See previous discussions at:

• User talk:Ground Zero/Archive 23World Brain Tumor Day, 2015 -
• User talk:Ground Zero/Archive 22World Water Monitoring Day, 2014 - World Brain Tumor Day, 2015
• User talk:Ground Zero/Archive 21Data Privacy Day, 2014 - World Water Monitoring Day, 2014
• User talk:Ground Zero/Older archives

This user is one of the400 most active English Wikipedians of all time.

Sorry if this is messy or in the wrong spot, but you're probably used to this by now, and it makes sense that I'm coming here to thank you for always and without complaint, cleaning up after me, fixing formatting and grammar and spellling. You do a grea job of making my contributions actually seem worthwhile. Cheers, mate. ALso, sorry for this rushed garbled message, but I love to see people that actually care about using the language properly (although i haven't done well here in this message, hence the apology. consider this a stream of consciousness on a roll of paper, and please forgive me ;) )CHeers againPanglossx (talk)

01:22, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

"the present tense indicates the present condition"
Thank you for quality articles on Canadian politics and their people, such asParti Québécois leadership election, 2005 andJanet Ecker, for tirelesscopyediting, "there are lots of Democratic and Republican parties around the world" and "the present tense indicates the present condition", for a user page full of advice, - repeating: you are anawesome Wikipedian(24 December 2010)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk)11:33, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A year ago, you were the 891st recipient of myPumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk)07:04, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Six years ago, you were recipient no.891 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk)06:04, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I note you didn't make reference to the relevant guideline in closingTommy (album). Would it be possible to update your close with reference to guideline?In ictu oculi (talk)16:19, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Following your invitation, generally I think you have communicated well. However in your post at 12:28, 22 June 2015 you replied accusing another editor of doing stuff which they hadn't done for at least a post or two. This had the effect of winding that editor up again.Graemp (talk)15:45, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this feedback on the discussion atTalk:42nd Canadian federal election. I have been frustrated that his disrespectful behaviour keeps recurring. I take your point generally that it is best to let sleeping dogs lie, but in this case I was responding to his comment about conspiracy theories, which he had repeated. I should have made it clear that I was focusing on that comment and not on other issues. Regards,Ground Zero |t20:25, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Hope you're doing well. I noticed that you made an edit atNo Gun Ri Massacre, which has seen a very heated debate betweenCjhanley andWeldNeck which has seethed for years.

Part of it revolves around a sourcing dispute, namely, the credibility of the U.S. No Gun Ri Review Report, the initial AP reports (particularly the credibility of certain eyewitnesses), and of historianRobert Bateman. In general, the page has been a battleground, with frequent personal attacks, accusations of POV, bold edits against consensus, and so on, although it has calmed down as of late. It is important to note that Cjhanley is in fact one of the AP reporters who initially broke the No Gun Ri story, and was awarded the Pulitzer Prize; also, WeldNeck hasaccused him of a conflict of interest. Both editors have compiled extensive lists of their grievances, and have dragged one another to ANI:[1][2][3][4][5] WeldNeck also attacked Cjhanley as a sock:[6]. Neither editor is blameless, to say the least.

For some time, I, along withTimothyjosephwood,Wikimedes, andIrondome have attempted to mediate, and we have successfully imposed an unofficial "freeze" on editing the page without prior proposals. While the situation is not urgent, I would appreciate any help an experienced editor such as yourself could offer. If you are interested, I can also provide some sources to provide background, although some can also be found on the page's external links category.

Thanks very much,

GeneralizationsAreBad (talk)22:40, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear GroundZero,thank you for making a swift change to the pageFreiburger Turnerschaft von 1844. I appreciate your efforts in the battle against vaguery, and the explanation of "currently" as an unnecessary adverb was very helpful. Sincerely,AmiableWookie (talk)08:49, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Any chance you would you replace the| in your sig with the entity code|? This would prevent its appearance there from breaking templates when your sig appears within them. — SMcCandlish ☺☏¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 03:48, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't understand what the problem is, but I've made the change. I hope that works. Regards,Ground Zero |t13:54, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • It will. :-) It was that the bare| in your sig was being interpreted as a parameter marker. See difference between these two:
    • "Foo!" –Ground Zero
    • "Foo!" –Ground Zero |t

