Hello, Skywriter, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:
If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
Always sign your posts on talk pages! That way, others will know who left which comments. You can sign your post like I did by using 4 tildes (~~~~), which will leave your username and time you posted the comment.
Check out Redwolf24's Bootcamp! Redwolf is a very friendly user, and this page might prove useful to you.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make mistakes at some point, here is what Wikipedia is not, which might help you out. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to ask me, check the help pages, or add {{helpme}} to this page, and someone'll be along shortly.
P.S. I can see that you aren't that new, but it appears you havn't been welcomed yet.
I'm glad to help. I hope you don't mind, but I moved your comment to my (and your) talk page(s). My welcome note is not protected, meaning that you inadvertantly edited it (my fault, sorry). Thanks for the comments, and let me know if I can help with the HZ article. All the best, [[User:Mysekurity|Mysekurity]] [[additions | e-mail]] 21:57, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your contributions to Howard Zinn. It would be helpful if you could cite your sources, however, as at least one of your changes was incorrect (Zinn's degrees are in political science, not American history). RadicalSubversivE 19:58, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
The above comment is incorrect. Zinn's graduate degrees are in both History and Political Science Skywriter
Welcome back to Wikipedia! Thanks for deleting the repeated discussions on Talk:Howard Zinn. How's the book coming? Any progress? As for people changing birthdates, I think you were right to ask the user directly, but in the future, if you see vandalism, like a person changing dates or facts, or deleting article content, you can add the template {{Test}} to their talk page (or, if they already have that template, {{Test2}}, {{Test3}}, and so on, at which point you should probably contact an administrator [like me!]). But really, it's good to see you back. Any thoughts for the plane crash article? -Mysekurity 05:27, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with your comment re: citing sources. This will be a big job when I can get to it. If you'd like to do it for me, be my guest. Here is the list of sources that were cited underlying the material I used. (I think you already got the last one). from DocGov Feb. 17, 2006 (unsigned)
Deleted long biographical list from DocGov message. skywriter 23:32, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your message. I agree it would be better to have particular items footnoted to particular references, and I could do that for about everything that was written, but I'll need to learn how. It's not something I've done on wiki before. I don't have time right now, but will try come back to that next weekend.--DocGov 21:06, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Binksternet's original proposal was at Talk:1953_Iranian_coup_d'état#Rebuilding_the_lede. I think discussing a compromise with SnowFire or Binksternet could lead to a workable solution. But I don't think there is any point in arguing with BoogaLouie - for reasons I won't go into yet - but a courtesy look at his website will give you the clues you need. I would suggest that you propose your own version of a compromise lead, something based on Binksternet's original proposal with some minor modifications that addresses the minor accuracy issues we discussed in "Re: Problems" and a disclaimer that the "fears od communist takeover" was a rational given by US administration, but refuted by many modern historians as "exaggerated" or something like that. --Kurdo777 (talk) 00:40, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You should explain why you deleted this.
Why does obscure reference dominate this proposal?
Why is this obscure 20-year-old resource [1] referred to below as Mohammed Amjad. (( http://www.greenwood.com/catalog/AFD%252f.aspx "Iran: From Royal Dictatorship to Theocracy"]. Greenwood Press, 1989. )) being used as the main source for this proposed lead when one the title and subject matter of the book is 1979 and not the 1953 coup and two Several excellent and widely reviewed books have been published much more recently on the 1953 coup in Iran, and three the governments of the US and UK have released information that sheds light on the coup and tends to discount this proposed lead?
This appears to be agenda-pushing at its worst. This kind of agenda pushing is what is keeping this article blocked for lack of consensus.
Did not delete. Moved it to the other criticisms below --BoogaLouie (talk) 20:35, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Referencing one section of old version of 1953 coup in Iran[edit]
Reposted from my talk page --BoogaLouie (talk) 00:04, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi BoogaLouie,
You have referenced this link several times
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat&diff=264350953&oldid=264350720#Cold_War
and I have written that it is irrelevant and unnecessary expansion of the article. Let me make clear that I think the following paragraphs are not necessary especially when primary documents are quoted (the Wilber document, the NSA document, along with comments from secretaries of state Dulles and Acheson), which put forward the "commies are a threat and, therefore, this is justification for overthrowing somebody else's elected government" argument.
