User talk:LP-mn

Welcome!

Hello, LP-mn! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, 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 using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Wikidudeman ^(talk) 17:28, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Wikipedia tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Proposed deletion of Hot Box (Appliance)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Hot Box (Appliance), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Original research

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Nuttah (talk) 15:33, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the proposed deletion template from the article. If you wish to continue improving the article, please find some reliable sources to verify the contents of the article. Thank you. --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 21:43, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of "Finletter-Pace"

A page you created, Finletter-Pace, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it has no content, other than external links, categories, "see also" sections, rephrasing of the title, and/or chat-like comments.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. WadeSimMiser (talk) 17:50, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

F-P MOU

replied on my talk page. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 11:34, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox

Hi, LP-mn.

To delete your unwanted or no longer used sandbox articles, replace all the text in the article with the template {{db-u1}}. The template marks the page for speedy deletion by an admin with the reason being it is your request because it is one of your user pages.

I was also writing because I saw your article, Pace-Finletter MOU 1952, and feel that you may have prematurely created it in the mainspace, as evidenced by the remaining copyediting editorial notes as well as the problems with nominations for deletion of the article. It may have been better to keep it as a sandbox until it was more mature as a draft article before releasing it "into the wild."

One specific problem I see is that you appear to have drawn conclusions from the 1952 MOU with the Army's decisions about the A-10. The separation in time between date of the MOU and the time frame that the Army may have actually been able to remotely consider developing and flying an A-10B is over 30 years. The link between the two does not seem to be a verifiable conclusion or opinion published in a reliable source, but appears to be your own conclusion. This may simply be a citation of sources issue.

As I had mentioned on the Army Aviation Branch talk page, other agreements with their related MOUs, specifically the Johnson-McConnell agreement of 1966, modified the Pace-Finletter agreement to be primarily about aircraft type and missions.[1] CAS remained the Air Force's mission (and responsibility) as specified in the Key West Agreement. So, regardless of any remaining thought on weight limits, it was the preserved idea that close air support was the Air Force's mission and responsibility that has prevented the Army developing any fixed-wing CAS platform, not just specifically the A-10B.

Other problems with the article are non-standard configuration of the article, the use of vague words ("Some people", "Other people"), and the articles inclusion of editorial notes that are best discussed on the article's talk page or made into text comments that are only available for editors to read while editing using: . --Born2flie (talk) 13:30, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your input. You are correct about the Sandbox issue. I can't turn back time, or I would have done so instead of "the wild" aspect of my actions. I'm still trying to find references to the some v other people. I know I've read about it. Perhaps I phrased the A-10B poorly. I'll re-think that. Johnson-McConnel is news to me. I'll try to refer to it. Thank you again. LP-mn (talk) 17:37, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think this project is mariginally useful. That is meant as no offense: I just think that you may want to put your time towards improving some other Honorverse articles, some in dire need of help, instead of tweaking the alraedy pretty good list of characters.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 11:25, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Piotrus-- (RESPONDING TO YOUR COMMENT -HERE-)-- I am willing to do the work of splitting up the sections (User:LP-mn/Sandbox). My (other) question to you was meant to be, will my work actually be USED? I don't want to do it only to find out that others object and it gets tossed out. I have my own reasons why I'd like to make html links that get one closer to the relevant entry in the wiki list. LP-mn (talk) 16:29, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am pretty sure your work will be accepted.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:08, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An article you created maybe deleted soon: Tools which can help you

The article you created, Hot_Box_(Appliance) maybe deleted from Wikipedia.

There is an ongoing debate about whether your article should be deleted here:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hot_Box_(Appliance).

The faster your respond, the better chance the article you created can be saved. There are several tools and other editors who can help you keep the page from being deleted forever:

List the page up for deletion on Article Rescue Squadron. You can get help listing your page on the Article Rescue Squadron talk page.
You can request a mentor to help explain to you all of the complex rules that editors use to get a page deleted: Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User. But don't wait for a mentor to respond to you before responding on the article for deletion page.
When trying to delete a page, veteran editors love to use a lot of rule acronyms. Don't let these acronyms intimidate you.
Here is a list of your own acronyms you can use yourself: WP:Deletion debate acronyms which may support the page you created being kept. Acronyms in deletion debates are sometimes incorrectly used, or ignore rules or exceptions.
You can vote to merge the article into a larger or better established article on the same topic.

