Hi!welcome toWikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia.Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:

• Try theTutorial. If you have less time, tryWikipedia:How to edit a page.
• To sign your posts (ontalk pages,Articles for deletion page etc.) use ~~~~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes).
• You can experiment in thetest area.
• You can get help at theHelp Desk
• Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikipedia:Manual of Style andPolicies and Guidelines,Wikipedia:Neutral point of view,Wikipedia:Civility,Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
• If you made IP edits before creating a user account, you can attribute your IP edits to your account atWikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit.

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop a note atWikipedia:New user log.

--Utcursch |Talk to me

Your wish is our command. *Poof* -- done.  :-)SWAdair |Talk 06:15, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Please have a look at my edit toquantum circuit. I tried to deal with your objection. Did I miss something? Thanks. --CSTAR 14:09, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately I think your "improvement" in the disambiguation notice made it worse, because those who are looking for "other meanings" in this case very often DO NOT KNOW that the philosophy of mathematics-education is another meaning and is not what the article is supposed to be about. Piaget is not relevant here!Michael Hardy20:15, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Michael -- I see what you mean -- it hadn't occurred to me that mathematics and education overlap in mathematics education -- I was just thinking that all meanings of constructivism are created equal and there seemed to be no reason to single out education from the others. These warnings shouldn't be too long, though, I think -- is my shortened version of your warning OK?

Wrong, wrong, wrong! You're totally missing the point! "all meanings of constructivism are created equal and there seemed to be no reason to single out education from the others"? The point is: the word "constructivism" in philosophy of education and the term "constructivism" in philosophy of mathematics refer to two entirely different things. In philosophy of education, "constructivism" is a tenet about the way people learn by "constructing knowledge". In philosophy of mathematics, "constructivism" is about the sense in which mathematical objects such as numbers, functions, sets, etc. can be said to exist, and how their existence can be known.Michael Hardy19:22, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign you posts with four tildes ~~~~ —Dunc|☺21:18, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oops -- I usually do -- sorry :-)Joriki21:37, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for the heads-up on this; it slipped under my radar. Well, even though there is no copyright notice on that site, I think we should err on the side of caution and assume that it is unless explicitly stated otherwise, so I removed it again and added a note onTalk:Davidson. I notified the user who inserted it, too, although he has not contributed for awhile.HollyAm03:50, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was a very nice example! Thank you.Well, I give. I need to recheck my notes. It will take me some time, as I will be completely offline in the next month. But I promise to come back and pursue this with greater detail.What I had in mind was what Arrow called "positive association" of the welfare function. Your examle is intriguing - it shows that monotonicity isn't equivalent with that. I think you should show it around more. I wonder what the others will have to say about it. Also, I have a feeling that this should be no more than a freak pathology having to do with having just one voter. Can you show this phenomenon in general with any number of voters? Where did this example come from?mousomer18:34, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip. My comments are on the talk page.AjaxSmack03:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The articleAstrological sign, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiringcleanup. If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia'squality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on thearticle's talk page. You have been left this message byPocKleanBot, an automated process that notifies editors that articles to which they may have contributed on more than one occasion in the past now need cleanup. If you have any comments or object to this message being left, please leave a message onPocKleanBot's talk page.

Please seeTalk:Framing (sociology). -Grumpyyoungman0114:01, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure there was some reason why I did that, but I at this point I don't remember, and you're right, it doesn't seem to make sense. I'll fix it. -TheMightyQuill (talk)03:36, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joriki!

I think it's best if it says for instansce: "There are 17 localities in Falkenberg Municipality" and the word "localities" should link to the page "Urban areas in Sweden". That's the way I'm going to write in the future.Jensapag (talk)13:27, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I actually don't know why they weren't listed. I have a strong suspicion that it is because the non-included cases were deniedcertiorari although that is a decision in itself and there can be dissents. I'm not sure why the missing cites weren't listed on the Supreme Court's website where I got the cites originally. Sorry it took me so long to respond (Holidays). --Cdogsimmons (talk)01:26, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you havefeedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me onSuggestBot's talk page. Thanks fromForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed onthe SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. --SuggestBot (talk)21:33, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Colbert involved? Why no, never... ;)

Also the population went from 8,000 tomore than 20,000. I think three times is a reasonable estimate. You could say two and a half, but that doesn't count the more than part, and it also doesn't read as well as "The population has tripled."Xizer (talk)21:45, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In line with your general proposals, I have reorganized the articles on Hellenism/Hellenization/Hellenistic period etc.etc.