 — SMcCandlish ☺☏¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 13:15, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'mBracketBot. I have automatically detected thatyour edit toToronto Transit Commission may have broken thesyntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: justedit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message onmy operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• http://www.ttc.ca/PDF/About_the_TTC/Commission_Meetings/Chief_Executive_Officers_Report_-_Period_5_(April_29_to_May_.pdf |publisher=Toronto Transit Commission |title=Chief Executive Officer's Report |
• Valve) on the [[T-series (Toronto subway car)|T1]] subway and [[Line 3 Scarborough]] trains( except for the new [[Toronto Rocket]] subway trains, which utilize a two-way intercom for

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, followthese opt-out instructions. Thanks,BracketBot (talk)13:00, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GroundZero,

(Sorry if I am contacting you in the wrong place, I am not sure how to do it any other way)

In thetalk:Matthew Steen page you mentioned: "At the same time, SJE did remove a whole lot of referenced content."

Sort of depends on how we are defining "referenced." Not only were there numerous passages with made up links, there were also numerous references that linked to documents unrelated to Steen. There were also numerous instances where he cited documents that were unrelated to whatever he was trying to say.

If you can point one (or more) out to me that I messed up, I will gladly revert them.

V/r,

SteveJEsposito (talk)21:29, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the currentArbitration Committee election. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipediaarbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome toreview the candidates' statements and submit your choices onthe voting page. For the Election committee,MediaWiki message delivery (talk)12:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ground, could you possibly look at I/P 83.216.94.186's recent edits onKeith Vaz? Thanks in advanceJRPG (talk)20:55, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You may be interested in the discussion atWikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style#Capitalization_for_Board_of_Aldermen.2C_etc. as it relates to style guidance you recently helped clarify.Rupert Clayton (talk)20:59, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As an admin, you should familiarize yourself withWP:BRD. While you've been busy reverting me, I had discussed your edits on the talk page. Please don't use edit summaries in place of discussion.Viriditas (talk)18:52, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• My apologies. I did not notice the discussion on the talk page. You are quite right.Ground Zero |t19:47, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk (talk)22:00, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedOshawa, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageMember of Provincial Parliament. 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)11:08, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(Charles R. Knight, 1922)

Ground Zero, I wish you and those dear to you golden days of love and joy in a Happy New Year 2016! Best regards, Me-123567-Me (talk)23:38, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply] Pass on! Send this greeting by adding{{subst:User:Sam Sailor/Templates/HappyNewYear}} to user talk pages. Automatic level-2 heading and auto-signing included.

(Unknown artist,Norway, 1916)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleWisconsin Green Party 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/Wisconsin Green Party 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.Me-123567-Me (talk)18:26, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking it might be fun to submitProgressive Conservative leadership election, 1983 for consideration as a good article. Any recommendations as to what we can do to make it better?Knoper (talk)17:26, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My concern is that parts of the article are written in a very journalistic style, which is not what we should be aiming for. An encyclopedia article should report the facts, rather than tell a good story. We should especially be avoidingjournalese. As well, as is often the case when many people are editing the same text, some of the sentences are growing long and unwieldy as different people add bits and pieces to sentences without trying to read the result. I will take another run-though to copyedit this. Another concern is going to be that it relies heavily on the Martin, Gregg and Perlin book, which is obviously the authoritative source, but I think people don't like to see such reliance on one source. It may be necessary to go back to newspapers of the day to bump it up a bit.Ground Zero |t13:21, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Amazing editor!Konnoke (talk)06:02, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Did you noticethis edit?Fences&Windows00:35, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw and reverted that edit. I didn't know what to make of it - whether it was intended as a compliment or as vandalism. Thanks for pointing it out.Ground Zero |t22:19, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedLachlan Maclean, 6th Laird of Coll, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageNorman MacLeod. 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)11:18, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In a recent edit, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is torespect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), useBritish English. For something related to the United States in the same way, useAmerican English. For something related to India, useIndian English. For something related to anotherEnglish-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that theoriginal author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in theManual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me onmy talk page or visit thehelp desk. Thank you.2.27.75.26 (talk)20:33, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How is "Barclays Bank Canada" a British article? It was chartered in Canada and operated exclusively in Canada. This is just sloppy and heavy-handed editing on your part. Also, "license" as a verb is normally spelled with an "s" in both UK and Canadian English. "Licence" is the noun.Ground Zero |t01:17, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It was a subsidiary (currently a branch) of a British company operating internationally, so you cannot claim national ownership. The English Wikipedia prefers no major national variety of the language over any other. An article should not be edited simply to switch from one variety of English to another.2.27.75.26 (talk)23:13, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that Barclays Bank is a UK company. If it were acquired by Bank of America, it would remain principally a UK company, chartered in and operating in the UK, and I would oppose changing the spelling in its article to US spelling. In any event, this discussion will be resolved on the article talk pages, not on a user's talk page, do take up the discussion there.Ground Zero |t00:53, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Times (of London) is owned by News Corp, an American company. Should we change the spelling of words in its article to US spelling?Ground Zero |t02:17, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More importantly, I did not edit any article to switch from one variant of English to another. The edit in question was a change of "licence" as a verb to "license", which is the usual spelling in both Canada and the UK.Ground Zero |t02:08, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'mBracketBot. I have automatically detected thatyour edit toCincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport may have broken thesyntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: justedit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message onmy operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• same year, Comair introduced its first international flights from Cincinanti to Toronto. In 1992,[[Comair moved into Concourse C, as [[Delta Air Lines]] gradually continued to acquire more of the
• work=[[Atlanta Journal-Constitution]]| date=August 2, 2009| accessdate=August 2, 2009}}</ref> Once[[Delta Air Lines|Delta acquired Northwest, Comair's older fleet, which was costly as a result of

