Welcome to Wikipedia, Editør! I amLogan and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. Thank you foryour contributions. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions check outWikipedia:Questions, or feel free to leave me a message onmy talk page or type{{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article

I hope you enjoy editing here and being aWikipedian! Also, when you post ontalk pages you shouldsign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. Again, welcome!

Logan_Talk^{Contributions}03:53, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In your recent article edits, 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.

List of Internet exchange points by size (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toZuidbroek andEde

William III of the Netherlands (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toWilliam III andMaurice

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)11:45, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedAmsterdam ossenworst, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageRaw (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read 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)11:29, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedRijksmuseum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageBuitenhof (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read 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)01:30, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedCornelis Apostool, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pagesDilettante andHendrik Meijer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read 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)13:04, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedJan Willem Pieneman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageNederland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read 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)11:33, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedWillem-Alexander of the Netherlands, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageCommodore (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read 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)19:18, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On13 August 2013,Did you know? was updated with a fact from the articleLodewijk Bruckman, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was... thatmagic realist painterLodewijk Bruckman has a permanent exhibition inMuseum de Oude Wolden, located inBellingwolde, the Netherlands? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Lodewijk Bruckman. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page(here's how,quick check) and it will be added toDYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on theDid you know? talk page.

Alex Shih^Talk01:03, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have addressed your concerns at theGA review for Daniel S. Schanck Observatory. Please review and let me know if there are further concerns.--ColonelHenry (talk)22:51, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Attempting to reach out to you so we can finish revising the article and conclude the GAN review. It has been 11 days since your last comments on the review. Please respond.--ColonelHenry (talk)05:58, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't find time to look at it and I probably won't in the next few days. I'm sorry if this doesn't match you expectations. –Editør (talk)11:56, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I disagreed with you so I figured as much. Walking away to let it languish out of spite. That's rather low, dude. You probably shouldn't commit to a GA review when you can't/won't deliver your end of it. --ColonelHenry (talk)05:36, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We already established that we disagree on certain points. Resolving these disagreements takes more time than I anticipated. Once I realized I couldn't respond right away, I tried tonotify you, because I didn't want to leave the impression that I was ignoring the review. After your last comments, however, I am not sure that you actually want a review. – Editør (talk)17:28, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry, dude. I don't start a review and then disappear for two weeks. I don't commit to something then drop it. I finish what I start. I don't leave people hanging, and I don't expect others to leave me hanging. Aside from the courtesy of it, I consider that a bare minimum of fairness. Would you wait for two weeks? --ColonelHenry (talk)18:07, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry that I wasn't more explicit about the time that it would take me. Though I don't understand why you are addressing me in this manner. Sure I would wait two weeks, especially in the holiday season I would understand these things can take a little longer. – Editør (talk)19:55, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the articleMuseum de Oude Wolden 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 ofChrisGualtieri --ChrisGualtieri (talk)02:02, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The articleMuseum de Oude Wolden you nominated as agood article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting thegood article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. SeeTalk:Museum de Oude Wolden for things which need to be addressed.Message delivered byLegobot, on behalf ofChrisGualtieri --ChrisGualtieri (talk)06:12, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thanks for your work on the English Wikipedia. Just a short note to point out that we don’t normally link:

• dates
• years
• commonly known geographical terms (including well-known country-names), and
• common terms you’d look up in a dictionary (unless significantly technical).

Thanks and my best wishes.

Tony(talk)07:55, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean that overlinking should be avoided, I agree with you. But I don't think I've linked any dates or years, and about the geographical names and commons terms, I think it is often a matter of preference. –Editør (talk)21:08, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do relink less common items if you really think it improves things. I've responded on my talk page more fully. Thx.Tony(talk)01:47, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The articleMuseum de Oude Wolden you nominated as agood article has passed; seeTalk:Museum de Oude Wolden for comments about the article. Well done!Message delivered byLegobot, on behalf ofChrisGualtieri --ChrisGualtieri (talk)05:02, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review and efforts! – Editør (talk)13:24, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed you tried to fix something onTemplate:Dutch municipality population density‎. What was the problem and is it fixed now?CRwikiCA talk14:29, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is fixed now, thanks. The output of the template couldn't be used as input for{{convert}}, so I've removed somenewlines/whitespace and now the conversion works properly. I hope it didn't cause any new problems elsewhere. –Editør (talk)17:52, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see, or expect, any problems, so it should be fine. I was just wondering what the problem was.CRwikiCA talk22:29, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleCoat of arms of Groningen (province) 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/Coat of arms of Groningen (province) 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.Launchballer15:19, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On12 February 2014,Did you know? was updated with a fact from the articleVestingmuseum Oudeschans, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was... that theVestingmuseum Oudeschans is a local museum with archaeological findings from thefortified village ofOudeschans in the Netherlands? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Vestingmuseum Oudeschans. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page(here's how,quick check) and it will be added toDYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on theDid you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 15:47, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

On17 February 2014,Did you know? was updated with a fact from the articleCoat of arms of Groningen (province), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was... that thecoat of arms of Groningen was formally adopted byQueen Wilhelmina in 1947, more than 350 years after it was designed? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Coat of arms of Groningen (province). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page(here's how,quick check) and it will be added toDYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on theDid you know? talk page.

Callanecc (talk •contribs •logs)00:02, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

YourFeatured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination forfeatured picture status,File:Goliath Poldermolen.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so atWikipedia:Featured picture candidates.ArmbrustTheHomunculus13:49, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

YourFeatured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination forfeatured picture status,File:Rembrandt van Rijn - A Polish nobleman.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so atWikipedia:Featured picture candidates.ArmbrustTheHomunculus10:21, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

		A beer on me!
		In lieu of a barnstar fromWikiProject Frisia here's a beer for you. It's for your recent efforts at improving and expanding theFriesland article.De728631 (talk)17:06, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! – Editør (talk)17:12, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

YourFeatured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination forfeatured picture status,File:Johannes Vermeer - Het melkmeisje - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so atWikipedia:Featured picture candidates.ArmbrustTheHomunculus09:37, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	The Resilient Barnstar
	Keep up the good job buddy..The Herald (talk)16:18, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! – Editør (talk)17:51, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have a point about the size of the map in theBellingwedde article, it is too bad the smaller map isn't available in a svg version. I'll try to look into that once I am done updating all the municipal infoboxes, because these maps become progressively more out of date as municipalities merge.CRwikiCA talk23:27, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

YourFeatured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination forfeatured picture status,File:Detroit Publishing Company - Rotterdam - Delfsevaart, c. 1895.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so atWikipedia:Featured picture candidates.ArmbrustTheHomunculus10:12, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't seems to got any ping, here,Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Wakatobi flowerpecker. Additional question.Hafspajen (talk)01:25, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No I haven't, but I can say that Alt 1 looks nice. – Editør (talk)08:13, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In that case it probably will not pass, pity.Hafspajen (talk)10:51, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, voting has already ended on 28 June 2014. – Editør (talk)11:03, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, that is a special area, waiting for the last vote, yours, Editør... (Additional question). They wait for your vote to be able to close it. Go toWikipedia:Featured picture candidates#Older nominations requiring additional input from users and you will see... or just scroll down onWikipedia:Featured picture candidates. A waiting area.Hafspajen (talk)15:00, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What Hafspajen said: those who usually close these things have left it open (ignore the comment to the contrary at the top of the page) so that people can re-comment since there was some question on the alt2 vs. alt2 issue... We are now just waiting on you as the rest have re-commented. --ThaddeusB (talk)03:42, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the explaination, but don't wait for me. – Editør (talk)10:27, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

