Hi Deltaspace42! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 12:13, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Thanks for you attention but Changes in the article were committed by me according to true transcription from Ukrainian language to English of city «Київ» should be “Kyiv” not Kiev. Writing Kiev instead of Kyiv it’s a mistake which shows supporting of russian imperialism because name “Kiev” was made due to russian occupation of Ukraine. It’s not a vandalism. I hope that you will change your decision. Thank you Oleksandr Stoliar (talk) 15:50, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree with you, because it's WP:COMMONNAME Deltaspace42 (talk) 15:54, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Deltaspace42, have you edited under different usernames before? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:21, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I made some edits under IP address, but those were few, no previous usernames. Deltaspace42 (talk) 20:24, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, that's perfectly fine. I was a bit surprised about the quick and unusual start (complex user page syntax, ~1600 edits in a week after almost exactly to-the-day two years of inactivity). All the best! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:28, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Deltaspace42 (talk) 20:29, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is much appreciated! Gilded Snail (talk) 00:20, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcomed, but most of the early contributions, I've had to revert. The remaining two *may* be acceptable.Naraht (talk) 15:59, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I saw that your report one of your reasons for reporting the IP was they kept removing warnings from their own talk page. This isn't a valid reason since this is something they are allowed to do per WP:NOTWALLOFSHAME. Just figured I'd let you know. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:40, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What if they vandalised some page, I reverted it, warned them, and they immediately removed the warning? Deltaspace42 (talk) 19:41, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter when they removed the warning. THe page I linked above says this: "Policy does not prohibit users, whether registered or unregistered, from removing comments from their own talk pages, although archiving is preferred. If a user removes material from their talk page, it is normally taken to mean that the user has read and is aware of its contents. There is no need to keep them on display, and usually users should not be forced to do so. It is often best to simply let the matter rest if the issues stop. If they do not, or they recur, then any record of past warnings and discussions can be found in the page history if ever needed, and these diffs are just as good evidence of previous matters." In other words, even if they remove the warning, it's not gone as it's still able to be viewed in the page history and therefore removing the warnings isn't considered vandalism. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:43, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that makes sense, thank you. Deltaspace42 (talk) 19:46, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! I've learned that myself in the past. Keep up the good work! ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:47, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My IP has hopped a little since you warned me about being civil. That may be so, but how do you justify this provocative and unprecedented behaviour? --92.40.205.192 (talk) 13:54, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mistakes happen, especially when there is a lot of vandalisms about changing names. So it's rare, but not unprecedented and definitely not in bad faith. Deltaspace42 (talk) 13:58, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to be back. It was no mistake Deltaspace. There was no need for it. He reverted a batch of edits that landed on mine. He then wilfully "undid" my update of the change in headteacher where I personally go!!!!!! --92.40.205.189 (talk) 14:03, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have misunderstood me, I meant reversal of your edit could be mistake. Deltaspace42 (talk) 14:10, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

👍 --92.40.205.189 (talk) 14:22, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

...but was sourced (as Wikipedia wants it to be). 92.40.205.189 (talk) 14:04, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to explain why I deleted the biography because it is fake news his daughter already had legal issues against their political rival team

And now someone removed the correct information 2403:6200:89A8:4378:C1F8:1843:EF99:C037 (talk) 22:40, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted the article because there was unexplained removal of the awards and honors section.

Editors who disagree on article content are expected to discuss their arguments on the article talk page here: Talk:Sukavich Rangsitpol. It's done there so that all of the discussion points are in one place rather than scattered across the talk pages of three or more editors. Edit summaries are not a substitute for talk page discussion. Continued reversions without discussion is considered Edit warring: constantly changing an article back to what you think it should be. Please discuss the changes and attempt to reach a consensus with other editors. Blue Riband► 01:43, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Test because you undo vandalism NickUserIvan (talk) 07:23, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Deltaspace42 (talk) 08:37, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources is Brad Groves Captain purple pants (talk) 11:40, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Citing sources Deltaspace42 (talk) 11:51, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The last edit here was vandalism since it broke things and repeated text. Reverting vandalism is not 'edit warring'. 103.240.204.88 (talk) 10:38, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I noticed. But I still suggest you make new section on the article's talk page and invite Saintstephen000 there to discuss the problem. Deltaspace42 (talk) 10:41, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you do it on the talk page, it will also allow other users to participate in the discussion. Deltaspace42 (talk) 10:42, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there a dispute. And I also dont think he is collaborative enough. Look at his response here, which was completely unrelated to the issue I raised. 103.240.204.88 (talk) 10:49, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you revert each other's edits, then there is a dispute. Their response is not ideal, but you asked them to just stop reverting your edits, and not invited to discuss the issue.

