Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Vladimir.copic! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you foryour contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try theTask Center.

If you don't already know, you should sign your posts ontalk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to insert your username and the date.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being aWikipedian! Again, welcome! –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄)05:51, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello andwelcome to Wikipedia. When you add content totalk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, such as atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Kabeedies, (but never when editing articles), please be sure tosign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add fourtildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄)05:52, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a bunch for sprucing up the page, I hope accessing the sources wasn’t too hard.Paragon Deku (talk)03:59, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• @Paragon Deku: Thanks. It's an interesting topic although hard to access sources (even with database access). It did raise questions as to whether there should be another page for Korean Cultural and Freedom Foundation or merge this with a Radio of Free Asia page.Vladimir.copic (talk)04:41, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want another headache, I made the unfortunate discovery a few days ago that there are far more sources on this topic than I realized because the outlet was often incorrectly called “Radio Free Asia” by print sources, which is a similar yet distinct organization. Thankfully the original Radio Free Asia was defunct before Radio of Free Asia began, so sorting newspaper archives to the 60s and 70s and searching for “radio free Asia” should only bring up information about the organization itself named radio OF free Asia.Paragon Deku (talk)05:58, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Paragon Deku: The Korean Cultural and Freedom Foundation has some interesting links tothe Moonies which would probably be interesting too.Vladimir.copic (talk)06:29, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

For additional information, please see theguidance on discretionary sanctions and theArbitration Committee's decisionhere. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

My very best wishes (talk)03:41, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Don't do this. Yes it would make a point, and yes I personally agree with that point, but you and I both know that this article is spurious and shouldn't exist. If you would like to challenge the AfD closure you may do so by either talking toUser:Sandstein or opening a formalWP:DRV if that is unsatisfactory.BSMRD (talk)15:37, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I can’t speak for them personally, but I doubt this was meant to go beyond the draft space to prove a point (in which case I don’t really find an issue). I do agree though that posting it to main space would be an awful idea.Paragon Deku (talk)17:42, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I started off looking into this as a joke but now actually think it’s a thing . Frank Lloyd Wright even wrote abook about it. There is so much published work discussing it. Happy to dump this if it’s seen as a bad idea.Vladimir.copic (talk)18:47, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I’d like to go over the sources and talk shop with you about it when I have the time (just to make sure we’re not going in the same direction of making a SYNTH mess), but if you think it’s a notable topic (rather than just analysis of architecture in democratic states), I’m all for you drafting it up.Paragon Deku (talk)18:55, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I actually think this little sojourn onto the edges of political WP has put me off for good. Think I’ll just retreat back to jazz and soul music articles.Vladimir.copic (talk)19:13, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently editedIdris Muhammad, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageUncut. Such links areusually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles.(Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)06:00, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules calleddiscretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may imposesanctions on editors who do not strictly followWikipedia's policies, or thepage-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see theguidance on discretionary sanctions and theArbitration Committee's decisionhere. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

--Neutrality^talk00:19, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect.It doesnot imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. You have shown interest in theUyghur genocide. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has enacted a more stringent set of rules. Any administrator may imposesanctions—such asediting restrictions,bans, orblocks—on editors who do not strictly followWikipedia's policies, or thepage-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see theguidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

—Mikehawk10 (talk)04:57, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vladimir.copic. You have new messages atMikehawk10's talk page.
Message added05:12, 8 September 2021 (UTC). You canremove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