These are the paragrpahs you want to re-insert.[reply]
Among the controversies involved in the coup is the importance and/or legitimacy of American and British fears of Communist influence in Iran. In the decades following the October Revolution, Iran's very large northern neighbor, the Soviet Union, had expanded its domain to rule over tens of millions of Muslim in Central Asia, and following World War II over much of Eastern Europe. [23] On June 26, 1950, as the movement for oil nationalization was gathering momentum in Iran, communist North Korea, with Soviet approval, crossed the 38th parallel and invaded South Korea beginning the Korean War. [24] Three years later, just before the coup d'état in Iran, the Soviets crushed an uprising of strikes and protests in East Germany. [25] In Iran itself, the well-organized, pro-Soviet Tudeh (Communist) Party, greatly exceeded the National Front in the sized of its rallies as the crisis became worse.[26] (this is an unfocused jumble unrelated to Iran)
In the view of American mainstream public and elite opinion, the crisis in Iran was a part of the conflict between Communism and "the Free world," rather than a nationalist struggle against Western colonialism.[27] Consequently, what the mainstream thought is not ascertainable. Who is the elite?
the United States, challenged by what most Americans saw as a relentless communist advance, slowly ceased to view Iran as a country with a unique history that faced a unique political challenge. who is to say what most Americans saw? This also ignores the controversy of Joe McCarthy and anti-communism, issues that spoke not to what most Americans saw but as the anti-Red crusade de jour. Whether or not Americans viewed Iran as a nation with unique history is beside the point. Iran was a country with a unqiue history.
According to Sam Falle, a young British diplomat at the time of the coup,
1952 was a very dangerous time. The Cold War was hot in Korea. The Soviet Union had tried to take all Berlin in 1948. Stalin was still alive. On no account could the Western powers risk a Soviet takeover of Iran, which would almost certainly have led to World War III[28] (Why is this in here at all? How insightful is a young diplomat? Stalin was still alive is a non sequitur. A lot of people were still alive. Hell, I was still alive. What does who is still alive have to do with anything, esp. the 1953 coup in Iran?Skywriter (talk) 15:44, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I note that you have failed to answer the questions posed above. I note also that you seem unwilling to compromise on any issue pertaining to the 1953 coup in Iraq. Skywriter (talk) 20:21, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
your posts are difficult to answer. The original text you are criticizing is mixed together with your assertions and questions, and the citations you complain about (e.g. [26] (this is an unfocused jumble unrelated to Iran)) are missing.
I'm not sure how to answer some of your questions - what the mainstream thought is not ascertainable. Who is the elite? - Yes, and what is truth? and how do we know that the universe exists? Much time could be spent in inquiry into these and many other questions but this is an encyclopedia so we take standard definitions and do our best.
You are very annoyed by mention of the Cold War: (Why is this in here at all? How insightful is a young diplomat? Stalin was still alive is a non sequitur. A lot of people were still alive. Hell, I was still alive. What does who is still alive have to do with anything, esp. the 1953 coup in Iran?
... But bear in mind the cold war and the American (and Western) fear of an expanding and tyranical Soviet bloc was raised by the author and the book (Kinzer, All the Shah's Men) you thought so crucial to the history of the coup you wanted to mention in the lede. In fact it was Kinzer who quoted the "young diplomat" and talked about Stalin still being alive.
Come to think of it almost every source you have used the importance of the cold war is raised.
