User talk:ProKro

26 June 2015

Hello, You undid revision on "Croatia national football team" article on 26 June 2015.

I see Your point, but You see that is a senior team information, indirectly. Shows how the transition from youth to senior level is done, and how the key players (of today) did or didn't do at younger age. Also it is the only place that information can be placed, because there isn't a combined page for all youth levels (and doesn't need to be one).

Regards, 95.178.198.179

@95.178.198.179: It's more of a style issue than anything else, really. Those numbers often lack reliable sources and/or vary significantly from source to source (if they're kept at all), and are thus usually omitted from the senior national team articles; as per WP:MoS/National Teams. While it would make for a nice addition, there'd have to be a reliable source to back it up, preferably the country's football federation records. While making a sort of combined "youth level teams" article sounds like a sound idea, that'd have to be done for every single national team which I just don't see happening any time soon. I'd suggest dissecting and moving the table to the country's feeder teams (the U21, and others; England's U21 is a good example, albeit outdated), if those are available, or even leaving the table in but backing it up with reliable sources while also maybe have it discussed in the article's talk page. ProKro (talk) 21:01, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

28 June 2015

Mirroring: "And you don't remove sources I include, Twitter @Box Office is a legit source, there was no need for you to remove just because you don't know any better." 92.25.125.146

@92.25.125.146: Hello. I'm assuming you and the IP user 78.150.200.232 are the same person; because of whom the article was locked for 2 weeks. There is nothing wrong with you adding any sources but please think and check before you do. If by "not knowing better" you mean following the established Manual of Style then I don't really see the point of this discussion. ProKro (talk) 20:44, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

I am the same person, the article got locked because I was posting refs to legit sources (which really did turn out to be legit) and you just kept removing them to replace it with outdated information.

@Box Office is the Twitter account for Boxoffice.com one of the leading websites for movie box office tracking. It is a 100% legit source. Yet again though you removed it and replaced it with outdated information.

If you don't understand this stuff then don't tamper with it. Clean it up sure but don't change anything. There is no point to this discussion just like there was no need for you to remove my source leading me to go find another source that states the exact same thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.25.125.146 (talk) 21:59, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

@92.25.125.146: I believe you misread. Twitter links in general are not recommended if there are better written sources. The source you provided is listed so I don't understand why would you keep insisting that I removed it when I clearly haven't. As to the understanding the matter at hand, I understand what I added and removed, but you unfortunately you don't, as made evident by this edit. You unnecessarily removed Box Office Mojo, the go-to site for box office revenue and the BoxOffice reference; reference invoked several times in the article thus breaking it (bottom of the page; the Cite error). All I've done is restored those and added and properly formatted the link you added; simple as that. This is more or less why I asked you to check before you edit. ProKro (talk) 22:12, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't matter if it isn't recommended as long as it was a legitimate source which it was. There was no other source at the time either. The source I originally provided was removed by you so I had to go find another one from Rentrak and do the same thing a second time.

I removed the Box Office Mojo source because it rather obviously A) doesn't show it made the amount written next to it ($44.8 million) and B) is over a month out of date. There is no need for it to be there when another legitimate source has a up to date gross for the movie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.25.125.146 (talk) 00:33, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

@92.25.125.146: A sound written piece from a verifiable source is better than any tweet, no matter the validity of the latter; even if it means waiting a little longer. That's mostly why YouTube, Twitter, Facebook and other are avoided in general. Links and posts on those are highly prone to link rot, often get re-routed or simply deleted without prior notice; not to mention that a lot of them are often hastily and prematurely posted and thus incorrect and even sometimes used as primary sources. As for Box Office Mojo, yes, it is obviously outdated, but not for long - as soon as the film hits the US theaters the figures will update to reflect the best estimation or even pinpoint correct worldwide gross. ProKro (talk) 00:54, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

I July 2015

Hi, I dont understand what was not constructive in my contribution. Croatian Wikipedia is part of Croatian media and Croatian Wikipedia controversy on far-right takeover of it was well publicised. Check the following sources:http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/24/tech/web/controversial-wikipedia-pages/

http://www.slobodnadalmacija.hr/Komentatori/BorisDezulovic/tabid/331/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/221735/Default.aspx

http://www.jutarnji.hr/radikalni-desnicari-preuzeli-uredivanje-hr-wikipedije--ndh-nije-svjesno-bila-totalitarna--a-antifasizam-se-bori-protiv-svih-sloboda-/1125398/

http://www.jutarnji.hr/otkrivamo--tko-na-wikipediji-promovira-ustase-speedygonzales-je-darko-cokor--on-urednicki-potpisuje-velicanje-ndh-/1125605/

