Jump to content

User talk:Anne9853

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am working on a page, trying to get it in pretty good shape before publishing it. Although it's only about half done, I believe I am on the right track and have demonstrated that I know the subject and the subject is Wikipedia-worthy. I'd like to get a second pair of eyes on it, and to advise me whether I should publish and edit later, or follow another path.

Anne9853 (talk) 19:27, 21 October 2012 (UTC)Anne[reply]

Link me to the page --Imagine Wizard (talk · contribs · count) Iway amway Imagineway Izardway. 19:28, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I see it --Imagine Wizard (talk · contribs · count) Iway amway Imagineway Izardway. 19:30, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


I was say, yes, as a stub, it is Wikipedia-worthy. Go ahead and be bold and post it. I have already made some minor edits to it, and I daresay other people will edit it here and there to improve it slightly while you add to it. I'll add a stub template to the bottom of it for now.
I believe this person is significant enough to be worthy of notice. He has received significant national honors within 2 fields. He is known for originating a new technique and to have started off its resulting field of research. The assessment technique he created is a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his fields of art therapy and visual literacy. If it is not already clear in the article, he has also been notably influential in the scholarly discipline/field of psychological treatment of trauma and dissociation. Through his widely read general audience book, he made a substantial impact beyond academia. His writings and his assessment are widely cited by peers. To have also received notice as he has in the diverse fields of painting, art collection and antiques and folk art is of interest. Anne9853 (talk) 01:42, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, sorry for delay, didn't quite figure out where to look for your response. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.174.165.67 (talk) 20:54, 21 October 2012 (UTC) 70.174.165.67 (talk) 20:56, 21 October 2012 (UTC)Anne Is it much harder to edit it and add to it once it is published? 70.174.165.67 (talk) 20:58, 21 October 2012 (UTC)Anne[reply]

No...you can edit it just the same once published. Other editors will probably edit it too. Go Phightins! 21:10, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Belated Welcome!

[edit]
Hello, Anne9853 and a belated welcome to Wikipedia! I see that you've already been around awhile and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help one get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are interested in learning more about contributing, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! Snowysusan (talk) 13:02, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

I posted the Barry Marc Cohen article (not sure if that is the right term) on about Nov. 17 and was told that it would take a few days for it to be reviewed (prior to publication, one hopes), as there were 725 articles in the queue ahead of it. Several questions: 1. How's that queue going? Is there a place I can go to see where my article is in the queue? 2. I have made lots of edits to that page since I posted it. Will a reviewer see the most up-to-date version? 3. Can I, as a newbie, be of assistance in editing or improving articles in the queue? 4. Is there anything else I can do to move the process forward? Have I done all I should do? Anne9853 (talk) 22:41, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anne. The backlog is called Articles for creation. We just had a backlog elimination drive, but since it's ended, the backlog has increased exponentially, so unfortunately it may take a while for us to get to your article. At this point, there's not much you can do to improve your article, but if you'd like, you are welcome to read the reviewing instructions and review some articles of your own. If you'd like more comprehensive experience and help on Wikipedia, perhaps you'd be interested in being adopted in the Adopt-a-user program. I am an adopter, and if you'd like, I'd be happy to adopt you. Thanks. Go Phightins! 23:00, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I would like to be adopted by you. Let's try that. Thanks. Anne9853 (talk) 23:08, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All right. Basically, the way this works is that I post a "lesson" of sorts, you read it, and let me know when you're ready for a quiz on the subject, you take the quiz, we discuss your answers and help you apply your new found knowledge to an area of the encyclopedia. Eventually, once I feel you're ready, you take a "final exam" that has a practical component and a written component, and then you graduate, get a barnstar, and have a sense of accomplishment. I'll set up your "classroom" in just a minute. Go Phightins! 23:11, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your adoption classroom is located right here. There are directions there, and you can post all questions, comments, concerns, etc. on the talk page of your adoption classroom. See you over there! Go Phightins! 23:14, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Would you please leave your signature at the top of your adoption page so I know you found it all right? Go Phightins! 23:35, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Sionk (talk) 02:07, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption Test

[edit]

Anne, I posted the test on your adoption page. You can complete it at your leisure. Go Phightins! 04:35, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Will do.

