This is an archive of past discussions about User:SusanLesch. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
This is a Wikipediauser talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user in whose space this page is located may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SusanLesch/Archive_48.
Deletions: Go ahead and delete any of my uploads. I would prefer no deletion tags on my talk page please. If I happen to sign on during a discussion I will try to contribute. Rules and fads come and go. Licenses are harder to change.
Thanks for uploading File:Lovin' Spoonful-Nice-1966.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Dear Stefan2, I restored this to the article. An IP removed it today, perhaps accidentally. Thank you for the incredibly quick catch. -SusanLesch (talk) 04:19, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
It is a place where women can go and be sure they'll be able to participate in discussions without being dominated by men's advice, criticism, and explanations. If interested, your participation would be most welcome. Lightbreather (talk) 23:17, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
John Lewis
Thank you for pointing out the LA Times op-ed piece. I've added a block quote to the controversy section of [[Selma (film)|Selma}. Perhaps you can and additional material, or help set up the quote better. I'd felt badly about the tide of what I considered irrelevant (from mainly self-serving Johnson COIs) criticism, but was hoping for something the quality and gravitas of Lewis' piece. (Surely the passage of 49 years in public service ought to give a (or the) primary source the currency of secondary. — Neonorange (talk) 23:53, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
You're welcome but I must say we read his letter much differently. (It takes all kinds. :) I would prefer to keep this discussion on the article talk page. Thank you. -SusanLesch (talk) 04:50, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Selma
The issue of the controversy was not about what was omitted, but what some historians claim was a deliberate distortion of President Johnson's attitude and role. Few would quibble with the right of DuVernay to not want to make another "white-savior" film and instead put an emphasis on the perspective of her primary subject matter, or her right to leave out mention of many prominent individuals across the social and racial spectrum who participated in the Selma marches or otherwise supported King. What Updegrove, Califano and other historians take issue with is how Johnson, who spearheaded the drive to pass the Civil Rights legislation and who proactively engaged and supported King, is portrayed as either a reluctant or obstructionist actor or self-interested opportunist. So your inclusion of Lewis' reference to the Lincoln film doesn't fit here.--Civlaction (talk) 06:53, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Civlaction. The discussion belongs on the article talk page, not here please. I see you have already posted there. Thank you. -SusanLesch (talk) 15:14, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Second Sex-20100831.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
For multiple reasons, I think you are very much mistaken to suggest that it is more encyclopedic to include both the legal name and the Dakota name when linking to Lake Calhoun.
First and foremost, the common practice on Wikipedia where place names have both European and Native names is to discuss the dispute on the actual place name's page itself, and perhaps use both names on that page, but not on linking pages. Examples abound, including Denali/Mt. McKinley, Mount Rainier/Tahoma, and Mount Baker/Kulshan. In each of these instances, linking pages almost solely (if not solely) use one name or the other, but not both. For example, despite active suggestions that Mt. Rainier should be officially renamed "Tahoma," no pages linking to the Mount Rainier page use the phrase "Mount Rainier, Tahoma" in the relevant wikilink.
Second, Wikipedia policy is to avoid political advocacy: see WP:ADVOCACY. In this case, the question of what the proper name of Lake Calhoun should be is very much a contentious political issue, and using a name that is not the legal name of the lake on linking pages subtly lends Wikipedia's authority to the concept that both names have (or should have) official status. Whether the Dakota name should replace the legal name is up to personal opinion, and Wikipedia should not (intentionally or otherwise) lend credence to that viewpoint.
Finally, listing the lake's name on linking pages as "Lake Calhoun, Bde Maka Ska" is quite confusing, especially when the name often appears on linking pages as part of a list of lakes. When someone without knowledge of Minneapolis reads a sentence containing the words, "Lake Harriet, Lake Calhoun, Bde Maka Ska, and Lake of the Isles," most people would naturally conclude that there are four lakes being referenced, rather than three. That level of uncertainty defeats the clarity that an encyclopedia strives for.
