User talk:Danlaycock/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Orphaned non-free image File:BMO Training Ground logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BMO Training Ground logo.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:32, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Merge

You added the merge template onto African Continental Free Trade Agreement and the African Continental Free Trade Area? Could you start the discussion headline in any of those pages? As per Step 3 of WP:Merge.Manabimasu (talk) 15:38, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

See Talk:African Continental Free Trade Area#African Continental Free Trade Agreement. TDL (talk) 01:31, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Fix the discuss link at African Continental Free Trade Agreement and also add heading link to the talk section not just talk page so other can see.Manabimasu (talk) 01:45, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

2008 Kosovo declaration of independence

On the China's reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence page, you changed ROC to Republic of China. Per WP:NC-TW, I changed it to Taiwan (ROC). What do you think? Thanks. Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:54, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

I've changed it to "Republic of China (Taiwan)", as this is more in line with WP:NC-TW since it is in reference to the state. TDL (talk) 00:08, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Paris Agreement and Russia

Dear Danlaycock, concerning all the reversals of my edits on Russia adopting the Paris Agreement. I have to say that your interpretation is incorrect. If you consult the sources I provided in the footnotes for the List of parties to the Paris Agreement, you'll see that it's adopted and not subject to the ratification process. The official website of the government of Russia clearly states:

Соглашение не содержит предусмотренных российским законодательством оснований для ратификации. В соответствии с Федеральным законом «О международных договорах Российской Федерации» согласие России на обязательность для неё Парижского соглашения выражается в форме его принятия. Подписанным постановлением принято такое решение.

i.e.:

The [Paris] Agreement does not contain any grounds for ratification provisioned by the Russian law. In accordance with the Federal Law "On International Treaties of the Russian Federation", Russia's consent for the obligatoriness of the Paris Agreement is manifested in the form of its adoption. By this signed decree, this decision was made.

Same reported by Bloomberg as follows:

What’s more, Putin wanted to neutralize domestic critics by ratifying the landmark accord via government order instead of through a vote in parliament as originally planned, according to two people familiar with the matter. Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said Monday he’d signed the order ahead of the UN Climate Action Summit in New York, RIA Novosti reported. “It’s obvious that stopping global change can only be done together,” he said. “For our country, participating in this process is important.”

Bypassing the State Duma at this stage prevented lawmakers allied with opponents of the Paris process, including energy and metals barons, from challenging the Kremlin’s position in public hearings, the people said. That means Putin wanted to stop members of the lower house from voicing the same kinds of arguments against the need for collective action that he himself has frequently expounded.

RBC consulted a lawyer and he said the same thing:

Специальный советник по санкционному праву коллегии адвокатов Pen & Paper, преподаватель кафедры международного права юридического факультета МГУ Сергей Гландин заявил РБК, что сценарий с ратификацией не через парламент реален.

«В Парижском договоре есть 20-я статья, которая говорит, что к договору можно присоединиться, ратифицировать, подписать или принять другим способом, — сказал он. — У нас есть ФЗ от 1995 года «О международных договорах», там есть 6-я статья, которая устанавливает те формы, в которых Российская Федерация выражает согласие на обязательность для нее международного договора, где приведен такой же перечень мер. Этот же закон содержит перечень договоров, которые подлежат обязательной ратификации со стороны парламента, я пытался разобраться с предметом этого договора по климату, и, как мне кажется, предмет этого договора не нуждается в обязательной ратификации через парламент. То есть федеральная власть в лице президента по ст. 6 данного ФЗ может определить, в какой форме нам к нему присоединяться. Поскольку у нас направление внешней политики формирует президент, то он может присоединиться к нему, как считает нужным», — заявил Гландин.

Также юрист отметил, что если бы в договоре были положения о передаче территорий, о бюджетных ассигнованиях или правах человека, то он бы подлежал одобрению со стороны Государственной думы.

I.e.:

Special council for sanctions legislation at Pen & Paper law firm, lecturer on international law at the Law Department of Moscow State University, Sergey Glandin told RBC that the scenario of ratification not through the parliament is realistic.

"The Paris Agreement contains Article 20 that says that the Agreement might be accessed, ratified, signed or adopted in another way, - he said. - We have Federal Law of 1995 "On International Treaties", there is Article 6 there that establishes the forms in which the Russian Federation expresses its consent for the obligatoriness of an international treaty, and it contains the same list of measures. This law also contains a list of laws that are required to be ratified through the parliament, I've tried to look into the matter of this climate treaty, and I believe that it doesn't require an obligatory ratification through the parliament. That is, the federal power in the person of President, according to Article 6 of this law, can designate the form in which to accede to it. As long as we have the direction of the foreign policy directed by President, he can accede to it in the way he prefers."