If your page is deleted, you still have many options available. Good luck! travb (talk) 03:06, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Steve McQueen

Replied at Talk:Steve McQueen - 4.240.117.96 (talk) 22:33, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Rebabbitting

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Rebabbitting, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Wikipedia is not a dictionary

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Mr. Vernon (talk) 20:59, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Honorverse template

It is, just in another form. I originally put it there the same way it was before, but then a few somebodies insisted it should look more templatelike. All that is missing are the references and the abbreviations for the books. Both were ommitted to keep the template from clutting up with less important information. Debresser (talk) 23:57, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I'll put that back then. About the abbreviations. I personally liked the way it looked before... Debresser (talk) 23:59, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look. Is this better? Debresser (talk) 00:32, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll need some help here and here. Debresser (talk) 20:01, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:AGF, WP:CIVIL, and refrain from personal attacks. Thanks. --Crusio (talk) 12:11, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. You do have a way of being direct, when you put your mind to it. :) Debresser (talk) 17:05, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He has, fortunately I have a thick skin. But LP-mn should realize that outbursts like this can lead to a block. Some moderation would be good. --Crusio (talk) 17:12, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Current Total Limiting

A tag has been placed on Current Total Limiting 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 that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Macromonkey (talk) 12:09, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong information

Dependent on the degree of wrongness and how much of the article is influenced (just a statement, a section, the whole article) you could use the following templates:

{{dubious}} like this {{dubious|date=February 2009}} for statements
{{disputed}} like this {{disputed|section/article|date=February 2009}}

Debresser (talk) 18:12, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, I think you've misunderstood. The article _IS_ now referenced. The banners now SHOULD be removed. There's no need for the 'disputed' or other banners. As the primary author, can _I_ be the one to take them down, even though I did not put them up in the first place? (While leaving the 'cleanup' one in place of course.) LP-mn (talk) 05:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added the "see" template, because you got mixed up. This comment was my answer to an earlier question of yours about the article Carter system. See the section below for my answer for the quesion about the banners on Circuit Total Limitation

Banners

Obviously you have to be pretty sure of yourself before removing a template. But if you are sure then go ahead and remove the template. It would be advisable to add some explanation in the edit summary (e.g. removed "unreferenced" template since sources are now included).

However in case of this article I would argue that not all templates need to be removed.

Expert attention is probably not needed any more.
The article is now referenced, but the references are mostly from 1 source only, and not all paragraphs are referenced. It might be appropriate to change from "Unreferenced" to {{Refimprove}}. Actually, I see, somebody has just done that.
The "howto" template could probably be removed. It is true that the article contains some information that could be used as implicit advice, but that is clearly by way of explaining the subject, not as a goal in itself.
I don't see any violation of wp:NPOV here, although those in favor of "Non-CTL Circuit Breakers" might be unhappy about some things here. You could remove it, and if somebody would put it back, you can always invite him to the talk page to explain what constitutes the problem in his eyes. Debresser (talk) 11:01, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, did all you recommended.LP-mn (talk) 20:55, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm flattered. Hope all works out well. Debresser (talk) 22:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Honorverse table

Thanks for updating it, but see also Talk:Honorverse#Rumors_of_5th_anthology.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:00, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Victor Mitchell

A DAB page would be okay if we can prove that the author and politician are two different people.--gordonrox24 (talk) 00:08, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know nothing about the man so I am no help there. Looking at his information, I too doubt he is the author. I wouldn't create the DAB page until we are sure that there are two different people.--gordonrox24 (talk) 00:18, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am hesitating because there is no current article, or any source anywhere telling us that this author is a different person. We have no evidence to say they are the same person, or that they are totally different people. If we make a DAB page, then we have to also make a page titles "Victor Mitchell(Author)". What is the sense of all that work when we can just look up the book, and see the background on the author?--gordonrox24 (talk) 00:32, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Victor Mitchell