Kind Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anamink (talk • contribs) 10:09, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@Anamink: Hello. The problem is not with the content so much as how it is presented. You posted bare links which will undoubtedly rot; most of which are not properly formatted and appear in the text; example being the edit where the "dailydot" link is right there in the text. Plus, the "It was hijacked by the group of extreme right wing nationalists who police any objective editing of highly politicised articles. A good example are article on Serbocroatian and pseudo scientific article on šćakavski speech." and "Administrators are promoting right wing ideology and pseudo science on Croatian Wikipedia and english language Metapedia." are both rather blunt and not in encyclopedic tone and sound more like an opinion than an unbiased piece. Also, your recent edit to the Media of Croatia does not conform with he established style as per WP:MoS, which is primarily why I had to revert it in the first place. Now, I'd like us to avoid unnecessary edit war and just rephrase everything and properly format it. I can even do it for you, and if you have any complains contact me. ProKro (talk) 14:43, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate your critique. I don't have interest in editorial war. I would like the facts surrounding this controversy to be publicly available, even more so because Croatian Wikipedia is administered by some really nasty far-right people. If you can edit so that you remove remarks that you view as my opinion without removing the facts about this controversy I will not undo it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anamink (talk • contribs) 14:56, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@Anamink: Alright then, glad to hear it. I'll do some tinker and then notify you. ProKro (talk) 15:00, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@ProKro Thank you. Now Sandbox time for me...

22 August 2015

Hey I noticed you undid a small edit I did to Dragon Ball Super article, with replacing the "after deafeat of majin boo" with "after events of DBZ". I was trying to remove spoilers from a section not discussing plot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Katsuhometa (talk • contribs) 14:48, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

@Katsuhometa: Hello. I understand what you intended with you edit; there were discussions on this before. However, please keep in mind that Wikipedia doesn't deal with spoilers; in other words story is layed out as it happens regardless, in as few words as possible. Furthermore, it turns out that even in in-universe story line, Super doesn't follow Dragon Ball Z, but is set years before the end of the latter. ProKro (talk) 15:02, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Sailor Moon#Edit warring

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Sailor Moon#Edit warring. Thanks. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:32, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@Sjones23: Sure thing. Will do. ProKro (talk) 20:29, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ash vs. Evil Dead, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Verge (news organization). 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) 08:55, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited White Collar (TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page VTM. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:38, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

That warning message

I went to go copy the quotes from your front page and clicked Edit. How did you create that warning message? I didn't see it in your page code. Knowledgebattle (talk) 20:12, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

@Knowledgebattle: I'ts called an Editnotice; it basically works as a warning. You can make one for yourself, for both your user page and talk page, by following this link. Glad you like the quotes. ProKro (talk) 21:38, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Awesome!! Thank you very much! Knowledgebattle (talk) 04:42, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

I copied them too but didn't get warning messages.... what are those?? Blessing66 (talk) 11:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Rugby reviews

Thanks very much for the constructive GA reviews of the rugby bios. Please do let me know if there's anything I can help you with at any time. FunkyCanute (talk) 20:53, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

@FunkyCanute: Glad to help. Thank you, will do, and likewise; if you have any more articles coming up, be sure to give me a ping. ProKro (talk) 21:43, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Friendly Notice.

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Signed

NotAlpArslan (talk) 06:19, 19 September 2015 (UTC).

@NotAlpArslan: I really don't see why that was necessary, but suit yourself, by all means. I see the "lousy" part is what concerned you, and I assure you it wasn't an attack directly at you nor did I mean to insult you. To add to that, you claim I have harassed you before, which I haven't, but I still apologize if you perceived anything like harassment, and that I am known for my "past violations"(?). I simply stated the entry was lousy (as in hastily made) as the link wasn't appropriate. I simply tried to be helpful by changing it, updating the figures as they were in the source, which you didn't do correctly mind you, and by adding missing accessdates parameters. Do not take things so personally, please, as no one is here with the intent of disrespecting you or use "untolerable intolerable language" against you. Try to understand the other party before reacting. Thanks and happy editing. ProKro (talk) 13:58, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

What is this? (Berber page)

You undid this message I wrote from a friends house "What kind of pseudo-science is this? Berbers are not related to these groups, only slightly to Iberians, but their big chunk of SSA negligates it.)"

Tell me, where is the proof for Berbers being related to these groups: "Iberians,[6] Picts,[6] Tartessians, Saami". This is absolutely ridicolous! Berbers are predominantly ENF, with significant SSA on top of that. Those are groups have nothing to with that. Berbers has a small amount of WHG, but it is not on the European spectrum. All of them is wrong, have it even crossed your mind that Berbers completely lack ANE? This is a sheet of population genetics, take a look for yourself https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JVGdg2UsN3jYWgaoxAZu-QsAmuCaq3kT7FvqSXwUsAA/pubhtml. Make the changes I did yesterday, or provide me with a good source.