• Hellenism now re-directs straight to a disambiguation page.
• Hellenism (Greek culture), replaces the old Hellenism article, and is listed on the disambiguation page, but re-directs toHellenization
• Hellenization now gives a brief definition of the general use of the term, and points the reader toHellenic civilization for an overview of the spread of Greek culture after Alexander.
• Hellenistic civilization gives a description of the spread if Greek cultre after Alexander
• Hellenistic period gives a description of the events of the Hellenistic period
• Hellenistic Greece specifically gives a description of the Greek peninsula during the Hellenistic period.

Hope this works for you!MinisterForBadTimes (talk)20:46, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Stifle,

your edit summary forRob malley says "certainly not an unlikely typo". I'm wondering whether you noticed the lower-case 'm'?

Joriki (talk)15:59, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed I did. Many people searching for a term in Wikipedia will type only in lower case, or in mixed-case, and may type the URL directly of their desired topic. As the software will assume that the first letter of an article title, but no more, is upper-case, and redirects are cheap, I see no reason to delete this page.Stifle (talk)16:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think this article is stub?Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk)06:45, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's probably too large for that; you might consider replacing the stub template by an {{expand}} template.Joriki (talk)07:03, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re: garbled sentence
Thank you, I do a lot of editing and sometimes forget to get back to cleanup my additions. I shouldn't have left that section in such a state. --BoogaLouie (talk)17:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Joriki,

Your edits to the foot-in-the-door article make it much clearer. Thanks!Renee (talk)19:49, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I know this page. But who decided, thatky (Kyrgyz language,кыргызча) is sorted as "kirgizca" andbg (Bulgarian language,български) as "bulgarski". ы isy in all transcriptions and transliterations I know and Bulgarian ъ may beʺ,ǎ,y,ŭ,u ora. Besides for exampleug (Uyghur language,ئۇيغۇرچە / Uyghurche as "oyghurque" orcbk-zam (Chavacano language (Zamboangueño),Chavacano de Zamboanga) as "zamboangueno" heve became disactualised. Andzh-classical (Classical Chinese,文言) is now "wenyan", not "guwenwenyanwen".BartekChom (talk)20:41, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OnMarch 7, 2009,Did you know? was updated with a fact from the articleASEAN Treaty of Amity and Cooperation, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on theDid you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk)10:57, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for proving that reasonable people may also agree. I had a little trouble tying in the second version, but it seems OK for now and I'm sure someone will improve it in time. Cheers,Celestra (talk)02:31, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, i have busily invested my time inAmerican Idol. Anyway, the nameTreaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia is the formal name s it should be used at the top of the article but not the title. Meanwhile,Treaty of Amity and Cooperation is more colloquial but not that exact or definitive. I prefer the nameASEAN Treaty of Amity and Cooperation because its not too lengthy yet it describes the article as being about ASEAN or Southeast Asia.--23prootie (talk)18:23, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, if your name has more hits then it should be used.--23prootie (talk)18:25, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With regard toASEAN summit, actually I just thought it is more recent so it is not history but I guess my expertise in this area is limited, perhaps it should be under recent history. --Just my 2 cents -- Hemanshu (talk)12:06, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments are requested on a discussion about whether or not a particular page is a disambiguation page or a stubhere.Neelix (talk)20:05, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The articleRoger Price (Utah politician) has beenproposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non-notable political candidate, still no references 18 months after tagging

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may bedeleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the{{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in youredit summary or onthe article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing{{dated prod}} will stop theproposed deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. Thespeedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, andarticles for deletion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion.Dravecky (talk)07:07, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Per you note on my talk page, done. Thanks for pointing this out.linas (talk)18:35, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot agree withthis edit. It is certainly true that in general, rearrangements depend on absolute convergence. But this is only one specific kind of rearrangement. We have

${\displaystyle a_0+\underbrace{a_1+a_2+\cdots +a_{n-1}}+a_n}$

and all of the terms over the underbrace add up to 0. The whole thing becomes

${\displaystyle a_0+a_n}$

and that approaches a limit if the sequence of terms a_n converges.Michael Hardy (talk)23:55, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to ask you to explain at some length why you addedTemplate:No definition toParlement.Debresser (talk)22:35, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, would you say that my definition "Parlements were regional legislative bodies in ancien régime France." is correct?Debresser (talk)23:10, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your question. You are right about the origin of the article. It has since been edited by others and frankly, it is now beyond my level of knowledge. I can't answer your question but I have no objection if you change it according to your suggestion.Encyclops (talk)14:54, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I reverted your recent edit to theprojective plane article. My reason being that mathematicians talk of "the projective plane" meaning in effect the mathematical class of object, and "a projective plane" when implying a specific example. You can also see this usage in thesphere andKlein bottle articles and probably in others on well-known manifolds. — Cheers,Steelpillow (Talk)20:22, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I replied to your comments onmy talk page. — Cheers,Steelpillow (Talk)22:16, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for correcting the missing factor in the four parameters section of the beta distribution article. Such collaborative efforts is the great strength of Wikipedia :-)

