Rather than "permission", something like "after discussion with" might have made more sense. You don't need my permission to edit any page, though certainly it was nice and good that you discussed it with me first.

Regards, Martin 22:23, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Because Cantus kept abusing him on it. Angela. 22:33, Apr 14, 2004 (UTC)

Hi, Dissident. Although I know it's been done recently with User:Wik, it's almost never a good idea to remove a nomination (self- or otherwise) before the usual week has passed. Leaving it for a week gives the community time to see it, think about it, and comment on it. If, for example, Ryan renominates himself or someone else nominates him, most people wouldn't even know about this one after such a short time.

I realize that you were just trying to save some embarassment and/or contention, and please don't take my reversion of the page personally.

Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 02:01, Apr 15, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for catching the removal of the message on Wik's page. I don't know what's going on. Also during the time I was offline, Cantus seemed to be rewriting Talk:Augusto Pinochet . 172 00:29, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hi Dissident, Thanks for the admin nomination. Cheers, --Zero 00:03, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Britain's Best Sitcom now has an intro. Would you like to remove it from Pages needing attention? Don't thank me, it wasn't my doing ;o) --bodnotbod 19:34, May 1, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks from Mary Ann Horton for the attention to my personal history. Alas, you keep getting it wrong. Would you please contact me for the real story?

 mah (at) mhorton (dot) net

Just a response about Counselor - I found that more articles linked to Counselor rather than Counsellor so I thought it better to use that spelling. And I plan to expand that counselor page (provided no one else beats me to it!) that was just a start.

-Xeroc 19 May 2004

Hello,

I reply you here because I think you'll read it faster here.

Yes, a week has passed after your request on ia. And you got my vote for you. Anyway, this is the only vote. It's a pitty no other people have voted there. Can you write please Ensjo to take a look on the vote? If he agrees, i'll give you sysophood on ia:, it just would be a bit strange to sysop you after being the only one who agrees with your sysopping. If you don't agree, feel free to tell it to me! :-)
Cheers, --Fire 01:26, 21 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you for your reply. I still need to really understand what it is that you are driving at. Look, people who are pro-Palestinian are never going to be "happy" with any sort of strong Jewish response to their behavior, so I don't see the point of picking on Eli Wiesel. He made a point of protesting any cover-ups of the Sabra and Shatila affair. Noam Chomsky is a rabid anti-Zionist who would like to see Israel disappear so it again makes no sense to quote his views, as he is just out to destroy the public image of people who don't agree with him. IZAK 07:24, 21 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Re Hazel Mcallion, Dissident, yes I could have just Redirected it. What the heck, I thought, let's put it into the Duplicate articles list and do it the long but correct way round. (;-)But you are quite right. It would have saved me some work. Thanks for deleting it. Dieter Simon 01:39, 22 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not much of a photographer, nor digital editor, but I'll see if I can get something better. This seems to be the best I can do with the existing image using PrintShop Pro: [1]. Niteowlneils 23:31, 24 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

The person who told me about the opening being solved (part of the team that did it) described it as that.Geni 20:25, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

You don't say what you think is wrong with my definition of free ball. I suggest you edit the article to what you think is correct, and we'll take it from there. --Auximines 21:25, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (| talk)

On November 25, 1941, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem declared jihad on the Allied Powers (Great Britain at first; a similar declaration against the United States was added after Pearl Harbor). The mufti then spent most of the remaining World War II years in the Balkans, recruiting Albanians and Bosnian Muslims into Hitler's Waffen SS units. Since the mufti was regarded as the spiritual leader of at least the "Palestinian" Arabs, if not all Arabs, his declaration at least conceptually put the Arab world on the side of the Axis in World War II - and depending upon one's POV, this declaration was either the reason or the excuse for placing the post-war Jewish state in the Middle East instead of giving the Jews either a slice of the Rhineland or Bavaria, as many, including Henry Morgenthau and Harry Truman, wanted to do. -- TOttenville8 (talk}

That is not correct. The Mufti's declaration had almost nothing to do with it and was pretty much ignored. We should resist the attempt to turn Revanchism into yet another ME war zone. Incidentally, Zionism presented itself as a movement to recover land that was lost millenia before and thus fits the definition of "revanchism" perfectly. So does the Palestinian movement to recover land taken by Israel. So do dozens of modern territorial disputes. --Zero 00:36, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hi Dissident, I discovered an old mass destruction at IA.wikipedia:

[2]

There might be a way to fix it automated, it's quite to much to do it manual. One other question: how can I request a page-deletion at IA.wikipedia? "TTA" and "Tta" are commercials and completely in English. Jcbos 01:48, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

OK, thank you, I will try to improve my Interlingua, because at this moment I can only read it. Jcbos 06:54, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Andre Engels made me temporary sysop of IA.wikipedia to undo the vandalism. After that I would like to start a huge maintenance, like delete non-articles, place interwikis and categorise articles. I subscribed here to get a normal sysop, if you like you can post there a vote. Jcbos 22:08, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Salve!
I nominated W. Mark Felt as a WP:FAC. As you commented on the Deep Throat talk page, I'd appreciate your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/W. Mark Felt/archive1. PedanticallySpeaking 15:42, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

i've turned off capitalization on the jbo wikipedia. pages will need to be renamed! --Brion June 29, 2005 18:17 (UTC)

