Jump to content

User talk:Touch Of Light

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


RE:

[edit]

Hello, I'm Touch Of Light. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to Trademark, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, Touch Of Light (Talk / Contributions) 07:05, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I made perfectly legal edit to the page to help folks better understand the term.

Thank you for your concern.

WikiCritic, Jared Gertzen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.41.130.163 (talk) 07:17, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Speedy deletion nomination of "User talk:Touch Of Light/Archive 1

[edit]

A tag has been placed on "User talk:Touch Of Light/Archive 1, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Mistaken copyedit. Please delete.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Touch Of Light (Talk / Contributions) 07:31, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to see there is a supposed human being policing Wikipedia but once challenged decides to run away like a child and tattle to the website. If you are going to be a WikiCop™, you need to stand up and not call for back up! It's the World Wide Web, not real life. I've seen all of your WikiPolicing and I've come to the conclusion that you feel powerful deleting legitimate edits. Why is this? Because you are old and still live at your parents? No friends? Virgin? There are deeper issues here and I'd like to talk with you about them. Maybe I can help. Maybe I can be a friend? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.41.130.163 (talk) 07:39, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do appreciate the respective "tone" in your prior message. Thank you for not being rude. That said, if you need a friend or someone to talk to, I'm here to help. Like I said, (and I didn't say it to sound mean) it sounds like you have some deeper issues when it comes to control. You may have been abused as a child, I don't know. Something brought this entire conversation on, out of the blue. I've never been challenged with my WikiCritic™ until now. I hope all is well and if you need to vent or whatever, get in touch. I don't post a fake name. WikiCritic™ Jared Gertzen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.41.130.163 (talk) 07:50, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

dude...

[edit]

How the fuck is this "vandalism"? I wanna know.


if it's not a notable band then just delete the entry completely. The entry was already there, I was just editing the wording of the entry. Not adding it so thus reverting my edit does not remove its existence.

"Law of the Jungle" article

[edit]

Hello. The quote by Rudyard Kipling in the "Law of the Jungle" article is woefully truncated. I'm attempting to provide the full and proper quote as indicated in the previous line about the poem being a code of law for the animals of the jungle. I would have the quote accurately in place and formatted properly if you had not undone my revision. If you would like to help me format it more appropriately, please be my guest. However, the quote as it stands is incomplete and lacking as an example without the missing lines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.109.7.239 (talk) 08:20, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for your concern over your recent edits to The Law of the Jungle. The reason that I reverted your edits is because I believe the entire quote is unnecessary to include in the entire article. My reasoning for this is even though it is indeed the full quote, the article deals with only addressing the "Law of the Jungle" and it's purpose and meaning, which can be understood with only four lines as it is. If you feel as if the entire quote is necessary to understand the meaning of the "Law of the Jungle" you may request that this option be considered in Law of the Jungle's talk page. Thanks for your concern and I hope you have a great day. Touch Of Light (Talk / Contributions) 08:27, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

youre information is 90% wrong

[edit]

if you want help with the correct info i will oblige

DO NOT PUT FALSE STATEMENTS ABOUT ME ON HERE

IM NOT HAPPY WITH THIS AT ALL — Preceding unsigned comment added by FERAL is KINKY (talk • contribs) 01:35, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, welcome to Wikipedia. I'm not sure what specific article you are referencing to, but after looking at your recent contributions I noticed that you have removed a large potion from a article relating to "MC Kinky". Please provide references and sources before you add uncensored information. Thanks! Touch Of Light (Talk / Contributions) 01:38, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rothschild Family post

[edit]

The post for the Rothschild family under the section conspiracy theories is misrepresentative of the Rothschild family influence on the world and big events/decisions . Actually the entire Wikipedia page for them is misrepresentative when discussing their financial influence and power today. Their wealth is still in the large as they own central banks in over 30 countries that is a fact. They have an enormous amount of influence on the mainstream media which is why the family receives so much privacy,. I would appreciate if you would respond as I feel you are misrepresenting the power and influence they hold.

