User talk:Cripipper

Archive 1

Thank you for the correction with regards to proper procedure, it is appreciated. It was more your insistence in persisting in your claims that I found somewhat provocing. I would have had a closer look at things after the person I was requesting sources from stated that he had made no such changes, not just charged along.Manxruler 01:34, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its cool, just try and be a little bit less hasty, is all. Manxruler 01:51, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Baldwin/Baudouin

You were not forced to do anything, especially move it to a just as incorrect form. You could have utilized WP:RM. I am dismayed that someone can be so rude as to expect (basically demand) me to move it to the original title when I am unable to (just as you are). As far as I am concerned, it is your problem and not mine for that reason alone. Charles 09:17, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a difference between a title and a territorial designation. The King was titled King of the Belgians, yes, but he was also of Belgium. We wouldn't say the King of Belgium because that is not a proper title, but we could say Baudouin/Baldwin of Belgium without the title. Also, we don't have an article called Margrethe II, Denmark's Queen, which is her formal title. We don't use titles for kings and emperors unless there is nothing that the title is specifically "of", such as a German Emperor or a Holy Roman Emperor... Those are more like modifications to a title although there was actually a territory for each. Remember, I had to change just as many redirects, including some double redirects that were left behind when you moved it. There are no exceptions to the title rule whereas the given name is always a grey area for some monarchs. WP:RM can be used and the admin will do all of the work of changing the redirects. Charles 11:25, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, we do not use "of the Belgians" because we do not include the title of king. The form is "Name of Place". Charles 11:25, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, sadly, I find maintaining the naming conventions for sovereigns to be necessary. The anglicization is something that has to be brought up at Requested Moves. Charles 11:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No need to thank me. Sorry for losing my cool yesterday. I had an awful day and should have checked my attitude at the door. Charles 23:35, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm an admin, so I could delete the redirect page. john k 15:31, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shahbag, request for help

Hi. I was going through your discussions on Talk:Bangladesh Liberation War. I want to request you to take a look at the Shahbag, an article I was working on, It's coming out nice, but still has a long way to go. Would you care to take a look at it, please? Aditya Kabir 22:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not on war or anything. But, your fastidiousness with citation and all that stuff may come to good use. Awaiting your advises. You can post either to the article talk page or my talk page. Cheers. Aditya Kabir 22:52, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Bao Dai Time.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bao Dai Time.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Nixon's gamble.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Nixon's gamble.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 15:58, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Giap.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Giap.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:42, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Mme Nhu Time.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Mme Nhu Time.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:12, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Mme Nhu Time.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Mme Nhu Time.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 18:59, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Watergate_burglaries overhaul

I ready your comment about the Watergate Burglaries articles needing a complete overhaul. I agree. Are you interested and have any time to work on this with me? Feel free to email me Ukulele 20:35, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jung Chang

If you have any more edits you want to make I would appreciate if you could join the discussion on the talk page first. There's little point in reaching consensus with one person if someone else wants to change the article at will. John Smith's (talk) 18:31, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't object to the edit per ce, but the thing is I need to re-word the whole thing as it wasn't well-phrased to begin with. I could end up using what you added, but at this point I don't know what it will look like.

Sorry if my first message suggested I was objecting outright, I'd just like to ensure the discussion running on the talk page actually leads to a stable version. I know you're an experienced and reasonable editor so I wanted to make sure you weren't planning on making lots of edits while the rest of us were talking things over. John Smith's (talk) 18:59, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying. It's not bad, but let's see where the talk page discussion goes first. John Smith's (talk) 19:17, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I've done my best to answer your question on historians and praise for the book. John Smith's (talk) 19:26, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Giap.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Giap.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 20:15, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

European fraternities

Cripipper, reagarding your edit here, what about the article List of fraternities and sororities in Europe, that lists them in 12 countries? —Scouter Sig 15:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Nguyen Khanh.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Nguyen Khanh.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

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 (talk) 23:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for citation

Have a look at the change I have made recently - if you are not satisfied please raise the matter on the talk page. John Smith's (talk) 07:49, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Norodom-Sihanouk.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Norodom-Sihanouk.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:40, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some advice

Given this edit you may find this piece of advice useful (or not) - Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars. Regards, Mattinbgn\^talk 12:16, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3RR deliberation

Surely the point of the 3RR is to avoid edit wars; so if an editor is reverting the same edit on a daily basis, on consecutive days, it is in violation of the spirit of 3RR, and an example of gaming the system? Cripipper (talk) 12:33, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that applies here. On the other hand I'm willing to protect the page for a week or two if you want to ensure that the discussion is brought to talk. Stifle (talk) 12:36, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

YellowMonkey reverts my cited and referenced edits every day on four successive days, and refuses to engage in a discussion on the talk pages. The least I would expect is to have some support from admins on this, but instead I get branded vexatious or frivolous. No cabal, huh? Cripipper (talk) 12:40, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you asked for a 3RR block but he hasn't broken the 3RR. He contributed to the talk page discussion somewhat, and he is an arbitrator; they have a lot on their plates. I've protected the page for a week; that should help. Stifle (talk) 12:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested a Third Opinion on Nixon header