He Editør, I reviewed your DYK nomination; seeTemplate:Did you know nominations/Museum de Fundatie for details... You further comments/adaptions are -as always- appreciated...L.tak (talk)21:45, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! – Editør (talk)09:32, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I made a note about the sons death at theJohan Witteveen article.--BabbaQ (talk)21:29, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the notification, I will have a look at it. – Editør (talk)21:32, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

YourFeatured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination forfeatured picture status,File:De pruimenboomgaard te Kameido-Rijksmuseum RP-P-1956-743.jpeg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so atWikipedia:Featured picture candidates.ArmbrustTheHomunculus09:22, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

YourFeatured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination forfeatured picture status,File:Vincent van Gogh - Bloeiende pruimenboomgaard- naar Hiroshige - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so atWikipedia:Featured picture candidates.ArmbrustTheHomunculus09:22, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission ofWillem Witteveen at theDid You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneathyour nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!czar ♔00:21, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

YourFeatured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination forfeatured picture status,File:Vincent van Gogh - Head of a skeleton with a burning cigarette - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so atWikipedia:Featured picture candidates.ArmbrustTheHomunculus11:40, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On26 July 2014,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleMuseum de Fundatie, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was... that the authenticity of the 1886Van Gogh paintingLe Blute-Fin Windmill(pictured) inMuseum de Fundatie's collection was established in 2010 by theVan Gogh Museum? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Museum de Fundatie. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page(here's how,live views,daily totals), and it may be added tothe statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on theDid you know talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 22:42, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

On28 July 2014,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleWillem Witteveen, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was... thatWillem Witteveen, who was killed on 17 July 2014 as a passenger ofMalaysian Airlines Flight 17, was a legal scholar,senator and non-fiction writer from the Netherlands? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Willem Witteveen. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page(here's how,live views,daily totals), and it may be added tothe statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on theDid you know talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 03:24, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Editør: Are you familiar with the work ofBas Jan Ader? I’m working on an article for “I’m too sad to tell you”. If you can suggest some sources or content, that would be great. I’m particularly interested in the influence this work has had on other artists.--Nowa (talk)12:50, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I can help you with sources or content for his work. – Editør (talk)12:02, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Thanks anyway.--Nowa (talk)13:25, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On8 September 2014,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleThe Goldfinch (painting), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was... that the 1654trompe-l'œil paintingThe Goldfinch(pictured) byCarel Fabritius has been in the collection of theMauritshuis inThe Hague since 1896? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/The Goldfinch (painting). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page(here's how,live views,daily totals), and it may be added tothe statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on theDid you know talk page.

—HJ Mitchell |Penny for your thoughts?12:02, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On3 November 2014,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleRechthuis, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was... that theRechthuis in the Dutch village ofBellingwolde was used as acourthouse from 1643 to 1811? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Rechthuis. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page(here's how,live views,daily totals), and it may be added tothe statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on theDid you know talk page.

 — Crisco 1492 (talk)00:02, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Railway stations in The Netherlands that are owned and maintained byNS Stations (which you recently created), should say that under the parameter {{{owned}}} and have {{{style}}} set as{{NS style}}. I think you are confusing train operations with stations and have created a false{{Arriva style}}. It appears to me that all of those stations have white on blue signage on the platforms rather than the train colors you have used. Am I correct in thinking that Arriva does not actually own the stations?Secondarywaltz (talk)18:00, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are right, the railway stations owned by NS Stations should use the colors of NS in their infobox. However, I was reluctant to change the colors back as boldly as I changed them the first time, before figuring out who owns what exactly at the railway stations. – Editør (talk)18:25, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If Arriva does not own any stations, then{{Arriva style}} could be redirected to{{NS style}}. That would instantly change the display.Secondarywaltz (talk)18:44, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

At theWinschoten railway station for instance, the station building is owned byNS Stations, the tracks byProRail, and the roofed bus station byArriva, but I'm not sure those are all related owners. In any case, I think your suggestion of the redirect is a good idea and make the edits right away. – Editør (talk)18:56, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

YourFeatured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination forfeatured picture status,File:De bedreigde zwaan Rijksmuseum SK-A-4.jpeg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so atWikipedia:Featured picture candidates.ArmbrustTheHomunculus11:47, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

BTW could you indicate atWikipedia:Featured picture candidates/William III of the Netherlands, whether you support the alternative or not? Regards,Armbrust^{TheHomunculus}20:13, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done! – Editør (talk)23:01, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.Armbrust^{TheHomunculus}03:54, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

YourFeatured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination forfeatured picture status,File:Willem III (1817-90), koning der Nederlanden, Nicolaas Pieneman, 1856 - Rijksmuseum.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so atWikipedia:Featured picture candidates.ArmbrustTheHomunculus13:40, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed onJuliëtte Wytsman requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done undersection A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under thecriteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more aboutwhat is generally accepted as notable.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a requesthere. -McMatter^(talk)/_(contrib)22:42, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't alter the format of the entries on the date pages as you have donehere. The explicit – is intentional and is part of the article template specified atWP:DAYS. --Mufka^(u)(t)(c)15:03, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I did use the "proper dashes", but changing the code from – to – is fine by me. – Editør (talk)15:15, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your exchange of images appeared to me editorially insensitive and so I have reversed it. The pearl-studded portrait needs to be closer to the mention of it in the text. Other images in the article are also placed near discussion of them or of the events they commemorate. It would have been better if you had read the article first.Mzilikazi1939 (talk)14:24, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really see a problem, the portrait is not mentioned in the section it accompanied (and now again accompanies). If there is a good reason for using it there, maybe a brief explanation can be added to the image's caption? I think there should be a portrait in the infobox instead of the coat of arms. Are there any alternative portraits that could be used here? – Editør (talk)17:22, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Mzilikazi1939: – Editør (talk)14:40, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you 'think there should be a portrait in the infobox' when there are plenty in the body of the text? Are there WP guidelines on this or is it pure POV? There are certainly many more portraits of Buckingham in Wikimedia, if you can justify their use by anything other than personal preference. The heraldic quarterings of his coat of arms, for those who can interpret them, play a vital part in understanding his aristocratic role and arguably belong where they have been placed. What is really needed is an explanation somewhere of what they mean.Mzilikazi1939 (talk)23:18, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A portrait in the infobox serves the purpose of visual identification of the person. A coat of arms doesn't serve this purpose as well (if it does at all), even though it can an informative illustration for the article on different places. – Editør (talk)10:01, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No infobox wars please. Thank you.Drmies (talk)14:40, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like there isn't any. – Editør (talk)14:42, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, I take some issue with your rather curt removal of an otherwise pretty useless infobox.Drmies (talk)15:32, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the infobox for Lulu Wang, not removed it. If you see a problem with it, please discuss this further at the article's talk page. – Editør (talk)16:14, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid you have that backwards: after your change was reverted, it was for you to obtain consensus for the addition. Now that I see the article creator,Drmies, also sees it as unhelpful on this particular article, it's plain that there is no consensus to add it, so I have removed it again. I saw you making other changes to the article that were helpful, but please do not impose infoboxes just because you like them and then demand others discuss before reverting that particular change. ArbCom has ruled them strictly optional.Yngvadottir (talk)16:39, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user talk page is not the place to find consensus on this issue. Please move this discussion toTalk:Lulu Wang#Infobox. – Editør (talk)16:44, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May I offer a small piece of advice, please? In my experience your case will always be damaged if you re-revert when your edit has been reverted. It's far better at that point to open the talk page discussion and lay out your reasons. You may also wish to alert any Wikiprojects that are interested in the subject, andWikipedia talk:WikiProject Infoboxes in these sort of disputes. If others agree with you, they'll restore your edit: there's never any advantage in doing so yourself. Cheers --RexxS (talk)19:50, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to be butting in again, but if you want to bring more eyes to bear on a discussion, you have to alert others in a way that will not give the appearance of distorting the consensus on the discussion page. I mean you mustn't only notify editors whom you expect to be sympathetic to your view; that's why I suggested alerting multiple Wikiprojects above, as that will usually attract an representative range of editors to lend weight to the discussion without unduly favouring one side. I hope that helps in future. Cheers --RexxS (talk)23:48, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, so I found this EU survey but I don't think it is the one Ethnologue is referring to, but I do think it is useful. This study cites the number of native speakers of Dutch at 96% which imho seems more correct. But judge for yourself:http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_243_en.pdfGati123 (talk)09:22, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I removed your "citation needed" templates fromThe Holland Times, as all you want citation for can simply be read in the paper, and there's already a link to a page that lets you read old editions online. Also, could you further describe the notability issue? It is the only English-language, national newspaper in the Netherlands, that makes it pretty notable to me.PPP (talk)15:22, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please read my comments on the article's talk page and comment there if you have any questions. – Editør (talk)16:59, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You've been around long enough to know that cutting-and-pasting material robs contributors of the credit they're due for their work. Please sort it out.WP:RIABazj (talk)21:48, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain what you want me to sort out. – Editør (talk)07:44, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've added two split templates, guessing that is what you meant, which you could have just said in the first place. – Editør (talk)08:28, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if following the link I left to the section "Repairing insufficient attribution" and reading 1 short paragraph of text was so difficult for you.Bazj (talk)10:49, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Editor,