Thank you Jim Carson — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.132.239.249 (talk) 21:21, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

March 28th 2013 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.132.239.249 (talk) 21:23, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for your message, and Welcome to Wikipedia. Regarding your recent edits to Rothschild family, I removed the content you posted because it seemed from a non-neutral point of view (please see WP:POV for more information). Additionally, your statements did not cite a verifiable source in which your statements can be backed up with. If you still feel that your contribution is accurate and informative, you may resubmit the information with a valid citation (and not the one that previously exists). Please be aware that many people use Wikipedia as a source to obtain information, so it is essential that all content follows WP:5 as well. Thank you for your contributions and if you have any more questions please feel free to leave me a message below. Touch Of Light (Talk / Contributions) 22:50, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer

[edit]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges. A full list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on will be at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

INeverCry 19:19, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Silvia Berger, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Austrian, Westendorf and Cortina (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Number of Victims in Jasenovac

[edit]

Hello,

I am Sven and live in Belgium, I am a history teacher and specialised in WWII (senior writer and moderator on Axis History Forum). Jasenovac had many camps (number one till 6) and today we speak about appr. 700.000 victims for all camps, not 70.000. During the conflict Ante Pavelic himself was reported that the number of deaths rose above 500.000. More and researched information can be found for example here (US-site btw): http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=152379 (much information and reasearch done in many topics at Axis history forum). A old Ex-YU doc also states the number of 700.000. You'll find it here (English subtitles): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=513VOo5P63Y.

First of all, this item should not be hosted by people from ex Yugoslavia since they are involved by history and can not be neutral. This would be like a Vietnamese or US-American hosting the topic about the conflict in Vietnam. Hope you are not from Ex Yugoslavia for the good of Wikipedia. If so hand it over to Western Europeans, Asian or Latin American collegues.

Hope you'll find out some more information.

Regards and keep on doing the good work at Wiki! Sven — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.23.154.106 (talk) 22:56, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

G'day. I'm afraid Sven has been misled. Both the US Holocaust Memorial Museum and the Jasenovac Memorial state the number of victims at Jasenovac was around 100K, not 700K. See the Jasenovac concentration camp article for a more detailed explanation of the story behind the numbers, sourced from scholars on the topic. With all due respect to the people that work on axishistory, neither it nor youtube is a WP:RS. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 09:41, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your omission of the section on the Fox Sports 1 page

[edit]

I'm assuming that you didn't take the time to research what people have said about the Speed to Fox Sports 1 change. I have, but don't have the time currently to go and gather every single thing people said, so I put the small section up to make people aware of it, but leaving enough for myself to go back and fix it, or for someone else to go in depth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.57.14.102 (talk) 01:05, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Just for the record, My edit wasn't a problem compared to another edit that was made to the article. Prior to my addition of that section pertaining to the Fan Reaction, I spotted a "Boobehs" edit, which, after my edit was removed, I left go to see if someone would decide to go after that instead of mine, but it was proven that small things are catastrophies and big things are just tiny. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.57.14.102 (talk) 03:47, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

why was it Fila phil Deleted

[edit]

This Work submitted is the truth about Fila phil by alvin3107 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alvin3107 (talk • contribs) 04:16, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the information located on your talk page as to why your page was deleted. In short, you had copied and pasted from another website, which is not allowed because it is copyrighted material. In the future, please refrain from copyright infringement, thanks. Touch Of Light (Talk / Contributions) 04:20, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

July 2013

[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to God's Mischief may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • {coi|date=July 2013}}}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:56, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

God's Mischief

[edit]

You have tagged the article for Conflict of interest. The subject is a well known book, which won India's second highest literary prize and was adapted into a critically acclaimed and award-winning movie as well. The author is considered one of the greatest living authors in Malayalam language and hence there is no question of notability. This is my first article related to this author although my area of interest is particularly Malayalam novels. I have taken care in not using any weasel words in the article even though I am a fan of this book. So I am removing the COI tag which I sincerely hope you tagged by mistake. Malayala Sahityam (talk) 04:58, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. It seems that I was unaware about the book and it's notability, as well as mistakenly took the synopsis area as an explanation of the book's merit. I sincerely apologize for flagging the article in question, and will be sure to take the time to read over articles more scrupulously in the future so that I do not make the same mistake. Thank you for assuming good faith and sorry to have incorrectly tagged your article. Thanks for all your contributions to Wikipedia. Touch Of Light (Talk / Contributions) 06:15, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

[edit]

The love has been given do not let it pass you love is patient it is waiting for you connects to John 3:16 you must leave it.

Regarding African foreign relations

[edit]

I made changes to African foreign relations because there is no credible reference to the information mentioned. A 'False fact' has been published. If it is not then kindly verify and provide credible reference to support the information. I would also suggest u to consider dictionary to define "vandalism" as you suggested, I made. As far as Wikipedia is concerned, it is public generated content and no individual holds any property rights over it.