I did some polishing on Victor Mitchell (disambiguation) and Victor Mitchell (author). Apart from a few stylistic improvements, to give them the same look as other similar pages, this meant doing some cutting. I've noticed that often the less you say, the clearer you explain. In Wikipedia articles I see this on a daily basis, and I try to do so myself. Debresser (talk) 19:50, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I think that the article about the politician shouldn't be renamed, since it is clearly the primary article for this name. See Wikipedia:Disamb#Is_there_a_primary_topic.3F. Debresser (talk) 19:54, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. In that case though, we should add a link at the top once we do have the info. LP-mn (talk) 00:57, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New developments on Honorverse articles

Somebody has proposed Imperial Andermani Navy for deletion. On the discussion page an option for a merge has been mentioned. The latter might be advisable.

That same editor has tagged List of organizations in the Honorverse with what could lead to another deletion proposal, and that is already too much IMHO.

I feel your input is necessary. Debresser (talk) 09:40, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That which I feared has now happened. User:EEMIV has successfully pushed the merge of Imperial Andermani Navy‎ and now has

tagged Technology in the Honorverse and Weapons technology in the Honorverse with PROD’s;
blanked (that is, turned into redirects) Office of Frontier Security and State Security;
tagged for deletion (as AfD’s) Treecat, List of treecats and Honorverse concepts and terminology
Is about to do the same to Elysian Space Navy, Royal Manticoran Navy and probably others. Debresser (talk) 13:33, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Victor Mitchell (author)

I have nominated Victor Mitchell (author), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Victor Mitchell (author). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Victoriagirl (talk) 15:08, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pair

We work in pairs. You have a lot of editing power, creating new articles and adding additional information. I bring the finesse of Wikiepdia style and formatting. Let's go on this way. Debresser (talk) 07:13, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me. What's your opinion of the Worlds of Weber shortcut? I'm not comfortable lumping it in with the rest of the HHAx numbering system. LP-mn (talk) 01:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It definitely is not HH. So it should not carry an HH code, nor have a place in the {{Honorverse}} template. Let's just call it "Worlds of Weber". Debresser (talk) 14:48, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is possible. Write {{Adminhelp}} on your talkpage, and say that you want him to paste you the text of it on your talkpage for whatever purpose. Debresser (talk) 20:36, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? You lost me. What train of thought are we on here?LP-mn (talk) 21:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That was a reply to your question on my talkpage "Hmmmmm... I wonder if it's possible to resurect (sp?) that old author article of mine that was deleted, and transfer it, and all the other content, over to the Honorverse Wikia... " The answer is that you can ask an admin to paste the text of any deleted page on your talkpage, and then you can do with it what you want. Debresser (talk) 20:56, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw on Honor Among Enemies that you added a second ISBN. Did you notice that the infobox shows only 1 (the second) of them? I added the second one with a <br />. That way it shows both, but they are not linked. The advice on Template:Infobox Book/doc is to use only the ISBN of the first edition. FYI. Debresser (talk) 20:56, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As memory serves, I believe that both of the ISBNs are for the same edition, one is the older 9 or 10 digit standard, and the other is the newer 13 digit equivalent. Both pieces of information came from the Baen promo page. If I'm wrong, please do correct me. Line break is a good idea. By my interpretation of your quote (I've not read the standard/template), both versions would remain relevant, as they are for the same edition, just different ways of saying the same info.

LP-mn (talk) 02:14, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, something is wierd here. I don't remember adding a second ISBN of the same number of digits, especially not for this book. See this site: http://www.baen.com/chapters/W200209/0671877232.htm?blurb for the correct ISBN to Honor Among Enemies.