Just to let you know, the Featured PictureFile:Vincent van Gogh - Head of a skeleton with a burning cigarette - Google Art Project.jpg is schedule to be Picture of the Day on October 31, 2015. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption atTemplate:POTD/2015-10-31. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk)23:32, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I explained, each one, at the article's talk page.

Before you posted to my user talk page, could you please check, and discuss, at the article's talk page, about the article ?

Thank you,

—Cirt (talk)19:26, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thank you for the pleasant manner in which you comported yourself during discussion on the talk page ofThe Truth According to Wikipedia !! Your polite and professional interactions are most appreciated. Thank you ! —Cirt (talk)19:46, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! – Editør (talk)

You're most welcome, —Cirt (talk)19:57, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd very much rather avoid violations ofNo Original Research.

Your own personal POV atThe Truth According to Wikipedia is interesting, but irrelevant.

I'd very much like to keep reliance onsecondary sources for this article, okay?

Thank you, for taking the time to think about this, and your understanding in this matter to not violateNO Original Research,

—Cirt (talk)18:14, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What are you referring to? – Editør (talk)20:46, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Let's both avoid "presume" things, on article talk pages, as you put it, in your words. Instead, let's suggest things backed up to sources, or not at all. Thank you, —Cirt (talk)02:35, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your vague accusations don't make any sense. – Editør (talk)11:19, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When you use the word"presume", without backing up your complaints to any sources and fail to present any sources to back up your complaints -- that is what is vague. You later did back up your claims with cited sources, and that is most appreciated, so that particular complaint is now done and Done and done. Hopefully we can successfully address all of your repeated complaints and move on forwards from here and continue to the future. —Cirt (talk)22:55, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, you are twisting things, because you claimed a violation of NOR before that edit. Secondly, I did link theNederlandse Publieke Omroep article as a reference. In the artice you can read that the NPO uses the three channels NPO 1, NPO 2, and NPO 3 (which were called Nederland 1, Nederland 2, and Nederland 3 in 2008). Your accusations are unfounded. – Editør (talk)23:21, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In the future, please, I ask of you, to avoid"presume" things, before you back them up with sources. Backing them up with sources is the way to go here, on the talk page and in the article space. Thank you for taking some time to think this over and modify your behavior accordingly. —Cirt (talk)00:04, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've been feeling a bit under the weather the past 24-hours with a bit of astomach bug. I'm sorry if my tone recently came off as weird, was suffering from 10/10 pain all day and finally feeling a bit better. Thanks for your helpful participation, it would be appreciated certainly if we could both focus the future discussion on sources and what sources say, rather than our personal opinions, hopefully that's agreeable to you. :) —Cirt (talk)03:57, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop revisiting past issues that we had already resolved.

Your disapproval that a "documentary" is a form of "film" is just mind-boggling.

Despite this, I went through and replaced instances of the word "film" with the word "documentary".

This issue was then resolved.

Thank you,

—Cirt (talk)00:26, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that you have added "done" to a discussion doesn't mean an issue was resolved. You are removing discussions fromTalk:The Truth According to Wikipedia andUser talk:Cirt which makes discussion and communication hard if not impossible. I would like to suggest that you take some distance and revisit the issues at a later time. – Editør (talk)00:34, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are repeatedly revisiting past issues that were resolved to a compromise between both parties. Can you agree that it is factually accurate that I went and removed all instances of the word "Film" and replaced them with the word "Documentary" ??? I would like to suggest that you take some distance and revisit the issues at a later time. —Cirt (talk)01:42, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And it appears you are ignoring my question, above. —Cirt (talk)12:46, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1. Please stop your continued postings reversing your prior positions at Talk:The Truth According to Wikipedia - it is confusing and stagnates progress.
2. I have now shown in several DIFFs where you previously agreed to compromises and my good-faith edits -- only to later go back and reverse yourself and say you are now not fine with them.
3. I removed all instances of word "film", and replaced them all with word "documentary". You previously said you were fine with this and agreed this was an effective compromise, atDIFF. Now, you appear to be reversing yourself, yet again, atDIFF.
4. You previously agreed that non-notable people should not be listed, perDIFF. Now, you appear to be reversing yourself, yet again, atDIFF.
5. It now is clear to me that your participation on the talk page appears to have an added motivation of getting me to make good-faith compromises, only to then go back on your word and make new claims that violate your own prior established agreement with these compromises.
6. Therefore, I respectfully ask you to disengage, back away, and stop participation in this discussion about this article, as you clearly have a lack of ability to engage in good-faith compromises when outreaches are made, as I have done, repeatedly, and you then agreed to, repeatedly, only to reverse yourself and go back on your word.

Thank you for agreeing to step away from your repeated reversals and going back on your word in this matter, it's most appreciated,

—Cirt (talk)12:45, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do no appreciate your continuous accusations, reversions, mentions, pings, premature archiving of talk pages, and complete removals of user talk page discussions. I recommend you to stop taking discussions about facts in articles personal. And I urge you to stop contacting me or posting again on my user talk page. – Editør (talk)13:09, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. Don't post to my user talk page either. And STOP going back on your word from prior agreements. Thanks !!! —Cirt (talk)13:18, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded to the matters of fact on the Escher talk page, but I wanted to mention to you here that the tone of your message seems to me needlessly aggressive and uncollegiate. I have worked hard to bring the article up to a good standard, and it is simply unhelpful to a discussion, and in breach of the Wikipedia policy oncivility, to raise accusations on talk pages. I had in fact noticed something of the sort before, but this instance was so clear that I could not overlook it. It appears from the comments byUser:Cirt above that this is not the first time you have behaved in this way. I would be grateful if you couldassume good faith from now on, if you wish to take part constructively. With many thanks,Chiswick Chap (talk)13:29, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of changing anything in the article, I merely asked questions. You may not like the questions or the issues addressed by them, but I don't see how they are in any way "aggressive and uncollegiate". – Editør (talk)14:07, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Let me just say, then, as gently as possible, that if a statement is made that tends to upset other people, it is the other people, not the person who made the statement, who can best judge whether they found its tone appropriate or not. All the best,Chiswick Chap (talk)14:25, 17 November 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)14:29, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Editør.Astrid Roemer, an article you either created or significantly contributed to, has been nominated  to appear on Wikipedia'sMain Page as part ofDid you know. You can see the hook and the discussionhere. You are welcome to participate! Thank you.APersonBot (talk!)01:54, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission ofAstrid Roemer at theDid You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneathyour nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!Human3015^{Let It Go} 11:27, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On15 January 2016,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleAstrid Roemer, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... that Surinam-born Dutch authorAstrid Roemer is the first Caribbean writer selected to receive the highest Dutch literary prize, theP. C. Hooft Award? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Astrid Roemer. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page(here's how,daily totals), and it may be added tothe statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on theDid you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk·contribs)12:02, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Editør,

