Welcome!

Hello, Sussexonian, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Thryduulf (talk) 21:27, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy, and welcome to Wikipedia. Just wanted to express my thanks for fixing Template:WikiProject Red Link Recovery/List handling instructions. It's great to see an editor diving right on in and fixing what ain't righr. Nice decision on Redwood Tree also. - TB (talk) 18:05, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sussexonian. I have just noticed the discussion from September about project inactivity which I missed at the time, being very busy with work then. There are a number of local editors quietly getting on with things, notably Hassocks 5489 who creates an awesome number of high quality articles. We just don't seem to need to work through the project page, and we are lacking anybody to assess article quality at present. As you say we do seem to get into maintenance and tweaking rather than writing new stuff. If you are interested it would be great to have you as a member. I wish you a happy new year.--Charles (talk) 12:46, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sussexonian – thanks for uploading the Brighton and Hove map; this will be invaluable for the city's building-related articles (current and future!). Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 12:55, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Autoblock #1913368 lifted or expired. Request handled by: James (T C) Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

I've just got round to !voting (oppose, partly for the concerns you raised). How much do you know about the differences between "polling place" and "polling station" in the UK? Would you be able to expand the article? Alternatively, could you point me towards useful resources?

Ta! TFOWR^propaganda 14:56, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've just reverted the change you made to Hertford and Stortford (UK Parliament constituency), removing David Barnes as a "fictional candidate", but on second glance I've just noticed that he's not on the Statement of Persons Nominated. Do you have any idea of what's going on? The BBC have him listed as a candidate. Wereon (talk) 13:16, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind - I see that he pulled out before nominations closed [1]. It's the BBC being inaccurate yet again. Wereon (talk) 13:22, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, would You support me here, please? As you see, I am convinced that WP:RUS and BGN/PCGN do not concern names/toponyms or parts of them, which are written originally in Latin alphabet and are not Russian. --Finrus (talk) 23:16, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has proposed renaming this article. His original choice was "Albanian genocide law". However I oppose any change of name because no reliable sources provide a short form for the law and there is another law on "Genocide" under the Albanian criminal code,[2] while this law has been repealed. Please comment at the article's talk page. TFD (talk) 00:15, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The triangular orthobicupola's net looks correct to me. I have actually printed this polyhedron out and folded it myself into the shape before. Being "ortho-" the triangles touch triangles and squares touch squares on the edges connecting the two triangular cupolae. If you ever think a net is wrong later, you may try to do as I have: print the net, cut it out, fold the edges, and then tape it. If it makes the shape then it's right.

P.S. Sorry it took me awhile to respond to your message. Kittenono (talk) 00:11, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there

I'm quite new to all this but I was reading the talk page on Kingdom of Great Britain and came across your comment that the article should really be called "United Kingdom of Great Britain". That interested me as I was thinking the same as it is clear that this is what was in the Treaty of Union as well as the description used on the websites of both the UK and Scottish governments. Maybe will should be doing more to edit references to the 'Kingdom of Great Britain' by adding 'united' in front of the phrase? Regards 217.44.32.79 (talk) 09:34, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have put your refs and lead back. Hope this is OK with you. I will try to deal with any problems this causes! Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 21:09, 23 June 2011 (UTC))[reply]

I am sorry about what has happened. I think it will be quite difficult to proceed with this and I don't know where to go for help. I think on citations it is probably a matter of sticking with the spirit of the existing style and tidying up the complete mess within it. How to deal with the strange multilevel things is a problem which I think doesn't fit in any style. On the view that it is not really a college yet, more of a proposal, I think this is a separate issue that has to be addressed. I also think the picture of UoL's Senate House Library is still a problem giving a bogus feel of actual existence and clearly potentially miss-leading. I guess on this we might have to wait until the UoL office writes to wikipedia to complain. I am not still not sure of the motivation of those supporting what I perceive of as the over-promotional nature of the article particularly the reversions of everything - eg changing Niall Ferguson back to historian from economist seems indicative simply of a desire to revert. NCH seems to want to have him as an Economist and Economic Historian - so it might not just be that NCH's view is being supported. My own motivation here is I came to the article to find out about the college, having enjoyed the works of some of those involved, and found what I thought was a massively over-promotional article. I tried to improve it but.... I have stuck around, despite trying to go away, because I got annoyed with how the page seemed to be being used for promotion and the, to my mind unreasonable, behaviour of one of our fellow editors. Anyway I am rambling. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 09:51, 24 June 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for the work you've done on the Sixth Review article :) I like some of the touches you've made; I wasn't sure what would happen with the Timetable section myself, so I like what you've done. I will be adding the Provisional Recommendations once they're processed, though how that's going to work out in practice may be open to debate!

Hope I can work with you throughout the next few years :)

doktorb _words^deeds 12:59, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Morning. I think it would make sense to canvas opinion on what to do (project pages are a bit dormant, I'd recommend putting a notice there but also the talk pages of any users you spot editing constituency or electoral pages on a regular basis). My preference right now is to have a brief summary of the recommendations and their development, as it'd be impractical to attempt a running commentary on all 600.

That said, deciding on what constitutes a summary might result in fun and games...This kind of article hasn't been tried before; at the previous review, articles were created (...by me, by and large) as and when Final Recommendations were agreed. There wasn't a "Fifth Periodic Review..." article (and indeed, there still isn't). doktorb _words^deeds 02:31, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You commented on the choice of separator for localities in Russia. I made a minimum proposal (", Russia" as default) at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)/Archives/2011/July#Remove Russia-specific clause and apply general rules. It would simply mean to remove the "Chupa (urban-type settlement)"- / now "Dikson (urban-type settlement)"-rule and would result in Dikson, Russia by applying the general Wikipedia rules. Bogdan Nagachop (talk) 12:45, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sussexonian. Because you participated at Wikipedia talk:Romanization of Russian#Convenience header (permanent link), you may be interested in Wikipedia talk:Romanization of Russian#Closing straw poll. Administrator SilkTork (talk · contribs) has reviewed the discussion and has opened a straw poll seeking clarification about several issues before he closes the discussion. Thank you, Cunard (talk) 02:33, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - I posted a reply to your comment at Talk:James I. Don't know if you've got the page watchlisted, so I thought I'd let you know about it, and see if it addressed your concerns. Thanks! Dohn joe (talk) 17:31, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since you have previously shared your view in a CfD about the Republic of China, I guess you are interested to share your insight at Talk:Republic of China#Requested Move (February 2012) too. Thanks for your attention. 61.18.170.79 (talk) 11:01, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man

Now that we're nearer November, I guess this question is worth putting. Should we / are we / could we put the full election box template in the 2012 police and crime commissioner election page? Or should we, at one point, split the page into bits? I'm awfully confused! doktorb _words^deeds 22:42, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Geocode". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 6 August 2012.

The request for formal mediation concerning Geocode, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Restoration of the Geocode article and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Requests for Arbitration;
• Wikipedia:Arbitration guide.

Thanks, New Media 15:06, 29 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by New Media (talk • contribs)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Christine Adams (actress), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page English. 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) 09:02, 26 July 2014 (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) 14:13, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sussexonian. 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]

Hello, Sussexonian. 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, Sussexonian. 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) 00:12, 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) 02:26, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]