—Mikehawk10 (talk)05:12, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This notice is being given to everyone who has reverted on the pageAdrian Zenz this month. It is not an indication that you have done anything wrong. It is to inform you that the pageAdrian Zenz is under aWP:1RR restriction until further notice in response to excessive edit warring on the page.HighInBC^{Need help?Just ask.}03:35, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think you make a really good point. I am just wondering if you have thought it to its full extent. Taiwan is in my mind not the best example. I thinkSomaliland and a few other de facto states are much better examples. In these cases there is no functional outside government in the area, so no matter what outsiders may recognize, how exactly do we consistently exclude them from being state leaders? The question of who the state leader is in Australia is also a good one. I think it is high time that in Wikipedia wenot allow lists that no one can find an actual published version of. One article including a listing of the two oldest people alive now who were ever state leaders is not at all close to the 100 oldest ones. Until someone can point to a published list of the 100 oldest living state leaders, regardless of if they are still in office, this list will be a step too far. This is especially true since it is not clear we can even say for sure if all former state leaders are currently alive or dead. If this set of people were actually a notable encyclopedic group we would expect people to make sure to always know for sure if every former state leader was currently alive, but this is not the case in every possible place it could be the case.John Pack Lambert (talk)14:16, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HiJohn. Yes unfortunately WP has become host to a whole heap of OR and unnessesary lists. I suppose they are fun for editors to put together and much easier than editing actual articles but so often they are not reflected in sources and contradict policy. Some editors are doing valiant efforts at bringing these to AfD but so often are outweighed by preservationists. For instancemy recent AfD was rejected despiteWP:NOTCATALOG advising against "non-encyclopedic cross-categorizations, such as 'people from ethnic / cultural / religious group X employed by organization Y'". So it goes. Such is life. EtcVladimir.copic (talk)03:16, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vladimir,

I wanted to ask for advice, given that you have started an RfC at the Reliable Sources noticeboard for ASPI, and I wanted to know whether you think I should do the same for theHouston Chronicle. I startednon-RFC post on the noticeboard because it hasn't been the subject of controversy; at the same time, the Houston Chronicle doesn't appear to have been the subject of any dedicated discussion to it in the noticeboard, nor does it appear in the perennial sources. It's crucially included in an article currently listed on the frontpage,Astroworld Festival crowd crush. Do you think I should request an RfC or not? Thank you in advance.Pilaz (talk)19:44, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I’m probably not the right person to give advice on this. I didn’t do myRfC in regards to any particular article so it seemed like the right thing. Maybe take it to the teahouse?Vladimir.copic (talk)09:34, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,On the pageList of minority governors and lieutenant governors in the United States, you've repeatedly removed sourced information saying that it's unsourced and to use a reliable source. The section in question cites the Washington Post, which is listed as reliable onWP:RSN. It'd be appreciated if you'd stop removing the sourced information now. Thanks,Thanoscar21_{talk,contribs}00:27, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Thanoscar21: Have you read the source you are referencing here? It never once mentions Chris Sununu and is about his father John. This is really not enough for a racial classification of a BLP. We have to have higher standards about this. I tried to raise this on the talk page but no one seems to want to engage there - just edit war.Vladimir.copic (talk)00:32, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vladimir.copic. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know thatDraft:Democratic Architecture, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six monthsmay be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, pleaseedit it again orrequest that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you canrequest it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.FireflyBot (talk)15:03, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just wanted to say that I love your user page :) —JThistle38 (talk)10:39, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Credit goes to Ju Feng who took this photograph and then gave it a CC license.Vladimir.copic (talk)11:13, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Sredersas, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can nowcreate articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work toArticles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at thehelp desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option tocreate articles yourself without posting a request toArticles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please considerleaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Renata•322:04, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How should I take this? I don't understand, Can you explain to me without much formalism? Best Regards.--Berposen (talk)20:26, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. I would suggest you read the linked guidelines/policy which talk about it better than I can. Thanks and happy editing.Vladimir.copic (talk)20:37, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What are these types of summaries? Am I hurting you? Why do you address me like that?Read this little article so you can try to address the community in a different way, greetings.--Berposen (talk)23:03, 8 April 2022 (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. -EnlightenmentNow1792 (talk)23:12, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On13 April 2022,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleBob Sredersas, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... that crane driverBob Sredersas's donation of over 100 pieces of art led to the establishment of Wollongong Art Gallery? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Bob Sredersas. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,Bob Sredersas), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added tothe statistics page. 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.

— Maile (talk)12:02, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You said in that edit summary:Boldy reverting. The last thing this discussion needs is more collapsible boxes (with collapsible boxes inside it). It makes it even more impenetrable to outside/uninvolved editors.Also concerned that this presentation does not present sources neutrally even though it presents like it does.

