This user may have left Wikipedia. Erachima has not edited Wikipediasince 2 December 2020. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.
This user is working himself to death at college, and probably won't be editing actively, except maybe on breaks, for the foreseeable future.
Hi, and thank you for taking notice. By the looks of it, that is a rogue IP used by one experienced blocked/banned user (I could guess who it is, but I don't want to give him the time of day), who known I watchlisted the page and trying to get my attention in the most pathetic way. I think he is gaming the system by posting an insanely crude and inane message then and now (for instance,this one), waiting for the IP to go stale (or changing it), then coming up with tiny reposts to let us know he's still around. If I guessed right about the identity of the user, so I tend to look at this, and then overlook it, in the light of that fact.Dahn (talk)06:53, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not going to revert your removal of NWA.Rep's joke banner from his talkpage, as I have already reverted the same edit by Bartsa. But I'm really sorry to see that you think it necessary to kick a guy who is so completely down. The joke isn't that funny, but it's not disruptive by any definition. Removing such harmless things from userpages, which users traditionally have wide latitude to manage themselves, raises the temperature and the mutual hostility in the community, and that is in the long run far more hurtful to the encyclopedia than a silly joke or two (this one wastes editors' time to the tune of what, three seconds?). And no, he can't "fight his own battles", as he has scrambled his password. His one point of pride right now is to retain the banner, which has been there for a long time. I confess I don't think it an important thing in itself, but I can understand how somebody can get very upset about the deletion of his userpage, and try to retain at least this last trace of his personal choice on Wikipedia. Please see the discussion on my talkpage.[1]Bishonen |talk22:40, 16 December 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Hello! Now, some of you might have already received a similar message a little while ago regarding the Recruitment Centre, so if you have, there is no need to read the rest of this. This message is directed to users who have reviewed between 12-14 Good article nominations andare not part ofWikiProject Good articles (the initial messages I sent out went to only WikiProject members and users that had over 15 reviews).
So for those who haven't heard about the Recruitment Centre yet, you may be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around it (to the right). The answer? WikiProject Good articles will be launching a Recruitment Centre very soon! The centre will allow all users to be taught how to review Good article nominations by experts just like you! However, in order for the Recruitment Centre to open in the first place, we need some volunteers:
Recruiters: The main task of a recruiter is to teach users that have never reviewed a Good article nomination how to review one. To become a recruiter, all you have to do is meetthis criteria. Now, one of the most important criteria is that you have at least 15 independent reviews. If you are reading this, you are likely 3 (or less) reviews short, so if you review another couple nominations, you can become a recruiter! If interested, make sure you meet the criteria, readthe process and add your name to thelist of recruiters. (One of the great things about being a recruiter is that there is no set requirement of what must be taught and when. Instead, all the content found in theprocess section is a guideline of the main points that should be addressed during a recruitment session...you can also take an entire different approach if you wish!) If you think you will not have the time to recruit any users at this time but are still interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still add your name to the list of recruiters but just fill in the "Status" parameter with "Not Available".
NOTE: If you are interested in becoming a recruiter but do not meet the 15 review requirement, you can still add your name to the list of recruiters and put your status as "Not Available" until you have reviewed enough nominations.
Nominators, please read this: If you are not interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still help. In some cases a nominator may have an issue with an "inexperienced" editor (the recruitee) reviewing one of their nominations. To minimize the chances of this happening, if you are fine with a recruitee reviewing one of your nominations under the supervision of the recruiter, please add your name to the list at the bottom ofthis page. By adding your name to this list, chances are that your nomination will be reviewed more quickly as the recruitee will be asked to choose a nomination from the list of nominators that are OK with them reviewing the article.
If you have any questions please do not hesitate tocontact me. I look forward to seeing this program bring new reviewers to the Good article community and all the positive things it will bring along.
