Zillazmg1998 (talk)23:00, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Archives

Vivio Testarossa-Talk (Inactive) 123456P Sakura Cartelet-talk (Main) 12

This page has archives. Sections older than48 hours may be auto-archived byLowercase sigmabot III.

This user may have left Wikipedia. Vivio Testarossa has not edited Wikipediafor a considerable amount of time. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Articles for Creation urgently needsYOUR help! Articles for Creation isdesperately short of reviewers! We are looking forurgent help, fromexperienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently there are2802submissions waiting to be reviewed and many help requests atour Help Desk. Do you have what it takes? Are you familiar withWikipedia's policies and guidelines? Do you know what Wikipediais andis not? Do you have a working knowledge of theManual of Style, particularlyarticle naming conventions? Are youautoconfirmed? Can you review submissions based on their individual merits? If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read thereviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog. You might wish to add{{AFC status}} or{{AfC Defcon}} to your userpage, which will alert you to the number of open submissions. PS: we have a great AFC helper script atUser:Timotheus Canens/afchelper4.js which helps in reviewing in just few edits easily! We would greatly appreciate your help. Currently, only a small handful of users are reviewing articles. Any help, even if it's just 2 or 3 reviews, it would be extremely beneficial. On behalf of theArticles for Creation project, TheSpecialUser TSU

Hello. For several years, there was a section in the Gardner-Webb University page about an athletics scandal that made national news. A few weeks ago, someone deleted it without explanation. I see that it was reinstated today, removed again, and then the page was locked. Now the article reads like it could have been written by the university's PR department. The scandal section could been better written, but the content was accurate. If anything, the person who removed it committed vandalism. I am hoping that, with some added citations, this section about an important part of GWU's history will be left in place. This is only one of many sources which can be easily located via a Google search:[1]

I apologize for breaking this - which I most assuredly am - but I just wanted to say hi and thanks.Hingleford (talk)08:06, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vivio Testarossa,

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

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

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

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is aone-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

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

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

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

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

Best regards,Stevietheman —Delivered:01:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vivio Testarossa. 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]

• Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery
• Wikipedians who opt out of template messages