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, followthese opt-out instructions. Thanks,BracketBot (talk)15:24, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'mBracketBot. I have automatically detected thatyour edit toCincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport may have broken thesyntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: justedit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message onmy operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• same year, Comair introduced its first international flights from Cincinanti to Toronto. In 1992,[[Comair moved into Concourse C, as [[Delta Air Lines]] gradually continued to acquire more of the
• work=[[Atlanta Journal-Constitution]]| date=August 2, 2009| accessdate=August 2, 2009}}</ref> Once[[Delta Air Lines|Delta acquired Northwest, Comair's older fleet, which was costly as a result of

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, followthese opt-out instructions. Thanks,BracketBot (talk)15:26, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'mBracketBot. I have automatically detected thatyour edit toBob Cole (sportscaster) may have broken thesyntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: justedit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message onmy operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• into the [[Hockey Hall of Fame]] in 1996 as the recipient recipientFoster Hewitt Memorial Award]] for broadcasting excellence.<ref name=Inks>{{cite news |title=Hockey Night in Canada inks Cole,

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, followthese opt-out instructions. Thanks,BracketBot (talk)12:13, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ground Zero.

I do apologize for making these mistakes, but please understand that I did not make these mistakes to intentionally inconvenience anybody. I will do my best to avoid making mistakes such as these from this moment forward, however; you may find other mistakes that I have already made in other articles. If you do find more of my mistakes, I hope that you point them out to me so that I may fix them rather than indiscriminately undoing entire edits of mine. I will do my best to track down any mistake that I may have already made and fix it.

Thanks in advance,

— SomeGuyWhoRandomlyEdits (talk)16:13, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I do apologize for my recent edit of theIshme-Dagan I article. I intended in immediately correcting my mistakes (such as using the Akkadian names for people and places), however; the power in my building temporarily went out and so I lost my internet connection along with all the progress I was making. I have now done my best to correct these mistakes. If you notice any more mistakes, please point them out to me. — SomeGuyWhoRandomlyEdits (talk)16:20, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain howthis sentence is misleading. Also explain how having a third-party opinion of the TWP by the Southern Poverty Law Center, but no third-party opinion of BAMN, contributes to the article's balance and neutrality. --50.46.239.77 (talk)23:09, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Because it isn't what the source says, and the source is from 11 years ago, which that statement doesn't mention.Ground Zero |t23:11, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The source says that BAMN was discussed during a seminar on domestic terrorism, and that the seminar was dedicated to discussion of groups "thought to be involved in terrorist activities." And this is exactly what the sentence you removed said. In your reply, don't forget to address my second point about third-party opinions and neutrality. --50.46.239.77 (talk)23:20, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And it left out the bit about the FBI acknowledging that Michigan police had information that BAMN had been peaceful, and that this was 21 years ago with no further claims of BAMN being possibly involved in terrorist activities since. When you add those bits on, you see that there is virtually nothing left to this accusation. If you can't come up with something better that this, you really have to conclude that there is nothing to it.Ground Zero |t23:27, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You still have not addressed my second point. Also, the claim that "this was 21 years ago" (which is false, the seminar was in 2002) does nothing to invalidate the fact that the FBI had designated BAMN as a group thought to be involved in terrorist activities. Neither does your second point about the Michigan police. --50.46.239.77 (talk)23:35, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

21 years ago was a typo. It should be 14 years ago. "Designated" is the ACLU's word. The FBI did not use that word, which sounds like they are on some list of "designated organizations", which they are not. What we have is an allegation not proven by the FBI, brought into question by the Michigan Police, and the FBI has taken no further action and made no further comment for 14 years. But you wouldn't get that impression from the statement that I removed. That is why it is misleading.