Dr. J. Rodal (talk)03:14, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The articleBABEL has beenproposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't appear to be notable; couldn't find any non-primary sources which discuss the language in detail.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may bedeleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the{{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in youredit summary or onthe article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing{{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop theproposed deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. In particular, thespeedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, andarticles for deletion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion.Psychonaut (talk)09:22, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have decided to put on a mini-contest within theNovember 2013 monthly disambiguation contest, on Saturday, November 23 (UTC). I will personally give a $20 Amazon.com gift card to the disambiguator who fixes the most links on that server-day (see the project page for details on scoring points). Since we are not geared up to do an automated count for that day, at 00:00, 23 November 2013 (UTC) (which is 7:00 PM on November 22, EST), I'll take a screenshot of the project page leaderboard. I will presume that anyone who is not already listed on the leaderboard has preciselynine edits. At 01:00, 24 November 2013 (UTC) (8:00 PM on November 23, EST), I'll take a screenshot of the leaderboard at that time (the extra hour is to give the board time to update), and I will determine from that who our winner is. Iwill credit links fixed by turning aWP:DABCONCEPT page into an article, but you'll have to let me know me that you did so. Here's to a fun contest. Note that according to theDaily Disambig, we currently have under 256,000 disambiguation links to be fixed. If everyone in the disambiguation link fixers category were to fix 500 links, we would have them all done - so aim high! Cheers!bd2412T02:33, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - thanks for your edit toBird vocalization. You reverted my edit saying "of course it's a hypothesis ... the title of the source even says so." I have two reasons to disagree with you here: (1) The title of the source talks of "testing the hypothesis" - once a hypothesis is tested, it is more than just a hypothesis (it is then either a fact or a falsehood). (2) The phrase "Scientists hypothesize that..." implies very strongly that the matter is not settled. You say "hypothesis does not imply controversy", which is true, but hypothesis does imply uncertainty. I would like to undo your reversion. Any thoughts on this? --mcld (talk)15:42, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you toreview other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located atSpecial:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located atSpecial: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:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.Beeblebrox (talk)19:47, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleBrooks (programming language) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according toWikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should bedeleted.

The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brooks (programming language) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ― Padenton|✉  08:36, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice thatIndian-occupied Kashmir, a page that you created, has been tagged for deletion. This has been done under two or more of thecriteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It is unambiguous vandalism or an obvious hoax. (Seesection G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please do not introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia; doing so is not in accordance with ourpolicies. If you would like to experiment, please use thesandbox.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you maycontest the nomination byvisiting 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 withWikipedia's policies and guidelines.Human3015 Say Hey!! •02:06, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the currentArbitration Committee election. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipediaarbitration 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome toreview the candidates' statements and submit your choices onthe voting page. For the Election committee,MediaWiki message delivery (talk)12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Joriki. Voting in the2016 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.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