In June you voted on the featured article candidacy of W. Mark Felt, which failed. It has now been resubmitted. In the event you would like to vote on the new candidacy, it is at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/W. Mark Felt/archive1. PedanticallySpeaking 19:01, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to thank you for your work on the article, tidying it up and fixing my own errors. Know that it's appreciated :) Sherurcij 02:58, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think your case about Marsden has merit, however I suggest you take the current one down and rephrase it in a way which doesn't include quite so many named parties. You only really need to list the 'key players' in the request. Hope this helps, Talrias (t | e | c) 12:30, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well the RFAR seems to have been deleted and you have been subject to a deal of high spirited holiday mockery. You wont get a change. I'm becoming ever more convinced that this is just borken. Happy 2006. Unbehagen 03:25, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I did it, hope it was sufficiently agreed upon. Sometimes after page moves that involve deletion like this did, the cache takes a while to catch up with the rest of the database and links appear to go to contradictory or impossible places. It will settle. Now there are lots of double-redirects to fix, probably. --Zero 01:08, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Dissident, I have created an RFC on myself so you can express any comments you have about my actions regarding the block duration of Marsden. I've attempted to fairly summarise the events and I've justified my actions. Based on the outcome of the comments given on the RFC, I'll take appropriate action afterwards. Thanks in advance for any comments you make. Talrias (t | e | c) 22:17, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please follow process. There was no vote on the move, so we admins don't know whether it's controversial or not. Should be relisted. —Nightstallion (?) 09:10, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Colignatus (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log). Well, perhaps. He had, however, been warned and spoken to several times- I didn't believe that he would conform to Wikipedia policy or help build an encyclopedia. Thanks.--Sean Black ^(talk) 03:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dissident,

I did get your message(s) but can't find them anymore (but it's okay). You will probably like that I did make full representation and proportional representation one and the same page. However, there is a big distinction between full representation and proportional representation in that nations with district elections can still have full representation (or an aspect of full representation). Canada and Germany, for instance, have district elections but they do contain emancipated parties, like from French speaking Quebec or the German Green Party, so they do have aspects of full representation and are not pure winner-takes-all. In the U.S. and U.K. the district systems, however, do not deliver full representation: these are truly winner-takes-all nations, where other groups cannot emancipate but must adhere (to some level) to (one of) the two parties.FredrickS 19:37, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