I suggest you tell them about the reasons of your edits on their talk page before making assumptions about their collaborativeness. Deltaspace42 (talk) 10:54, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are really fast at reverting vandalism. Keep up the good work. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 18:59, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Deltaspace42 (talk) 20:15, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware that this figure was based on calculation. Thanks for clarifying that. Have some strawberries 🍓🍓🍓 from me as well. 103.240.204.88 (talk) 11:18, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't call it that way. Many Vietnamese have a Sino-Vietnamese name. It's not useless information. It's the same as including the Hanja of a Korean name. It doesn't detract anything from the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.120.22.25 (talk) 10:06, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit removed the date of birth. If it wasn't intentional, you are welcome to re-add Sino-Vietnamese name without removing date of birth. Deltaspace42 (talk) 10:12, 14 September 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) 01:48, 29 November 2022 (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) 01:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Being a "professional footballer", which is a specific term indicating significance (means he was good enough to make a living off it) and having played for teams which have articles on Wikipedia (and are therefore presumed to be notable) are the two claims of significance in that article. The article claims he played for seven important teams in two countries and six of those have their own Wikipedia article. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 09:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would probably agree with the second part (playing for notable teams is a claim of significance), but I don't agree that just making a living off playing football is a claim of any significance (there are more than 100 thousand professional footballers in the world, and if you add people from other sports, then there are just too many of them). Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 09:17, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully, given you have attempted to CSD A7 multiple articles (incorrectly!), I suggest you consider staying away from footballer articles until you know what you are doing. GiantSnowman 19:49, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@GiantSnowman: Sorry, I've been already told by Liz that WP:A7 should not be used on old articles about athletes. I've thoroughly read the criteria and thought that was applicable when I used WP:A7, but yeah, I'm still inexperienced in speedy deletion. I was cautious not to WP:A7 all analogous articles, so I did it only to a few articles about footballers, so I don't think much harm was done.

I will focus more on articles about computing and software in the future since it's closer to my interests.

I also noticed that I've put two articles created by you in quick succession first on speedy deletion, then nominated on AfD, so I understand that you might feel angry. In that case, sorry, I didn't mean to provoke any anger, I'm just gaining experience in article deletion - that is all. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 20:28, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not angry, don't worry, thank you though. GiantSnowman 22:31, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the creator of JSSP, and I'm fine with deleting it. There was a little use of the tech even a decade later, but it never gained real significance, and I don't see much from the past six years or so. Way too many attempts to delete articles are problematic, but this one makes sense. —Kaz (talk) 15:53, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Kazvorpal: then the article can be speedy deleted under WP:G7. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 15:57, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! A couple of minor technical points about withdrawing an AfD nomination. It is customary to add a note next to your nomination stating that you are withdrawing it, even if it is clear from the context of the discussion that this is the case. It is also customary to let an uninvoled editor close the AfD, just to make sure there's no appearance of bias. And lastly, when closing a withdrawn AfD, it's important to make sure that all participants support the Keep option. I have no problem with how you closed WP:Articles for deletion/Visit filter, but technically, since my !vote there was Redirect, not Keep, it was supposed to stay open for the full seven days, according to WP:WITHDRAWN. I apologize if my comment we can speedy close this AfD in WP:Articles for deletion/Selfie Type was misleading or ambiguous.

No need to fix either of those closures; no harm done, and no one is going to complain about either. But since non-admin closures are often scrutinized more closely, I just wanted to make sure you are aware of how things are normally done. Other than that, keep up the good work! Your review of sources for science-related articles is just what we need around here. Thank you! Owen× ☎ 19:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@OwenX, OK, thanks, I will add notes before closing the AfD in the future.

About closing the AfD with someone voting Redirect:

WP:MERGE says Any editor can perform a merge. No permission or discussion is needed if you think the merge is uncontroversial; just do it (but it might get reverted). Otherwise, the merge should be first proposed and discussed, as detailed below. So I thought, since I could just redirect Visit filter in the first place, then I could just close the AfD because the only response was Redirect.