Please do not change possible back to likely. I requested an independent third opinion on this topic. Please see my my talk page for the verdict. Possible was the word that was agreed upon, based upon WP:NPOV.--Jojhutton (talk) 16:11, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid that I may have no other choice but to bring this case to official arbitration based on Wp:Gaming the system, and not respecting WP:Third Opinion. I am reporting your violations to the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents for possible abuse. Please understand that I do not do this lightly. I only wish that you would respect wikipedia policies.--Jojhutton (talk) 17:08, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its not what you can cite, its that you are not following wikipedia policies. That is basically frowned upon by the rest of the community. I still wish to have a discussion on this, but you continue to revert the edits. I will not get into an edit war with you although you seem to want one. I will respect your views and let the arbitration process decide your fate. Although I don't think that YOUR interpratation of events is correct, especially for the header of an article, I still wish to have an open discussion, but only if you are willing to compromise, which you have not up to this point.--Jojhutton (talk) 18:01, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for Image:Nixon Farewell.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Nixon Farewell.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 02:10, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Milhous Nixon

As a recently involved editor to the Richard Milhous Nixon article I would like to inform you that I nominated the article for WP:GA. Lets cross our fingers and hope for the best. Sadly, a recent dispute on the Talk:Barack Obama page has spilled over to other articles on the presidents. The Nixon article has gone through a few changes, but I reverted the changes with the argument that any consensus reached on the Obama talk page is not binding on other pages. An editor has asked for a discussion. If you would like to join in, please do so at Talk:Richard Nixon.--Jojhutton (talk) 02:38, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

5 star rank

Thank you for your well argued response. Perhaps it would be improved by providing supporting references? Pdfpdf (talk) 13:27, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Please clarify "twat". (twat (disambiguation)) Pdfpdf (talk) 13:33, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the article 5 star rank to make it a little less American centric. You might like to take a look. -- PBS (talk) 14:18, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Proposed districts of Northern Ireland

As you created one of the articles in the above category, I'd appreciate your thoughts here. Valenciano (talk) 17:00, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Empire of Brazil

Thank you for teaching me about Brazilian history. I didn't know that. However, what you perhaps might not know is that:

1) The Portuguese were the first European people to settle in present-day Uruguay by founding Sacramento in 1680. Not far from the Portuguese town, a few years later the Spanish founded Montevideo. Over the next decades both Portugal and Spain founded towns and forts in the area. In 1777 Portugal handed over its towns in present-day Uruguay to Spain. In 1811 the Portuguese returned to reclaim it, unsuccessfully. They tried once more in 1816 and this time, they conquered back not only what was once theirs, but also the entire Spanish towns in the area.

So, "was in a territory that had only been under Brazilian rule for eight years" is a very, very incorrect sentence.

2) I don't know what kind of books did you read in English, but all I saw have D. João, not John. Examples: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], etc...

Having said that, Im requesting you to revert your edits, please. --Lecen (talk) 14:37, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Firstly, dealing with the links you provided, the first three are citations to books that appear to be written in Portugese, so are irrelevant for our purposes." I'm sorry. But... did you read the books? They are written in English, not Portuguese. The first and the third were written by American historians and the third by a British historian.

Cisplatina was a Brazilian province. Simple like that. Part of its population was Portuguese-Brazilian. Simple like that.

I'm going to wait to see you revert your own edit. Since this is not the first time you get into trouble for edit war, I'd warn you to be careful. --Lecen (talk) 16:00, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"you appear to have some sort of nationalist agenda". Thank you for kind treatment. I prefer not to lose my time with you anymore. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 16:16, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is at least the third time you change "Dom João VI" to "John VI" in that article, although there are 3 editors who are agaisnt the changes. According to Wikipedia rules as per 3RR, you should be blocked. I want to avoid this, although I warned you about this behavior and you mocked me ("As for your 'warning me to be careful'..."). I'll give you a chance to revert your edits and discuss the matter through civilized channels (NOT imposing your view), that is, the talk page. --Lecen (talk) 17:16, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Giap.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Giap.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Damiens.rf 16:20, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Þóra Arnórsdóttir

The article Þóra Arnórsdóttir has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. MarkBurberry32|talk 22:00, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Þóra Arnórsdóttir

The article Þóra Arnórsdóttir has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. MarkBurberry32|talk 22:00, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited William Somerville, 1st Baron Athlumney, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Meath (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) 09:06, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clan Houston

The deletion, without discussion, of this part of a series of clans is likely to be contentious, so I deprodded it. Please take it to WP:AfD. Bearian (talk) 15:06, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Cripipper. 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 2017 election voter message

Hello, Cripipper. 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]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Cripipper. 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]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Cripipper. 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]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

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) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

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) 01:21, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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) 00:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cornelius Desmond (Irish politician), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MEP. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 18:05, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]