User talk:Slugger O'Toole/Archive 6

DYK for Henry Weston Farnsworth

On 12 October 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Henry Weston Farnsworth, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Henry Weston Farnsworth served in the French Foreign Legion and was one of the first American soldiers killed in World War I? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Henry Weston Farnsworth. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Henry Weston Farnsworth), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih (talk) 00:02, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aaron Hernandez:

If you keep stating things about Aaron Hernandez in Wikipedia's voice when they are opinions or hearsay, I will take this to an appropriate noticeboard. Wikipedia has rules we are supposed to follow. One is WP:YESPOV. Read it. Another is WP:In-text attribution. Read it. Another is WP:Undue weight. Read it. We should not be giving undue weight to a book or single source, even if the book was written by Hernandez's brother. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:42, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Aaron Hernandez, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Armored car (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:19, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Slugger O'Toole. 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]

Redirects

I've undone the redirects - because the redirect has a non-trivial history, including the merger discussion I think it would be better to set up the new article at another disambiguation (maybe Red Knights (fraternal society) ). Seraphim System ^(talk) 15:20, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nice catch. I didn't see the discussion on the Flaming Circle article. I made the change as you suggested. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 17:57, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please review your behaviours

I deliberately stopped editing for a while in the autumn to give myself space as I found your editorial style aggressive and disrespectful. I had hoped that this might change. But things are just as bad. Your recent edit history shows that you are focused almost exclusively in making edits that remove, revert or target edits only I have made. I find this intimidating (surprising) and bordering on harassment. This is accompanied by threat after threat of "edit warring" - seemingly as a way to demonstrate to administrators that I am being unreasonable. My interest is in ensuring articles are neutral, easy to ready, informative and factually correct. I don't care if they tell a good story or a bad story concerning the Catholic church. Where there are problems to be solved to make articles better than I'm happy to collaborate to come up with sensible answers. What I do not like in other editors is a sense of possessiveness - that makes editing combative and unpleasant. Can I encourage you to be open minded and to approach editing in the spirit of collaboration. Otherwise we are going to get no-where. Thanks. Contaldo80 (talk) 21:19, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The edits you complain about were on articles that have been stable for weeks and months. No one else has made any edits on any of these articles, so there have been no edits on these articles to build off of, tweak, or revert. I am not targeting you. I have even thanked you publicly for your constructive edits. However, there have been other editors who have reverted you in addition to me. I am glad to collaborate with you, but only if you understand the principles of consensus, edit warring, and BRD. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 14:18, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DC sports template

Shepherd University may be "a couple of hours outside DC"... but it's in Jefferson County, West Virginia, which IS within the federally defined DC metropolitan area. — Dale Arnett (talk) 08:19, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 31

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of the Catholic Church and homosexuality, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Avondale (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Pelletier moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Joseph Pelletier, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. ~~Cheers~~Mgbo120 18:54, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ENGVAR

Was it by reflex you changed from American English to Commonwealth English? /mobilise/mobilize/? Hmm, no, you were altering for the location? But, then you were altering away from the original style of the author, who is from England. While you consider your sins I'll assuage mine by being helpful and fix "weathly". Shenme (talk) 02:37, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it per MOS:TIES. Thank you for fixing my typo, Shenme. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 02:42, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John W. McDevitt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Supreme Judicial Court (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:35, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your e-mail

In response to your e-mail, I do not think that I should act on it at this time. Sorry. Sandstein 21:06, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No need to be sorry. I wasn't sure and wanted your honest opinion. Thanks. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 06:03, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

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

Disambiguation link notification for May 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Our Lady of Good Voyage (Boston), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bose and Regis College (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Brandeis play house.jpg

The file File:Brandeis play house.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

onesource

Perhaps it would be a good idea to try to expand such minimal stubs as Edward P. Murray. There are those who doubt relying on a oral history alone, without more formal documentation. Myself, I support the use of oral history here, and have been trying to advocate for it for the last 10 years, anit would be a shame to give the doubters any opening. DGG ( talk ) 20:54, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maine justices

Greetings! If you are interested in working on articles for more justices of the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, there are 51 drafts underway at Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/United States judges and justices. Cheers! bd2412 T 01:06, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Our Lady of Good Voyage (Boston), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Martin Walsh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regina Cleri moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Regina Cleri, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources to establish notability. Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can develop the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 03:08, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

3RR violation notice

Just a friendly note — you are at 4RR on Catholic Church and homosexuality in the last 24 hours and I have restored my well-sourced compromise. You're welcome to propose different language on the talk page for discussion. I won't file an edit-warring noticeboard request at this point, but if you revert again, I certainly will. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 02:24, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. That was my mistake. As you are already aware, I did go to talk instead of reverting again. I'll try to keep a better eye going forward. I appreciate the warning. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 03:26, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	I'm involved with the current effort to get the Mother Brook canal on the National Register. Your article on Mother Brook is SO comprehensive and detailed that I am curious how you came to know so much about it. Do you live in Dedham? Max Mom (talk) 18:12, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I am just interested in history and have access to newspaper archives... along with a little too much time on my hands sometimes. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 17:59, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 19

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:24, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Andrew G. Geishecker

Hello, Slugger O'Toole,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Onel5969 and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I’ve proposed an article that you started, Andrew G. Geishecker, for deletion because it meets one of the relevant criterion.The particular issue can be located in the notice, that is now-visible at the top of the article.

If you wish to prevent the deletion:

Edit the page
Remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
Click Publish Changes button.

But, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the raised issues. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Onel5969}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:14, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Andrew G. Geishecker for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Andrew G. Geishecker 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/Andrew G. Geishecker until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:45, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Daniel J. Fitzgerald

Hello, Slugger O'Toole,

Thanks for creating Daniel J. Fitzgerald! I edit here too, under the username Boleyn and it's nice to meet you :-)

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

This has been tagged for 2 issues.