I think the rule exists, so that if someone votes Redirect then the nominator can't just close the AfD and not redirect the page afterwards.

But yeah, I'm trying to be really careful about these decisions since I'm relatively new to deletions. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 19:34, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! You're doing a great job. Owen× ☎ 19:36, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand the point of this edit diff. You clearly do not have a clue what the problem is, your attempted solution was never going to work, and you posted it below my post, which at least identified the issue. Please only post on that page when you have something useful to say. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:57, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tagishsimon: Wow! I don't understand the hostility, especially coming from the Teahouse discussion which is supposed to be friendly. I just wanted to confirm that I, too, see this weird behavior that when in preview mode (at least when previewing only a section, not the whole article) it looks correct, but when published, the image goes to the wrong place. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 22:09, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

~ ~ ~ Merry Christmas! ~ ~ ~

Hello Deltaspace42: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:53, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@CAPTAIN RAJU: Hello! Thank you! Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 20:53, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Hey, good job on the thorough WP:BEFORE at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sing and Dance With Barney. Keep up the good work! microbiologyMarcus (petri dish·growths) 20:28, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MicrobiologyMarcus: Hello! Thank you! Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 20:30, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The user known as 61.6.233.93 has been reverting vital information on this article for no reason. I have been reverting their edits, and they have been warned by you before. 173.53.35.177 (talk) 15:37, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your hard work in categorizing and responding to lot of different discussions in the articles for deletion section! StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 17:58, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:19, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the revisions, including identification of where citations are needed. Years ago I raised the article to GA. I recently nominated it for consideration as a Featured Article. My nomination was turned down without review on grounds that significant improvements were needed before it could be formally considered. P.S. I was able to find a ref for Jame Cook receiving a medal. David notMD (talk) 13:13, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@David notMD: Hello! Honestly, I just ran this page through AutoWikiBrowser's regex typo fixer and it fixed one typo, replaced some templates (for example, "fact" with "citation needed", since "fact" is a shortcut to this template), and removed duplicate reference. It took literally 15 seconds to make this edit, 10 of which is to review the diff to make sure that AWB doesn't do something stupid. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 13:20, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even "drive-by" help is appreciated. I am finding that a significant problem is a need to evaluate content that was already in the article and which I accepted without deep review when I began my GA effort. David notMD (talk) 13:30, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About the hanging paragraph on my update to Volcanism of Iceland. Addressed as soon as I could, as if you had left a message on my talk page.ChaseKiwi (talk) 19:51, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for the Orphan reminder, Hope you don't mind me asking this here, I've already added a link to Zahirok from other article(in persian), would you mind taking a look at this article and give me your review how to remove from Orphaned tag. Balash-Vologases (talk) 13:05, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Balash-Vologases: Hello! An orphaned article is an article to which there are no wikilinks in the English Wikipedia. You can see all the links here. Right now only user space pages link to this article, and to de-orphan the article, you need to find the relevant articles in the English Wikipedia and add there a wikilink to this article. Please read this: Wikipedia:Orphan#Various_ways_to_de-orphan. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 13:11, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank a bunch. Balash-Vologases (talk) 13:12, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It look to me like the duplicated text you found at Bézier curve was the result of the paper author copying himself. The change was special:diff/1008905816. If you feel motivated, you may want to do another check up on other contributions by the same editor, Special:Contributions/Elusiveman. –jacobolus (t) 19:37, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jacobolus: Hello! Thank you for checking the history of the article, actually, I've already checked Elusiveman's other contributions (and fixed some typo in the Product of exponentials formula article). However, I don't have the access to the paper itself, and the Google search of the content didn't reveal anything. My first impression was that they encountered this paper and decided to post some information from it to the relevant articles, and it didn't cross my mind that it could be the author themselves. Now that I think about it, this seems more plausible, though I'm not sure. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 20:24, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In any case, thanks for noticing and fixing it. Cheers. –jacobolus (t) 21:01, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An article about Benjamin Franklin states that his political affiliation is non-partisan, but at the same time, an article about the Democratic-Republican Party of the United States states that he was one of its founders. Thus, the article about Benjamin Franklin misstates his party affiliation and should be corrected.