Hello, thanks for getting in contact with me. If you feel like the information contained in the Foreign relations of the African Union article is incorrect or faulty, please feel free to bring this concern up in the talk page of the article. Additionally, you can request that a certain statement cites a source by adding this code [citation needed] at the end of the fact you wish to dispute, in the edit menu. You can read more about flagging a statement or other portion of an article on this template page. If you have any more questions or concerns, please feel free to message me back below. Touch Of Light (Talk / Contributions) 08:15, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank God.

[edit]

Yes, thank God that we have you looking out for everyone, making sure that nothing but irrefutable truth is found on Wikipedia. I have read many responces to your admirable work, and have concluded that you are more concerned with your agenda than anything that could possibly reflect the truth. I do understand how it must have stung when I hit home with the phrase, "self appointed authority". Add to that the fact that you offer no documentation for your claim of this "Queen of Nannies'" authorship of the two thoroughly stupid expression which I referred to, and which you claim he authored, at least any which can be taken seriously. I am a 58 year old American, and "junk food" was a commonly used phrase in Spokane WA (where I lived at the time) in 1960, ant which time the Queen would have been 17. I was there, that is my source. I checked out yours, and where I come from, we call the stuff you are pushing bull shit. Please don't bother to reply, and for the good of all, don't change, since people like you are the best advertisement for why we need to be intellectually honest.

Hello, I'm going to assume you are referring to the negative content you posted? I am not sure what you are upset about. Please elaborate. Thank you Touch Of Light (Talk / Contributions) 07:27, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to STiki!

[edit]

Hello, Touch Of Light, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Here are some pages which are a little more fun:

  • The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users!
  • Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes!

We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (talk) 13:49, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

STiki emergency

[edit]
[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pacari Chocolate, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Biodynamic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you edit Scott McCord

[edit]
Why did you edit Scott McCord
why did you edit scott McCord 
Ibrahimsqureshi (talk) 12:03, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted your edit because the file name for the picture was very long and it looked like vandalism. After double-checking I realize that the file name needs to be modified, not the article itself, but it looks like someone has already done that. Sorry for the inconvenience. Touch Of Light (Talk / Contributions) 02:03, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Revdel

[edit]

I've semi-protected the page, and blocked the IP for two weeks (including logged-in users). Let's see if anyone protests... Peridon (talk) 10:19, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent work. Thanks for handling that. Touch Of Light (Talk / Contributions) 10:20, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reverting my page. I'm not bothering to revdel it, though. Insults don't worry me a lot. I've commented after your warning at the IP page... Peridon (talk) 10:37, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm confident you have thick enough skin to handle a few racists/immature fools ;) , might as well frame the comment and add it to the board of "brazen all-caps insults I've received throughout my time here on Wikipedia" haha Touch Of Light (Talk / Contributions) 10:39, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Probably won't get anything from the block - the IPs are all in China, and some appear to be with a mobile provider. Peridon (talk) 10:42, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Guess we can just hope they get bored eventually...after 7-8 different IP swaps you would think it would get a bit old... Touch Of Light (Talk / Contributions) 10:45, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please define "reliable source" Touch of Light.

[edit]

So, what is a "reliable source" to you Touch of Light? Is it only something funded and/or officially endorsed by multi-billion dollar media conglomerates, or religious conglomerates, or the powerful money changers, land owners, media moguls, arms dealers, pharmaceutical pushers, genetically modified food pimps or perhaps the myth making so-called official (read bought and paid for) historians, news anchors, think tankers, cyber trolls, and so on, paid directly or indirectly by the aforementioned (or any other for that matter) entrenched, monied interests with high stake positions to defend and promote? Are these the only legitimate arbitrators of reality to you?

Does something have to be sourced from the mouths, pens, keyboards or publications of entrenched power (or their lackeys) to be "reliable"? Because we all know that multi-billion dollar conglomerates have absolutely no agenda whatsoever other than getting to and promoting the real truth of any matter, right? And its beyond dispute that monied interests will always and without hesitation go directly against their own monetary, political and/or legal interests in the pursuit of delivering and maintaining "reliable" information, right? Even to the detriment of their own power, influence, reach and credibility? That happens every day, right? Entrenched power would surely report and/or fund and promote the reporting of honest investigative journalism, even when it ends up exposing said entrenched power's outright self-serving and often hidden agenda, right? History clearly demonstrates that entrenched powers can, beyond any reasonable doubt, be relied upon to insert into the endless echo chamber of "official", "reliable sources" the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help them God, correct?