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) 05:54, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of Dedham, Massachusetts, 1635–1792, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Benjamin Church (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:58, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Slugger O'Toole! You created a thread called Table deleting the following section header at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of Dedham, Massachusetts, 1635–1792, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jonathan Edwards (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:53, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Metcalf

Hi, I see you have found another Michael Metcalf who deserves an article. I have added his dates of birth and a reference. TSventon (talk) 14:00, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dedham Public Schools, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Elliot (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:01, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:James Cardinal Gibbons Medal winners has been nominated for discussion

Category:James Cardinal Gibbons Medal winners, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:16, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve John Endicott (Dedham)

Hello, Slugger O'Toole,

Thanks for creating John Endicott (Dedham)! I edit here too, under the username Domdeparis and it's nice to meet you :-)

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

please supply other sources than a local historical register. This reads as a list of dates and needs more prose about the person

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|Domdeparis}}. 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.

Dom from Paris (talk) 17:20, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Norfolk County Registry of Deeds

The article Norfolk County Registry of Deeds has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't meet WP:NORG as this is nothing more than a routine government department that is duplicated at nearly every level of government. If the focus of the article is supposed to be the building, there is nothing to show that this building is notable per WP:GEOFEAT

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. John from Idegon (talk) 22:24, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Erastus Worthington, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page History of Dedham, Massachusetts (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:43, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Slugger O'Toole! You created a thread called Citing a mobile app at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Patronal Medal winners has been nominated for discussion

Category:Patronal Medal winners, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:35, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception has been nominated for discussion

Category:Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:37, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Fisher (Dedham)

Is Daniel Fisher (Dedham) different from Daniel Fisher (Massachusetts)? --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:29, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Tagishsimon: Yes. Daniel Fisher (Massachusetts) died in the late 1600s. Daniel Fisher (Dedham) served in the early 1700s. I imagine they are father and son, but I don't have a source for that. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 21:30, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Tagishsimon: In case you're still wondering, I found a source that said they were, in fact, father and son. I've updated their articles accordingly. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 03:38, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of John Phillips (Puritan)

Hello, Slugger O'Toole,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Onel5969 and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I’ve proposed an article that you started, John Phillips (Puritan), for deletion because it meets one of the relevant criterion.The particular issue can be located in the notice, that is now-visible at the top of the article.

If you wish to prevent the deletion:

Edit the page
Remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
Click Publish Changes button.

But, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the raised issues. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Onel5969}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:54, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jason Haven

Hello, Slugger O'Toole,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Onel5969 and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I’ve proposed an article that you started, Jason Haven, for deletion because it meets one of the relevant criterion.The particular issue can be located in the notice, that is now-visible at the top of the article.

If you wish to prevent the deletion:

Edit the page
Remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
Click Publish Changes button.

But, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the raised issues. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Onel5969}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:57, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of William Adams (Dedham)

Hello, Slugger O'Toole,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Onel5969 and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I’ve proposed an article that you started, William Adams (Dedham), for deletion because it meets one of the relevant criterion.The particular issue can be located in the notice, that is now-visible at the top of the article.

If you wish to prevent the deletion:

Edit the page
Remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
Click Publish Changes button.

But, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the raised issues. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Onel5969}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:59, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Joseph Belcher

Hello, Slugger O'Toole,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Onel5969 and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I’ve proposed an article that you started, Joseph Belcher, for deletion because it meets one of the relevant criterion.The particular issue can be located in the notice, that is now-visible at the top of the article.

If you wish to prevent the deletion:

Edit the page
Remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
Click Publish Changes button.

But, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the raised issues. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Onel5969}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 04:32, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of John B. Hynes, III

Hello, Slugger O'Toole,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Nsk92 and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I’ve proposed an article that you started, John B. Hynes, III, for deletion because it meets one of the relevant criterion.The particular issue can be located in the notice, that is now-visible at the top of the article.

If you wish to prevent the deletion:

Edit the page
Remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
Click Publish Changes button.

But, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the raised issues. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Nsk92}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Nsk92 (talk) 00:22, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of John B. Hynes, III

The article John B. Hynes, III has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

a mere notice , not a biographical 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. DGG ( talk ) 04:30, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of John Andrew Barnes III

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article John Andrew Barnes III you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 09:21, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019

Before adding a category to an article, as you did to The Perfect Storm (film), please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified according to Wikipedia's categorization guidelines. Categories must also be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. Actually, the article doesn't seem to say anything about where the film was shot. DonIago (talk) 14:19, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@DonIago: Fair point. I added a few sources for this, and readded the category. Nice catch. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 14:47, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and thanks for adding in some worthwhile and sourced material! DonIago (talk) 19:12, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of John Andrew Barnes III

The article John Andrew Barnes III you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:John Andrew Barnes III for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 23:00, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John H. Fleming for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John H. Fleming 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/John H. Fleming until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DGG ( talk ) 04:04, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 30

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:32, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction

The following sanction now applies to you:

You are prohibited from making any reports about Roscelese at any administrative noticeboard, including but not limited to WP:AE and WP:AN/I.

You have been sanctioned for the reasons provided in response to this arbitration enforcement request.

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Christianity and Sexuality#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Thryduulf (talk) 11:45, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry this backfired so hard. Luckily it's probably the easiest sanction on the project to keep...it's hard to accidentally create a report about somebody. I wouldn't worry too much if I were you. Just keep trying to get along with R. If it's something that really bugs you, you can appeal in a year or so with an apology for the WP:HOUNDING-like behavior, an explanation of the misunderstanding about reverts (which I'll back you up on), and a clear commitment not to try to be a parole officer for ideological opponents. ~Awilley (talk) 04:42, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]