The lawyer added that if the Agreement contained provisions on cession of territory, budget allocations or human rights, it would have been subject to approval from the State Duma.

That is, all the sources - both official sources and expert comments - say the same thing: Putin bypassed the ratification because he had the power to do so. There will be no further ratification, it's already fully adopted. VanHelsing.16 (talk) 23:14, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

You are confusing two separate processes. The discussion above relates to Russia's domestic approval process. That is ultimately up to Russian law, and the sources say parliamentary approval is not required. However, the agreement still requires that Russia deposit a notification of ratification/approval with the UN to complete ratification and have the agreement become legally binding on it (see article 21). To date that has not happened, hence Russia is not yet a party.

A similar approach was taken by the US. TDL (talk) 09:03, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited TD Ballpark, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page TD Bank (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:30, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

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)

Eurasian Economic Union

You deleted my edit despite me giving sources to my information. Please give an explanation to why you did that. Comrade King1234 (talk) 10:12, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

I didn't delete it. The substence of the edit is still in the article. See Eurasian_Economic_Union#Enlargement: "In March 2020, Uzbekistan announced that it wished to become a Eurasian Union observer state."

However, I removed the claim that Uzbekistan intends to become a full member, as the referenced sources did not support that and I could find no other sources stating that. In fact, the sources state that it has yet to decide whether to become a full member or not.[1] TDL (talk) 17:07, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Cuba-Palestine relations

Could You please create the article for Cuba-Palestine relations. I don’t know where to start and I’m a new user. Just send me a something or create that article and I will put it on the International recognition of the State of Palestine. User:NYC6x7x talk 13:46, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

You can start with Cuba–United States relations as a sample template, and rewrite with content on Cuba-Palestine relations. TDL (talk) 03:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Well if you want TDL DanlayCock you create that article about Cuba-Palestine relations. I mean it’s not that hard. I think that you may have to expand it later and create that map as well. Just saying. 17:20, 29 March 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by NYC6x7x (talk • contribs)

Welcome back Koov! TDL (talk) 04:06, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bulgaria and the euro, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bloomberg (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:17, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Czechia vs Czech Republic

Hi, some time ago I changed "Czech Republic" to "Czechia" in the Partnership for Peace page and you reverted these changes. I was trying to find a reason why my change was rejected but I couldn't find one. I'm not very familiar with the Wikipedia editing process, so maybe the reason is mentioned but I couldn't find it. Otherwise, I would be glad to learn from you why is the short name "Czechia" less correct than "Czech Republic" on a webpage where all other countries are listed with their short names ("Slovakia", "Germany", "France", etc.). Kind regards, cerniagigante (talk) 16:44, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi cerniagigante, I reverted because generally on Wikipedia we follow general English language usage rather than offical usage. See WP:COMMONNAME for details. France, Germany and Slovakia happen to be both these state's common name and official short names. Due to historical reasons, the Czech Republic became common, and the recent change to make Czechia the official short name has not really caught on yet in the Englsh world.

There was extensive debate on this subject a few months ago here and the consensus was against renaming the article. Generally we should follow this usage on other pages.

Personally I prefer Czechia and hope it catches on, just think we need to keep the encyclopedia consistent until then. TDL (talk) 14:06, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

African Continental Free Trade Area

Hi. What you don’t seem to understand is that a country may have already ratified the document but have yet to deposit it to the African Union. If you analyze well your document, you will observe that coincidentally the countries which have deposited their ratification to the African Union, and those countries only, have already been marked as having ratified it. If the document were up-to-date, you would have some countries that have ratified it but not deposited it yet. Or else, what is the point of having 3 different dates (signature, ratification, deposition) instead of only 2 dates (signature, ratification)? Morocco has yet to deposit the document to the African Union so the African Union did not update their document with Morocco's ratification date. But I am pretty sure that the document has already been signed and ratified. Here are 5 other sources saying that the document has been signed and ratified: - https://aujourdhui.ma/economie/zlecaf-lafrique-a-son-marche-commun - https://leseco.ma/adoption-du-projet-de-loi-relatif-la-creation-de-la-zone-de-libre-echange-continentale-africaine/ - https://leseco.ma/zlecaf-comment-accelerer-le-marche-commun-africain/ - https://www.le1.ma/zleca-sa-ratification-par-rabat-nest-pas-une-reconnaissance-de-la-pseudo-rasd/ - https://www.yabiladi.com/articles/details/85759/pays-l-ua-redoutent-l-adhesion-maroc.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ucfberrada (talk • contribs) 12:50, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, you're right. I've self-reverted. We can reconcile the ratification date once Morocco deposits with the AU. TDL (talk) 12:55, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