I hope that helps answer some of your questions. Have a nice day. :-) --BoogaLouie (talk) 00:04, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
it did not belong that far up....it neither defined his life nor was he a key player in the history of slavery. WillC (talk) 20:00, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While we are grateful for your opinion, the secondary source -- the report by Brown University on Braxton's role is more usable in encyclopedia article. Skywriter (talk) 12:06, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Asking for help. I thought the article was making some progress on non-controversial areas but it was only because Kurdo777 had taken a break. Do you have any recommendations? --BoogaLouie (talk) 22:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have nominated David Wayne Hull, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Wayne Hull. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Glenfarclas (talk) 20:10, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:54, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure if you read my response to your post on my talk page a day or two ago, so I'll say it here. Since I also favor merging the material, I would appreciate it if you would tone down the claim that Buz lightning is some kind of proponent of Alma White's POV. If you actually read what he has written in the articles, instead of making assumptions based only on their subject matter, you would see that he is not. It makes the rest of us who agree with merging the material look bad by association. The cool thing to do would be to refactor your comments and apologize to him, but at the very least, please don't do it anymore. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:27, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your opinion. There are way too many articles on this topic [[2]] and some are way overblown. The basis of this article is an early 20th century newsletter distributed by the Pillar of Fire Church, which is both an article and a category Category:Pillar_of_Fire_Church on Wikipedia with many subtopics. The newsletter became this book and other of the books that have their own separate articles at Wikipedia. I am sure the enthusiasts who are placing these articles have good intentions but they seem to be stepping over the WP:Not line into advocacy.Skywriter (talk) 22:38, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was negligent to quote a sambo joke without commentary or warning. I regret doing that. Buz lightning (talk) 23:43, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Buz, I have no problem with your work. I was an editor just passing by that Klan article when I saw it for the first time the other day. I mentioned how offensive that and some of the other stuff in the article were and you quickly agreed to change it. I have no problem with change. Change is good. Now there's an article And you are lynching Negroes where I periodically stop by to point out that what its editors perceive is a joke is no joke because there's lots of history there that is none too funny. There's little or no change there and I do have a problem with that. And they, in turn, beat me up every time I come around to comment. So, I've learned that change sometimes takes a long time.
On the articles in the Pillar of Fire series, I do think they could usefully be combined, not all of them but some of them. I do think the subject is of historical interest and if I am anything it is a history buff. Combining them would actually make them stronger because it would show the relationships and get rid of the redundancies. Cheers. Skywriter (talk) 01:16, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
...why not take full advantage of that fact? Why undermine yourself? Wouldn't it be better not to do that? Come on, make it easy for me to support you. -GTBacchus(talk) 22:36, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm ready to work with you. See detailed reply at my talk page. If you think the thing's non-notable, you can pursue the time-wasting strategy, or the time-saving strategy. Up to you. -GTBacchus(talk) 06:54, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A proposal for a new lead has been posted in Iranian 1953 coup talk page. I suspect that some regular editors on that page will oppose using it and am planning to request comments WP:RfC in that case. If that is no help I plan to request mediation or arbitration --BoogaLouie (talk) 19:42, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is a discussion at Talk:1953_Iranian_coup_d'état#Fear_vs_Smoke, seeking wp:rs on two conflicting theories of the motivation behind the coup. The article has been in a state of flux, I hope this framework can be used to build wp:consensus. Given your past contributions to the article, I though you may be willing to help.--Work permit (talk) 00:28, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A request for formal mediation of the dispute concerning 1953 Iranian coup d'état has been filed with the Mediation Committee (MedCom). You have been named as a party in this request. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/1953 Iranian coup d'état and then indicate in the "Party agreement" section whether you would agree to participate in the mediation or not.
Mediation is a process where a group of editors in disagreement over matters of article content are guided through discussing the issues of the dispute (and towards developing a resolution) by an uninvolved editor experienced with handling disputes (the mediator). The process is voluntary and is designed for parties who disagree in good faith and who share a common desire to resolve their differences. Further information on the MedCom is at Wikipedia:Mediation Committee; the policy the Committee will work by whilst handling your dispute is at Wikipedia:Mediation Committee/Policy; further information on Wikipedia's policy on resolving disagreements is at Wikipedia:Resolving disputes.