Am a bit disappointed that my article was turned down for publication. Seems to be for notability, need for secondary sources, etc. I am editing the article. However, I believe that the article that was turned down was an earlier version that was far less comprehensive than the form it had gotten to by the time it was turned down--that is, the reviewer didn't see the the most up-to-date version of the article. Did I make a mistake in how I posted it? Would you be willing to look at the current improved version? Anne9853 (talk) 04:42, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. Give me a little while. I'm a little tied up at the moment, but I'll definitely take a look. You're talking about the one on your user page right? Go Phightins! 04:43, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, "Barry Marc Cohen" with edits right up to midnight 11/30. Thank you in advance for looking! I completed the test, thanks. Anne9853 (talk) 05:06, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you ready for me to grade it? Go Phightins! 05:09, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
Getting an article rejected can be disappointing, but I've never been disappointed after eating a chocolate chip cookie! Go Phightins! 05:35, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Anne9853 (talk) 12:59, 1 December 2012 (UTC) Sorry for delay. Yes, please grade the test. Anne9853 (talk) 23:21, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
Award of First Success
You've passed the first lesson. I have no doubt you'll do well in this adoption course! Here's a barnstar for your efforts. Go Phightins! 20:48, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I am thrilled--did not think I would get a barnstar for a looooong time! Looking forward to learning more, including learning your thoughts on the article that got turned down. Anne9853 (talk) 03:43, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

[edit]
Hello, Anne9853. You have new messages at User talk:Go Phightins!/Adopt/Anne9853.
Message added 22:28, 11 December 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Go Phightins! 22:28, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Publishing your article

[edit]

Hi Anne9853, I've reverted your page moves of your User page and Talk page. Your User page and Talk page are personal to you. Other editors, in particular, need to use your Talk page to contact you. If you wish to publish your an article, please use your sandbox.

If you want to get your article on Barry Marc Cohen published, I suggest you improve the draft at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Barry Marc Cohen and resubmit it for review by an experienced editor.

Kind regards Sionk (talk) 01:34, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! SarahStierch (talk) 08:29, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiWomen's Collaborative

[edit]
WikiWomen Unite!
Hi Anne9853! Women around the world who edit and contribute to Wikipedia are coming together to celebrate each other's work, support one another, and engage new women to also join in on the empowering experience of shaping the sum of all the world's knowledge - through the WikiWomen's Collaborative.

As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved! You can do this by:

Feel free to drop by our meta page (under construction) to see how else you can participate!

Can't wait to have you involved! SarahStierch (talk) 08:30, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption

[edit]

Hey Anne, sorry for the delay. Your adoption course is back at the same URL it was at previously. Welcome back! Go Phightins! 22:45, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Barry Cohen

[edit]
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! LM103 (talk) 00:49, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

English-speaking Wikipedian can't log in to French Wikipedia

[edit]

Hi. Although I've been an English-language Wikipedian for a while, I am still pretty unskilled and a relative newbie. I'm also rusty, so forgive my errors, please.

I've been reading a few French Wikipedia pages lately and made one edit to Categorize an English-language entry into an English-language Category about architecture in France. Went fine-- very satisfying.

Then, I wanted to Categorize a French-language page. So I tried to log in from that French page--and it won't let me, it doesn't have any user with that name. I logged in to the English Wikipedia and then t

Does one need to set up a different account/name for each language of Wikipedia? (That seems contrary to my understanding of correct Wikipedian behavior!) Please help me solve that problem. (I understand that French Wikipedians do not want people who are not fluent editing their content. But this is adding a Category notation only.)

Also, is it okay to Categorize a French-language page into an English-language page (which is the Category and a list of links)?

Finally, I'd like to set up a Category in one of my knowledge areas. Can you please direct me to a tutorial on that?