UK Prum Convention participation

Hello. I recently changed the map of the Prum Convention page to include the UK. Although we have now left the EU, we are an active participant in the Prum Convention. Can you edit the current picture to include them in the orange colour to reflect this? I had uploaded a separate picture which I had created and uploaded which has since been reverted. I was unable to edit and continue the previous picture thread. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Urbanninja88 (talk • contribs) 10:11, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

The version you uploaded was just a PNG copy so better to update the raw SVG. I can update. The UK is particpating during the transition period? I don't believe that they have concluded an agreement on permanant participation? TDL (talk) 13:57, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

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) 01:16, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Greece

Greece Under Kyriakos Mitsotakis will become the second Western State that is a member of the European Union to officially recognize Palestine as a State but Before Greece Officially Recognize that Said State in 2015 under the Government of Alexis Tsipras the Greek Parliament Voted in Favor of Recognizing Palestine as a State in 1988 Bulgaria Cyprus Czech Republic Hungary Malta Poland Romania and Slovakia Recognized Palestine Before Joining the EU Albania Belarus Serbia Russia Turkey and Ukraine also Recognized the Said State in 1988 but not an EU Member in 1992 Azerbaijan Bosnia and Herzegovina and Georgia Recognize Palestine in 2006 Montenegro also Recognized that said state in 2011 Iceland Becomes the First Western European and Nordic Country that is a Member of the European Free Trade Association to Recognize Palestine in 2014 Sweden Becomes the First Western European and the Second Nordic Country that is a Member of the European Union to Officially Recognize Palestine and in 2015 the Vatican Recognize this Said State. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4454:23F:ED00:59F:28D3:332B:54C5 (talk) 05:54, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

OK, are you proposing that some article get updated with this information? TDL (talk) 16:00, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Its All About the Formal Recognition by Greece to Palestine as a State. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4454:23f:ed00:6434:8afd:1db3:6bb (talk) 14:56, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

OK, but we need to wait for WP:Reliable source to report this. Wikipedia is not a WP:Crystal ball for speculating what will happen in the future. TDL (talk) 00:02, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4454:23F:ED00:90D0:903D:CF48:305 (talk) 05:05, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

TfD nomination of AFL season templates

Hi there - I have nominated all of the Arena Football League's team season templates, some of which you created, for deletion. You can find the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 January 26#Arena Football League team season templates. Thanks, PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 21:22, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

SPI clerking?

Hi, your name is listed on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Clerks under "Temporarily inactive clerks", and I noticed you haven't been active at SPI for some time. Do you think you would eventually like to return to clerking one day? If not, that's okay too, and I can remove your name from the list of clerks. Thanks for all the work you've done as a clerk! Sro23 (talk) 12:36, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I'd like to return to clerking, but am quite busy in real life these days so am not spending as much time on wiki as I used to. As a result, I don't really know if or when it will happen. So if you'd like to remove me I'm OK with that. TDL (talk) 05:01, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I moved you to the "long term inactivity" section. Sro23 (talk) 01:08, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

CCI update

This was so long ago, but thank you so much! --Sennecaster (What now?) 02:21, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

FILECAT

WP:FILECAT explicitly says that non-free images are not allowed to be galleried in categories, so that's not a legitimate excuse for reverting an attempt to clean up galleries of non-free images in categories. Bearcat (talk) 01:22, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

The solution to that, as explained on WP:FILECAT, is to add __NOGALLERY__ to the category to prevent gallerying, not removing the cateogory. TDL (talk) 01:29, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Image files only belong in categories that are specifically for image files, by virtue of having words like "logos" or "images" directly in the file name. That's where NOGALLERYing the category is an appropriate solution, because otherwise the rule against categorizing non-free images completely contradicts the core purpose of the category. Text links to image files aren't supposed to be filed in categories that cross-pollinate them with text articles, because that's adding absolutely nothing of value to either the category or the individual files — and while it's not exactly the end of the world (but still isn't supposed to be done) if the team that the logo is for has its own dedicated eponymous category for the team, an individual team's logo image really doesn't belong in a broad general category like Category:Australian rules football clubs in Toronto or Category:Rugby teams in Toronto, that just broadly collects a lot of teams instead of just being dedicated specifically to a single individual team. That's just not necessary or valuable, in the exact same way that it's not necessary or valuable for Category:Canadian people to contain every individual photograph we have of a Canadian person — and we just don't do that either, nogallery tag or not. Bearcat (talk) 01:50, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

The guidelines explicitly state otherwise: "A category can mix articles and images". I can't find any policy that supports the restriction you state above.