The SLPC description of TWP is from October 2015, not 14 years ago, so it is current.Ground Zero |t23:48, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And you still have not addressed my second point. Your claim that the FBI "has made no further comment for 14 years" needs a citation. How does this reworked paragraph sound to you? "In January 2002, officials from the FBI and Secret Service attended a symposium dedicated to issue of domestic terrorism. BAMN, along with other groups 'thought to be involved in terrorist activities,' were discussed during the meeting. The Michigan State Police, which was also in attendance, noted that BAMN's past demonstrations 'have been peaceful.'" --50.46.239.77 (talk)23:59, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am assuming that the FBI had made no further comment on BAMNbecause no one has provided one. If the FBI had, we wouldn't be spending so much time fussing over this claim from 14 years ago. What you wrote above is factually correct, but way too detailed for this article. A vague, unsubstantiated, out-of-date claim about one of the organizations doesn't belong in this article. It could be in the BAMN article, of course, and in fact something very much like it is because I put there.Ground Zero |t00:11, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to go with bold italicized text now, since italics alone didn't do it:Also explain how having a third-party opinion of the TWP by the Southern Poverty Law Center, but no third-party opinion of BAMN, contributes to the article's balance and neutrality. Also, the article has a section called "Participants," and a three- or four-sentence third-party description of one of the participant's history is hardly "way too detailed." Furthermore, we're not in the business of substantiating the FBI's allegation; we only report what the FBI alleged about the group. You're an administrator, so I'm shocked that you do not understand this. --50.46.239.77 (talk)00:18, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Look, we report relevant information. Balance does not require us to use outdated information on one organisation just because we have recent information on another. Find something recent on BAMN if you think it is needed. What the FBI thought may have happened 14 years ago isn't enough. The articles is about something that happened this week. This is a current event, not history.Ground Zero |t11:04, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to take your continued refusal to answer my second point as a tacit admission that balance has not been achieved. In the past, you seemed to understand how Wikipedia works when thediscussion focused on the TWP, but your behavior when the discussion concerns BAMN betrays your bias. I'm asking you to put your money where your mouth is and start acting like an administrator. If you find that difficult, then please extricate yourself from this dispute and go edit elsewhere. Instead of being constructive, you fling everything at the wall to see what sticks. The only thing outdated about the FBI's report is the claim the Michigan State Police made about BAMN being "peaceful." BAMN is a self-described militant organization that initiated the violence last Sunday and has been implicated in violence at many other protests. In any case, while the article may be about a recent event, the "Participants" section is intended to provide readers context, and context is achieved by discussing the participants' history and goals. The TWP was only established in January 2016; BAMN has a much longer history. You admitted that my reworked paragraph is "factually correct," but objected that it is "way too detailed." When challenged on this point, you failed to defend your objection. I have since added that reworked paragraph into the article. If you remove my edit without explanation, my attempt at dialogue will have failed and I will initiate the arbitration process.--50.46.239.77 (talk)16:16, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This issue is not whether BSMN is violent or not. The events in Sacranentob sure that they are. The issue if whether the "terrorist" label belong in the Sacramento article. I have put it in the BAMN article. It does not belong here because of was so qualified, it is so old, and there has been nothing further on it. The FBI statement is 24 years old. Not just the Michigan Police statement. You have not been able to provide anything recent to justify the terrorist label. I have explained my position. You don't have to agree with me, but accusing me of not defending my position is ridiculous. And making threats is not a constructive way of dealing with issues in Wikipedia. Especially for an unregistered editor.Ground Zero |t16:36, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleHumaninstitut 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/Humaninstitut 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.

Hi, I have nominated a page you contributed to for deletion and wanted to let you know about it as part ofWP:Good faithMenschpædia (talk)15:02, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'mReferenceBot. I haveautomatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On thePresto card page,your edit caused anarchiveurl error(help). (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,ReferenceBot (talk)00:19, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ground Zero.