Please let me know how I could alter that source review in a way that makes it present the information more neutrally in your opinion. Thanks — Shibbolethink^(♔♕)15:54, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Shibbolethink! Commendation to you for work on the source list. I'll just give a couple of ways I think the table presents itself as neutral or a "source of truth" but is, IMO, lacking in this regard:

1. Over categorisation Separating sources into coloured sections for "neo-nazi" "formerly" "with neo-nazi elements" etc oversimplifies the sources, is one editor's reading of the source and encourages bean-counting rather than reading and assessing of sources.
2. Incorrect categorisation For example from the quickest of scans, I can see quite a few examples where the opinion is attributed but the sources are not listed as attributed. Just two here:[1] (literally a collection of interviews) and[2] (made up of attributed statements). Incorrect or disputed classifications (which of course will happen and are probably numerous) can skew opinions when the table is presented as a "source of truth" and people are not encouraged to read sources themselves.
3. Categories do not allow representation for option D There is no category to show where sources talk about others categorising the group as neo-Nazi. For example theFrance 24 piece is categorised as "formerly" but the first sentence isSome call them war heroes, others neo-Nazis. This is on top of the statements in the article about being de-ideologized being attributed to others which is not mentioned in the table.
4. Editorial notes The inclusion of editorial notes (in bold) on the quality of some sources just seem unnecessary and pushing a point of view. If this sources are not RS they should just be removed OR we should allow editors to make their comment in discussion section. Examples: "Note: some users participating in an RSN discussion do not consider this source reliable.", "Note: some users consider this a drive-by usage of the term "neo-nazi". Who does "some users" refer to - seems to be just one user in some cases?
5. One-sided All of the issues above at the moment only seem to benefit a certain viewpoint on the RfC. For example only those categorised "neo-Nazi" have the "attributed" classification next to them despite them not being the only sources to fit this category (see above). It isn't a coincidence that one of the most partisan participants in the RfC is shopping this table around so much ([3],[4]). But this could just be me being grumpy bastard.
6. Other issues This is a convoluted way to add sources and most editors won't bother trying to deal with it. I don't even think all of the sources from the original table have been included (such as the two recent i New sources, the Stanford source and some academic texts). For fear of messing up the table, having to figure out how to do it and having the time to weed through the wikitext, I haven't added anything to this. I found this interestingNew Spectator piece this morning but can't figure out how or where to put it in this table as it doesn't fit this simple categorisation.

From the lack of uninvolved editor's participating in the RfC (and getting jumped on when they do[5][6]) we can see that these approaches are not making the RfC more accessible. The original source list for "includes neo-Nazi" has been bludgeoned to death so that isn't any better now. The idea of the source list made more sense to me when it was simply a list without all the editorialising.

Looking at your vote, I think we havebroadly reached a similar conclusion with different end points - largely because the options were not great and we need a more nuanced lede.

The RfC is completely cursed and was wrecked within about 10 mins of it being launched. I don't want to add to the bludgeoning now taking place there so am taking leave of the page to pray for the souls of all of us who have edited there.

Once again happy editing! Catch you around the traps.Vladimir.copic (talk)00:19, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Vladimir.copic many of these are your subjective opinion of how you would have done this differently. That's great, I would much rather that you actually had done that, it would have saved me the time. But since you did not, it falls to me to make those choices. And many of them are just that--choices which one must make and there is no policy or consensus to guide us on how to make them.

I stand by those formatting choices. Even so, I appreciate your input, am happy to incorporate it wherever possible. Here are my responses:

1.Over categorization - I disagree in the strongest possible terms. We have members of RFCs vote with single letters, and it has not yet become an issue that we don't require them to not say "A" or "B", but do require participants toexplain their choices to be considered worth including. Similarly, we have explanations in the source review with the quotations of the sources which support the assessment.

2.Incorrect categorization - Okay, so tell me which ones or put it in the discussion section (either one) and I or someone else can fix it. Or fix it yourself. There is no point in complaining about this without actually helping improve it. If I emphatically disagree about one of the changes you make, and don't think I can somehow help, I will revert it and we will enterWP:BRD, just like anything else on this encyclopedia. Otherwise I will just help you make that change in as neutral a way as possible.

3.Categories do not allow representation for option D - That's "attribution." OH I see what you mean, it doesn't quite cover the same thing. I have added a category:[7]

4.Editorial notes - What would you change about this? How would it be better to just let those things sit in the discussion section and not be known when one is looking at the list of sources? What alternative would you suggest? I emphatically believe we should point users to the fact that there are disagreements. I am borrowing "some users" from the language ofWP:RSP and RFC closures. It's wikipedia-ese. And it means we don't have to update it every time someone voices disagreement, changing it from "one user" to "two users" or from "one" to "some" to "a few". That would be insane. Similarly, I would disagree emphatically that the comments should be in-line.WP:ANI vsWP:AE and many other policies and guidelines on this wiki show us that is a bad idea. In-line disputes tend to become more contentious. Segregated disputes tend to be more moderated. And they also read more cleanly.