I agree 100% with you about the eponymous categorization, though I don't believe that there were any such cases of the scenario you are highlighting (eponymous category exists, but categorized in the broad category.) Can you point to an example, so we can correct it? You've also attempted to removed cases of eponymous categorization as well: [2].

On your last point, I agree because we have Category:Images of Canadian people, which is itself a subcat of Category:Canadian people. However, if no such subcat existed then puting them into the main cat would be perfectly reasonable. TDL (talk) 02:14, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

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) 00:02, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Template:Country data Federal Republic of Yugoslavia/sandbox

Hello, Danlaycock,

This template page you created was tagged for speedy deletion so I wanted to see if you were notified (which you weren't) and what you thought about this and the rationale. I don't deal with templates often so I wanted to see if you agreed with the editing of the template and the tagging. It looks like it is causing Template talk:Country data FR Yugoslavia/Archive 1 to appear as if it has also been tagged for deletion. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:49, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Regarding your revert in Ivory Coast (revision 1089313016)

Hello, Danlaycock. You had reverted my edit to Ivory Coast in which I added the name 'Côte d'Ivoire' in {{lang-fr}}. But Côte d'Ivoire is indeed the French name, even the infobox shows that "République de Côte d'Ivoire" is in French (since your edit summary said "this is the english name, not french"). So can I undo your edit? Thank you. Excellenc1 (talk) 05:31, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Right it also happens to be the name in French, but the point of the usage in the first sentence is that Côte d'Ivoire is the English name. They way you formulated it implied that it was only the name in French. TDL (talk) 23:17, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Kosovo

I saw you reverted my edit and I think you are right. Should I include Kosovo in the end that it aspires to join NATO (or PfP to be more precise)? Since they actually do. S.G ReDark (talk) 01:40, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Statistics relating to enlargement of the European Union

Hello! Could you please update the information in the candidate countries section of this article to add information about Moldova and Ukraine? Thank you in advance. Uliana245 (talk) 23:38, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

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) 00:21, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Don't remove Kosovo from the country lisitings

Because Montenegro recognises Kosovo as a country ! Adem Sopaj from the Republic of Kosova (talk) 10:05, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

"Proposed 2017 'In/Out' Referendum on United Kingdom membership of the European Union" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Proposed 2017 'In/Out' Referendum on United Kingdom membership of the European Union has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 10 § Proposed 2017 'In/Out' Referendum on United Kingdom membership of the European Union until a consensus is reached. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 12:50, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Noam Chomsky "Failed States" book

Hello, Danlaycock Have you ever been uploaded Noam Chomsky "Failed States" book published by Metropolitan Books to Internet Archive (archive.org)? Internet Archive is a digital library for digitized old and new archives like videos, photos, books, etc. Yuliadhi (talk) 22:11, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

July 2023

Hello, I'm Sportsfan 1234. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, CAA Centre, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 20:05, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Map of IAEA member states

Hi, thank you for your amazing work on Wikipedia's maps! As for the map on Member_states_of_the_International_Atomic_Energy_Agency, do you think you could please add another color (blue?) to "observer states"? Palestine is an observer state of the IAEA (https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2019/06/276239/iaea-recognition-palestine-controversy-israel). Thank you very much. Dan Palraz (talk) 11:02, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

@Dan Palraz: Done. Just reused yellow, since there are no more states pending membership. TDL (talk) 03:06, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your work. Dan Palraz (talk) 21:04, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

States parties to the Rome Statute

Hi there- thank you for your edit on States parties to the Rome Statute regarding Armenia :) Under "State parties", I noticed that you changed the number of the "Asia-Pacific" group from 19 to 20. Was that change because of Armenia? As an FYI- Armenia is not part of that grouping, it belongs to the Eastern European Group. Therefore the "Eastern Europe" figure should have changed from 18 to 19. I don't mind making the change myself, but I just wanted to ask you first. Thanks! Archives908 (talk) 02:15, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

I was actually basing that on the United Nations geoscheme, whitch places Armenia in Western Asia. Kind of strange that they aren't aligned. I don't particularly care which is used, just wanted to put it somewhere so the numbers added up! TDL (talk)

I understand, that particular table uses the United Nations Regional Groups for the tally, not the geoscheme. I'll go ahead and adjust accordingly. Thanks again for your contribution! Archives908 (talk) 02:36, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:MLSE logo 2014.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MLSE logo 2014.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:26, 16 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) 00:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sweden–NATO relations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bloomberg.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:48, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

East African Community/Somalia

Please keep in mind that countless reliable sources have clearly stated that Somalia is a member of the East African Community. This includes the BBC, Al Jazeera, and VOA. Do not revert changes to East African Community so as to indicate that Somalia is not a member without evidence. Doing so is original research and not allowed. jhpratt (talk) 10:53, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

While some news articles from back in November did indeed have oversimplifed headlines that Somalia had already joined, these are not considered reliable. See WP:HEADLINES.