I will also leave here a link to an article about the US Democratic-Republican Party so that you can read it in more detail.

Please, this needs to be corrected and the correct changes made. That is, put in this particular batch 212.241.28.102 (talk) 12:58, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Need to change the political party line from independent to Democratic-Republican Party USA 212.241.28.102 (talk) 14:10, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Deltaspace42. Please try to avoid making Wikipedia a political spin soapbox. In times of conflict not all references are worth the trust.

Kind Regards IP 84.187.45.46 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.230.99.163 (talk) 14:18, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Deltaspace42. After reviewing your request, I have enabled rollback on your account. Please keep the following things in mind while using rollback:

• Being granted rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle or Ultraviolet. It just adds a [Rollback] button next to a page's latest live revision - that's all. It does not grant you any additional "status" on Wikipedia, nor does it change how Wikipedia policies apply to you.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear and unambiguous cases of vandalism only. Never use rollback to revert good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war, and it should never be used in a content-related dispute to restore the page to your preferred revision. If rollback is abused or used for this purpose or any other inappropriate purpose, the rights will be revoked.
• Use common sense. If you're not sure about something, ask!

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Fastily 23:51, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	For all you do around here to keep vandalism at the lowest level possible. Keep it going! Volten001 ☎ 06:40, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Delta, I was wondering, do you know how to make a custom user signture? And do you want to work together to revert Vandalism? TheTeam219 (talk) 07:34, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And btw, I have a user box for the vandalism, here you go:

{{User wikipedia/CVU-Vandal Fighter}} TheTeam219 (talk) 07:55, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheTeam219: Hello! See the Wikipedia:Signature tutorial. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 13:47, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure about this edit?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BespokeSynth&diff=prev&oldid=1195346046

It does seem odd. Demonburrito 19:15, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Demonburrito: Hello! Why do you find it odd? I just removed redundant parent categories and added free software programmed in c, because it is programmed in c and it is free. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 19:25, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. It's because the removed categories aren't strictly redundant. The inferred hierarchy doesn't mean the categories serve no purpose.Demonburrito 21:13, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And hello! Hope you got the thanks for fleshing out the article. Demonburrito 21:15, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One last thing I neglected to mention: It's mainly a C++ project. And C++ is not a strict superset of C. That sort of illustrates the wider problem of interpreting categories to be in a particular kind of hierarchy, or Conceptual Graph. You can look at this in an ontological or computer science context, or both. Demonburrito 21:22, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Demonburrito: I am aware that C and C++ are very different languages (having tried programming in both btw), I just saw in GitHub repo of the BespokeSynth project that it contains both C and C++ parts, so I decided to include the C as well. By redundant categories I meant that it is recommended that the article is included in the narrowest category, so that if it belongs to the subcategory, then it shouldn't be included directly in the parent category (except for non-diffusing categories and the current categories are not non-diffusing). Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:42, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for perpetrating woe upon you, but I am re-draftifying this; the original author has some UPE red flags and keeps bypassing AfC and moving it into mainspace. I'm going to move it back and probably pagemove-protect it; sorry if this means I have wasted some of the time you spent copyediting it. jp×g🗯️ 22:42, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JPxG: Hello! Thanks for notifying me, I have a question though, would you consider the sources I used in the Overview section sufficient for establishing the product notability? Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 22:51, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That was a seriously major edit (took me over a week off and on; thankfully no power failures) and it's nice to know someone checked it for the more glaring stupidities. 97.102.205.224 (talk) 15:51, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's been a month, but you have made the first edition since this year 2024 (UTC) began! (see this other diff) (; 194.61.116.186 (talk) 22:09, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On 8 February 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Open Source Tripwire, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a computer system can contain tripwire files that alert administrators upon being accessed by intruders? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Open Source Tripwire. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Open Source Tripwire), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—Kusma (talk) 00:02, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, as more secondary resources were requested, I tried to find some and added a section on reception and adoption. By looking at comparable libraries on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_platform-independent_GUI_libraries, there are even more popular libraries with pages which also are mainly based on content what's being provided by the project pages. I could add some threads on NAppGUI on various discussion groups, but not sure whether this would be considered secondary source. Please let me know. Looking forward to get this published. LinsErik (talk) 13:23, 27 May 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) 00:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]