3. See the new AN discussion here. This block can be lifted if you will promise to follow our style guideline in the future. You can also appeal the block using the instructions at WP:GAB. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 15:58, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@EdJohnston: It was my misunderstanding that a minor edit would be uncontroversial but now after going through MOS:DIGITS and why the guideline was originally created, I understand that I had to gain consensus first. I'll ensure that from now on I will use talk page instead of edit warring over MOSDIGITS and abide by WP:BRD. Azuredivay (talk) 03:36, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've unblocked you on the assurance you will wait for consensus in the future before changing number formats. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 15:18, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:48, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Karchana. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Do not change WP:COMMONNAME, which is Allahabad in Wikipedia. Do not be disruptive. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 06:42, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do not add Indian scripts in lead and infobox either. Follow WP:NOINDICSCRIPT. No honorifics as per WP:NCIN, MOS:DOCTOR. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 06:45, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maintain the WP:COMMONNAME of places please. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 06:34, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop vandalising wikipedia. False accusations against me of being a sock puppet are not acceptable. I edit on here under my own name and have seen no evidence from you that the original edits were investigated and shown to be invalid. Deleting content and pointing at random WP policies do not make you correct. You have deleted any discussion on the topics talk page. This is not WP policy. The only deletions I have seen on talk pages are where profanity is used. Please point me at where your actions have been agreed upon. Brian R Hunter (talk) 10:38, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain your edits here? They contradict the Manual of Style, including the removal of quotes around statements made by others, use of Indian decimal systems, italization of proper names, and removal of the definite article from country names that take definite article. ViperSnake151  Talk  05:18, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Please refrain from disruptive changes against Manual of Style, like WP:COMMONNAME, MOS:JOBTITLES — DaxServer (talk to me) 08:29, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Passengerpigeon. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to the page Statue of Unity because it appeared to have removed negative or disparaging information that was correctly sourced. Please note that Wikipedia has a neutral point of view and must cover controversies relating to particular topics as well as positive aspects; removal of accurate negative information from an article could be seen as POV pushing. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Passengerpigeon (talk) 01:38, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Azuredivay. You have new messages at Passengerpigeon's talk page.
Message added 13:01, 25 September 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Passengerpigeon (talk) 13:01, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from reverting edits without any discussion. I've been waiting for replies on articles Talk page for over a month. Instead of replying on the Talk page, you simply chose to revert the edit based on what you think is right. You've pushed an entire section containing the plight of the tribals negatively affected because of the project under "Construction" section which absolutely makes no sense. This type of suppressing or minimizing all the negative aspects of any subject constitutes POV pushing. --coolk (talk) 19:26, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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 India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. 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.

Tayi Arajakate _Talk 19:20, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Two of your edits - diff and diff could only be termed, with a lot of WP:AGF, as weakly explained. I request you to please heed the DS notice above and previous requests to use talk page before such removals. hemantha (brief) 04:22, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You've reverted material twice now (see this as an Edit War notice, I don't want to template). There's enough consensus in talk archives that criticism section is warranted in that article. Your repeated removal without any talk consensus isn't productive. hemantha (brief) 08:07, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You had enough warnings regarding WP:COMMONNAME. The next time you violate this, as in here with the change from Gurgaon to Gurugram, I will start a discussion at WP:ANI.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 15:34, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries are required per policy, see Wikipedia:Editing policy#Be helpful: explain. In controversial articles like Ayurveda, you shouldn't make changes without any explanation. Hemantha (talk) 10:52, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of quote in this edit is misleading and grammatically incorrect. Quotations are used for direct speech, not indirect speech. The text you copy-pasted was an already paraphrased summary of the content from the original source (litigator), otherwise they put that in quotes. If you quote that, the readers would misread it as the direct voice of the litigator. Additionally, that Oneindia reference fails WP:RS as I already mentioned in talk. The Doom Patrol (talk) 21:20, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi , Thanks for your Edit. Can you explain why you remove the link ? all the link provided that is after 2016 . But my reference from 2013 . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nangeli — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellodasan (talk • contribs) 14:59, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Azuredivay, I urge you to stop removing "the" before "United States" in Wikipedia articles (for instance, in "Ratanakosin-class corvette": diff1, diff2). It's grammatically incorrect. Russian Rocky (talk) 17:02, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Tibetan Terrier, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 08:14, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to complementary and alternative medicine, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