If you would be willing to participate in the mediation of this dispute but wish for its scope to be adjusted then you may propose on the case talk page amendments or additions to the list of issues to be mediated. Any queries or concerns that you have may be directed to an active mediator of the Committee or by e-mailing the MedCom's private mailing list (click here for details).
Please indicate on the case page your agreement to participate in the mediation within seven days of the request's submission.
Just checking in. Not a "formal" discussion, just a head check. What really keeps me addicted, and frustrates me at the same time, is that that there are a number of knowledgeable editors (like you), that can cite sources that are basically in agreement, and yet we can't seem to make any headway on consensus. I am perplexed. What's the problem? How do we go forward? --Work permit (talk) 03:48, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What was this edit about? You put your own thoughts into the article page, not the talk page. Please do not talk in the article. Binksternet (talk) 14:45, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have any reply? According to the people at Village Pump you can't tag an article and not give actionable reasons as to why you tagged it. --BoogaLouie (talk) 20:32, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here's one example among many. Defections reduce Mosaddeq's ability "to organize crowds in the streets." [44] You have distorted what p. 233 states. Like so many items in this timeline, you have added your spin and twisted words to a non-neutral viewpoint. I am not going to go through this article and fact-check all of your spin. If you want the tags removed, you must work toward transparency and verifiability. What you include must accurately be reflected in the sources that are quoted. Skywriter (talk) 20:45, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
First off, what is distorted about it?
Second, your claims raises other questions. "I am not going to go through this article and fact-check all of the spin inserted by this particular editor who has a long history of doing this sort of thing. If the editor wants the tags removed, the editor must work toward transparency and verifiability." Are you saying there just must be problems with accuracy, neutrality, quality in the article because I contributed a lot to it and you don't need to know exactly what is wrong with it? Or that until I change my unspecified "transparency and verifiability" to your satisfaction you won't say where exactly (you feel) the problems with accuracy, neutrality, quality are in the article? --BoogaLouie (talk) 21:13, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
If you don't start explaining what is wrong with the article by tomorrow morning I will delete the tags. --BoogaLouie (talk) 18:58, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Complaint against BoogaLouie (me) by Skywriter: ... He recently filed a complaint against me for a typo, not spelling his pen name correctly. And that attack was to cover up the criticism he was receiving on the 1953 Iran coup talk page for a separate long but non neutral page he had drawn up ostensibly claiming that Mossadegh was a dishonorable figure in Iranian history, ....
One thing that makes dealing with you difficult, Skywriter, is you never show the alleged misdeads you are complaining about. I'm sure if you look on the help page you can learn how to make a link and then editors to click to the source of the problem. This would help enormously.
For example, I had no idea what this complaint above refered to until I remembered being called BoogaLuise, not by you, but by Kurdo. (I know, big deal, but it was part of a pattern that was starting to wear me down.) If you had shown where the "not spelling his pen name correctly" happened, I could have replied and maybe cleared the issue up. --BoogaLouie (talk) 15:45, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You filed an accusation against me, not another editor, claiming I misspelled your pen name. I have no idea whether there was a typo. It is your claim, not mine. Presumably you have the link. I try not to make spelling errors, but sometimes I do. Why are you mis-using this talk page to argue about this sort of thing? This page is to discuss article content, not personal grievances or typos. The subject is 1953 coup in Iran. Skywriter (talk) 09:08, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The post above is a suggestion to use links so when you (or other editors) think another editor has done wrong you can link to the alleged wrong and there won't be any misunderstanding. Yes, I made a complaint against you and kurdo about a bunch of comments ("your cherry picking skills ...trivial character assassinations ... a new low for you Booga ... your addiction to micromanagement ... If you have a low tolerance for change, try something else. In any case, Get A Grip. For Your Own Sake.") on the Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts. To the best of my knowledge the "typo" of my wikiname you are refering to ("BoogaLuise") was by Kurdo, not you. Did I miss something? Are you talking about something else? --BoogaLouie (talk) 15:24, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above material is inappropriate for article talk page. Please do not clutter article talk page with stuff like this. Thank you.Skywriter (talk) 17:16, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It may or may not be appropriate for an article talk page, but it deserves an answer. --BoogaLouie (talk) 18:38, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Answer is this is another example of your proclivity toward conflation. In your complaint about the typo, you claimed I made the typo. And then time passes and you change who you are accusing, and as it turns out, I am not the person you are accusing of mistyping a word.
