User talk:An anonymous username, not my real name/Archives/2023/November
This is an archive of past discussions with User:An anonymous username, not my real name. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Please restore the article
- Hello, An anonymous username, not my real name! Please restore the article you deleted (Andrey Korolev (traveler)) in my personal space. Korolev is a great traveller, he did a lot of remarkable achievements. And there are reliable sources that can be added!----Pustov (talk) 18:52, 30 October 2023 (UTC)Pustov (talk) 08:12, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- My apologies it you feel deletion was unwarranted, @Pustov:. An admin has restored the article to your userspace, so feel free to add the reliable sources you mentioned and republish it. Anonymous 22:09, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot, dear Anonymous. Everything will be done to the power and glory of the great encyclopedia!--Pustov (talk) 07:56, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- My apologies it you feel deletion was unwarranted, @Pustov:. An admin has restored the article to your userspace, so feel free to add the reliable sources you mentioned and republish it. Anonymous 22:09, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, An anonymous username, not my real name! Please restore the article you deleted (Andrey Korolev (traveler)) in my personal space. Korolev is a great traveller, he did a lot of remarkable achievements. And there are reliable sources that can be added!----Pustov (talk) 18:52, 30 October 2023 (UTC)Pustov (talk) 08:12, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
Infoboxes
Thanks for taking time to comment. I saw your comment here[1] and thought the forum shopping argument was a little unfair. If a majority of editors are pro-infobox like you suggest then it's up to "invested editors" to convince them per WP:LOCALCONSENSUS. Project participants do not WP:OWN articles. If a group is unable to convince the majority then it's not forum shopping to start a RFC. Otherwise a small group could stonewall changes against the larger community consensus. Does that make sense? Nemov (talk) 16:39, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's absolutely true. I must admit I may have been slightly biased due to the rather off-putting and disrespectful remarks by the user who started the RFC, especially since they seem to have a history of bringing issues straight to RFC without making any effort to resolve them one-on-one. Perhaps in this one case, they had a point. Again, I'm generally pro-infobox and pro-article uniformity. I may be tempted to vote in your favour if the discussion remains inconclusive. Anonymous 16:48, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
- (watching) Don't comment in anybody's favour please ;) - just by the arguments Voceditenore had for Mozart (and didn't we think that settled it?). - I am aware of the Sullivan RfC but will stay away, after the Feydeau postlude on AN. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:20, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Laomaki you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of PrimalMustelid -- PrimalMustelid (talk) 12:02, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Lebanese Haitians
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Lebanese Haitians you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of A455bcd9 -- A455bcd9 (talk) 12:02, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Lebanese Haitians
The article Lebanese Haitians you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Lebanese Haitians and Talk:Lebanese Haitians/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of A455bcd9 -- A455bcd9 (talk) 09:41, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
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) 00:56, 28 November 2023 (UTC)