User talk:Gremlinsa

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Gremlinsa! Thank you for your contributions. I am SW3 5DL and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! SW3 5DL (talk) 21:11, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on this RfC

Hello Gremlinsa, Because you participated in this AfD here, you are being asked to comment on the RfC regarding that article and others.

The RfC the link is here.

The question is:

Should we keep these newly created separate country articles about the Ebola epidemic?

Your participation is greatly appreciated. Thanks!

SW3 5DL (talk) 22:08, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Halloween greetings!

Happy Halloween!

Hello Gremlinsa:
Thanks for all of your contributions to the Ebola country articles. Have a fun Halloween!
– SW3 5DL (talk) 16:31, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Removal of redlinks

Hi! You removed some red links from the Ebola virus epidemic article -- I can see that your edits were well-intentioned, but I've now put them back, as they serve a useful purpose in building the encyclopedia.

Here's why: red links like this serve as a hook to indicate that an article on a topic is missing, and should be created. As government ministries, there is no question that these are article-worthy topics, and the fact that both are involved in the greatest public health crisis in recent history makes them of immediate topical interest.

The question should be not "why are these links red?" but "why aren't these links blue?", and the best way to turn these from red to blue is to create well-formed stub articles on them. See WP:REDLINK and WP:STUB for more. -- The Anome (talk) 14:22, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mali

Hi there, I want to be sure that I don't hurt your feelings, but I don't think that the article is ready for a FA. It is good to work with you. Gandydancer (talk) 10:29, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gandydancer No hurt feelings at all... The article is good, and should be a model on how articles get written, also Mali one is the one with the better, stable content compared to any other page I've worked on... In fact I have haad a dyslexic moment and went to FA instead of GA, well lets see what happens... Gremlinsa (talk) 10:57, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

speedy deletion tagging of Miss Heritage South Africa

Please be more careful with speedy deletion tagging. You tagged Miss Heritage South Africa as not having content. In terms of speedy deletion that means you can not understand what the article is about. In this case it was very easy to understand what the article was about. It had references,a link to the parent organization, a link to their homepage, and more. The tagging was entirely I inappropriate. -- GB fan 11:34, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The tagging of Vitthal Jhaveri was also inappropriate. There is more than enough to tell what the article is about and there is an obvious claim to significance. You should go back and read WP:CSD before tagging any more articles for speedy deletion. I also went and read your comments on the article talk page, you even say that he might be a little bit notable, that is enough to survive speedy deletion.-- GB fan 11:41, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ebola/west africa

Gremlinsa hi, now that Liberia hasn't registered any new cases, should Sierra Leones section be more prominent in the article and go first after Guinea? (let me know your opinion at my talk page thanks)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 19:10, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Gremlinsa. 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]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Kidnapping in South Africa

Template:Kidnapping in South Africa has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. TM 00:06, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of South Africa Partners for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article South Africa Partners is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/South Africa Partners until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 01:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]