As said earlier, Booga, typos are typos. I wouldn't take them personally. This couldn't be your real name so why are you getting worked up about it? And if it is your real name, typos are still typos.
You've spent some time defending your edits saying you are trying to help me learn the internet. Thanks for your help but listen up. I'm pretty good at this internet stuff, as good as some and worse than others. But that's not the point. If you think it OK to give me advice, why am I wrong in suggesting you take a break to get a grip?
On the playground when little kids start publicly attacking other kids --even for stuff the other kids didn't do like typos)-- grownups suggest the kid who is yelling needs a nap. Skywriter (talk) 23:31, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Skywriter, WHERE IS this complaint about the typo???? I do not think I made any such complaint, and in all your posts about it you have furnished no evidence it exists. --BoogaLouie (talk) 19:24, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#1953 Iranian coup POV and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Statements made on the case request page are not supposed to invoke large amounts of evidence or argument, and are supposed to be limited to 500 words. By my count, yours is over 5 times that size. As such, I have cut down your section to just under 500 words. I did my best to try to retain your information, but clearly it will not be to your liking. Please feel free to replace it with what you like, but stay under the limit. You may be interested in Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. Thank you, ~ Amory(u • t • c) 00:13, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Hzphotoneutral-3.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. 75.244.120.5 (talk) 21:18, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:01, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A few months, during the big fight over the name, you'd done some research into the most commonly used term(s) in reliable sources. There's so much material on that page that's been archived, that finding it is a pain. Do you happen to have it available somewhere?
Hello Skywriter, I've reverted (again) the material you've re-added (again) to this article. Given that there wasn't support for including so much on this topic back in 2007 and there were concerns about the wording and you didn't attract any support when you re-added it earlier this year you need to discuss and gain consensus support for including the material you propose - you may wish to post notifications to relevant Wikiprojects seeking comments from other editors. Cheers, Nick-D (talk) 08:55, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nick-D, the Wikipedia standard is not whether you personally agree or disagree with reliably sourced scholars. That Morison's fans are editing his bio is not justification for rejecting the findings of scholars. I sense then and sense now that your personal point of view is overtaking logic in your misguided edits. Please reconsider what you are doing. Wikipedia has never stood for the wholesale deletion of views that are reliably sourced but that particular editors prefer to remain buried. Thanks for your consideration. Skywriter (talk) 18:27, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As a direct result of this ill-thought-out block, I rarely spend any time on Wikipedia anymore. This kind of juvenile behavior drives professional editors far away. Skywriter (talk) 02:05, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that you made an edit to the David P. Barash article, removing a link to David Horowitz's book as self-promotion. Regrettibly since then, not only has it been restored but the entire article has become a coat-rack article for David's criticisms of Barash. This is especially troubling because it violates wikis living persons bio policy. I really don't want to get involved in a wiki-ediitng war. But I thought I would try to alert someone who could get this sorted out. Thanks. --Gary123 (talk) 01:05, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There's a discrepancy in between the punctuation in the title and in the lead, and the only reference you provided is now a dead link--is there a comma after Resistance in the center's name? Aristophanes68(talk) 05:39, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have explained the situation to the user who keeps adding it back in, and I asked him not to do it any more, and suggested that if he wanted the information on wikipedia that badly, he should create an article about the father and put the info there. :) I hope this settles everything! I just wanted to let you know! Jeancey (talk) 08:13, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My removal of your comments from Talk:Richard M. Scrushy/GA1 was not inadvertent (as noted in the edit summary when I removed the text). I moved the comments to the proper location (Talk:Richard M. Scrushy) and responded there. Best, --auburnpilottalk 20:09, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library![edit]
Hi! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 19:45, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for February 2[edit]
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Link fixed. Skywriter (talk) 22:47, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for October 22[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Joan Orie Melvin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Republican. 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) 09:44, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for February 5[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:44, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for March 18[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Carl Malamud, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page PACER. 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) 09:01, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for September 6[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ross Levinsohn, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Prodigy and Time Warner Sports. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:43, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
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) 12:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
User:Dr. Blofeld has created Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/Contests. The idea is to run a series of contests/editathons focusing on each region of Africa. He has spoken to Wikimedia about it and $1000-1500 is possible for prize money. As someone who has previously expressed interest in African topics, would you be interested in contributing to one or assisting draw up core article/missing article lists? He says he's thinking of North Africa for an inaugural one in October. If interested please sign up in the participants section of the Contest page, thanks.♦ --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 01:37, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Skywriter. 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.