So thank The Lord Almighty that we have you, Touch of Light, with your oh-so-modest monicker, to be at the ready when any free thinking, non affiliated, hoi polloi dare propose any idea with even the slightest hint of the potential to run afoul and counter to the official story (read interests) of said entrenched powers currently defining our mutual reality that is of course wholly and totally accurate, obviously perfect, unassailable and beyond reproach.

And so, clearly there is no secret society known as Skull and Bones, made up of the most powerful people on the planet that represent nearly every aspect of centuries old, entrenched, power. Just ask George W, Bush and/or John Kerry and they'll tell you that no such fraternity exists and there's absolutely nothing whatsoever to see here. And clearly the logo of this non-existent secret society does not in any way whatsoever prominently display the number 322 under its non-existent skull and crossbones logo that also, does not exist. And clearly its obvious and blatant blaspheme of the highest order for anyone but officially sanctioned mouthpieces of these entrenched powers to suggest any possible (no matter how slight or remote) connection between the non-existent skull and crossbones 322 logo and the equally mysterious 3/22 date in The Georgia Guide Stones mythology, even when both mysterious 322 numbers have been officially sanctioned to make and perpetually reside on their respective pages of Wikipedia because no "official source" has made mention of the potential for any such connection.

Thank you Touch of Light, for being there to immediately and repeatedly delete (within minutes) my attempt at adding a single line, solitary addition to the Georgia Guide Stones page merely for the fact that others might find the 3/22 date and the 322 Skull and Bones logo coincidence/possible connection intriguing. Thank you, whomever you are, for being there to keep everything in line with the official version of corporate sanctioned reality.

I guess knowing that you, Touch of Light, are on the job with your illuminating ability to immediately find and delete unsourced Wikipedia additions as if you have no other purpose in life (or no other life for that matter) will finally allow me to accept other things, that until now seemed a bit fishy like: only 9% of Americans are actually out of work, nuclear power is both clean and safe, and lead, arsenic, fluoride and pharmaceutical residues in our municipal water supply are good for me because the government, big business, official news outlets, and most of all you Touch of Light, say so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.214.34.179 (talk) 10:29, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, I'm going to give you the decency of responding to your statement/question above, even though your question has been answered multiple times on other Wikipedian's talk pages. (See here, and here. The reason your edits were deleted is because they are unsourced statements and are not considered reliable sources. "What constitutes a reliable source on a conspiracy page?", you may ask; a reliable source on a conspiracy page can really be anything in the form of a newspaper article, a book, a report, anything other than unverified, unsourced content on the article. More info and an in-depth explanation on this can also be found on WP:RS. If you can find a reliable source from a website or in print, cite in in the references pointing towards your statement, and we won't have this issue anymore. If you have any questions about this, we can always discuss it further, but keep in mind that any personal attacks towards me or any other members of Wikipedia won't get you very far. Thanks for reaching out. Touch Of Light (Talk / Contributions) 19:21, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MyReno411

[edit]

This page was marked as being and advert. Is there anything specific that needs to be modified or taken out? I am removing the social media links. However, this is very similar to the Houzz page which includes the social media links. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Syslop (talk • contribs) 15:47, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Star Trek edit

[edit]

I made an edit to Star Trek Into Darkness that got reverted because I didn't leave an edit summary, even though I did indeed leave an edit summary. 204.12.196.250 (talk) 06:15, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your newest edit on the page is much more efficient and also covers the section that you had previously deleted. I must have mistakenly marked as no reason for content removal when I noticed such a large section removed. Thanks for your efforts and sorry for the warning! Touch Of Light (Talk / Contributions) 06:18, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Warriors Characters

[edit]

I made the edit because Mapleshade was listed as a RiverClan cat when is, in fact, a ThunderClan cat.

You are like me

[edit]

We are both Twinkles! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.174.138.220 (talk) 21:20, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

[edit]

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) 16:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New deal for page patrollers

[edit]

Hi Touch Of Light,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

[edit]

Hello, Touch Of Light. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

  1. Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
  2. Editor-focused central editing dashboard
  3. "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
  4. Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
  5. Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dreadstar

[edit]

When Wikipedians are deceased, is this also referencing real life? I noticed the amount of verification required, but am not sure any of it is extra-internet pertinent. Thanks for your work!No rule applies to everything... including this one. (talk) 07:35, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, Touch Of Light. 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]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Touch_Of_Light&oldid=1144178786"