5.One-sided - This is because only one side appears to be interested (at the moment) in knocking down the other side's sources and bludgeoning about it. I believe it's relatively obvious that's happening, and like any discussion where you believe someone isbludgeoning, it's usually better to let other users see that for themselves.

6.Other issues - I am one person, and I do not have unlimited time. If you think there is an issue, you, like anyone else, are free to fix it yourself. All it is is taking a source citation template and putting it in a list. It's no more difficult than citing sources in a normal wikipedia article.competence is required. I think you may be confused because you may not know how to use citation templates. So here are two pages that might help:Wikipedia:Citation templates &Wikipedia:Citation tools

Some of those sources, I don't think are RSes, such as TV news from youtube. Others I just haven't had time to add. I am a full time medical student on clinical rotations, in the hospital ~70 hours per week, the rest I try and spend studying. I am passionate about wikipedia, so I help in short bursts whenever I can. I need help maintaining a source list like this, because i cannot do it fully myself due to those time constraints. Nor should anyone person be doing it.

Re: your other comments, I think the issue is that we have never had an RFC which is simple, clean, and reasonably worded with only a few choices. Not 10 choices, not walls of text of sources and back and forth and people trying to cherry pick and tear down each others' lists, and only creating lists of things that agree with them, and so on. Similar to the difference betweenWP:ANI andWP:AE, the issue is that having everyone nit-picking back and forth in a single section creates long walls of text which are impenetrable to anyone uninvolved. Also, the past RFCs have not been advertised much beyond the automated RFC service. It would also require a new RFC also to be provided as a draft for anyone to try and poke holes in for a week or so.

In the past, I have been successful creating RFCs with similar lists of sources, very few choices, and carefully moving any non-!votes to the discussion section of the RFC. That includes replies. It's hard work, but it creates an RFC which is intelligible. It helps if you set out those rules from the beginning. It helps if you keep it brief. Etc. etc. This worked in the extremely fraught COVID lab leak topic area, where users are even more cutthroat than here. Doxxing is a regular activity over there, and twitter meatpuppets, etc. etc. But we still achieved consensuses. My current plan would be to wait for the current RFC to expire or be closed with no consensus, the most likely situation, and then to re-run with the source list at the top, way way way fewer options, and carefully curated discussion that does not go off the rails. AnyWP:NPAs or user conduct criticism would be moved to user talk pages, where they belong. Any FORUM content would be collapsed. Any discussion in the votes section would be moved to the discussion section. Etc. etc. Unbiased-ly, not favoring either side, but just making it actually readable.

Does that make sense? I don't think there's much other choice. And I am open to any suggestions and modifications as I said before. I appreciate your help making it more palatable and useful of a source review. I can understand why you would want to run as far away from this topic area as possible, waving your hands like a wacky waving inflatable arm flailing person. But what I would say is: voicing criticism without trying to help usually just makes problems worse. You don't have to get involved in the disputes, you don't have to spend hours trading barbs on the talk page. You can just add sources, once, and then never post again. Or place sources in the discussion section that are not currently in there, and maybe someone will add them. There are a lot of choices here that are not as frustrating (to you) as inaction likely will be! — Shibbolethink^(♔♕)01:06, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Received and understood. Like I said, I wasn't planning on continuing contributing to the RfC further (it'll just make me grumpy and a bad editor - I've even somehow ended up taking someone to AE over this!) but as a show of good faith I'll make the edits I think are necessary (I'm sure they'll be challenged) then F off. Efforts to avoid wall-of-text discussions are great and I truly thank you for your efforts - however we can unwittingly editorialise or tip the scales when presenting thinks like this. Thanks again.Vladimir.copic (talk)01:27, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I would say every single one of those changes you've just made was a helpful one and worth doing! Thank you for helping make that list as NPOV and comprehensive as possible! — Shibbolethink^(♔♕)02:42, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

you closed the RfC with not-enough participation tag. RfC was raised as no consensus was possible to achieve as result of talk page debates and DnR. Number of editors reached consensus, and only 1 editor continuously pushing his point of view without any solid argument, although other editors made solid policy-based arguments. That was the reason for RfC - to get the uninvolved comment, because no consensus was possible to reach. Uninvolved editor also confirmed - do not include. Just interesting, why it is not enough? Should we take this simple case to dispute resolution boards again and again, only because 1 user pushes his point of view?

p.s,However, the arguments for inclusion of the quotation that were put forth at DRN were not provided. - no arguments for inclusion from DNR were provided, because not a single solid argument for inclusion was given in the DNR.