A message will be sent out to all recruiters regarding the date when the Recruitment Centre will open when it is determined. The message will also contain some further details to clarify things that may be a bit confusing.--Dom497 (talk)
Despite having no prior interactions, you have made a string of personal attacks and you assume bad faith. Please stop that realize that I am not alone in my disagreement with MOSAM. And note that I didn't even start the discussion or go to the policy fact itself. I have worked tirelessly to improve A&M topics and I've got many articles to GA levels in the last month alone. Your characterization of me as malicious and with a "vendetta" is very rude and I ask you retract your statements and assume good faith.ChrisGualtieri (talk)14:19, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I maintain that I have not personally attacked you, and you are simply abusing the warning process to try to scare people you don't like into shutting up. --erachimatalk21:46, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You cannot revert out pages like that, especially during a discussion. Multiple editor OWN and localconsensus does not make your actions correct. Revert your removal and let the process continue.ChrisGualtieri (talk)00:32, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Your personal attack has been removed. Casting aspersions is a violation of NPA. Even your final statement is inaccurate because of CWW and condescending.ChrisGualtieri (talk)05:48, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at theWikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!ChrisGualtieri (talk)14:16, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bleach (anime) 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.ChrisGualtieri (talk)14:25, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is apersonal attack and clearly inappropriate. I have reverted it. Your preceding comment isn't much better. You may want to redact parts of that yourself. I fully understand that there are longstanding disagreements with ChrisGualtieri about various anime- and manga-related articles, but personal attacks of this type only poison the well and do not help at all, least of all yourself.Huon (talk)03:42, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I, obviously, disagree that it was unwarranted or I wouldn't have said it. The division between a standard disagreement and aWP:TEND case is that it's the editor, not just the editing, that has become the problem. --erachimatalk04:07, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Remove your post where you twist my words and reinsert it under the false guise of "vandalism".[2] I removed my own post because you were likely to make it into NPA when I am tired of these trolls.WP:DENY all trolls is best.ChrisGualtieri (talk)19:09, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure thatthis sort of thing is at all helpful, especially as theuser in question is blocked and can't say anything in protest. I'd also suggest that it's probably fairly impolite to modify another's signature, even with a (presumably intended to be) humorous edit summery, and quite likely to be outside policy too. Perhaps you'd like to go back and revert yourself? Thank you, Cheers,LindsayHello08:19, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bleach (anime) 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. —Ryulong (琉竜)16:16, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Alwis, who was 42, was dragged from his house and murdered on the night of July 31, 1989. The murder has been blamed on theJanatha Vimukthi Peramuna[1],but nirmala de Alwis is proved wrote a book murder was handled by Hudson Samarasinghe..[2][3]
Your Opinion is More Important than You Think Barnstar
For defending the right of Wikipedia to fight censorship within its policies, customs and respect for BLP subjects. Keep your voice up!cyclopiaspeak!00:40, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Erachima. It's an impressive work; a B, for sure. A matter of preference but I'd go with{{gnr}} for citations of the manga itself. It's cleaner, visually-wise, in my opinion. Instead of citing everytime "Kubo, Tite (2000).Zombie Powder vol. 01. Shueisha. pp. XX.ISBN4-08-872828-9," it's okay to have the complete citation once and then only use the chapter.{{rp}} is also a good option. The difference is that you cite the chapter with gnr and the page with rp. Cheers,Gabriel Yuji (talk)18:53, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I replied to your idea at WT:GAN and I like it. Though I was wondering about a collaboration on something. I'm not to picky on the topic or area, but I think it'd be good to work together on an article. I've always found that to be a fun way to get to know each other better. Would you want to do that?ChrisGualtieri (talk)03:30, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, erachima. I actually edit-conflicted your close of the Historicity of Jesus charlie foxtrot on ANI with a close of my own, which would've said more or less the same thing. Thanks for closing it; that thread was way off, as far as venue.Writ Keeper⚇♔06:53, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for closing. The basic problem appears to be well-meaning but very bad advice atWP:DRN. The issues were taken to WP:DRN, where the volunteer editor said that the issues involved both content and conduct (which was correct), and said to take the content issues torequests for mediation and the conduct issues toWP:ANI. The latter was well-meaning but bad advice, because, although there are conduct issues, none of the contentious editors have put together diffs or made a specific case. (Also, it isn't, in my opinion, a good case for formal mediation, but that is another question.) There are conduct issues, but they aren't formulated for admin action yet. (I don't think that they will ever be dealt with at WP:ANI anyway. I have the feeling that the case will eventually go to arbitration, but that is my opinion.)Robert McClenon (talk)15:12, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Your review of Scottish art in the nineteenth century
The seven days from the on hold on the 11 of August is not today, it is tomorrow. I have been away and was hoping to deal with this today.--SabreBD (talk)07:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I responded to your most recent layout change on the talk page. I was wondering if you could at least partially revert the part of your edit that lumps the anime in with other media until we can establish a full consensus on the talk page? Thanks.Artichoker[talk]04:04, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing todisambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.