Just to let you know, the Featured PictureFile:Goliath Poldermolen.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on February 6, 2016. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption atTemplate:POTD/2016-02-06. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk)00:08, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. – Editør (talk)11:30, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Editør,

Just to let you know, the Featured PictureFile:Johannes Vermeer - Het melkmeisje - Google Art Project.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on March 1, 2016. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption atTemplate:POTD/2016-03-01. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk)00:33, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do notremove voicing assimilations from the Dutch IPA transcriptions. The transcription was correct, the pronunciation[ˈmɑksvɑn] is impossible in connected speech if you're saying these words as if they were one word (unless you're extremely overpronouncing it). I suggest that you readthis excellent free ebook on Dutch phonetics.Martin sv 85 (talk)03:52, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, don't forget that[ɣ] can't appear in the word-final position (see[1]) unless a voiced plosive starts the next word (the next word that is pronounced without a pause between it and the word ending in[ɣ]).Martin sv 85 (talk)03:59, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your transcription onBlauwestad was incorrect; no Dutch word can end in[d] in isolation - seeFinal-obstruent devoicing.Mr KEBAB (talk)13:14, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The same applies to your transcription onDouwe Bob.Mr KEBAB (talk)13:19, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, don't forget toinclude the stress mark in each transcription of words that contain more than one syllable.Mr KEBAB (talk)14:14, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need to send me a message each time you make a correction. – Editør (talk)15:17, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, just trying to help.Mr KEBAB (talk)15:44, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Editor,

Just to let you know, the Featured PictureFile:Rembrandt van Rijn - A Polish nobleman.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on April 26, 2016. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption atTemplate:POTD/2016-04-26. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk)00:09, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just for your information, perWP:NOPIPE, pretty muchthis whole edit was unnecessary rather than "fixes". Links to redirects are not broken.Relentlessly (talk)12:37, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed two links, the others seem alright to me. – Editør (talk)12:46, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They're fine, it's just unnecessary! (Personally, I have CSS styling that alerts me when I have links to redirects, so I always deal with any that matter.)Relentlessly (talk)12:52, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added a "clarification needed" tag under the "Models" section today. I could not determine the missing noun in the phrase. I believe this to be the result of your edit. Hope you can help. --LilHelpa (talk)16:18, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I can, I believe this part was written byUser:Quirienraat. – Editør (talk)23:12, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:LilHelpa,User:Editør Dear all, Sorry for my late reply. I never saw the notification. The missing noun should be "Model" I assume. This comes from a dutch publication about the mode (https://www.cpb.nl/sites/default/files/publicaties/download/doc217.pdf)User:Quirienraat

On23 May 2016,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleWinschoten railway station, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... that during World War II, approximately 500 Jews were transported from theWinschoten railway station via theWesterbork transit camp toNazi concentration camps, where most of them were killed? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Winschoten railway station. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page(here's how,Winschoten railway station), and it may be added tothe statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on theDid you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk·contribs)00:02, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

HelloEditør, onthis edit: The text saying that her conversion to Catholicism was one of the causes of the constitutional crisis has since been removed from the article. Above I see that you also added one for the Winschoten railway station.... as it happens, I was there just one and a half hours ago!Gerard von Hebel (talk)21:41, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have not added the dyktalk template, just ordered the banners perWP:TPL when I added the dyk parameter for theWP:NL banner. – Editør (talk)09:42, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

• Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you,The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee viaMediaWiki message delivery (talk)21:50, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Editør,

Just to let you know, the Featured PicturesFile:De pruimenboomgaard te Kameido-Rijksmuseum RP-P-1956-743.jpeg andFile:Vincent van Gogh - Bloeiende pruimenboomgaard- naar Hiroshige - Google Art Project.jpg are scheduled to be Picture of the Day on September 5, 2016. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the captions atTemplate:POTD/2016-09-05/1 andTemplate:POTD/2016-09-05/2. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk)02:28, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Editør. 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]

If you wanna edit or reverse my edit on theParty for Freedom article please use the talk page. It's well enough documented on the European Election resultS OF 2009 or the dutch wikipedia pages. I also added 5 references. I tried to accommodate your criticism of the edit, but editting my contribution without any discussion on the talk page i would consider hooliganism and report you.— Precedingunsigned comment added byBasBr1 (talk •contribs)04:33, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I had used thetalk page, which you ignored, and I have used explicit edit summaries, which you haven't. If you disagree with the reversion of your edits you should start a discussion. Also seeWikipedia:Edit warring. – Editør (talk)11:01, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Editor,

Just to let you know, the Featured PictureFile:De bedreigde zwaan Rijksmuseum SK-A-4.jpeg is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on April 29, 2017. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption atTemplate:POTD/2017-04-29. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk)01:00, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed you recently added these tags to the above article. They seem redundant to add to an article alreadynominated for AfD over notability and referencing concerns. I was just wondering why you added these tags instead of participating in the AfD discussion. Thanks.Eggishorn(talk)(contrib)20:15, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You might have addressed these issues before nominating the article for deletion. – Editør (talk)21:27, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As noted in the nomination, I attempted to find such sources and did not.Eggishorn(talk)(contrib)21:53, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Editør, I just wanted to let you know that I haveadded the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload onnew page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, seeWikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing!Alex Shih^Talk06:08, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the notification. — Editør (talk)18:36, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Editør. 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]

Hi there, just letting you know that I believe I have adequately addressed your notability concerns regardingSutton Hoo Helmet byRick Kirby; I've responded onthe talk page, and there isan attendant discussion on its DYK nomination page. Please weigh in in one or both of the discussions; if you still do not believe your concerns have been addressed, the probable next step is, asNarutolovehinata5 mentioned, to nominate the article for deletion in order to allow for a more robust discussion. Thanks, --Usernameunique (talk)04:47, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not reopening the merge discussion despite Prince of Thieves being banned as a sockpuppet, it puts a different slant on the discussion but there are more useful things for me to be doing. RegardsSzzuk (talk)11:05, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for informing me about Prince of Thieves being a sockpuppet and being banned. — Editør (talk)09:34, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Sutton Hoo Helmet (sculpture) (edit |talk |history |links |watch |logs)