Sincerely, --Abrvagl (talk)13:13, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

HiAbrvagl,

In the RfC only one editor gave an opinion in the survey section (aside from your comment in the discussion section). With this level of participation it was not possible to claim consensus was reached. It is a shame that editors who had previously thoughtfully discussed this issue (including yourself) did not feel the need to give and explain their opinion in this RfC.

As I said, I would take no issue with an editor starting another RfC andpublicising it better to gain more participation.Vladimir.copic (talk)23:16, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think editors did not participate simple because they said everything they can and did not reach the consensus. So RfC was raised to get view of uninvolved editor. There is not much said because simple because there is no much to say. it is very simple case, which escalated to the RfC just because one editor is very good at ignoring valid arguments and strong at pushing his POV.

Can you then please re-open the same RfC? What is the point in opening another RfC on the exact same topic?Abrvagl (talk)03:12, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RfC has been reopened, tags restored and been publicised. Two grumpy comments from me: #1 I would strongly suggest you actually give your vote/opinion now in this RfC - you should not rely on vague waves to previous discussions. #2 When you asked for the RfC to be closed, did you seriously expected a different outcome?(rhetorical question - not wanting a reply) One vote was cast!Vladimir.copic (talk)04:00, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for restoring RfC. And yes, I you are right. It is my first RfC, and I had different understanding of RfC process and expected different outcome :)Abrvagl (talk)10:30, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On5 May 2022,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleSam Atyeo, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... thatWinston Churchill reportedly calledSam Atyeo the world's most foul-mouthed diplomat? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Sam Atyeo. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,Sam Atyeo), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added tothe statistics page. 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.

Cwmhiraeth (talk)00:03, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 18,010 views (750.4 per hour), making it one of themost viewed hooks of May 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk •contribs) (she/they)06:03, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Chris’s paternal grandmother was named Victoria Dada Basiliadis (the daughter of Miguel Jorge Dada Tadros and Isabel/Elisabeta Vasiliadis/Basiliadis). Victoria was born in San Vicente, El Salvador. Miguel was the son of Jorge Dada and Justini Tadros. Isabel was born in Athens, Greece. The Dada-Basiliadis family I found out were a prominent Salvadoran family of Greek and Lebanese/Palestinian descent in El Salvador and even have ties to the Bukele family which includes Nayib Bukele, President of El Salvador. So I think now He should be considered Hispanic because his maternal grandmother is clearly from a Salvadoran family.2600:8807:C80B:2D00:C98A:1871:7FC2:2B2B (talk)21:51, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - I saw this on the article Talk page. I would suggest that you read Wikipedia's policy onno original research. You need to gain consensus before adding Chris Sununu to the article - at the moment the RfC is still running.Vladimir.copic (talk)00:42, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On26 June 2022,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleBig Chief Russell Moore, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... that trombonistBig Chief Russell Moore was the first member of thePima tribe to receive an obituary inThe New York Times? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Big Chief Russell Moore. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,Big Chief Russell Moore), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added tothe statistics page. 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.

Cwmhiraeth (talk)00:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleRonnie Zito 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/Ronnie Zito until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

Alexandermcnabb (talk)15:18, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently editedHans Heller, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pagesNew York andUniversity of Prague.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk)09:16, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On15 July 2022,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleHarry Stein (communist), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... that Australian communistHarry Stein was personally invited by Prime MinisterNguyễn Cao Kỳ to tourSouth Vietnam? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Harry Stein (communist). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,Harry Stein (communist)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added tothe statistics page. 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.