Best regards Justicaro — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justicaro (talk • contribs) 17:03, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

@Justicaro: Hello. The ethnic groups mentioned in the article are corroborated in the provided source by Lancelot Hogben [link] as added by user NotAlpArslan, who graciously provided it. No, it has never crossed my mind, as I had never delved into the issue. The sole reason your edit was reverted is simply because you deleted the content without providing a source for your claims. What you provided here is a genetic analysis which is good, but the cultural relation is also taken into account. If I were to edit it back in, it mostly likely wouldn't sit well with the aforementioned user, so I'd like it best if there was a discussion on the article's talk page first. Regards. ProKro (talk) 17:13, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

That link does not even mention Tartessians and Samis, secondly, it doesn't have anything to do with autosomal DNA. What has cultural relations has to do with ethnic groups? Nothing. Lets say that it did, Berbers are as far away as you could be compared to Samis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justicaro (talk • contribs) 17:25, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

@Justicaro: I do not know about Saamis or Tartessians as that is clearly unreferenced – only the Picts and Iberians are. As I said, feel free to discuss or edit accordingly, but do provide a reference. And again, I am not the one arguing against your points. ProKro (talk) 17:34, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dragon Ball Z: Resurrection 'F', you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cinetel. 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) 12:30, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Shame on you

This is childish behaviour. I created a valid and cited edit. One only reverts errors. — O'Dea (talk) 20:56, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

@O'Dea: Hello. See it as you will, but please, be sure to update everything if you can in the future; instead of cherry-picking what you like. That's all I did, and in order to do it I had to revert your edit. Meant nothing by it. ProKro (talk) 21:00, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

1. I was updating everything on multiple pages and was looping back to perform the edits on that page.

2. It was not so-called 'cherry-picking' and I always update the other statistics when others do not. Always. Check my history. I have been contributing to that article for years and know what is neccessary better than any parvenu.

3. It is not for you to decide who should edit what, in what manner.

4. Your claim that you 'had to revert [my] edit' 'in order to do it' is bullshit. You did not have to revert my edit in order to add your material, which is welcome, thank you, but you performed it wrongly.

5. What you meant is immaterial; you reverted a valid edit. If you do it to me again, I will not tolerate it and I will take the matter further. — O'Dea (talk) 21:09, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

@O'Dea: Actually, I did, as we must've been updating concurrently. I haven't for a second doubted your editing prowess (I guess?), but you know just as well as I do that a lot of editors, especially IPs, rush to the article right after every game to make, more or less, half-arsed edits – which, for a second, I thought was the case, so I apologize for that. But all things considered, I really don't see the need for any of this, now that everything's up to date. Also, there is really no need to be smug and haughty. Your work on the articles is commendable, keep it up, cheers. ProKro (talk) 21:39, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

We did not update concurrently, not even nearly; you have described your actions untruthfully. You deliberately reverted my edit (at 20:50 UTC) eight minutes after I performed it (at 20:42 UTC) in an unjustifiable action before adding your own contribution. An editor does not need to delete another's work before adding unrelated material, such as statistics, and so on, in other areas of the article. It is all clear in the article history which is there for all to see. It would be best not to do it again. — O'Dea (talk) 21:57, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

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) 17:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Jeff the Diseased Lung for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jeff the Diseased Lung 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/Jeff the Diseased Lung 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. Prhdbt [talk] 15:30, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Work on wimipedia

Hi sorry for some information spacial abaut India thea have grow from 16.8% and more on (ppp) wronge information maheby but littel its raide thea have 3 ppp on world and China economi came much sllower rise 6-7%. Oprosti na informacijama. Informacije o RH su tocne kad se gleda prosla i ova godina brojke su bile krive kao pad od 15% stavio sam samo stvarne podatke rast 2015 i pocetak 2016 rast od 2.7% hvala i bok

Davor xx (talk) 17:45, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

I have a question.