For these reasons, I intend to change the Minneapolis page back to read simply "Lake Calhoun." However, I thought I would be polite and notify you of my reasons first, and await any thoughts you might have. If you still disagree with that move, please feel free to respond here or on the Minneapolis page itself, where we can have a group discussion, rather than relying on one person's opinion. Thanks! Jrt989 (talk) 22:06, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
Greetings, Jrt989. Why don't you copy this to the Minneapolis talk page, where this discussion might belong? I already posted to the Lake Calhoun talk page where you might also wish to contribute. Thank you. -SusanLesch (talk) 22:35, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
You are invited to attend an Art+Feminism edit-a-thon at Minneapolis Institute of Art which will be held on Saturday, October 24, 2015. This editing event is dedicated to improving and increasing the presence of cultural, historic, and artistic information on Wikipedia pertaining to women artists.
Restored. Thanks very much for telling me. If something else can go wrong today it will. I'll post a note to Rhodeisland's talk page. -SusanLesch (talk) 04:09, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello SusanLesch! You are invited to attend an edit-a-thon at the Loft Literary Center which will be held on Thursday, February 11, 2016. This editing event is dedicated to improving and increasing the presence of cultural, historic, and artistic information on Wikipedia pertaining to artists from marginalized communities. Please bring a laptop. Refreshments will be provided.
Hello SusanLesch. You are invited to attend an Art+Feminism edit-a-thon at the Minneapolis Central Library this Saturday, March 5, 2016 from 11:00am to 5pm. This is the 3rd annual Art+Feminism editing event, taking place in conjunction with over 100 events in locations around the world. It is also part of the Guerrilla Girls Twin Cities Takeover. We will be providing refreshments, reference materials, and trainings for new editors. Please join us as we collaboratively expand Wikipedia articles pertaining to women and the arts. gobonobo+c03:20, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello SusanLesch! You are invited to attend an Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Pride 2016/Minnesota at the Minneapolis Central LIbrary which will be held on Saturday, June 18, 2016. This editing event is dedicated to improving and increasing the presence of LGBT-related articles on Wikipedia. Please bring a laptop. Refreshments will be provided.
Greetings Rklawton. The MoS isn't applicable here. They are trying to name places. We are trying to point to them. Why obscure both Minneapolis and Minnesota with a wikilink to Minneapolis, Minnesota? -SusanLesch (talk) 18:41, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
You are citing a talk page with exactly one opinion supporting your view and using it as justification for your 2nd revert. That's not how we build consensus here on Wikipedia. Rklawton (talk) 20:08, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Elmer McCollum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Phosphorous. 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.
You are invited to the San Diego Wiknic on Saturday, July 9, from 4:00 pm to 7:00 pm in Fanuel Street Park, a grassy park on the Mission Bay side of Pacific Beach. Join San Diego-area Wikimedians at the "picnic anyone can edit" as part of the Great American Wiknic celebrations being held across the United States.
Visit our event page for full details. Remember it's a wiki-picnic, which means potluck. Sign up today!
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for San Diego-area events by removing your name from this list.)
Elmer McCollum
Greetings, Susan Lesch. You may have noticed that I just promoted Elmer McCollum to the DYK prep area. While I judged it good enough to pass DYK, I would strongly recommend that you either thoroughly copy-edit it yourself, or submit it at WP:GOCE. While the prose is fine, the section divisions feel like arbitrary breaks; the prose often picks up from the previous paragraph with no explanation of the new topic. Otherwise, well done with the article. Regards, Vanamonde93 (talk) 12:29, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
This is update is being done according to a request for comments on the WikiProject Computer Security talk page.
Be sure to state your status at the User status section in the WikiProject Computer Security talk page before the end of four weeks as this will state your status as inactive in the project if not done before then.
On 14 October 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Henri Laborit, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Henri Laborit recognized the psychiatric uses of chlorpromazine, which helped reduce asylum populations and "change the face of serious mental illness"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Henri Laborit. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Henri Laborit), 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.
Hi SusanLesch, I added Salman Rushdie's comment on Bob Dylan's Nobel prize to the Dylan article: “From Orpheus to Faiz, song & poetry have been closely linked. Dylan is the brilliant inheritor of the bardic tradition." I linked Faiz and Orpheus since I thought they were not familiar terms in an article on popular music. (Personally, I had not heard of Faiz until this mention.) I was surprised you removed the links, and would like to restore them. Best, Mick gold (talk) 14:19, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Mick gold, go ahead and restore the links if you wish. WP:LINKSTYLE says to not link inside quotations which is why I removed them. Thank you for your great work on this article, and on maintenance during such a busy time. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:52, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello, SusanLesch. 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.
Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey
Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future.[survey 1] The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey.[survey 2] The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.
You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.
^This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
^Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.
I think that there are a couple of things that are happening:
Confusing 3x statements about the comparison between the 2009 Obama and 2017 Trump inaugurations, like your statement that Washington Post said that the Women's March was 3 x the size of the Trump inauguration. They didn't say that, that I've been able to find anyway, but they did say that Obama's first inauguration was likely about 3 x the size of the Trump inauguration.
That the 500,000 is likely a low estimate of the crowd size for the Women's March, based upon the photos (which is original research without sources). But, unfortunately, it seems to be routinely reported that there were about 500,000 people at the march. Many of the articles that explain the difficulty in calculating the attendance figures state why it's difficult to give an accurate estimate.
There's a wide disparity between the estimates for the size of the marchTrump's inauguration from 200,000 to 600,000 - or up to 1.5 million if you're Trump.
Readers of the compromise paragraph could decide for themselves if the Women's March was 2 1/2 times, 2 times or about the same as the Trump inauguration... and look at the images from the NYT article and decide for themselves.—CaroleHenson(talk)22:50, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey
Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.
If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again.
About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF) or surveys@wikimedia.org. About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 08:25, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
St. Cloud, April 15, 2017: Wikipedia as Social Activism
I know about Howie Wyeth. Tragic story. I agree that his drumming on Desire was "ethereal," especially on Black Diamond Bay – a spooky song anyhow. Sca (talk) 21:43, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Notability of Dosho Port
I have created an article about a living Zen master, Dosho Port. It was reviewed and rejected by Seraphim System because the sources were deemed be inadequate. A subsequent review by worldbruce went into more depth and also considered the sources inadequate. (His review has been deleted.)
My problem is that within the world of contemporary American Zen, Dosho Port, is famous and respected. He has studied and practiced Zen for 40 years. He has studied with several of the most prominent Zen masters of the 20th century. He has taught at several Zen centers and is now the head abbot of the Nebraska Zen Center, one of the oldest Zen centers in the U.S. He is published. So within the world of Zen, Dosho Port is notable.
How to demonstrate this? The sources I cited in the article would be considered authoritative within the world of contemporary American Zen. In other contexts they might be considered inadequate, but that would be applying the wrong context.
Do you have any suggestions of how I can move forward?
Hi, TooTallSid. Sorry, not really. I guess you'd need to find him given in a third party reliable source. I just looked and did not find him in Zen Master Who? by James Ishmael Ford. Lots of people have practiced for 40 years and remain outside Wikipedia. It might take years. (For example who ran the Nebraska Zen Center for the last 25 years?) Good luck. -SusanLesch (talk) 18:24, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
(Incidentally you answered my question: it was Nonin/Norman Chowaney.) You can quote page 135 which lists the dharma heirs of Katagiri. It says "Dosho Port guides the Wild Fox Zen Monastery outside the twin cities[sic]."[1] I doubt there is any question that his heirs are notable. -SusanLesch (talk) 18:56, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Edits on Minneapolis page: what are you talking about?
You reverted my edits to the Minneapolis page. Why did you do that? Why on Earth would you accuse me of vandalism? If you cannot provide some constructive criticism, please do not revert my edits.
Trump administration
Lots of open 'white space' around "Notable non-Cabinet positions"
Please do not assume ownership of articles as you did at Minneapolis. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. You appear to be edit warring in order to keep images in the article, of which you are the photographer. Please take a moment to read MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE. This article is not your personal photo gallery. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:35, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi. This month The Women in Red World Contest is being held to try to produce new articles for as many countries worldwide and occupations as possible. There is over £3000 in prizes to win, including Amazon vouchers and paid subscriptions. Wikimedia UK is putting up £250 specifically for editors who produce the most quality new women bios for British women, with special consideration given to missing notable biographies from the Oxford Dictionary of Biography and Welsh Dictionary of Biography. If you're not interested in prize money yourself but are willing to participate independently this is also fine, but please add any articles created to the bottom of the main contest page even if not competing. Your participation in the contest and contributing articles on British women from your area or wherever would we much appreciated. Thanks.