— Maile (talk)00:03, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vladimir.copic. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know thatDraft:Pierre Merlin, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six monthsmay be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, pleaseedit it again orrequest that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you canrequest it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.FireflyBot (talk)03:02, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission ofHerb Wong at theDid You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) atyour nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!Cielquiparle (talk)11:01, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just have one additional question re: ALT1...could you please take a quick look?Cielquiparle (talk)05:52, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On15 August 2022,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleHerb Wong, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... that zoologistHerb Wong wrote theliner notes for more than 600 jazz albums, by his own count? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Herb Wong. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,Herb Wong), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added tothe statistics page. 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.

Cwmhiraeth (talk)00:03, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On6 September 2022,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleZodiac Suite, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... that nine songs fromMary Lou Williams'sZodiac Suite were composed during a live radio improvisation? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Zodiac Suite. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,Zodiac Suite), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added tothe statistics page. 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, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

jazz

Thank you for quality articles around jazz, such asZodiac Suite,Big Chief Russell Moore,Harry Stein (communist) andHerb Wong, and for other people in the arts such asBob Sredersas andSam Atyeo, for attempting higher quality, for being open to suggestions, for an enjoyable user page, - you are anawesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no.2758 of Precious, a prize ofQAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk)12:38, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi can you amend the Peerage of the United Kingdom please as I left amended tables in the talk page, thank you86.191.232.221 (talk)19:20, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not knowledgeable enough in the area to know if these suggested corrections are right. I would suggest you create a Wikipedia account and after 10 edits and four days you will be able to edit the page yourself.Vladimir.copic (talk)21:45, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The data is in the talk page of the Peerage of the United Kingdom.86.191.232.221 (talk)18:51, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A very interesting and well written article, well done!VickKiang(talk)03:03, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@VickKiang thanks and very apt! I'll drink it in complete silence while listening to Coltrane.Vladimir.copic (talk)03:09, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I've ratedJazz kissa B-class for now.VickKiang(talk)03:19, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Great work on thejazz kissa article! I hope you intend to take it to GA, because it certainly looks the part already :) ♠PMC♠(talk)06:08, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Premeditated Chaos thanks! I'm getting a lot of love for this article already which makes all the work worth it! I've put it up for GA which will hopefully improve it further.Vladimir.copic (talk)06:11, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to hear it, it's nice to see good and interesting work get recognized. I'm not reviewing any GAs right now but if it doesn't get picked up I may wind up taking a look once I'm done with current projects. ♠PMC♠(talk)06:15, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission ofJazz kissa at theDid You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) atyour nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!DigitalIceAge (talk)18:50, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On1 November 2022,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleJazz kissa, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... thatJapanese jazz cafés often require customers to be silent? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Jazz kissa. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,Jazz kissa), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added tothe statistics page. 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.

