Hello, welcome to Wikipedia.

You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Maintenance or the Task Center for further information.)

Help counter systemic bias by creating new articles on important women.

Help improve popular pages, especially those of low quality.

You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

• If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.

• You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.

• If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

Again, welcome! - UtherSRG 04:27, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Hi...just so you know, your currently red-linked article for the Persian Invasion of Greece is already covered under Persian Wars. I suppose that article could be divided into the separate invasions, but I guess you could also just expand that one. Adam Bishop 06:15, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I deleted your subpage that you listed for deletion. If you need anything else just ask. silsor 06:39, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)

Dear Great, thnk you for the time invested on Roman subjects, always neglected around here. About your change in the Ancient Rome directory, i dont agree with a series of things. Now, i am out of my base camp but in another two weeks i would like to discuss my ideas with you. Meanwhile, i ask you to explain in the talk page your basic motivation for changing the page, so i can see your point. Normally, thats how things work (or should): discuss first, change later. All the best, Muriel 14:46, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

• Hello! Me again. I added some more arguments to our ongoing Ancient Rome discussion. Cheers! Muriel 11:24, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in responding to your email: I've made a sensible disambiguating stub with a link to Silvanus (mythology) that shopuld be clear. Wetman 08:01, 28 Sep 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 1000 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) 18:26, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

A quick note to thank you for your patient and cautious re-reading of UNPROFOR. You were harsh with yourself in putting this as a minor edit. Or perhaps minor edit, great improvement ! Merry Christmas and Happy new Year ! Rama 17:10, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Among your spelling corrections you changed English spellings to American English - just curious about your rationale for doing so. Guettarda 17:54, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It's a judgement call when an article contains a combination of British and American English spelling. I try to use the dominant spelling of the article except when the article is about an American, British, Canadian, etc. subject. According to the article, Isla Mona is part of Puerto Rico and thus American territory - so American English seemed appropriate. GreatWhiteNortherner 22:37, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)

I am having trouble with a simonP. I edit Arete (virtue) and he immediately reverts the edits. Him and his friends have deleted [Classical definition of republic] and after the many facts and the quoting of material they will not acknowledge they won't even let an external link and the talk is ongoing at Talk:Republic. This man doesn't know what he is doing. I ask that someone step in and stop this please. This man has no expertise in the classical field. He is an anonymous user. Please see also Talk:Arete (virtue).WHEELER 17:27, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi GWN. You made some spelling corrections to "List of genres of reggae" but I wondered about the last one where you changed ragga to reggae. I assumed that was correct as ragga (short for raggamuffin) but I may be wrong. I wonder if it should be changed back or are you confident about your change? cheers. Nurg 08:06, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Just a case of not knowing what I was talking about. I have reverted that change. GreatWhiteNortherner 07:49, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)

Hi - I made a list of users who've been around long enough to have made lots of edits but aren't admins. If you're at all interested in becoming an admin, can you please add an '*' immediately before your name in this list? I've suggested folks nominating someone might want to puruse this list, although there is certainly no guarantee anyone will ever look at it. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 00:32, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the nomination but I am not interested in an administratorship. GreatWhiteNortherner 07:42, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand the factual basis for your contention that "Pratt & Whitney Canada and its products are NOT part of P&W."

Pratt Canada's financial numbers are reported as part of P&W's figures. Pratt Canada's president is appointed by and reports to the president of P&W, not to UTC headquarters. Seems like is it very much a "part" of P&W and not an independent sister company the way, say, Hamilton Sundstand is to P&W or Sikorsky. Certainly, PWC is a stand-alone division within P&W, but it is still a part of it. Do you disagree?

Hello,

I’m an historian working at the Center for History and New Media at George Mason University (http://chnm.gmu.edu/) and we are very interested in digital, peer-produced works of history, including history articles in Wikipedia. We’d like to talk to people about their experiences working on articles in Wikipedia, in connection with a larger project on the history of the free and open source software movement. Would you be willing to talk with us about your involvement, either by phone, a/v chat, IM, or email? This could be as lengthy or brief a conversation as you wish.

Thanks for your consideration.

Olivia

oryan at gmu dot edu

Hi, I saw that you changed "neighbors" to "neighbours" saying that you wanted to standardize on UK English? Any reason why?

Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 17:28, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia standard is to stick with the same version of English throughout an article - it doesn't matter which. I do a lot of spell checking because it doesn't require me to do anything difficult, like thinking.

Choosing the flavour of English to use is a judgement call. Articles clearly related to one of the Anglo-Saxon countries should use the local version of English. In other cases, I try to use the English most used within the article already. The "Spanish Language" article seemed to be mainly in UK English so I standardized on that.

GreatWhiteNortherner 19:04, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your good editing of Gaeta... Hem, it seems that mine was and... Italian English at all! I try to write for the English edition considering it a kind of international version, in order everbody in the world could learn things that, if I wrote them in Italian, will be of course reserved to a minority. Therefore I list here some of the articles I wrote and that will surely need intervention like yours to appear better written:

• History of Palermo
• History of Naples
• History of Rome (check this first if you can)
• Hugo Pratt
• Itri
• Mantua
• Marada (comic book)
• Mort Cinder
• Schweinfurt
• Trapani

If you have time, check them and correct at your will. Thanks. Attilios

Hello, you once edited Camouflage. You might be interested to know, this article has been nominated for peer peer review. novacatz 03:40, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I notice you actively standardize English usage in Wikipedia articles. Kudos. One edit you made to the Aztec article made me wonder, however. I have been accustomed to the standard that "theater" was used for the place where a dramatic work is performed, while "theatre" was used for "the art" of playwrighting, performance, etc. What reference do you use to determine a country's standard? And are you familiar with the distinction I have made? I don't recall where I got it, so it is as likely that I read it somewhere as it is that I made it up and thought I read it, so I wouldn't mind being corrected if that's what's necessary. PAZ, --Rockero 04:38, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I take it that "theatre" is British/Canadian spelling and "theater" is American spelling. The meaning is the same for both versions. For a reference see: [1]. GreatWhiteNortherner 05:41, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you realize it, but the site to which you referred me is actually a Wikipedia mirror site. Compare it to Theatre (disambiguation). I know there is a tendency to rely on other Wikipedia articles as sources and references, but I'm not sure that it is the best policy. See the definitions of "theaters" and "theater (discipline)" at the Getty Thesaurus of Art and Architecture: [2] and [3]. I prefer this thesaurus for art-related topics. But as you can tell, they are both spelled "-er", which I would guess has to do with the fact that the Getty is an American institution. So it looks like you may be correct after all. Adelante, pues, --Rockero 17:19, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, editor! Your name appears on Wikipedia:List of non-admins with high edit counts. If you have not done so lately, please take a look at that page and check your listing to be sure that following the particulars are correct:

1. If you are an admin, please remove your name from the list.
2. If you are currently interested in being considered for adminship, please be sure your name is in bold; if you are opposed to being considered for adminship, please cross out your name (but do not delete it, as it will automatically be re-added in the next page update).
3. Please check to see if you are in the right category for classification by number of edits.

Thank you, and have a wiki wiki day! BD2412 T 04:04, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Canadian military formations

I see you already have one barnstar, but you can never have too many! Great edits: finding spelling errors and duplicate words.

I am curious to know how you hunt for duplicated words? I use WP:AWB myself which is highly effective. Gaius Cornelius 16:59, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do a Google search on the wikipedia site using the parameters

"the the" -talk: -user: -wiki/Wikipedia:

I copy the page to an OpenOffice file to do spell checking. I assume that an article containing duplicated words has not been carefully proofread and thus is a prime suspect for spelling errors. I have three separate files for US, UK and Canadian English open at the same time. Choosing the right flavour of English can sometimes be an awkward choice as many articles are a combination of US and UK English and have no obvious link to either country.

The whole process becomes quite mechanical and does not require me to do anything difficult like thinking. I am usually multitasking by listening to music or a movie at the same time. GreatWhiteNortherner 02:33, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi: there have been some updates on the topic of Searching for Duplicate Words on my user talk page which you may find interesting. Gaius Cornelius 17:41, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The user Haiduc added questionable material in Mahmud of Ghazni page. I will revert his changes then I will apply your changes to that page. You can check later if those changes have been done correctly. Thankyou for your cooperation.