Hello fellow project participants. Not sure how many users are still active as normal Wikipedia editors but felt the need to attempt to get a gauge on who can be called on for help with articles falling under the umbrella of the African diaspora project. According to the project's article table there are over six thousand articles related to the African diaspora; there's not a hundred at FA/GA grade and there's over twelve hundred that are unassessed. With Wikipedia being one of the major information reference points in the world today we should consider this unacceptable. Much work needs to be done on the rating of the importance of articles as well. With more communication amongst participants and a dedication to addressing the articles on the to-do list I believe we can make this WikiProject one of the most well organized and thorough on the site. If you are interested in collaborative work with some of your fellow project members, have certain expertise on any particular subjects, ideals on/about the WikiProject, etc. simply drop your name under the "Project revision" section I've created on the project's talk page and state your intentions and main points of interest in our WikiProject and we can attempt to move forward from there. Hoping to hear from everyone soon! WikiGuy86 (talk) 03:22, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Skywriter. 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.
Hello, I'm Tgeorgescu. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) personon Curcumin, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Tgeorgescu (talk) 18:42, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
AfroCine: Join us for the Months of African Cinema in October![edit]
Greetings!
You are receiving this message because your username or portal was listed as a participant of a WikiProject that is related to Africa, the Carribean, Cinema or theatre.
This is to introduce you to a new Wikiproject called AfroCine. This new project is dedicated to improving the Wikipedia coverage of the history, works, people, places, events, etc, that are associated with the cinema, theatre and arts of Africa, African countries, the carribbean, and the diaspora. If you would love to be part of this or you're already contributing in this area, kindly list your name as a participant on the project page here.
Furthermore, In the months of October and November, the WikiProject is organizing a global on-wiki contest and edit-a-thon tagged: The Months of African Cinema. If you would love to join us for this exciting event, also list your username as a participant for this event here. In preparation for the contest, please do suggest relevant articles that need to be created or expanded in different countries, during this event!
If you have any questions, complaints, suggestions, etc., please reach out to me personally on my talkpage! Cheers!--Jamie Tubers (talk) 20:50, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is a global online edit-a-thon, which is happening in at least 5 language editions of Wikipedia, including the English Wikipedia! Join us in this exciting venture, by helping to create or expand articles which are connected to this scope. Also remember to list your name under the participants section, if you haven't done so already.
On English Wikipedia, we would be recognizing Users who are able to achieve the following:
Overall winner (1st, 2nd, 3rd places)
Country Winners
Diversity winner
High quality contributors
Gender-gap fillers
Page improvers
Wikidata Translators
For further information about the contest, the recognition categories and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. See you around :).--Jamie Tubers (talk) 22:50, 03 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Skywriter. 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.
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.
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, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
AfroCine: Join the Months of African Cinema this October![edit]
Greetings!