— Maile (talk)12:02, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 7,661 views (638.4 per hour), making it one of themost viewed hooks of November 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk •contribs) (she/her)01:33, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!Jazz kissa is definitely one of the most well-written and thorough articles I've patrolled last month during NPP.VickKiang(talk)01:36, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It was a lot of fun to write and research.Vladimir.copic (talk)05:59, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vladimir.copic, thank you for your assistance in reviewing atWP:Good article nominations. When you pass a nomination, please remember to add it to the appropriate list ofWikipedia:Good articles. All steps that should be taken are listed atWP:GAN/I#PASS. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best regards,CMD (talk)06:50, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Chipmunkdavis thanks for the reminder (it was my first review)! I did read this in the instructions but forgot to do it...Vladimir.copic (talk)21:43, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! It looks a thorough first review.CMD (talk)22:34, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the articleJazz kissa 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 of100cellsman --100cellsman (talk)22:01, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The articleJazz kissa you nominated as agood article has passed; seeTalk:Jazz kissa for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as abold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you cannominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility.Message delivered byLegobot, on behalf of100cellsman --100cellsman (talk)02:22, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)01:47, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I'vebegun reviewing the articleZodiac Suite 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 ofAmitchell125 --Amitchell125 (talk)17:22, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The articleZodiac Suite 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. SeeTalk:Zodiac Suite andTalk:Zodiac Suite/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed.Message delivered byChristieBot, on behalf ofAmitchell125 --Amitchell125 (talk)14:02, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I notice that none of the review comments I posted inTalk:Zodiac Suite/GA1 seemed to have been addressed yet, and that there is quite a lot of work to be done on the article before it can be passed at GA. Please note that the article will be failed if the comments are not all addressed by 6 January. Regards,Amitchell125 (talk)16:26, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Amitchell125 Hey. Thanks for starting the review. It’s the holiday season where I am so I’ve been taking a break from the computer. I’ll try to get around to looking at it this week but might not be able to. I’ll definitely be able to go through it next week.Vladimir.copic (talk)20:31, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Vladimir.copic No worries, I've extended the deadline untilJanuary 16, enjoy your break.Amitchell125 (talk)07:53, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, any news? Nothing seems to have happened regarding the article, which is due to be failed in three days' time if the issues are not addressed.Amitchell125 (talk)20:24, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Amitchell125 Thanks for the reminder. Full response at the GA nom.Vladimir.copic (talk)11:40, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vladimir.copic. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know thatDraft:Caravan of Memory, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six monthsmay be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, pleaseedit it again orrequest that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you canrequest it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.FireflyBot (talk)03:02, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The articleZodiac Suite you nominated as agood article has passed; seeTalk:Zodiac Suite for comments about the article, andTalk:Zodiac Suite/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as abold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you cannominate it within the next seven days to appear in 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 ofAmitchell125 --Amitchell125 (talk)16:42, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 11 March 2023,In the news was updated with an item that involved the articleTraute Lafrenz, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on thecandidates page. —Bagumba (talk)01:26, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 16 March 2023,In the news was updated with an item that involved the articlePhyllida Barlow, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on thecandidates page.Spencer^T•C23:43, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vladimir.copic. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know thatDraft:Swing Journal, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six monthsmay be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, pleaseedit it again orrequest that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you canrequest it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.FireflyBot (talk)01:01, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 March 2023,In the news was updated with an item that involved the articleGloria Dea, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on thecandidates page.Stephen00:12, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vladimir.copic. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know thatDraft:Intensification-90, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six monthsmay be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, pleaseedit it again orrequest that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you canrequest it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.FireflyBot (talk)05:02, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vladimir.copic. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know thatDraft:Soviet jazz, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six monthsmay be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, pleaseedit it again orrequest that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you canrequest it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.FireflyBot (talk)00:02, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vladimir.copic. It has been over six months since you last edited theArticles for Creation submission orDraft page you started, "Intensification-90".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopediamainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you canrequest its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing.Liz^Read!Talk!04:15, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleTotalitarian architecture (2nd nomination) 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/Totalitarian architecture (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

Paragon Deku (talk)02:02, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Paragon Deku Now this is a blast from the past. Not sure if I have the stomach for this one.Vladimir.copic (talk)05:48, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'mQwerfjkl (bot). I haveautomatically detected thatthis edit performed by you, on the pageBuddhism in Brazil, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "missing periodical" error. References show this error when the name of the magazine or journal is not given. Please edit the article to add the name of the magazine/journal to the reference, or use a different citation template. (Fix |Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is afalse positive, you canreport it to my operator.Thanks,Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk)07:03, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vladimir.copic. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know thatDraft:Open Country (Boyd family), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six monthsmay be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, pleaseedit it again orrequest that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you canrequest it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.FireflyBot (talk)08:02, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On8 June 2023,Did you know was updated with a fact from the article1987 Bullingdon Club photograph, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... that theBBC commissioned a painting of a1987 Bullingdon Club photograph featuringDavid Cameron andBoris Johnson to circumvent copyright protection? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/1987 Bullingdon Club photograph. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,1987 Bullingdon Club photograph), 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)00:03, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vladimir, I've started an RfC in the talkpage ofBen Roberts-Smith about whether the phrase "disgraced his country" as attributed to Justice Besanko should be included in the article. The phrase has currently been ripped out of the article entirely, both from the lead and the judgment section. I thought you may be involved.AlanS^talk05:38, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 22 June 2023,In the news was updated with an item that involved the articleMichael Hopkins (architect), which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on thecandidates page. —Bagumba (talk)06:15, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On16 July 2023,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articlePeter Read (historian), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... thatPeter Read coined the term "Stolen Generations" to refer toAboriginal children who were forcibly separated from their families by Australian governments? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Peter Read (historian). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,Peter Read (historian)), 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.

—Kusma (talk)12:02, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is anew requested move discussion in progress for the Charles III article. Since you participated in the previous discussion, I thought you might like to know about this one. Cheers.Rreagan007 (talk)06:48, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On26 July 2023,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleIvan Conti, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... that drummerIvan Conti earned the nickname "Mamão" after destroying a papaya tree? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Ivan Conti. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,Ivan Conti), 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.