Hello, andwelcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedlyreverting or undoing other editors' contributions atSutton Hoo Helmet (sculpture). Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing thenormal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach aconsensus on thetalk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to beblocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of thethree-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. ...SerialNumber54129^{...speculates}21:59, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Other users were not following guidelines by agressively removing a warning template and prematurely archiving the discussion about the issue. — Editør (talk)18:57, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Others were repeatedly removing the notability template, but you were repeatedly adding it. That is correctly described as an edit war, and is subject to theWP:EW policy. Whether you felt the discussion reached a proper conclusion is not a factor, sinceWP:3RRNO doesn't give you an exemption for your reverts. The steps ofWP:DR are available if you think you aren't being heard. I agree with you thatthis archiving of a discussion on March 2 looks premature.EdJohnston (talk)19:13, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have checked the article history and I did actually not intend to do the third reversion (the one without an edit summary, which I would normally always add), but that doesn't matter now. It was very clear fromWP:MAINTENANCEDISAGREEMENT that I was generally not doing the wrong thing here. See also my comment below about the apparent reason why people were so keen on archiving the discussion and removing the template. – Editør (talk)19:20, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MAINTENANCEDISAGREEMENT is a section of a how-to guide, whileWP:Edit warring is a Wikipedia policy. The latter takes precedence.EdJohnston (talk)20:03, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was not arguing against precedence or policy. — Editør (talk)21:01, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you atWikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy onedit warring. Thank you.Prince of Thieves (talk)22:09, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The complaint has been closedper this result but you should be cautious about restoring the notability tag again. It seems consensus is against that. Thank you,EdJohnston (talk)16:27, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@EdJohnston: Other users were ignoring guidelines and repeatedly removing templates during an ongoing discussion. — Editør (talk)18:44, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi Editør, nice to see you back. I think you should be aware that the article has been now accepted for DYK, I won't probably support a merge at this point should one be started for that reason.Prince of Thieves (talk)18:59, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Very interesting, now I understand why people were so aggressively removing the warning template and inappropriately archiving an open discussion, it was to make it appear that the notability issue was resolved so theDYK nomination could be accepted. — Editør (talk)19:10, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that is accurate, the AfD was put forward as a procedural requirement to clear the way for the DYK to be accepted, once complete it has gone ahead.Prince of Thieves (talk)21:27, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was just informed above that Prince of Thieves is banned for being a sockpuppet. – Editør (talk)09:39, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Withthis edit in April 2014 you removed the "Further reading" section of theLeeuwarden article, stating "remove Further reading with only Dutch publications". Unfortunately, that section should have been more appropriately entitled "Bibilography", as it contained the bibliographic data for several citations in the main body of text, namely to books by P. J. de Groot,et al., and K. Jansma. The citations were given in short form in the text, so when you deleted the "Further reading" section you removed essential information about sources. On a side note, you might want to think about whether an entry in a "Further reading" section is inapposite simply because it is in a non-English language, or published in a non-English speaking country. For a number of topics the in-depth works were not always published in the English language;Phenomenology (philosophy) comes to mind as an example. Also, not all readers are hindered bymonolingualism. --Bejnar (talk)15:25, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Editør. You have new messages atTalk:Rick Kirby#Merger from Sutton Hoo Helmet (sculpture).
You canremove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Bejnar (talk)16:07, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Editør. 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]

Editør, thank you for informing People on Wikipedia about the error spelling mistakes. It will be taken care of.
I have also noticed that you must —sorry, I meant have lots of experience on Wikipedia. And so I ask for your help, could you improve theWikipedia:WikiProject Carnival Page. as the Project has no task forces and Does not have any Requested articles!

Best Wishes,—Martian-2008 (talk)12:35, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed onCategory:Vlagtwedde requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done undersection C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not adisambiguation category, acategory redirect, afeatured topics category, under discussion atCategories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you maycontest the nomination byvisiting the page and clicking the button labelled "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 deleted 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.Liz^Read!Talk!15:56, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed onCategory:Loppersum requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done undersection C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not adisambiguation category, acategory redirect, afeatured topics category, under discussion atCategories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you maycontest the nomination byvisiting the page and clicking the button labelled "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 deleted 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.Liz^Read!Talk!17:00, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Overijssel Regions has beennominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion atthe entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Dutchy45 (talk)18:28, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NL style has beennominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion atthe entry on the Templates for discussion page.WikiCleanerMan (talk)22:55, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Syntus Stoptrein color has beennominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion atthe entry on the Templates for discussion page.Frietjes (talk)20:50, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Arriva Stoptrein stations has beennominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion atthe entry on the Templates for discussion page.Frietjes (talk)19:08, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I'vebegun reviewing the articleFemke Bol 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 byChristieBot, on behalf ofThe Blue Rider --The Blue Rider (talk)12:42, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Editør, I've seen you have made a tremendous amount of edits on the articleFemke Bol, I just wanted to know what your goal is and if you needed any help. Thanks.Alexysun (talk)21:49, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for checking in. I've been trying to improve it to good article standard. Two weeks ago, I've nominated it for GA it and I am currently awaiting the (full)review that was started last week as you can see right above your post. I think I need to wait and see for now, but I will let you know if I need help in a later stage. I've just started working on the articleAmsterdam Marathon, where there is still a lot to do if that would interest you. – Editør (talk)22:39, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexysun, the articleFemke Bol is now a good article. I've been improving several articles about 400 m / 400 m hurdles / 4 x 400 m relay events at championships.2024 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres hurdles has just past its good article review. Would you like to help improve more event articles up to good article status? – Editør (talk)21:27, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Editør Thanks for pinging me. I would like to help yes.Alexysun (talk)21:50, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you could have a look at the events linked in the medal table ofFemke Bol. – Editør (talk)22:15, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexysun ping – Editør (talk)19:47, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Editør Will look into it.Alexysun (talk)02:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The articleFemke Bol you nominated as agood article has passed; seeTalk:Femke Bol for comments about the article, andTalk:Femke Bol/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you cannominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility.Message delivered byChristieBot, on behalf ofThe Blue Rider --The Blue Rider (talk)11:42, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you are already considering doing it, but someone with such an impressive curriculum as Femke Bol would look great at a DYK. Do nominate it!TheBlue Rider23:32, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am considering nominating her indoor world record (Did you know thatFemke Bol broke the 41-year-oldworld record ofJarmila Kratochvílová in the400 metres indoor on 19 February 2023?), or do you have another suggestion? – Editør (talk)23:54, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, that one looks great.TheBlue Rider00:59, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've justnominated it. – Editør (talk)11:37, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Minor barnstar
	For cleaning upTalk:The TRACK at New Balance.I dream of horses(Contribs)(Talk)02:33, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! – Editør (talk)12:08, 27 November 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)00:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On7 December 2023,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleFemke Bol, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... thatFemke Bol broke the 41-year-oldindoor world record for the400 metres with a time of 49.26 seconds in 2023? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Femke Bol. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,Femke Bol), and the hook may be added tothe statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on theDid you know talk page.

RoySmith(talk)00:02, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I'vebegun reviewing the articleFemke 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 byChristieBot, on behalf ofThe Blue Rider --The Blue Rider (talk)12:03, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		Women in Green Editathon October '23
		At last – here is your barnstar! Thank you for your excellent contributions to GA nominationFemke Bol and GA review ofSeraphina Sforza at theWiG "Around the World in 31 Days" Good Article editathon. Best,Alanna the Brave (talk)02:25, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and thank you for organizing! – Editør (talk)10:21, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, Editør! The list you nominated,Dutch Athlete of the Year, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. Thenomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you maynominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers,PresN (talk) viaFACBot (talk)00:25, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The articleFemke you nominated as agood article has passed; seeTalk:Femke for comments about the article, andTalk:Femke/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you cannominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility.Message delivered byChristieBot, on behalf ofThe Blue Rider --The Blue Rider (talk)18:04, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@The Blue Rider, thank you for your review! – Editør (talk)18:14, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Editør. Your question has been answered at theTeahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions arearchived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added byGeardona (talk to me?)12:52, 10 January 2024 (UTC). (You canremove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.[reply]

Congratulations, Editør! The list you nominated,List of winners of the Amsterdam Marathon, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. Thenomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you maynominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers,PresN (talk) viaFACBot (talk)12:25, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On26 January 2024,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleFemke, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... thatFemke is the most common femininegiven name ofWest Frisian origin in the Netherlands? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Femke. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,Femke), and the hook may be added tothe statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on theDid you know talk page.

Z1720 (talk)12:02, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Felt like sending someone a kitten.

Coulomb1 (talk)16:26, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :-) – Editør (talk)16:48, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Editør:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-longGood Article Edit-a-thon event in June 2024!