After a successful first iteration of the “Months of African Cinema” last year, we are happy to announce that it will be happening again this year, starting from October 1! In the 2018 edition of the contest, about 600 Wikipedia articles were created in at least 8 languages. There were also contributions to Wikidata and Wikimedia commons, which brought the total number of wikimedia pages created during the contest to over 1,000.
On English Wikipedia, we would be recognizing participants in the following manner:
Overall winner (1st, 2nd, 3rd places)
Diversity winner
Gender-gap fillers
For further information about the contest, the recognition categories and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. See you around :).--Jamie Tubers (talk) 00:50, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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.
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, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Join us in this exciting venture, by helping to create or expand contents in Wikimedia projects which are connected to this scope. Kindly list your username under the participants section to indicate your interest in participating in this contest.
We would be awarding prizes to different categories of winners:
Overall winner
1st - $500
2nd - $200
3rd - $100
Diversity winner - $100
Gender-gap fillers - $100
Language Winners - up to $100*
We would be adding additional categories as the contest progresses, along with local prizes from affiliates in your countries. For further information about the contest, the prizes and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. Looking forward to your participation.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 19:22, 22nd September 2020 (UTC)
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list
The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November![edit]
Greetings,
Thank you very much for participating in the Months of African Cinema global contest/edit-a-thon, and thank you for your contributions so far.
It is already the middle of the contest and a lot have been achieved already! We have been able to get over 1,500 articles created in over fifteen (15) languages! This would not have been possible without your support and we want to thank you. If you have not yet listed your name as a participant in the contest page please do so.
Please make sure to list the articles you have created or improved in the article achievements' section of the contest page, so that they can be easily tracked. To be able to claim prizes, please also ensure to list your articles on the users by articles page. We would be awarding prizes to different categories of winners:
Overall winner
1st - $500
2nd - $200
3rd - $100
Diversity winner - $100
Gender-gap filler - $100
Language Winners - up to $100*
We are very excited about what has been achieved so far, but your contributions are still needed to further exceed all expectations! Let’s create more articles before the end of this contest, which is this November!!!
Thank you once again for being part of this global event! --Jamie Tubers (talk) 10:30, 06 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list
Welcome to the Months of African Cinema Global Contest![edit]
Greetings!
The AfroCine Project core team is happy to inform you that the Months of African Cinema Contest is happening again this year in October and November. We invite Wikipedians all over the world to join in improving content related to African cinema on Wikipedia!
Please list your username under the participants’ section of the contest page to indicate your interest in participating in this contest. The term "African" in the context of this contest, includes people of African descent from all over the world, which includes the diaspora and the Caribbean.
The following prizes would be recognized at the end of the contest:
Overall winner
1st - $500
2nd - $200
3rd - $100
Diversity winner - $100
Gender-gap fillers - $100
Language Winners - up to $100*
Also look out for local prizes from affiliates in your countries or communities! For further information about the contest, the prizes and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. We look forward to your participation.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 23:20, 30th September 2021 (UTC)
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list
The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November![edit]
Greetings,
It is already past the middle of the contest and we are really excited about the Months of African Contest 2021 achievements so far! We want to extend our sincere gratitude for the time and energy you have invested. If you have not yet participated in the contest, it is not too late to do it. Please list your username as a participant on the contest’s main page.
Please remember to list the articles you have improved or created on the article achievements' section of the contest page so they can be tracked. In order to win prizes, be sure to also list your article in the users by articles. Please note that your articles must be present in both the article achievement section on the main contest page, as well as on the Users By Articles page for you to qualify for a prize.
We would be awarding prizes to different categories of winners:
Overall winner
1st - $500
2nd - $200
3rd - $100
Diversity winner - $100
Gender-gap filler - $100
Language Winners - up to $100*
Thank you once again for your valued participation! --Jamie Tubers (talk) 18:50, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikipedia Library
The Wikipedia Library
Hello, I'm Tgeorgescu. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Curcumin, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Tgeorgescu (talk) 18:42, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
.svg)