Hey I got an "on hold" notifications for the GA review. Now that Crisco inserted the revised Lead, I think we should be all set to continue the review? Sorry things are a bit slow due to following COI procedure + there is a long history of debate on the page, but I think it has died down.CorporateM (Talk)14:31, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Erachima, the same applies to your review ofTalk:Yelp/GA1, which you started on August 15, and where the issues were addressed by CorporateM later the same day. There have been significant edits since then, too. If you're around, it would really help for you to post whether you intend to continue with these reviews; otherwise, we may have to find someone else.BlueMoonset (talk)18:43, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the articleZombiepowder. you nominated forGA-status according to thecriteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.Message delivered byLegobot, on behalf ofJaguar --Jaguar (talk)13:00, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Women's marches on seven continents attracted strong Wikipedia engagement; Media luminaries and a presidential candidate joined WMF boss Katherine Maher at a New York gathering
The Signpost's poll suggests we should take a cautious approach to the Newsletter Extension, under development; and our RSS feed is functional once again
While the English Wikipedia community produces no new requests for adminhood in June, the Wikimedia Foundation makes changes to the Product and Technology departments.
The anatomy of Uber CEO Travis Kalanick's chest area has been the talk of the month. But so have high-profile edits, hacked articles, and one particular newborn growing up.
A researcher applies Marxist critiques of political economy to investigate whether gamification, a culture of altruism, and other anti-corporatist influences on peer production can create a sustainable gift economy in a project like Wikipedia.
The English Wikipedia sees its first new admin of the season, discord rocks Wikimedia France, some tweaks to the WMF reorg, and a new WMF annual plan mark this issue's community news.
A grab bag of alt-right speech, classical scholars, the dark web, elicited European tourism, $500,000 golden parachutes, forgery, the Great Firewall, net neutrality, nukes, paid editing, porn, and terrorism.
A closer look at the research that found that the 2013 Snowden revelations coincided with a significant drop of pageviews for privacy-sensitive Wikipedia articles
Enjoy the Parameters: The Infobox Game can be enjoyed by everyone, not just those interested in water buffalo breeds, volcanic hotspots or the mysterious heteroisoform, and some day just might spawn an important facet of the financial derivatives industry.
Popular interest in celebrities, blockbusters and an upcoming season of a popular television show drive traffic, with a smattering of world events, holidays and a Reddit storm around – surprise – free porn for the U.S. Congress.
The heat turns up on the 32 contestants who entered round three: 13 featured articles, 82 good articles, 167 DYKs, but we had to pick just eight of them to advance.
Local tourism gains +9% when Wikipedia articles are improved; significant improvements in predicting article quality with deep learning; recent editor behavior is a strong predictor of content quality
The Canadian Supreme Court ruled that Google must remove search results worldwide, dismissing concerns that this may impede freedom of expression for people outside of Canada or inspire other countries to censor speech.
The Wikimedia Foundation publishes the latest fundraising report, convenes over the close of the strategic plan discussion, and moves into a new space.
A chat with a developer of open source software which allows users to download web content for offline reading, and the future of offline access to Wikipedia.