Running from June 1 to 30, 2024, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) edit-a-thon event with the themeGoing Back in Time! All experience levels welcome. Never worked on a GA project before? We'll teach you how to get started. Or maybe you're an old hand at GAs – we'd love to have you involved! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films) during the event period. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least20 centuries by month's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

Grnrchst (talk)11:02, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you for the suggestion. I have not yet personally ever added a photograph. Is it a straight forward process? Thanks GHildreth gazzard (talk)18:30, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hildreth gazzard, a simple way to start is using images that are already uploaded onWikimedia Commons. When you have found an image you want to use in an article, you can insert something like this[[File:Filename.jpg|thumb|Caption text]] in the source of that article. Here is a real working example of an image that you can copy-paste and maybe preview to see if you like it in theLouise Maraval article:

[[File:2024 European Athletics Championships womens 400 metres hurdles podium.jpg|thumb|Louise Maraval (left) with her silver European [[2024 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres hurdles|400 m hurdles]] medal, together with gold medalist [[Femke Bol]] and bronze medalist [[Cathelijn Peeters]]]]

You can find more info onHelp:Pictures, including info for inserting images with the visual editor. Feel free to let me know if you have any questions. – Editør (talk)19:50, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I'vebegun reviewing the article2024 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres hurdles 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 byChristieBot, on behalf ofArconning --Arconning (talk)14:04, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article2024 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres hurdles you nominated as agood article has passed; seeTalk:2024 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres hurdles for comments about the article, andTalk:2024 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres hurdles/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article iseligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you cannominate it within the next seven days.Message delivered byChristieBot, on behalf ofArconning --Arconning (talk)14:23, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Arconning, thank you for your review and your quick responses! – Editør (talk)14:27, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You too! :)Arconning (talk)14:33, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

		Women in Green Editathon June '24
		Thank you so much for contributing toWomen in Green's sixth editathon, with your successful GA nomination of the2024 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres hurdles. Excellent work! Best wishes --Grnrchst (talk)11:41, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! – Editør (talk)11:44, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, regardingyour revert: Diamond Leagues are the highest tier single-day events in athletics, so I'd expect those to be the best-maintained of such articles. The world record listsofmostDiamondLeaguepagesareinreverse chronological order, so that is (apparently) the standard way, and I merely made the FBK Games list consistent - along withthreeremainingDL pages. But I guess I should have been more clear about applying this standard on the FBK Games page. Does this explanation suffice to accept my edit as yet? (As for marking it minor, it seemed just a small formatting change to me, but I guess that's too loose an interpretation of 'minor edit'.) --Xymph (talk)Xymph (talk)16:02, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message. Looking atHelp:Minor edit, I think fixing a misordering (1994 1995 1997 <–> 1996 1998 1999) would be a minor edit, changing the order of an entire table would probably not be one. Thank you for your explanation, it wouldn't be my choice though, it seems to me more fitting for an encyclopedia to have them chronologically ordered as most tables with athletics results are chronologically ordered on Wikipedia, although apparently not these WR tables. (By the way, the FBK Games are a not a Diamond League event, although that doesn't seem relevant here.) – Editør (talk)16:42, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, but as major single-day events they seem the most suitable examples to follow for page organization and style in other such athletics articles. So far I had only looked at the FBK Games out of personal interest (I'm a judge at this event), but reverse order is also used onotherWorldChallenges, and even a lower tierevent. In recent days I have worked on making various bits of information consistent(ly presented) on the Diamond League pages on the English and Dutch wikis (mostly on the latter, tbh), and so using reverse order on the FBK Games page (and twomoreevents I found to deviate) would be consistent. Whether it's logical... I don't know how this order became so widely adopted, but now that it's in place it can stay, as far as I'm concerned.
What I was a little surprised to see however is your requirement that references are added for world records at the FBK Games, only. Few of the Diamond League and World Challenge pages even list references, but none of the others have been tagged with Unreferenced-section. Theworld record progression pages for each discipline typically have sources for all entries, doesn't that suffice? Again, I am looking at this from a consistency POV, to strive for with a pragmatic amount of work. Adding sources to all mentioned event pages seems like, well, an excessive amount of duplication. --Xymph (talk)20:06, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Consistency can be a positive thing, but I would be careful with using 'most articles do it this way' as an argument for also doing it that way, especially when the article you're copying hasn't undergone any review process. I looked atCategory:GA-Class Athletics articles and for instance the good articleChicago Marathon has only chronological tables and list.

On the English Wikipedia, I think it is common to add sources for all the information that you're adding to an article. This makes the information verifiable for other readers (WP:V), but also prevents people with a personal connection to a subject (like you have in this case) to accidentally add unpublished information from original research, which is not allowed (WP:OR).

I don't think that another Wikipedia article is suitable as source for a world record. Sometimes you can simply copy the source used in that article. For the article about the FBK Games, there are only six world records, so sourcing isn't very much work, here are six sources you can use (but please double check them before adding):[2][3][4][5][6][7] – Editør (talk)21:32, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the links, they are in place along with two more. Of course it wasn't a real problem to do that for this short list. But it's another matter for long lists likeBislett_Games#World_records,Memorial_Van_Damme#World_records, andWeltklasse_Zürich#World_records (which uses a single but dead and unarchived source). Not requiring the same sourcing there and on related articles seems a little uneven - but I'm not going to spend the effort to address it.
I didn't see other GA-class articles on similar competitions, and among B-class articles some use regular sorting butthreeusereverse. So apparently there no guideline and either way is fine depending on what the editors working on such tables feel like. Thus I applied reverse ordering for consistency, which then is a good enough fallback reason. --Xymph (talk)14:14, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why you are favoring consistency with not reviewed articles over consistency with a reviewed article, and I don't understand why you've changed it again using this discussion as a reference that doesn't seem to have this conclusion. – Editør (talk)14:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And you should probably declare your connection to the article's subject on its talk page usingTemplate:Connected contributor. – Editør (talk)16:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hesitated why I'd even bother to address such a silly suggestion, but figured you may not have any idea how a big one-day event is organized. So, as said I am an (in-field) judge, one of several dozen judges and one of a few hundred volunteers in total, who spend one day a year contributing to make the competition possible. Without unpaid volunteers, these things just don't happen, at least not in the Netherlands. I am not involved with the organization, its financing, its publicity, or anything else that might be considered a conflict of interest. My interest ispersonal as in: an athletics fan who recently started contributing more to athletics articles and improving little bits in lots of articles – FBK Games just being one of them. Single-day competitions in particular since they appear to get less attention than the major championships. In fact the number of broken links in need of archiving is mind-boggling... Anyway, no, I don't think I need to declare anything. And btw, thanks for showing how to improve table accessibility. --Xymph (talk)15:26, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining your connection as judge in more detail. As an unpaid volunteer, you clearly don't have a directfinancial interest. I don't know enough about declaring personal connections on Wikipedia to determine which should and which shouldn't be declared. And please note: "Someone having a conflict of interest is a description of a situation, not a judgment about that person's opinions, integrity, or good faith." Quoted fromWP:COI. – Editør (talk)17:12, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, one more thing about tables: what determines whether the first column on a row should be a header cell (with appropriate scope),like here? I don't recall seeing this elsewhere on meeting record tables (or e.g.world or area/national records). And why not on FBK'sworld records table? --Xymph (talk)10:06, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is my understanding that a header is meant to label a column or row and is typically a fixed element. For instance, in the meeting records tables of theFanny Blankers-Koen Games article, "100 m" is a fixed label of a row and the other values in that row vary to match the best result until the meeting record is broken again. SeeWikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility/Data tables tutorial for more information about tables, including headers. Not all potential header cells on Wikipedia are yet labeled as such, maybe the editor that created a table forgot it or didn't know about them: another reason why you should probably be cautious using articles that haven't gone through a review process as guide on how to do things. However, in my opinion not all tables require row headers, like the world records table in the FBK article, but others may disagree.