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

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

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

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template. tgeorgescu (talk) 11:39, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to pseudoscience and fringe science, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

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

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

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

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template. tgeorgescu (talk) 11:39, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Azure. I have undone your reversion to the page Indian National Army. I dont know what you mean by whitewashing, but the page as it mostly stands was written in painstaking neutral language over the last 15 years, and as mentioned in the edit summaries, hoisting "collaborator" as a pejorative adjective(I suspect that is the intention) is a very biased PoV which stands at marked against Indian perspective of this organisation. I would invite you to discuss in the talk page, or seek a comment or third opinion if you feel your emphasis is not covered adequately in the article (the view of collabroators vs freedom fighters is covered in the very introduction. Happy to hear and discuss further. Best wishes rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 18:06, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All my citations are from reliable sources from 1942 like British Government declassified files from British government archive websites. Apart from this, other citations are from 1942 New York Times and 1942 Indian Express from Google Archives - hence please do not claim that it is cherry pick - Please read all the citations - for your information, I have written 6 books and several articles - I have a PhD from US university. You need to stop Gandhi lover. Sixty years of Nehru-Gandhi dynasty rule in India has Completely corrupted the freedom struggle history in India. People need to know true face of Gandhi and history of freedom struggle. India did not get independence because of Gandhi at all. 1942 Quit India Movement died down within few months. India got independence because of massive threat of coup in Indian army within 5 months of end of WWII once Bose's INA surrendered in East Asia and they poisoned the mind of 2.5 million "native" Indians (among British Army) who were fighting in East and West. British Govt declassified all its papers in 16 volume Transfer of Power series, of 1300 to 1600 pages - the massive coup threat and decision to give independence in Jan 1946 due to this massive coup is there in Transfer of Power Vol 6 which you can find read at www.archives.com also - its link is written below also. Britain wanted a cordial relations with India after 1947 and hence it went along with the propaganda of Nehru-Gandhi dynasty of India getting independence due to Gandhi and Congress party whereas Gandhi and Congress party had no role in independence of India at all.

https://archive.org/details/transferofpower10006unse/page/n5/mode/2up Sxk125125 (talk) 05:28, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the reason that Gandhi was never given Nobel prize, i.e. he was never in favor of independence (as per the British govt declassified papers) - all the top decision makers in West knew "true" Gandhi during 1920s, 30s, 40s & 50s and hence he did not get Nobel Prize. Once Gandhi captured the Congress party in 1920 using radical Muslim organization Khilafat Committee at 1920 Sept Congress Meeting, he did not start any movement for independence at all. Please read the abstract of following book - Gandhi was same in India. In India, British Raj used him to suppress the independence movement in India. Subhas Chandra Bose and his Azad His Fauz (INA) was a disaster at battle field, but once INA surrendered along with Japanese Army at the end of WWII in East Asia, the 1.5 million "native" Indians in British Army in East Asia came to know about how heroically their tried to liberate India and also about the two and a half years existence of Bose's Azad Hind Govt, headquartered in Singapore which was recognized by 9 countries, (including Germany, Japan and Italy) and which had its own bank and its own currency. When the 1.5 million "native" Indians started to come to Indian cantonments (and another 1 million from West), Britain came to know that there would be massive coup and Britain would have to send massive army to suppress it (as per Commander-in-Chief of Indian Army in Delhi - his telegrams are there in Transfer of Power Vol 6 - please download it and read it yourself). Hence in Jan 1946 (even before 1946 Feb Naval Mutiny) Britain decided to send Cabinet Mission, of 3 Cabinet Members, to discuss transfer of powers to Congress and Muslim League which finally led to Nehru as PM in Sept 1946. Hence Gandhi and Congress party had no role in India's independence at all. 60 yrs of Nehru-Gandhi dynasty has completely corrupted India's history.

https://www.amazon.com/South-African-Gandhi-Stretcher-Bearer-Empire/dp/080479717X

The South African Gandhi: Stretcher-Bearer of Empire (South Asia in Motion) 1st Edition (Published by Stanford University, US)

by Ashwin Desai (Author), Goolam Vahed Sxk125125 (talk) 05:50, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]