Siddiqui 02:23, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking out on the Diablos page. I greatly appreciate it.

I see why you earned the Barn Star! Thanks for the corrections! Bo 12:05, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

COTW = Collaboration of the Week

Please do not change spellings in quotes, (the first source uses Rumania). Please do not change section headings unless there is a good reason to do so as other articles may link to a section heading. Please do not remove blank lines after a section heading, it is not wrong to include them (See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings)), and many people, myself included, like them. Removing (or inserting) spaces with a small change to the next paragraph can cause the history differences to show whole paragraphs in red for a very minor change which makes tracking differences in the text difficult to follow. --Philip Baird Shearer 17:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for cleaning up all the dodgy punctuation on the Ancient Rome article. But if you don't mind me asking, why did you change so many spellings to US English? I think that, before this, the article was pretty consistently British English. US English isn't the preferred English. Cheers — Donama 22:16, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your efforts to standardise spelling in this article but it seems you accidentally truncated the article here [4]. All fixed and I'm currently looking for a compromise between sneaked and snuck. Don't take it to heart, I've done far worse myself! But I thought you'd want to know, as I would. --Guinnog 21:30, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edit, but the words you edited came from a quote, that you should not alter, regardless whether it is British or US English style. Cheers. — Indon (reply) — 07:35, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there; I know it's been sitting there unchallenged for more than two years, but could you possibly document your statement that the belief that Saint Peter was held here is unfounded?--Anthony.bradbury 22:51, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that you have me confused with someone else. My edit was a spelling correction and adding a category. GreatWhiteNortherner 23:18, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I will review the edit history. After some two+ years it can be difficult to allocate authorship. Again, my apologies.--Anthony.bradbury 23:22, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit of a slob when I write articles and just tend to braindump without taking due care over spelling, punctuationa nd grammer. Thanks for clearing it up! - PocklingtonDan 18:59, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

		Germanic WikiProject award
		I, Odin Rex, hereby award you the Snorri Award for your work in Germanic articles. 08 April 2007. King Óðinn The Aesir 20:09, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, We Are The Emergency, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/We Are The Emergency. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Frozenguild (talk) 04:57, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you changed one British spelling in Python programming language to American spelling. You also left other Anglicisms in place, with no change. While it would be nice to have articles use consistent spelling convention, changing one word from an article with variation is just silly. Personally, I indeed prefer the American spellings I was taught in school, and that my publishers use. But random American/British spelling wars are generally frowned upon. LotLE×talk 02:55, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree with the spelling correction you have done to James Kanehoa. Chiefess is the correct term. There is no such thing as a chieftess but is a common mistake found all over the internet. The suffix of tess might be because of the confusion between the word chief and chiefess and priest and priestess.KAVEBEAR (talk) 04:54, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,
I have finished proofreading and expanding the article above—translated from its equivalent in Italian—to which you contributed in the past. If the topic still interests you, I invite you to visit the page and provide any feedback you may have on the article's talk page. Thanks!
Francesco Campelli (talk) 23:28, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for corrections at Below Poverty Line (India) Yogesh Khandke (talk) 11:25, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Langley Flying School, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Langley Flying School. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ahunt (talk) 02:16, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion, guidelines for use at WP:MINOR). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and all users will still be able to manually mark their edits as being minor in the usual way.

For well-established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 20:35, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You recently made a change to Genocide under municipal laws to paraphrase Meatloaf "two out of three is bad".

• The word "ethnical" appears inside quotes and should not have been changed to "ethical" -- it is actually a quote within quotes and is taken from the wording from Article 2 of the Genocide Convention. If you have changed the word "ethnical" to "ethical" anywhere else please check that the change is correct.
• The word "offences" is not a spelling mistake it is British English, and it appears in lots of other places in the same article as the article was written in British English.

-- PBS (talk) 16:11, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Several years ago, you created Craftsmanship, which is currently a redirect to Artisan. I've nominated it at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 May 27 for retargeting, since the identical concept of Craftmanship has a different target. Your input to help decide the proper target for both titles would be appreciated. Nyttend (talk) 02:20, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GreatWhiteNortherner! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 15:50, 18 January 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) 22:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 213 (number) 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/213 (number) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:47, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]