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

Looking at youredit (removed sexist language), I have to wonder if the previous wording was actually more accurate. The latter wording is what we'd like to say about a relationship and events today, but back in Cortés days, there wasn't much "together" about the events. Sexist was the way of the world.Tarl N. (discuss)16:01, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comment! I thought about that briefly when I made the edit but then decided against it. I do think there was more "together" than the previous formulation suggested, but you're right that my replacement also implies something about gender relations at the time, which it shouldn't, even if it happened to be right. I've replaced it now with the formulation used in the article on the mother: "she would later give birth to his first son". That seems more neutral than either of the other two?Joriki (talk)23:34, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that definitely sounds better. There are lots of comments about La Malinche which fly by, ranging from calling her "La Chingada" (effectively a slut) to calling her a victim of pedophile rape. We know there was a sexual relationship, but her options in the matter may have been limited. So going beyond stating the birth is probably reading more than we know about their interaction. Thanks,Tarl N. (discuss)03:30, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Joriki. Voting in the2017 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.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Joriki. Voting in the2018 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.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AtFIDE_Grand_Prix_2019#Grand_Prix_standings, I appreciate that you're trying to disambiguate colours, but green is conventionally used for qualifying (see e.g.FIDE Grand Prix 2017,FIDE Grand Prix 2014–15,Candidates Tournament 2018, and also other sports e.g.2019_Cricket_World_Cup#Points_table). So I'd prefer to go back to green for qualifiers like Rajabov, and remove green from the points part of the table. Actually a while ago I suggested removing some colours from the points part of the table atTalk:FIDE Grand Prix 2019.Adpete (talk)10:19, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I've made some changes to the article and replied to your two points on the talk page.Joriki (talk)14:08, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joriki, I did'nt see your last edit message and all extensive discussions about your foggy consensus.I just update the fact : According to the Wild Card selector: A Russian will be the wild card.Moreover, if you really want to put every eligible player according to the FIDE rules, they is MVL, Alekseenko, Giri, Mamed, Nepo, Grischuk ans So.If you want to be more realistic and take in account the Russian Chess Federation, you put Alekseenko, Nepo and Grischuk.I dont think there is any other realist list.— Precedingunsigned comment added byHyrozen (talk •contribs)22:39, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hyrozen – thanks for replying to my message on your talk page.

I'm not sure why you consider the consensus on the talk page "foggy". Please elaborate.

You're wrong about Giri, Mamed, Nepo, Grischuk and So being eligible according to the FIDE rules. They are in the top ten of the rating averages from February 2019 to November 2019. Eligibility for the wild card will be determined according to the rating averages from February 2019 to January 2020. It is not only possible, but in fact currently seems likely that Aronian will overtake So and end up in tenth place in the averages from February 2019 to January 2020. Thus, we don't know yet who will be eligible for the wild card based on average rating. By contrast, we do know that MVL and Alekseenko will be eligible (unless they qualify for the Candidates Tournament via another path).

By the way, this was also already discussed on the article's talk page. In the meantime, a discussion about how to take into account the RCF announcement has also begun on that talk page. I suggest that we continue the discussion there, where all editors can read and contribute; I was just writing to you on your personal talk page because I got the impression that you weren't aware that there was a discussion on the article's talk page and you might not see it if I wrote there.Joriki (talk)23:28, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently editedDon't Give Up the Sheep, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageDon't Give Up the Ship (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links areusually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles.(Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)09:36, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirectChinese Kashmir. The discussion will occur atWikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 2#Chinese Kashmir until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion.Soumya-8974^talk_contribs^subpages17:30, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)01:19, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I created the page for theMagnus Carlsen Chess Tour. Since you are following theChampions Chess Tour 2021 page, I thought you might be interested. I am a n00b at editing so that page might need some more expert eyes.Retxnihps (talk)17:54, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know! The article actually looks quite good to me – I just added a missing space and combined the columns for third and fourth place into "semifinalists", since there were no games for third place.Joriki (talk)20:32, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm sorry but after six months I don't remember, it was probably a mistake. Anyway it was for the list of January, we are in July now.Conviene (talk)07:44, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the reply – I just wanted to make sure I'm not missing something.Joriki (talk)08:43, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:06, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect.It doesnot imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest inpost-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules calleddiscretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may imposesanctions on editors who do not strictly followWikipedia's policies, or thepage-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place{{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see theguidance on discretionary sanctions and theArbitration Committee's decisionhere. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Wellertalk08:48, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting 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]

Thanks for your contributions toToni Najdoski. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing becauseit has no sources.Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information atHelp:Unreviewed new page.When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Alexandermcnabb (talk)10:24, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Chess champions 8 has beennominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion atthe entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Pbrks ^(t • c)03:32, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting 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]

You have recently made edits related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. This is a standard message to inform you that post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people is a designated contentious topic. This messagedoesnot imply that there are any issues with your editing. Contentious topics are the successor to the former discretionary sanctions system, which you may be aware of. For more information about the contentious topics system, please seeWikipedia:Contentious topics. For a summary of difference between the former and new system, seeWP:CTVSDS. —Red-tailed hawk _(nest)14:59, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirectKing Edwards has been listed atredirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets theredirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect atWikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24 § King Edwards until a consensus is reached.Cremastra ‹ u —c ›15:43, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed onGMPI requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done undersection G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is aprimary topic);
• disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
• is anorphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under thecriteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Pleasesee the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you maycontest the nomination byvisiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag.Shhhnotsoloud (talk)17:45, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]