templates substituted by a bot as per Wikipedia:Template substitution Pegasusbot 08:07, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How did you learn Interlingua?Cameron Nedland 23:52, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Given the nature of Interlingua, one can come a long way by simply having access to a dictionary and a grammar. -- Dissident (Talk) 03:57, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.Cameron Nedland 19:15, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you moved Serbo-Croatian language to just Serbo-Croatian. Although it sounds the same, "Serbo-Croatian" can also be an ethnicity (and it would be better if "Serbo-Croatian" redirected to Yugoslavs), not just a language. Perhaps we could solve this by moving the "Serbo-Croatian" page back, or leave it as it is and add a dissambiguation link that would explain this whole thing. What do you think? --GOD OF JUSTICE 00:49, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point. Maybe the best solution would be to write This is the article about the Serbo-Croatian language. For the Serbo-Croatian ethnic group, see: Yugoslavs in the Serbo-Croatian article. That would satisfy me, what about you? --GOD OF JUSTICE 01:02, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, I'm not 100% sure. I have lived in SFR Yugoslavia for many years, and have heard that some people declare themselves as Serbo-Croats. I don't know if it's official. I'll do some research, and will surely contact you if I decide to make any changes. All the best, --GOD OF JUSTICE 01:14, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Read my comments on the top of the talk page. my computer showed the last diff to change the page to an entirely different article - which is vandalism - but then when i checked afterwards it wasn't. I believe it was a glitch in the system. Xtra 23:33, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then please post your evidence in your own section. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:15, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the interwiki sorting order on interlingua: It was done on a proposal/request by ia:Usator:McDutchie. Please contact him or even better, the interlingua userbase at large. When an agreement has been reached, I'd be happy to implement it. - Andre Engels 18:30, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dissident. I put Jean Claude Van Damme back on the top of the Requested moves list because a notice was not put at the top of the talk page about the move and a place for discussion and a survey was not created. Thanks, Kjkolb 09:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, just being an admin who tries to help out at Requested moves, I did not know how this particular actor's name is supposed to be spelled before coming across this requested move. With no evidence given for what the spelling should be in the move request, how was I to know how the name was spelled and whether the move would be uncontroversial? For all I knew, it could be a matter of contention, and I already get yelled at enough when I decide in favor of the majority and naming conventions (people are surprisingly sensitive about these things). If you were an admin with no knowledge about the spelling of an article's name and came across a move request that just said "proper name", wouldn't you be reluctant to move it? I could have researched what the name should be, but it is up to the requester to make a case for moving an article and I would get very few moves done if I have to investigate each one myself from scratch (I say "each one" since I investigate controversial moves further when necessary). When I come across an improper or incomplete move request, I now always inform the requester so that I do not have to do all of the work each time he or she wants an article to be moved. Granted, this one probably would not have taken that long, but a conscientious investigation would take significantly longer than adding a notice and place for discussion on the talk page. Finally, I am uncomfortable in making a move that only an admin can perform without a discussion, unless the move is to conform with naming conventions and other policies and guidelines (although it does seem to come up an awful lot, I wish people would read the rules more, especially concerning disambiguation). I have added a move notice and a place for discussion to the talk page. It will be moved in about a week, if the move is supported by the majority or is unopposed. -- Kjkolb 16:52, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted your additions to Most common words in English and have posted my reasoning on its talk page. We may discuss the matter there, or by our talk pages if you like. -- Rmrfstar 09:26, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dissident, your recent edit summary (compromise edit; it's arrogant to assume that there is an ISO 639-2 code for every single existing language or even an encompassing one.) appears to call me 'arrogant'. Please read the talk page and comment there about what your edits are all about. — Gareth Hughes 20:52, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On the John Cope page you added this blurb about the supposed origin of Mark Hollis' pseudonym. As a Talk Talk fan and as a Wikipedian concerned about sourcing, I'm curious as to where you got this information; I can't seem to find it anywhere. Thanks. Punctured Bicycle 21:15, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the skepticism. I mean, All Music Guide is good for criticism, but when it comes to information, they are notoriously shaky in the reliability department. I wouldn't be satisfied until I read Hollis explaining the meaning himself. In fact, he was asked the question in this interview, but the response was "???". Punctured Bicycle 11:37, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see 2 deletes (one being you), and two keep/redirects, so there is no consensus. John Reaves (talk) 00:17, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why the deletes would transform into redirects. I also don't think anyone would mind if you redirected it since there is no opposition to redirecting (I know I don't care). John Reaves (talk) 00:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please support this nomination for deletion. Yellowbeard 20:55, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Alexander Gode at desk.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 19:00, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Carom, by Wikihermit (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Carom is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Carom, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 05:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per the outcome of the deletion review that you requested, I've restored the article and listed it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Victor Allis. Best regards, Tikiwont (talk) 08:05, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Tenball, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American pool (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:39, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I'm a steward. A new policy regarding the removal of "advanced rights" (administrator, bureaucrat, etc.) was adopted by community consensus recently. According to this policy, the stewards are reviewing administrators' activity on wikis with no inactivity policy.   You meet the inactivity criteria (no edits and no log actions for 2 years) on iawiki, where you are a bureaucrat and administrator. Since iawiki does not have its own administrators' rights review process, the global one applies.   If you want to keep your rights, you should inform the community of the wiki about the fact that the stewards have sent you this information about your inactivity. If the community has a discussion about it and then wants you to keep your rights, please contact the stewards at m:Stewards' noticeboard, and link to the discussion of the local community, where they express their wish to continue to maintain the rights, and demonstrate a continued requirement to maintain these rights.   We stewards will evaluate the responses. If there is no response at all after approximately one month, we will proceed to remove your administrative rights. In cases of doubt, we will evaluate the responses and will refer a decision back to the local community for their comment and review. If you have any questions, please contact us on m:Stewards' noticeboard.   Best regards, Rschen7754 22:50, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dissident. Stewards are undertaking further works on inactive admins through the wikis, and I see that you are

• crat/admin at ia.wikipedia.org

at that wiki you have been inactive for many years. If you do not wish to maintain those rights, then they can be resigned at m:SRP; if you do wish to maintain those rights, it would help if you could do some editing on that wiki when we get to do formal notifications to the wiki. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth

Thank you for your contribution to this World Chess Championship 2014. I wanted to show you what tool we use in the Hebrew wikipedia to show the games. [3]. You can also annotate the games using this tool, and the best is that the reader can sit down and see the game playing by itself like in the chess sites. You are invited to install the tool in the English wikipedia!--Yoavd (talk) 09:00, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Dissident..I have already written the list of the cities of Libya by population, but ليبي صح distorted the list later only to make his hometown Al Bayda the fourth instead of the eighth!!! (original list is shown on the List's talk page). I have doubts myself with list, and expressed some of them in the sentence on the top of the list, but this is the only reliable source I found about these figures, since it had been depended on governmental data, and the government of Libya is unable to make another census because of the ongoing war there. Would remind if If I restored the original list, after fixing some red links?!--Maher27777 (talk) 20:41, 8 November 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) 22:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dissident. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page.

Hello, Dissident. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Offside law. Since you had some involvement with the Offside law redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. —Ketil Trout (^<><!) 07:02, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dissident. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:15, 24 November 2020 (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) 00:02, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Great Britain (kingdom) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 10#Great Britain (kingdom) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Balkovec (talk) 15:06, 10 April 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) 00:25, 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) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (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) 00:05, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]