The site where I _THINK_ that I _DID_ place two ISBNs is the one for Torch of Freedom. (See this URL: http://www.webscription.net/chapters/1439133050/1439133050.htm?blurb)

LP-mn (talk) 02:44, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Plot Torch of Freedom

I read an online copy of Torch of Freedom and wrote a short plot synopsis. Debresser (talk) 10:30, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Got the whole book in .pdf format. Send me an email, so that I may have your address, and I'll send it to you. Debresser (talk) 07:28, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

neighborhood

You can use Template:Infobox neighborhood, like they did in Northeast, Minneapolis. It redirects to Template:Infobox settlement, but that is fine.

Userboxes are all those boxes on a userpage. See mine for example. 04:38, 3 September 2009 (UTC)Debresser (talk)[reply]

Supreme Court dates

It's been a while, but I think I looked here and here and kind of figured it out from there. There's actually an easier way now, using Template:age in days, but I never bothered to convert that page. Coemgenus 14:25, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of The Big Blue Book of Bicycle Repair

“The Big Blue Book of Bicycle Repair”, a clone of an article that you created, has been nominated for deletion by another editor. I created the clone after you mistakenly made “Big Blue Book” (which is properly about a sister series to the better known Little Blue Books) into an article about The Big Blue Book of Bicycle Repair. I'm not competent to judge the importance of The Big Blue Book of Bicycle Repair. If you wish to comment on potential deletion of the article, then please go to AfD/The Big Blue Book of Bicycle Repair. —SlamDiego_←T 07:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non Free Images in you User Space

Hey there LP-mn, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot alerting you that Non-free images are not allowed in the user or talk-space. I removed some images that I found on User:LP-mn/Sandbox. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use images to your user-space drafts or your talk page. See a log of images removed today here, shutoff the bot here and report errors here. Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 22:54, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Could you please update the Vector_Video_Standards2.svg image?

See User talk:TheJosh#Could you please update the Vector_Video_Standards2.svg image?.

July 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Dassault Systemes SolidWorks Corporation do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 08:19, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Bud Kraehling

A tag has been placed on Bud Kraehling, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, file description page, file talk page, MediaWiki page, MediaWiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your reasoning on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. DASHBot (talk) 06:00, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Bud Kraeling

A tag has been placed on Bud Kraeling, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, file description page, file talk page, MediaWiki page, MediaWiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your reasoning on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. DASHBot (talk) 12:00, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Shields & Brooks

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.

A tag has been placed on Shields & Brooks requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Ravendrop (talk) 06:47, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Shields & Brooks (disambiguation)

Your contributed article, Shields & Brooks (disambiguation)

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, I notice that you recently created a new page, Shields & Brooks (disambiguation). First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Mark Shields and David Brooks (journalist). Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will to continue helping improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Mark Shields and David Brooks (journalist) - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Cind.amuse 13:16, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

March 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Fukushima I nuclear accidents are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. btw, that plane is not equipped to deliver water Pontificalibus (talk) 19:53, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, Noooo. As I understand it, they have the option of EITHER adding in the fire suppressant chemical OR straight water.

LP-mn (talk) 21:42, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aircraft canopy merger

Hello, LP-mn. You have new messages at Talk:Aircraft canopy.
Message added 18:18, 14 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Disambiguation link notification for March 6

Hi. When you recently edited T-Mobile myTouch Q by LG and T-Mobile myTouch by LG, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages TFT and WVGA (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) 10:30, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

myTouch article

Thanks for cleaning the article up, but I don't think a wikitable is the best way of presenting the content. Maybe the devices can be split into different sections, and the content in each box can be written in prose form. Also, there is a template box for the LG phones, but I couldn't find one for the HTC phones. Can you help create the template for the HTC A series? I've started it here. - M0rphzone (talk) 05:34, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, no time.