I remember on the article for Dragon Ball GT, you removed one of my edits at the video games section and said it was "fancruft". What exactly does that word mean? DBZFan30 (talk) 13:27, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

@DBZFan30: Fancruft for more information. Basically, it is intricate info that would be of interest only to a dedicated fan and not to general audience to which Wikipedia tries to cater. As you might imagine, articles about works of fiction are especially susceptible to this. One good example would be the "in-universe canon"; what is or isn't canon doesn't matter and as such shouldn't even be discussed for the sake of succinctness and reading fluency. ProKro (talk) 16:57, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

DRAGON BALL SUPER

Can u plese mention why you removed summary of dragon ball super episode 42 Blessing66 (talk) 11:49, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

@Blessing66: I didn't. It was removed by an IP user before my revert. But I'd say it was done for a good reason - it was overly detailed and not really in line with other summaries. Feel free to add another one that is shorter, more focused and free of any unnecessary details that needlessly break the reading flow and might only be of interest to a dedicated fan rather than general audience. Constructions such as "Little do they know,..." is not a impartial summarizing, but storytelling. You might want to consult WP:Manual of Style and WP:How to write a plot summary for tips. Also, feel free to use the article's talk page for your drafts or other users' input. ProKro (talk) 18:14, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Češi

Ahoj, všiml jsem si teprve dnes, že jsi odstranil mou editaci v článku, která odmazala chybný údaj o počtu Čechů žijících v České republice. Správný je ten první údaj podložený zdrojem, kterým je povinné sčítaní lidu z roku 2011. Druhá reference, která "dokládá" to vyšší číslo, odkazuje na tu první a zmiňované vyšší číslo nezmiňuje. V článku je tak vložena informace, která je zbožným přáním Čechů, ale pravda je taková, že se jich ubývá. Při zmiňovaném sčítání se spousta ke své národnosti nepřihlásila, to ale přece neznamená, že tito jsou automaticky všichni Češi. Svou chybu mohou napravit v roce 2021. Do té doby bych byl velice opatrný a důvěřoval spíše autoritativním zdrojům, které poskytuje Český statistický úřad.--Dendrofil (talk) 03:11, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

• translate en
• na hrvatski

S pozdravem--Dendrofil (talk) 15:11, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't speak Czech nor Croatian, and the English translation seems to be wonky at best. ProKro (talk) 08:48, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, ProKro. 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)

Revert Definition in Austria

Hello,

I corrected a false definition in Austrians, which apparently was wrongly translated from the german source AND explained it. U then reverted, reasoning that no explanation was given. This is not only plain wrong, but pretty annoying, since your revert cant be undone now. I would ask you not to revert changes from IP-editors w/o further Investigation what was changed.(this is wiki policy) Thanks

I will correct it now again. 188.22.228.134 (talk) 18:57, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Me again, now with user - if my text sounds offensive I apologise, I was a bit emotional that I had to change it again, greets J3010daahfuq (talk) 10:12, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

@J3010daahfuq: No absolutely not! I am the one who should apologize. I am sorry I accidentally reverted your edits. I haven't been all that actively lately and have only recently switched to wikitools. Your edits aren't the only ones I unjustly reverted due to my clumsiness. I apologize once again! By the way, welcome to Wiki, glad to have you and hope you'll stick around! Keep up your editing! ProKro (talk) 17:30, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, ProKro. 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)

My cleanup of Dutch people

I like how you reverted my cleanup (I was going to complain about it), but I noticed you reverted back to my cleanup again, haha. I can understand how you might feel that a cleanup wasn't necessary. On the other hand, you'll have to agree that centered unbulleted lists in an infobox are a sight for sore eyes, right? I was only trying to streamline things. Finally, I was on the fence about the flag, too. In the end I did remove it because it felt out of place considering the article subjects; Dutch ethnicity.

Take care. --Jay D'Easy (talk) 22:14, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I am sorry about that, my bad there. I was editing something else that needed reverting and sort of went on an unwarranted killing spree. My apologies, your edits were more than needed. Thank you, take care as well. ProKro (talk) 09:50, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Chileans

Dont change the article,IE Related Ethnic groups — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.160.78.112 (talk) 03:18, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

@181.160.78.112: I will. Because your edits are not constructive nor corroborated. Stop your vandalism. ProKro (talk) 16:02, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, ProKro. 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)

Be consistent

Why don't you remove the mention of S Africa from the recognised minority languages of Tamil language as well, as you did in Portuguese language? Where is your reason for removing sourced content? --Spirit of the night (talk) 19:42, 21 June 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) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

About malay world

it seems you have to learn what is the Malay world and Malay tribe, there is a lot of confusion here as if all the tribes in Indonesia are categorized as "Malay culture" Nelson Salomo Jr (talk) 19:45, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

on this page as if all people of Indonesian descent are referred to as "ethnic Malay (ethnic)" not "Malay world (definition of race)

See Ethnic_groups_in_Indonesia Nelson Salomo Jr (talk) 19:48, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Walloon's native

Hello- I am keen to learn what this edit summary is meant to convey: "Unnecessary, as French was brought to Wallonia through education, Walloon's native". In case you are curious, the main goal of my edit was to correct the awkward capitalization of southern. Eric ^talk 01:48, 15 April 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) 02:34, 24 November 2020 (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) 00:34, 23 November 2021 (UTC)