I saw that you removed the comment in the lead about Glen Taylor also owning the Timberwolves stating "Undid because that is not who he is". I am not sure what you mean as he is the majority owner of both teams. Noting that a WNBA team is under the same ownership as an NBA team is consistent across all articles as most people have noted that is how the WNBA survives. See New York Liberty, Washington Mystics, San Antonio Stars, and Indiana Fever as examples. Even teams not owned by NBA teams are noted as not being affiliated in the lead (Atlanta Dream, Chicago Sky, etc.) and the Los Angeles Sparks even have a note that they used to be owned by the Lakers ownership. It would seem logical that the ownership (Taylor) should be noted as being involved with both. Yosemiter (talk) 02:20, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
I was only explaining why I reverted you and was asking you to explain why you feel it should be removed. In my experience here, minor league talk pages rarely get any feedback, it seemed like you had issue with the inclusion of the mention of the Timberwolves, so I felt I should contact you directly for your direct thoughts on the matter. I simply asking for a more thorough answer as your revert explanation was confusing to me. Thank you, Yosemiter (talk) 15:40, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Yosemiter, Mr. Taylor is a lot of things (he owns a business, two basketball teams, and a newspaper, and is a former state senator). I continue to resist Wikipedia's non-reciprocal treatment of the NBA and WNBA. As far as I'm concerned the article should stay the way it is until the day people start making sense with respect to women's sports. I liked your rationale with illustrations of the Liberty, Mystics, Stars and Fever (and Sky and Dream) so thank you. -SusanLesch (talk) 19:10, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi, SusanLecsch. Thank you for your edits on the Ayn Rand Institute article. I appreciate you updating that information; however, with due respect, I feel that your edit summaries there violate WP:GOODFAITH. Please do not continue to make edits implying that whoever made the edit had ulterior motives when making the edit. It's quite obvious that the information is simply outdated. I do appreciate you updating the information, but I do not appreciate your cynical edit summaries. Michipedian (talk) 23:54, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, SusanLesch. 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.
Hi, thanks for your edit. I don't think your source was aware that the Minion family includes an "optical size" for display use that's specifically intended to look crisp at large sizes, fixing the problem he mentioned. Maybe he didn't have access to it. It looks like this. Blythwood (talk) 21:55, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
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.
I saw your comments at Talk:Chromium#Not essential, and I was impressed by your integrity and sense of fairness in reporting the existence of sources that disagree with what you believe to be the current mainstream view. Thank you for doing what you can to achieve the NPOV ideal in that article. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:23, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey
Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.
You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.
Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey
Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 29% of Wikimedia contributors. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed. Take the survey now.
If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have design the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone.
If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thanks!
Solved: File permission problem with File:INRIA 2007-02-05.jpg
Thank you very much for sending an ORTS ticket -- the backlog displayed in the template (269 days!) shocked me. I have sent one myself, 10 days ago. So it's just 259 to go until my file gets approved. lol ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:12, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
Thank you for taking the time to send an ORTS request.
Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey
Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 23 April, 2018 (07:00 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.
If you already took the survey - thank you! We will not bother you again. We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. To opt-out of future surveys, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement.
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 18:13, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Invitation to join Women in Red
Thank you for creating several articles on women and their works over the past few weeks. We have become aware of your contributions thanks to research undertaken by Bobo.03 at the University of Minnesota. We think you might be interested in becoming a member of our WikiProject Women in Red where we are actively trying to reduce Wikipedia's content gender gap. You can join by using the box at the top of the WiR page. But if you would like to receive news of our activities without becoming a member, you can simply add your name to our mailing list. In any case, thank you for actively contributing to the coverage of women (currently, 17.64% of English Wikipedia's biographies).
Hello! Your submission of Alice H. Lichtenstein at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 23:46, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Inventor(s) of the World Wide Web?. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:33, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Template:MinneapolisEthnicity has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 22:44, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
Please do not assume ownership of articles as you did at Minneapolis. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. You appear to be edit warring in order to keep images in the article, of which you are the photographer. Please take a moment to read MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE. This article is not your personal photo gallery. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:35, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Meetup/San Diego/April 2018 . RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:38, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