Thank you! Anne9853 (talk) 16:35, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi there. I have moved your help request to your user talk page.
To set up a global account, go to Preference -> Global account status
I am not sure what do you mean by categorizing a French language page; are you trying to set up a category in English Wikpedia, with a list of links directed to pages in French Wikipedia? Each Wikipedia is operated separately, so you shouldn't be doing that.
For more information on categorization, please check Help:Category. Happy editing! Alex ShihTalk 16:56, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

[edit]

Hello Anne. Thank you for the message. I find it easier to answer here, hope you don't mind.

  • To change your username, submit a request at Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple
  • For your third question, I just realised that you might be looking for Wikipedia:Userboxes. You can add userboxes according to your interest or expertise, which will automatically categorize your userpage. I have added one userbox for you to start with.

By the way, I have taken the initiative and reset your sandbox while moving the articles you've been working to separate sandbox pages (see userpage). Alex ShihTalk 20:01, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Barry Marc Cohen concern

[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Barry Marc Cohen, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 17:08, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at AfC Barry Marc Cohen was accepted

[edit]
Barry Marc Cohen, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:24, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
I'm sincerely honored to get this good news from a Wikipedian who has done so much! I will continue to improve this, my first article, and I have others I'd like to work on, too. Thanks again. Anne9853 (talk) 02:12, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi, Anne9853. Hope you don't mind that I closed the cookie box for you with a |} so it wouldn't interfere with the rest of your talk page. I came here to see if I could help you with your question below, but I'm sorry I'm not really qualified to help in those matters. Also, it might be a good idea to place this cookie box on MatthewVanitas' talk page, don't you think? Joys! – Paine Ellsworth CLIMAX! 12:28, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Paine Ellsworthl. Because of your kind suggestion, I did put it over there. I DID wonder about that at the time, but wasn't clear on what to do. Anne9853 (talk) 19:23, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking help re: test or assessment protection & validity

[edit]

Is there a doctor in the house? I think I need a Ph.D. psychologist Wikipedian to have the particular skills to help me with the ethical issue of details of art therapy assessments being available in Wiki articles. It seems to me that excessive information is given that may weaken the validity of the tests. I want to know if there are existing guidelines on this in psychology or elsewhere. Thank you in advance for being that person or telling me how to find such a specific help. Anne9853 (talk) 11:10, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The relevant policy is WP:UNDUE, however, we need to present a WP:NPOV, so some information of this sort is needed. --Mdann52talk to me! 14:07, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Florence Cane

[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Florence Cane requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Randykitty (talk) 13:33, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Randykitty. I knew I had to provide more content on Florence Cane and hoped to have time to be able to do that. Unfortunately, it was deleted so quickly I was unable to contest it. I tried to follow the request to have the deleted material e-mailed to me, but got confused and was unable to do so. I hope you can help me. Anne9853 (talk) 18:45, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The deleted page's only content was this:
==Publications==
* Cane, F.  (1951).  The artist in each of us.  New York:  Pantheon Books.

[[Category:Art therapy]]
[[Category:American art therapists]]
Yours, Huon (talk) 19:11, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Huon. Anne9853 (talk) 19:15, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions at Barry Marc Cohen

[edit]

Hello, the article met the basic criteria to publish, but there's always room to make improvements as you find the chance. The primary thing I'd suggest tweaking is the intro. Introductions aren't chronological, you don't need to explain his early life in the first paragraph, but rather the goal is to give a who-what-why-when-where about the subject.

You give some good basic details on Cohen in the intro: Barry Marc Cohen (born November 1954) is an American art therapist and scholar. All good there. But the next sentence should be something like "He is known for his series of books on XYZ which gained him ABC awards/attention from EFG authority, and for his... etc. etc." The goal of a WP:Lead section is that a reader could read just the lead section and get a pretty solid feel of the overall gist of the article. Right now a reader wouldn't get that, would miss key things like his work on the Diagnostic Drawing Series and award from the therapy association. For that lead, just try to take a couple of your absolute key points from the article overall and add them up there.