Hello, Erachima. 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.
The media discuss online copyright issues, Wikipedia's coverage of the capital of Israel and creation of a "reasonably clean, honest and reliable" work on Earth and in space.
Evidence phase in Mister Wiki editors case is complete; the community is proposing remedies and the Arbitration committee is slated to make a decision by end of year. Meanwhile, voting has closed on 2017 elections.
Looking back on a decade of contributions including over 1,000 images and over three dozen Featured Pictures, Charles shares his wildlife photography experience and tips.
In deciding to de-sysop an admin for efforts to evade discussion and review of paid edits made on behalf of a PR firm, Arbitration Committee doesn't significantly change the rules around paid editing, and leaves it up to the community whether to apply special restrictions to administrators.
The Wikimedia Foundation's Analytics team compiles a clickstream dataset, now available as a series of monthly data dumps for English, Russian, German, Spanish, and Japanese Wikipedias.
Thanks for uploadingFile:Vinland Saga art comparison.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under aclaim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (seeour policy for non-free media).
Diplomats join Wikipedia for International Women's Day, the perfect "Human", how fringe theories are sustained, and perennial plagiarism from our pages.
Following Kudpung's op-ed "Death knell sounding for The Signpost?" in the 29 March issue, user comments encouraged a burst of enthusiasm to keep the newspaper in print.
How to revive and evolveThe Signpost? Big blue-sky proposals and small concrete proposals from the community and from two regularSignpost contributors.
A recent Community Health Initiative survey found only 27% of respondents are happy with the way reports of conflicts between Editors are handled on the Administrators' Incident Noticeboard (ANI).
Wikipedia's myth of the clean Wehrmacht and what you can do about it. Or, how not to be one of "the worst distributors of pro-Nazi perspectives and the Wehrmacht myth".
What should we do about Portals? Keep them, delete them, or mark them as historical? Or should they be more closely connected with their WikiProject(s)?
Major grants announced, a new milestone for Afrikaans Wikipedia, a new WMF technical engagement team, an effort to start up a new library, two new admins – or maybe three fewer depending on your math.
Several online battles are juxtaposed with stories about cooperation and good deeds, Arbcom hovering over it all; notwithstanding, a good action movie script is not necessarily found here.
Community discussions include style updates to project-wide icons and the main page, procedural questions on royal names and jettisoning unsuitable drafts, and deeper questions of compliance with European privacy laws and the perennial issue of shrinking admin corps.
WMF appeals to Turkish Minister of Transport, Maritime, and Communications Ahmet Arslan to lift the block of all language versions of Wikipedia for over a year.
Citation bot and mapframe enhancements; new licenses for Data space; possible hiccup on 12 September; per-user page, namespace, and upload blocking; and miscellaneous new bots and tools.
As the global community of volunteer Wikimedia editors mourns the destruction of this amazing museum, this post pays tribute to all editors who have contributed restlessly to tell the story of the National Museum, our history.
Hello, Erachima. 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.
Did World Patent Marketing pay to get Wikipedia to include flattering information on their board member, now the Acting United States Attorney General?
NPP wins the wish list poll; Wikipedia editors will be able to work better at night; new WMF appointments and new arbitrators; and who wants to be an admin?
When the desire to continue to have the privilege of editing Wikipedia overrides the body's innate desire to choke the living shit out of some bastard who really has it coming.
This may be too wordy, verbose and loquacious – and possibly redundant – but as you know, it takes others to check our work, and if there were more people in the Newsroom, we'd be able to double check ourselves and produce a better product for our readership; if you think you are up to it, you are welcome to join us and even copyedit the Editor-in-Chief's article intros.
Horsemen of the apocalypse all represented in recently promoted content, alongside new life, pretty birds, great music, and other miscellaneous topics.
Wikimedia Foundation data scientists are using machine learning to predict whether—and why—any given sentence on Wikipedia may need a citation in order to help editors identify areas of content violating the verifiability policy.