LP-mn (talk) 10:05, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 4

Hi. When you recently edited The Matrix (production team), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Graham 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) 14:25, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 28

Hi. When you recently edited Generic Access Network, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Katalyst (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) 14:29, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Mark Rosen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to WCCO

Mark Rosenzweig (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to WCCO

Minnesota gubernatorial election, 1986 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to WCCO

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:23, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redirecting

Hi! I noticed that you created an entry for a book in the Honorverse series. I redirected it to the main series page because it's simply WP:TOOSOON for this to have an article at this point in time and none of the sources on the article showed notability for the book. The thing about books, especially unreleased ones, is that they do not inherit notability by being written by a notable author or being part of an ongoing series. Each entry has to show that it's notable via in-depth coverage in independent and reliable sources, which do not exist at this point in time. Will it eventually? Probably, but it's not a guarantee. I've seen books by some of the big mainstream names that never really got enough coverage to warrant an entry, after all. I do want to state that forum posts are not usable as a reliable source, especially if they are in a closed forum that you have to sign up for in order to view. Some of the sources also linked to merchant sites, which are a big no-no for sourcing of any nature, whether it is trivial or major. I also noticed that the entry was more written from a fan's point of view and sort of seemed like a little bit of original research, which should also be avoided. The article also relied heavily on primary sources. The general rule of thumb with stuff like that is that if you don't see it written in something independent of the author, it probably doesn't need to be mentioned in the article and that you should never expand on what the author has written. That runs into original research if you theory that a book is "likely to be called" something. It's just better to avoid adding anything of that nature that can't be easily accessed or shown via sources because it's so easily questioned.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 10:17, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Technically ARC availability is not counted as the book being released, regardless of how available the ARC is. A book can even be leaked onto the internet ala Midnight Sun, but that does not count as an official release. That is a leaked copy or an advance copy and not the official final product. Until something is officially released, any preview copies of the book are considered to be unofficial copies of the book. In 99% of cases the review copy is usually the finished novel, but it's been known for books to have some things either left out or changed from the review copies. That's why the availability of advance copies do not really count as the book actually being "available" or "out" in the way that an official release would on its release date. As far as snippets go, the big problem was that you were linking to every snippet for the book. At some point it ceased being a link to a preview of a book and became borderline EL spam. You don't need links to every snippet of the book released on every site. That just bogs down the EL section, making it a bit unwieldy. Those sort of things are pretty unnecessary in the grand scheme of things and would become even more unnecessary when the final product is released. Overly long lists of external links should be avoided and as far as other articles allowing it, that doesn't really mean anything because there are a lot of articles that have issues with having too many external links. A long list of snippets or whatnot in the EL section might just mean that it hasn't been cleaned up yet. As far as to which sub-series the book is part of, go by what the publisher says on the final product or what the author says officially. If they don't specify, then just go with the overall basic series. The thing is, you can say "it can be argued", but in the end that's still technically one person's opinion on what part of the series or sub-series the book belongs in. A far better way of phrasing it would be "the book is the fourteenth novel set in the Honorverse in the main Honor Harrington series and brings in story lines and elements from the "Saganami Island" sub-series" or something to that extent. Until the author or publisher officially states that it's part of the sub-series, you have to go with the basics and just assume that it's a cross-over but is considered part of the main series. It's kind of like how several comic companies will have cross overs from their comics. For example, volume 13 of the Fables comic series deals heavily with a crossover from Jack of Fables, even going so far as to conclude one of the story arcs. Yet despite all of that, it's still considered to be part of the main Fables series and not technically a Jack of Fables volume. It brings in elements and story lines, but that doesn't make it a volume in the Jack of Fables series. It just makes it a crossover. In any case, this is sort of a moot discussion since released or no, SoF lacks coverage and should just be redirected at this time. When/if it gets more coverage, hopefully it'll clear up a lot of stuff and any of the minor stuff can be sourced by things other than other articles.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 18:19, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Breathe (British band) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Peace of Mind

Peace of Mind (Rebelution album) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Peace of Mind

Peace of Mind (album) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Peace of Mind

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:11, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Peace of Mind (2012 album) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Rebelution

Rick Nolan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Patrick Murphy

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:53, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're Welcome!

You're welcome! Articles with no pictures are just so dull and sad to me. I found it on his website nolan . house . gov, and it can be found in the "about" section on his website. Or if you click on the photo to make it larger there should be a direct link to the photo in the description box. I will try to search for the larger version of his Official Congressional Portrait, but with the 113th Congress just settling in it may be a while before it get uploaded to his personal House website, or the portraits get released on house . gov.