The legal process for joining is clear. The EAC agreed to admit Somalia in November, and it signed the treaty of accession in December. The last step is for Somalia to ratify the agreement. This is explained on the EAC's own website here.

Do you have any evidence that this last step has occured? Note that sources from November are clearly insufficient to evidence that.

Pending that, please don't keep reverting to add unsubstantiated claims in the article. There is an active conversation on the topic on the talk page, and policy requires estabilishing a consensus to change the text rather than unilaterally implementing changes against consensus. See WP:BRD. TDL (talk) 18:46, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: 2024 Toronto Rock season has been accepted

2024 Toronto Rock season, 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 .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Toadette^Edit! 15:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Algeria a member of EEC after 1962?

There is an ongoing discussion about whether Algeria was a member of EEC after it gained independence from France in 1962. If you would like to contribute with your view on this topic in the discussion, it would be highly appreciated. Many thanks! Nablicus (talk) 18:26, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

27.109.114.41 (talk) 04:49, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Naismith Cup, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page TSN.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:09, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Algeria

You really need to participate in the talk page discussion but tbh I don't see that the changes you want to make are an improvement. In any event, procedure requires that you do not continue to edit the section while it is being discussed under WP:BRD. So you don't have the 3RR protection for the edits that you should really not be making. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 00:10, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

I have participated in the discussions?

The editor recently added some dubious content, and I've tried to find a compromise way to improve on it to make it acceptable rather than fully reverting their changes outright. Per BRD it is up to the editor that wants to add content to get consensus for the changes, not those who are removing the additions. I'm happy to fully revert to the version prior to their recent contested additions, while discussion takes place to form a consensus on how to revise the text.

My main objection is that the user is claiming definitively that the Algeria was part of the EEC until 1976, when that is debatable at best. I think my wording in this change fairly reflects that, by focusing on highlighting the legal ambiguity and not commenting on whether they were or were not members.[3] I've also made a number of typo and grammar fixes.

@JMF: I'd appreciate any feedback on what part of these changes you think are not an improvement?

I'm happy to try to find a consensus text that reflects what the sources actually say. TDL (talk) 01:05, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

It is more about process than detail. Once a BRD has been opened, you have to use that forum to argue the case for change. But since you ask:

1. The implications of Algeria's independence on its relationship with the EEC was legally unresolved, Your inference. Which is probably true, but is uncited. But see #3, that quote would seem to support your argument but it must be made in the BRD discussion if it is to succeed. Otherwise you will be correct but ruled out of order.
2. This status persisted until 1976 v Thus, Algeria remained active in the European Economic Community. I agree with your version; the word 'active' is to be removed. (The word "thus" is rather questionable, given the treatment of Algerian wine.)
3. quote="Even after independence in 1962, Algeria remained part of the community, although its ongoing inclusion was a matter of debate." This is a critical quotation and it is essential that it be reinstated.
4. bilateral treaty v new treaty: cosmetic.

So I urge you to raise these points in the BRD discussion: I will certainly insist on #3 being reinstated. That in turn supports #1, albeit less assertively (either way). 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:36, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I have already raised all of these points on the talk page. It looks like you had missed that, but I see that you have now responded there in support of these changes.

On point 1, I'm not quite sure what your concerns is. As you highlight in your comment, this is supported by the cited quote in point 3. Happy to discuss alternative phrasing.

Unfortunately it appears that the editor is simply here to promote a particular fringe view, rather that work constructively to make the text reflect what the sources actually say.

Legitimate concerns have been raised by multiple editors with the text they are proposing to add, which has been met with unilateral edit warring to force the changes into the article without consensus, walls of text which don't address the substance of the concerns raised and just repeat the same talking points, and uncivil attacks. TDL (talk) 02:46, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Timestamping is important

Please sign your posts using four tildes. If you want "TLD" to bed displayed instead of Danlaycock, see WP:CUSTOMSIG. Timestamping is important because not all discussions have a single thread. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 15:38, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, yes I've been editing Wikipedia for 20 years so am aware of how to sign my posts. Unfortunately it looks like I made a typo and only included WP:3TILDES, which led the wiki software to substitute an untimestamped signature. TDL (talk) 02:46, 15 August 2024 (UTC)