This editor has decided to leave Wikipedia.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Non-specific effect of vaccines, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mortality. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Dai Pritchard, I have to say that looking at this page and finding that you've decided to leave Wikipedia permanently caught me by surprise, and I really do think it's a shame, I definitely value your contributions. I can't count the amount of times that you've beaten me to nominating something for speedy deletion. I guess I'll leave this here in case you ever check back, and I really do think you should reconsider, although I can understand if you've left for personal reasons. Regards, Pishcal — ♣ 04:47, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am offended by your deleting what I had started to write, IT IS AN Encyclopedia - My page was still being edited, I don't have a lot of time to spend writing, if anything I write can be deleted without inquiry as to what the subject matter is about, based upon one individual's limited perspective - then perhaps that is the problem with wikipedia being filled with inaccurate information on many topics. I was giving basic information about Golf club which is normally being done by other golf clubs, however because you "jumped-the-gun" and deleted what I had started without inquiry or directive regarding the information - now I don't have a copy of what was on the page. Thanks for nothing - I will probably not use or contribute nor donate to wikipedia anymore because your "judgmental approach to editing" without first making some type of inquiry is (for lack of time and better terminology) totalitarian, prejudicial in perspective, unwarranted without some type of precursor. To my recollection, an encyclopedia is "a book, set of books, and/or an established media-oriented conduit that enables the free access to information utilized in various formats pertaining to (yet not necessarily limited to) historic, scientific, culture, economic, religious, social and sports context. My page was not being designed to function in anyway that would violate or interfere with the statement: "Although a lot of leeway is allowed in personalizing your user page, it is not a personal website, blog, or social networking medium, nor should it be used to promote myself, or host a fake article, CV, or lengthy biography. My statements, that you deleted, are articles, including historical fact, and biographic information; Not to create a blog, or to a "fake-alias" - if all my content can be deleted before I finish then that should have been stated when I signed-on, having material deleted by someone who just assumes the page is somehow not valid based on personal prejudice and/or incomplete comprehension of what and how something is being presented. Thanks. — Jan2366 (talk) 9:32, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

NOTE: The above was not written by Jan2366. It was copy pasted from my talk page, originally written by User:Datrufth. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:54, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bhagawati Prakash Sharma 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/Bhagawati Prakash Sharma 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. Itsalleasy (talk) 17:19, 21 May 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) 17:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Savvyjack23 (talk) 07:44, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ACivilian 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/ACivilian 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. CerealKillerYum (talk) 03:03, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I clicked the "thanks" button to thank you for this edit. This is because I liked the anecdote in the Mary Jo Foley article where Ms. Foley accidentally sent Steve Jobs away from her Bill Gates interview. :) —Unforgettableid (talk) 17:43, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article Bhagawati Prakash Sharma has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lots of puffery here, but ultimately insufficient claim to notability. No coverage in secondary sources, and so does not meet WP:GNG. Claims in the article about lots of publications, but cannot be seen on google scholar (suggesting they are from dodgy journals and publishers); research gate link shows much output but no impact (hasn't been cited a single time, thus fails WP:PROF). Vice-chancellor of a private university, but that is insufficient by itself in the absence of any other coverage/impact; private universities in south Asia are very common.

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Vanamonde (talk) 15:34, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bhagawati Prakash Sharma 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/Bhagawati Prakash Sharma (2nd nomination) 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. Vanamonde (talk) 15:40, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Grammatical error. Since you had some involvement with the Grammatical error redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:27, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article The Tangent Line has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Covered in Mason–Dixon line. There is no reason to have a separate article for a part of the line.

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Pontificalibus 16:44, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The Tangent Line. Since you had some involvement with the The Tangent Line redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Pontificalibus 18:44, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Señorita México U.S ® and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 15#Señorita México U.S ® until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. BD2412 T 05:15, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Xenophobe's Guides, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xenophobe's Guides until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Create wikipage and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 31#Create wikipage until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Capsulecap ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:28, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect A List Of Indian Chef has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 2 § A List Of Indian Chef until a consensus is reached. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 05:37, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]