Coming back to whether a personal connection should be disclosed or doesn't have to be, when Iasked about this to get a better understanding, two other editors shared their preference for disclosing their connections for the sake of transparency. – Editør (talk)12:21, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, no biggie then. Done. And while I had already read that tutorial, it didn't clarify thepurpose of row header cells, but immutability is a fair point. --Xymph (talk)13:28, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On21 July 2024,Did you know was updated with a fact from the article2024 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres hurdles, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... thatFemke Bol won thewomen's 400 metres hurdles at the 2024 European Athletics Championships(medallists pictured) in a championship record of 52.49 seconds? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/2024 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres hurdles. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,2024 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres hurdles), and the hook may be added tothe statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on theDid you know talk page.

RoySmith(talk)00:02, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Been following your FBK Games table edits, and am deploying them slowly to the Diamond League meeting pages, but I am wondering whetherthis change is such a good idea. I can see your point language-wise, a person from Australia is an Australian. ButNationality is also "the legal status of belonging to a particular nation", so in that sense it doesn't seem wrong to me to list the nation (country) from which the athlete received their nationality. The point is that this term isverywidelyin use in athletics tables, and even if they haven't been reviewed to GA status, it strikes me as very unlikely that dozens (hundreds?) of regular athletics contributors got this wrong all this time. The Chicago Marathon article doesn't help here as its two tables are too simple to help out in this matter (nor in some other changes you made on FBK Games, but those seem fine to me). So what do you think, should we stick to Nationality, or seek council higher up? --Xymph (talk)18:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that in the end these sorts of things come down to what makes sense to individual editors working on an article. I would go with grammar, semantics, and how you would say it; and someone's nationality is not Australia, but someone's nation is. One could argue that a table with records should not have a field called "Nation" or "Nationality" in the first place, because it is not a property of the record, but of the athlete. One way to deal with that is by merging the nation(ality) column into the athlete column using{{Flagathlete}} (inside{{Sortname}}) so that 'Usain Bolt of Jamaica' looks like this ' Usain Bolt (JAM)'. However this makes it impossible to sort the table by nationality. – Editør (talk)21:54, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is used inother table types, but indeed not relevant for the case at hand. In somerelated tables, Country is used. I haven't seen Nation used in athletics tables (although I admit not browsing exhaustively), but in other sportsit is - sometimes even interlaced with Nationality onthe same page. My take away is that many editors accept all three terms to mean the same thing. It seems unlikely that a wider discussion would result in consensus about a single term, let alone to achieve widespread consistent adoption. So I am okay with your FBK Games edit but with Nationality being the most commonly used term in athletics tables, it feels like a waste of effort to start changing that elsewhere. --Xymph (talk)09:43, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In tables on the website ofWorld Athletics, they're using "Nat" referring to the nationality of an athlete or nation the athlete is representing and "Cnt." referring to the country as location of a competition. Both Nat and Cnt. values are abbreviated like "JPN" or "GBR". On the athlete profile, they're using "Country" for the country an athlete is representing. Here the Country value is written in full. So there are different ways of writing it down. When it comes to consistency on Wikipedia, I think it is more important to be consistent within an article than to be consistent between articles thoughout Wikipedia, like with date formats or English language variants: choose what you believe to be most appriopriate for that article and allow diversity on Wikipedia. – Editør (talk)10:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For example, in2024 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres hurdles that I helped improve to good article, the word 'nation' is used throughout consistent with the fixed term "nations" in the infobox, and in its tables the nation is separate when sorting is meaningful and merged when sorting isn't meaningful. – Editør (talk)10:39, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Within the context of athletics, an athlete can only represent one nation at a given time, while this athlete can have more than one nationality in the definition you quoted before "the legal status of belonging to a particular nation". Listed are the nations they're representing. Maybe that can help? – Editør (talk)10:51, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I am fine with what you chose elsewhere, I'll just repeat that I am not going to invest my (limited) time/energy in editing this particular aspect on the page series that I'm working on. Also, it could then be that there are some (a whole lot?) of swimming articles waiting for your internal consistency edits. :-) --Xymph (talk)16:26, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On3 August 2024,Did you know was updated with a fact from the article2024 World Athletics Relays – Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... that the championship record was broken three times in themixed 4 × 400 metres relay at the 2024 World Athletics Relays? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/2024 World Athletics Relays – Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,2024 World Athletics Relays – Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay), and the hook may be added tothe statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on theDid you know talk page.

Z1720 (talk)00:03, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On4 August 2024,Did you know was updated with a fact from the article2022 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... thatFemke Bol won thewomen's 400 metres and400 metres hurdles at the 2022 European Athletics Championships in an unprecedented double victory? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/2022 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,2022 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres), and the hook may be added tothe statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on theDid you know talk page.

Z1720 (talk)00:02, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On4 August 2024,Did you know was updated with a fact from the article2022 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres hurdles, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... thatFemke Bol won thewomen's 400 metres and400 metres hurdles at the 2022 European Athletics Championships in an unprecedented double victory? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/2022 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,2022 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres hurdles), and the hook may be added tothe statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on theDid you know talk page.

Z1720 (talk)00:02, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit you added a citation needed notation. This information is easily located on most Olympic documents. Please don't do this. If you find it so overpoweringly needed, go source it yourself instead of posting the "citation needed" tag. That tag on a very visible page this week detracts from Wikipedia credibility. If it were a contentious issue, maybe this would be appropriate. This is not such a situation. It makes us look stupid. I hope I don't find more of these posted elsewhere, this is not an area I customarily search because it is so common knowledge. Please go back and remove if you have. ReadWP:BEFORE fix problems before dragging other people into a problem.Trackinfo (talk)06:38, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the information is easily located, as you say, adding a citation shouldn't be an issue.WP:BEFORE is about actions that should be taken before nominating an article for deletion, which doesn't seem to apply here because the article was not nominated for deletion. – Editør (talk)08:42, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know that an imminent block is coming if you don’t stop your disruptive edits. Even if you want to use the argument that specific references need citation, the pattern of your edits are disruptive and unhelpful snd you should stop. Instead of adding these ugly tags, how about you source them yourself? You know that’s also an option…Journalist .talk— Precedingundated comment added13:17, 4 September 2024‎ (UTC)[reply]

@Journalist, I didn't add the OLY letters and I wasn't able to find a source.Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce is a good article, so according to thegood article criteria (criterion 2) all information that can be challenged should be sourced. A citation needed template should not be removed because you believe it looks ugly without adding a suitable citation, see for more informationTemplate:Citation needed. You have now reverted three edits in a short period of time, which is considerededit warring and unacceptable behaviour. – Editør (talk)13:35, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Editør:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-longGood Article Edit-a-thon event in October 2024!

Running from October 1 to 31, 2024, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) edit-a-thon event with the themeAround the World in 31 Days! All experience levels welcome. Never worked on a GA project before? We'll teach you how to get started. Or maybe you're an old hand at GAs – we'd love to have you involved! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films) during the event period. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least31 countries (or broader international articles) by month's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

Grnrchst (talk)09:25, 25 September 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)00:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Editors are expected to treat each other with respect and civility. On this encyclopedia project, editorsassume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not appear to do atWikipedia:Village pump (policy). Here is Wikipedia'swelcome page, and it is hoped that you will assume the good faith of other editors and continue to help us improve Wikipedia! Thank you very much!Hey man im josh (talk)18:50, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another user repeatedly displayed disruptive behaviour and I called this user out. A user whose previous account was blocked indefinitely for disruptive behaviour, I might say. Maybe I made some mistakes along the way, but I did not start this. – Editør (talk)19:46, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Editør. I'm just posting to let you know thatList of winners of the Amsterdam Marathon – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page asToday's featured list for January 13, 2025. The TFL blurb can be seenhere. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or atTFL talk. Regards,Giants2008 (Talk)01:34, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Giants2008, the TFL blurb looks like a good summary to me, thanks. – Editør (talk)12:15, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On20 December 2024,Did you know was updated with a fact from the article2023 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... thatFemke Bol successfully defended her 2021 title by winning thewomen's 400 metres at the 2023 European Athletics Indoor Championships? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/2023 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,2023 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres), and the hook may be added tothe statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on theDid you know talk page.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk)00:03, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~~ Merry Christmas! ~~~
Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten!
¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua!
God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus!
Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce!
Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством!
শুভ বড়দিন! ~ 圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스!
สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส! ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành!
Весела Коледа! ~ Meri Kirihimete!