Aoidh (talk)00:03, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vladimir.copic. It has been over six months since you last edited theArticles for Creation submission orDraft page you started, "Caravan of Memory".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopediamainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you canrequest its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing.Liz^Read!Talk!22:25, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations |August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You cansign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. (t ·c)buidhe05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vladimir.copic. It has been over six months since you last edited theArticles for Creation submission orDraft page you started, "Soviet jazz".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopediamainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you canrequest its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing.Liz^Read!Talk!22:13, 2 October 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)00:59, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations |March 2024 Backlog Drive
March 2024 Backlog Drive: On 1 March, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You cansign up here orask questions here.
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t ·c)buidhe02:40, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On28 February 2024,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleCloaca (art installation), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... that, according to the artist, theCloaca art installations(example pictured) are "shit machines"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Cloaca (art installation). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,Cloaca (art installation)), 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.

♠PMC♠(talk)00:02, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited1987 Bullingdon Club photograph, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageThe Telegraph.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk)06:00, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vladimir.copic. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know thatDraft:Henry Wuga, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six monthsmay be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, pleaseedit it again orrequest that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you canrequest it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.FireflyBot (talk)23:06, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On 14 September 2024,In the news was updated with an item that involved the articleDan Morgenstern, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on thecandidates page.PFHLai (talk)11:49, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vladimir.copic. It has been over six months since you last edited theArticles for Creation submission ordraft page you started, "Henry Wuga".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you canrequest its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing.Liz^Read!Talk!22:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vladimir.copic. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know thatDraft:JJ McRoach, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six monthsmay be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, pleaseedit it again orrequest that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you canrequest it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.FireflyBot (talk)03:05, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, we edited at the same time, so that -with my third effort- I didn't provide a summary, where I intended to thank you for pointing out, that the English editions don't exist yet,) I also wrote the translations as translations, not in italics like titles.MenkinAlRire22:23, 10 October 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)00:46, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Erasmo Carlos was never a member of The Sputniks, this is a mistake that started decades ago and even after his death, it continues to circulate, I have his autobiography, the biography of Tim Maia by Nelson Motta and I edit these entries in Portuguese.Hyju (talk)10:14, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ok. The reason I undid the edit was because you removed the entire infobox as well.Vladimir.copic (talk)22:37, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vladimir.copic. This message concerns theArticles for Creation submission ordraft page you started, "JJ McRoach".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with ourdraftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simplyedit the submission, and remove the{{db-afc}},{{db-draft}}, or{{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion by following the instructionshere. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia!DreamRimmer bot II (talk)10:25, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So, are you going to rewrite the article's introductory section to say that a "minority" is anyone described as a "minority" by the media? Because the article currently uses the definition from the U.S. Census (which you claim to be "original research").

AuH2ORepublican (talk)22:05, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vladimir.copic. Thank you for your work onAndy Coles. Another editor,Klbrain, has reviewed it as part ofnew pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for creating this biography for a former policer officer, best known for his role in theUK undercover policing relationships scandal. However, there is enough other material, I think, to warrant separate discussion, particularly given his role local politics. Clearly referenced and linked from other pages.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with{{Re|Klbrain}}.(Message delivered via thePage Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Klbrain (talk)21:50, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On 25 July 2025,In the news was updated with an item that involved the articleRoger Norrington, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on thecandidates page.Spencer^T•C06:31, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

story ·music ·places

Thank you for help then, and today for what you did forCanto General,my story! --Gerda Arendt (talk)11:32, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I enjoya DYK that pictures a person together with achievements in art. --Gerda Arendt (talk)12:22, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As you will know,Arvo Pärt is 90 today. Did you know that it took me some trouble to get him to the main page?Listen! --Gerda Arendt (talk)13:13, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt Belated happy birthday Mr Pärt! I've been meaning to listen to the celebration they did of him at the Proms last month.Vladimir.copic (talk)04:01, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! -Today is the birthday of the 16th Thomaskantor after Bach, remembered. --Gerda Arendt (talk)12:28, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Three years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk)06:05, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My 100th biography to the Main page in 2025 isSiegmund Nimsgern. --Gerda Arendt (talk)16:35, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. 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 2025 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)00:47, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]