An overview of Wikimedia Summit 2019, a working conference to discuss the Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy Process, preparing draft recommendations for Wikimania 2019 in August.
Wikimedia photographers surge to contribute to the Wiki Loves Earth campaign even while rogue clothing company The North Face replaces wiki illustrations with advertisements.
You currently appear to be engaged in anedit war according to the reverts you have made onTalk:Ƒ/8 and be there; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected tocollaborate with others, to avoid editingdisruptively, and totry to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
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.
Active administrators and articles achieved are marking milestone metrics, but in diverging directions. Plus, the first time any court has found there exists a constitutional right to read Wikipedia.
A look at different approaches taken by Wikipedia's founders in 2002, as seen from the perspective of nine years when it was written; nearly twenty years ago now.
Emotional injury and rising standards against a backdrop of a dwindling sysop cadre: the 2021 Requests for adminship review grapples with tough issues.
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages.
Belarusian Mark Bernstein to serve 36 months of "home chemistry" for unapproved posting,Slate covers historically large adminship bid, UBI economist with goofy infobox caption thinks it's funny.
The Signpost looks back onThe Signpost: New reports, conceived in a spirit of collaboration, and dedicated to the proposition of information and, uh, more information for all.
Facebook's Galactica demo provides a case study in large language models for text generation at scale: this one was silly, but we cannot ignore them forever.
You head into the featured content report. Amongst the features you see astronauts, both Gilbert and Sullivan, Ursula K. Le Guin's incredibly talented mother, andBillboard charts. It is pitch black, you are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Cicely Mary Barker has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to thereassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ♠PMC♠(talk)07:34, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Tale of Mrs. Tittlemouse has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to thereassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ♠PMC♠(talk)20:19, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In this article, we will look atThe Signpost statistics. More precisely:Signpost article statistics by year, TOP 20 titles ofSignpost articles, TOP 20 article authors, and the home wikis of article authors.
First of a two part series summarising the priorities for the Wikimedia Foundation's next fiscal year (July 2022–June 2023) including staffing, budget and other changes, and how to provide your feedback.
The second article in a series describing the priorities and work of the Wikimedia Foundation. The article invites Wikimedians to collaborate with the Foundation.
William Robinson (gardener) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to thereassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.Z1720 (talk)23:04, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The innards of the Signpost received a major overhaul in March/April 2019. Here's how we reduced behind-the-scenes busywork and improved writers resources.
Material must be written with the greatest care and attention; the level of detail and commentary regarding the antlers of living persons is to be kept to a minimum.
I have nominatedBleach season 1 for featured list removal. Pleasejoin the discussion on whether this article meets thefeatured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process arehere. While I recognize you've been inactive for a while, in case you return, your input would be appreciated.RunningTiger123 (talk)00:47, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cyberpunk (album) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to thereassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.Z1720 (talk)02:17, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is yourlast warning. The next time you makepersonal attacks on other people, as you did atWikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Anime- and manga-related articles, you may beblocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on fellow editors.You've already been warned. This is your final warning. Stop making personal attacks on me. I don't even know you!ChrisGualtieri (talk)21:14, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. There is currently a discussion atWikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.ChrisGualtieri (talk)22:13, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Erachima, there's a message for you atTalk:Mordin Solus/GA1, when you have a momentczar ♔01:52, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
czar ♔02:36, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.Message delivered byLegobot, on behalf ofJaguar --Jaguar (talk)13:00, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
. The article is close to meeting thegood article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. SeeTalk:Zombiepowder. for things which need to be addressed.Message delivered byLegobot, on behalf ofJaguar --Jaguar (talk)14:20, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
; seeTalk:Zombiepowder. for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you cannominate it to appear in Did you know.Message delivered byLegobot, on behalf ofJaguar --Jaguar (talk)16:42, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You currently appear to be engaged in anedit war according to the reverts you have made onTalk:Ƒ/8 and be there; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected tocollaborate with others, to avoid editingdisruptively, and totry to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