Hello, Editør! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you aMerry Christmas and aHappy New Year!
Yue🌙21:41, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, happy holidays for you as well! – Editør (talk)14:04, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think Naide Gomes still needs quite a bit of work, particularly towards the article body, before it is GA material. I will work on the article gradually these coming days and weeks, but my pace will be much slower due to real-life commitments. If you're strict with GA timing and procedures, I suggest closing my first nomination and not revisiting until my second nomination. Otherwise, I will ping you at the first nomination's page when most or all of the work has been done and you can take a look then. Regardless, consider your or other editors' projects in the meantime, and apologies if I caused you any trouble. Cheers.Yue🌙02:42, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to take more time to expand the Career section of the article, that is alright with me as long as there continues to be some progress. And it shouldn't go on endlessly, do you think it is realistic to do the expansion in the next two weeks so we can try to finish the review before the end of January? – Editør (talk)13:43, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the already endless nature of our work on Naide Gomes. I'll try to implement all your suggestions and other improvements within the coming week, probably sooner.Yue🌙05:47, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Editør: I've implemented all your suggestions toNaide Gomes. The only major deviation was I listed her national championship titles but not her full results because I wasn't confident in the World Athletics' distinctions. Take a look when you have time (this isthe diff since your second review). Cheers.Yue🌙00:26, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I will look at the article and comment on the review page. – Editør (talk)12:02, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Editør: Howdy again! I've responded to all your points in your final review and made adjustments accordingly. I have I think two questions asking specifically for your opinion on something. Everything else was addressed according to your suggestions. Please let me know which edits were inadequate;the diff is here. Cheers again.Yue🌙09:58, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your diligence. Cheers!Yue🌙00:18, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, cheers! – Editør (talk)00:20, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The Good Article Rescue Barnstar
		This is presented to you bythe GAR process in recognition of your sterling work in helpingKristen Bell retain its Good Article status. Please feel free to display the GA icon on your userpage. Keep up the good work!~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk)17:15, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! – Editør (talk)18:23, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I'vebegun reviewing the article2023 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres 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 byChristieBot, on behalf ofRiley1012 --Riley1012 (talk)01:04, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article2023 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres you nominated as agood article has passed; seeTalk:2023 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres for comments about the article, andTalk:2023 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article iseligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you cannominate it within the next seven days.Message delivered byChristieBot, on behalf ofRiley1012 --Riley1012 (talk)02:42, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Riley1012! – Editør (talk)10:30, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. What should be done withEuropean Athlete of the Month? Updating the winners has become an issue.KWiki (talk)04:53, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure European Athletics is still organizing this. If not, the article should reflect this, but finding a source with this information will likely be difficult. – Editør (talk)07:55, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I'vebegun reviewing the article2024 World Athletics Relays – Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay 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 byChristieBot, on behalf ofSSSB --SSSB (talk)09:23, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article2024 World Athletics Relays – Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay you nominated as agood article has been placed on hold. The article needs changes or clarifications to meet thegood article criteria. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. SeeTalk:2024 World Athletics Relays – Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay andTalk:2024 World Athletics Relays – Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed.Message delivered byChristieBot, on behalf ofSSSB --SSSB (talk)09:46, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Arriva style has beennominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion atthe entry on the Templates for discussion page.Cards8466401:55, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I'vebegun reviewing the article2024 European Athletics Championships – Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay 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 byChristieBot, on behalf ofIt is a wonderful world --It is a wonderful world (talk)19:45, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article2024 European Athletics Championships – Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay you nominated as agood article has passed; seeTalk:2024 European Athletics Championships – Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay for comments about the article, andTalk:2024 European Athletics Championships – Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article iseligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you cannominate it within the next seven days.Message delivered byChristieBot, on behalf ofIt is a wonderful world --It is a wonderful world (talk)21:02, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@It is a wonderful world, thank you! – Editør (talk)00:37, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article2024 World Athletics Relays – Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay you nominated as agood article has passed; seeTalk:2024 World Athletics Relays – Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay for comments about the article, andTalk:2024 World Athletics Relays – Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article iseligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you cannominate it within the next seven days.Message delivered byChristieBot, on behalf ofSSSB --SSSB (talk)06:01, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SSSB, thank for the review! – Editør (talk)08:43, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article2025 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres you nominated as agood article has been placed on hold. The article needs changes or clarifications to meet thegood article criteria. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. SeeTalk:2025 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres andTalk:2025 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed.Message delivered byChristieBot, on behalf ofDaniloDaysOfOurLives --DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk)16:03, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I'vebegun reviewing the article2024 World Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres 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 byChristieBot, on behalf ofIt is a wonderful world --It is a wonderful world (talk)07:24, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article2024 World Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres you nominated as agood article has passed; seeTalk:2024 World Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres for comments about the article, andTalk:2024 World Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article iseligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you cannominate it within the next seven days.Message delivered byChristieBot, on behalf ofIt is a wonderful world --It is a wonderful world (talk)14:44, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @It is a wonderful world! – Editør (talk)20:46, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I'vebegun reviewing the article2023 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 4 × 400 metres relay 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 byChristieBot, on behalf ofIt is a wonderful world --It is a wonderful world (talk)11:44, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On15 May 2025,Did you know was updated with a fact from the article2024 European Athletics Championships – Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... that Ireland won themixed 4 × 400 metres relay at the 2024 European Athletics Championships, receiving their first European gold medal in athletics since 1998? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/2024 European Athletics Championships – Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,2024 European Athletics Championships – Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay), and the hook may be added tothe statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on theDid you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk)00:03, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article2025 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres you nominated as agood article has passed; seeTalk:2025 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres for comments about the article, andTalk:2025 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article iseligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you cannominate it within the next seven days.Message delivered byChristieBot, on behalf ofDaniloDaysOfOurLives --DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk)03:46, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @DaniloDaysOfOurLives! – Editør (talk)10:28, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article2023 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 4 × 400 metres relay you nominated as agood article has passed; seeTalk:2023 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 4 × 400 metres relay for comments about the article, andTalk:2023 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 4 × 400 metres relay/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article iseligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you cannominate it within the next seven days.Message delivered byChristieBot, on behalf ofIt is a wonderful world --It is a wonderful world (talk)12:43, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @It is a wonderful world! Sorry that it took me a bit longer than anticipated to address all your points. – Editør (talk)12:51, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, thanks for addressing themIAWW (talk)13:09, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I'vebegun reviewing the article2024 World Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 4 × 400 metres relay 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 byChristieBot, on behalf ofIt is a wonderful world --It is a wonderful world (talk)20:41, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I'vebegun reviewing the article2024 European Athletics Championships – Women's 4 × 400 metres relay 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 byChristieBot, on behalf ofIt is a wonderful world --It is a wonderful world (talk)21:28, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I'vebegun reviewing the article2022 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres 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 byChristieBot, on behalf ofIt is a wonderful world --It is a wonderful world (talk)22:02, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]