Nice work, hope this is also helping you get a feel for the overall Wikipedia editing process. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:42, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello, I hope you can

. I have set up a Category:American art therapists because I saw a cluster of articles about individual American art therapists in a See Also section of the article on art therapy pioneer Margaret Naumburg. I questioned why the original writer even had a See Also section, and removed the articles that were already linked in the article above. The list of American art therapists seemed un-Wikipedian, like advertising by being listed on the page of the pioneer in the field, so the Category was set up to avoid that. I then removed the links to the American art therapists and tried to substitute a link to the Category:American art therapists under the See Also section.

However, I cannot make a link of Category:American art therapists. It does not show up. I have temporarily settled for a non-link "Wikpedia Category of American art therapists".

I'd like to know if I have made good choices in doing this, and if so, can I link to a Category in some way? Thank you! Anne9853 (talk) 15:47, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly do you mean by saying that the category "does not show up"? Do you mean that it doesn't show up in the article? When I look at Margaret Naumburg, I see a blue link to the category at the bottom of the page, as there should be. Or do you mean that the article does not show up on the category page? If so, I see Margaret Naumburg listed there too. Those are the only two things that adding an article to a category should do, and they both seem to have worked OK. For the moment, I am marking your {{help me}} as "helped", but please reinstate it with more explanation of what your problem is if what I have said doesn't cover it. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:01, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have made an edit to the "See also" section at Margaret Naumburg. If you add a colon in front of the word "Category", you turn it into an ordinary Wikipedia link to the category page - Category:American art therapists. But since the article is in the category anyway, as JamesBWatson says, there is no real need for another link in the "See also" section. -- John of Reading (talk) 16:04, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at AfC Michael Edwards (art therapist) was accepted

[edit]
Michael Edwards (art therapist), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:44, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Hello Anne, getting smoother and smoother! A few small formatting tips:
  • Don't forget to bold the title term on its first appearance. That is, bold Edwards' name, just once, in the very first sentence.
  • Don't include WP:External links in the body of the article. You can WP:wikilink to exisiting articles (such as the one for Norma), but if a given topic is a "redlink" (no such article yet, like the Brit Association), so be it. Footnotes can link offsite, the "External links" section can link offsite, but not in the body of the article.
  • Once an article publishes AFC, a WP:PERSONDATA template is generated at bottom. Can you fill that out for Edwards for me? And in the future if you write directly into mainspace, make sure to include the WP:PERSONDATA and WP:DEFAULTSORT codes. Not a tremendous deal, just it helps establish the metadata for filing the article in the big picture.
So a few small things, but overall you're really getting the hang of it. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:49, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Response to question

[edit]

Hi there, In response to this question, this isn't a problem. By all means be bold and remove such information. If someone reverts you, then follow the Bold, revert then discuss cycle. If that fails, then WP:3O and WP:RFC is the final port of call. Also for future reference, you posted you question at User:Mdann52, however you should contact the user at their user talk page (such as User talk:Mdann52). Let me know if you have any other questions :). --Mdann52talk to me! 07:26, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Edward Adamson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Edwards (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) 11:20, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American art therapists

[edit]

Category:American art therapists, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:10, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the heads up! Anne9853 (talk) 15:59, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

expense ratio page help needed!

[edit]

Please Help!

Recently, Tking 1974 added an "other uses" page to the "expense ratio" page that is very clearly for a term with an entirely different meaning, "operating expense ratio". Rather than just delete that particular edit, I added information that provided a very clear distinction between the terms "expense ratio" and "operating expense ratio". Mean as custard, in my opinion, improperly removed my contributions. Since operating expense ratio has a distinctly different definition, I believe either my edit shout be reinstated, or the "other uses" section deleted entirely from that article.

Very clearly, at the very least, the additions I had provided should be included with the other uses section that was added....and possibly a new page with "operating expense ratio" as a title should be added.

Thank You, pokermatters — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pokermatters (talk • contribs) 20:12, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

[edit]

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) 13:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

[edit]

Hello, Anne9853. 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]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, Anne9853. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 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]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, Anne9853. 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]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Toronto Clarion has been accepted

[edit]
Toronto Clarion, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

- The9Man (Talk) 18:55, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

[edit]
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) 00:13, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

[edit]

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) 00:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Anne9853&oldid=1258264697"