Re:

So did you find what you were looking for? c:

January 2013

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to Al Franken, even if you intend to fix them later. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 21:01, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

United States House Committee on Appropriations (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Bill Owens and Mike Quigley

United States House Committee on Homeland Security (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Filemon Vela

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Taken care of. Cheers! bd2412 T 18:42, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Committees

Thanks for your help keeping the committee articles up-to-date. I do have a few thoughts on formating, though. First, the current style has evolved over the last several years through consensus, and a lot of editors don't like to see wholesale changes. There's nothing wrong with being bold and adding new formatting and ideas, but if there is an edit conflict it's best to take it to the project discussion page. There is a general style guide up at the Congress WikiProject.

With respect to the "new members" section, some find too many headers in the bullet table list distracting. Simpler is better in my opinion, but consensus rules so I'm always open for a change. The main problem I have with adding that section directly to the bullet list is that committee membership changes throughout a Congress. We already need to keep the main list updated as items change, and a "new members" section, would be one more item we'd have to keep tabs on. I'd be OK putting them in a footnote, though.

Long-term, my real goal is to create articles for each committee with a list of their members througout history, and the length of service for each member. I think something like that would be much more useful, along the lines of the various "list of senators from state X" articles, rather than filling up the primary committee article. The primary article should be focused on the written history of the committee and it's actions, a list of current members, and important topics. Again, that's just my opinion. If you don't mind, I will take a stab and a compromise view on a "new members" section as I update committee articles. The committee rosters should be settled by now. Please don't take offense if you see these items deleted or changed. If you really think it adds to the article after seeing my suggestions, I'd welcome moving the discussion to WP:USC. Thanks again.DCmacnut <> 23:19, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm from Bismarck, but used to live in DC, hence my interest in congressional articles. I'm going to work on a sandbox to figure out alternative display options for committees.DCmacnut <> 02:20, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there's anything nefarious. The Budget committee simply hasn't organized yet, and I would expect anything until next week. The House GOP have been at their conference retreat this week.

On your reference example, there's a simpler method to call the references using named refs. That's too many footnotes. For DCmacnut <> 01:19, 20 January 2013 (UTC)a list like this, I think it's sufficient for a single reference for the entire list feather than person-by-person. DCmacnut <> 01:19, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New Members

Thanks again for updating the committees. I've given your idea to highlight the new members of the committee some more thought. In most cases, there is no specific source for which members are new. Without a reliable source, we are left comparing the list between this Congress and the last, which could violate the prohibition on original research. In the cases where the committee has a press release or other source saying "here are the new members", I think we'll have to leave that information out. I'm also fine tuning the references as I mentioned to make things look cleaner.DCmacnut <> 17:18, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree there needs to be a separate footnote when someone leaves or is added to the committee at a later date. But we don't tend to do that with the initial committee resolutions at the beginning of a Congress. It would be best to treat the first list as static, and then footnote changes as needed later. With respect to seniority for prior service, footnotes where we can find sources are good. But since each Congress is a new congress, the committees are not continuing bodies from one Congress to the next. Seniority on a committee matters in determining seniority, but the resolution laying out seniority takes precedence over a previous congressional committee membership list.DCmacnut <> 23:46, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Doug Collins of New York ???

The only Collins I see on the House Committee on Small Business is Chris Collins of New York. Sk8terguy27 _Talk 07:31, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Inline comments in committee artilces

I would recommend you use the {{Template:update}} to highlight changes that need to be made to the articles from now on. Your notes and commentary are helpful, too, but should be placed on the article talk page or embeded in the article using hidden comment tags (<!-- -->). The committees are starting to officially organize, so all of the membership and subcommittee assignments are being dolled out in the next several days.DCmacnut <> 22:41, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Minnesota Sports Facilities Authority, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bill McCarthy (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) 11:18, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Meier (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) 11:13, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

February 2013

Hello, I'm Areaseven. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Kre-O, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Do not use YouTube links as references (see WP:YouTube). Areaseven (talk) 01:16, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ronny Jordan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Off the Record (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) 13:23, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Michael J. Mosley, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Mosley (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) 11:12, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

July 2013

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Peace of Mind (2012 album) a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Peace of Mind (Rebelution album). This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 22:41, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

August 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Minneapolis mayoral election, 2013 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

| * Cam Winton,<br> responsible inclusive), attorney||([[Independent (politician)|Independent]])||<ref name=minnpost/><ref>{{cite web|url=
{{Collapse|1=  (Based on [http://candidates.sos.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:39, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Journey (band), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scarab beetle (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) 11:55, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation pages

Hello, I see you've continued to add external links to WP:Disambiguation pages. Please see MOS:DABENTRY: Never include external links, either as entries or in descriptions. Disambiguation pages disambiguate Wikipedia articles, not the World-Wide Web. If you feel the person is WP:Notable, you might want to WP:Create the article first. Boleyn (talk) 07:54, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mayor of the Pentagon for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mayor of the Pentagon 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/Mayor of the Pentagon until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Jeremy112233 (talk) 19:48, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Shannon Tweed, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page A Woman Scorned. 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) 08:53, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Electrolux Ankarum Assistent

Hi, I'm Lstanley1979. LP-mn, thanks for creating Electrolux Ankarum Assistent!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Hi. I've had to copy-edit this article, since it included a lot of material that was not necessarily encyclopaedic - please see WP:OR. Please see if you can add some more third-party, neutral WP:Reliable sources - thanks!

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. LS1979 (talk) 20:37, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Electrolux Ankarsum Assistent a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Electrolux Ankarsrum Assistent. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you. Redrose64 (talk) 08:38, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redrose64: I consider myself to be an above average Wikipedia user or contributor, but NOWHERE near the level of "Guru" or "Editor". As a result, while I may know this, that or the other thing, there are some big gaps in my knowledge. Examples include the Move command, formatting titles, and so forth.

When the (original) Electrolux Ankarum Assistent web page was (in my opinion) vandalized to Electrolux Ankarsum Assistant, I had to react fast, and correct the misspelling of Assistent. BUT, at the same time I notice that _I_ had introduced a misspelling, and double-fixed it to Electrolux Ankarsrum Assistent (forgot the R in Ankarsrum).

Anyway, I didn't have the time to investigate the correct way, I just had to "Get R Done"; (I so hate that phrase!).

LP-mn (talk) 12:45, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, please note that _NOW_ I'm trying to use the Talk page re the Move command for the latest move proposal.

LP-mn (talk) 12:48, 19 December 2014 (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) 17:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Temporarily removed Steve Vogel disambiguation

Hi there; I removed the note you put at the start of Steven Vogel. When Steve Vogel gets his own article, we can set up a proper hatnote, or indeed a disambiguation page, pointing people to him. Until then, I don't think its necessary to mention this Vogel is not a Washington Post reporter; people are unlikely to get them confused. Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 22:41, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, LP-mn. 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, LP-mn. 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, LP-mn. 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]

Dave Mattingly (Producer/Newscaster) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Dave Mattingly (Producer/Newscaster). Since you had some involvement with the Dave Mattingly (Producer/Newscaster) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. 84.46.53.14 (talk) 09:56, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve The Saluting Marine

Hello, LP-mn,

Thank you for creating The Saluting Marine.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Please add clear references.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Boleyn}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Boleyn (talk) 05:38, 23 October 2019 (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) 00:10, 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) 01:42, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Altar Painting

Information about the Altar's painting:

  See URL: https://www.norwegianamerican.com/easter-mindekirken/

Caption Quote:

  "Photo courtesy of Mindekirken

August Klagstad (1866-1949) replicated Norwegian artist Axel Ender’s painting of the Resurrection for Mindekirken in Minneapolis." --- "The painting, which was located in the church at Molde" (Norway) ---

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%C3%96vertorne%C3%A5_church_altar_4.jpg LP-mn (talk) 02:49, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Karl E. Brinkmann GmbH

The article Karl E. Brinkmann GmbH has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of N:ORG in a BEFORE or De article

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Star Mississippi 15:22, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]