I completely understand your concerns. I sincerely apologize for the mistakes that I have made. Please understand that I did not do this to intentionally inconvenience anybody. I intended to correct my mistakes as quickly and as efficiently as possible. I still intend to correct my mistakes as quickly and as efficiently as possible. Again, I do apologize for any inconvenience that this may have caused. —SomeGuyWhoRandomlyEdits (talk)21:27, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedJoint Precision Approach and Landing System, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageEmissions control. 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)09:41, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ground Zero. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned"extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created followingthis community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016,a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

• Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
• A bot will post a notification atWikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updatinga report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please reviewthe protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators'mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Great work onCommunist Party of Canada.Me-123567-Me (talk)16:47, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In response to my mistake moves on the French-language Radio-Canada TV networks, I saw that someone moved Ici ARTV to ICI Artv and made the mistake to assume that was correct without second guessing. I should have posted this on its respective talk page, rather than moving the rest of the ICI articles to match ARTV. I apologize for mistake and this case will greater improve me as a contributor.Rewind Wrestling (talk)18:52, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. I had not seen the move at Ici ARTV. I think it would be best for you to move the other articles back now. I will post messages on the talk pages to help avoid these mistakes being made again. Regards,Ground Zero |t19:35, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have explained my edit at length atTalk:Andscacs. If you want to discuss this change, I am happy to do so. If you are just going to revert and edit war to get your way, you will be violatingWP:3RR and can be blocked from editing. SeeWP:AVOIDEDITWAR.IQ125 (talk)14:07, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's pretty childish. I posted this message on your talk page, you have deleted it and posted it on my talk page with your signature. As the article's talk page shows, I have explained my edit on the talk page; you have not.Ground Zero |t14:20, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for things including (but not limited to) catching the redundancy of my writing oninteractive storytelling and being humorous about it. ;)Rroberie (talk)03:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the coffee! Unfortunately, not everyone saw the humour. One editor on another article found that comment to be insulting, so I had to apologize. I'm glad you took it in next the spirit in which it was intended. Best regards,Ground Zero |t15:08, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

First, Hi!

I'm a huge admirer of Wikipedia, and wish I had the time to learn the ropes and contribute. Instead, I send a small amount of money and the occasional bit of intervention.

Two notes today: I quite approve of your intervention to prevent self-interested dolts adding their causes to the page on the Toronto Trump Hotel and Tower. On the other hand, the article is now seriously out of date. The tower is in receivership, badly managed, and the subject of multi-directional litigation. I hope somebody will update the article appropriately.

Then I came to your page and found you quoting Merriam-Webster as an authority. I'm afraid this is something that needs extreme care. If you want an American Dictionary, the best idea is always American Heritage. Warning: I am a former editor on American Heritage magazines, same company but two floors below, and used to be friends with and an admirer of a number of their staff.

Merriam-Webster is the descendant of formerly great companies, Merriam and Webster, but they spent a disastrous generation in thrall to the American academic fad for demotic language. They allowed themselves to mix up reporting on what people said and wrote with stating the commonly understood meanings of words.

From about 2010 onwards they came to the conclusion that this had been a mistake, and they have repaired their ways. New material from Merriam-Webster is at least making the attempt to report accurately the commonly accepted meanings of words, and no longer giving equal weight to widely used solecisms. This will eventually return them to respectability. It will not undo the damage of the last generation's errors.

Very best wishes in your important work,

-dlj.

David Lloyd-Jones (talk)10:31, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks first your feedback, DLJ. To be honest, M-W was the first that came up when I googled. I am interested to learn that there is such keen rivalry in next the dictionary world, and am glad to know that the people who compile them are so passionate about the language. Best regards,Ground Zero |t15:08, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Please note thatTOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on yourpreferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see thedeveloping help page for additional information.Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to thethread on the administrators' noticeboard.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I actually share your disdain for corporate stylings, and have removed many ™ symbols from articles. The exclamation mark in "Yahoo!" particularly irks me. I just didn't feel it applied in this case, and obviously it's somewhat subjective what the common name is. Thanks for being a reasonable person, we need more like you.Kendall-K1 (talk)14:51, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You put forward a better argument than mine, so fair is fair. Regards,Ground Zero |t14:53, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ground Zero.

A new user group,New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin atPERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are availablehere but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us atWT:NPR.(Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk)13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken!Chrisdoyleorwell (talk)21:18, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quite alright. I'm glad you agree.Ground Zero |t

Hello. I noticed that you recently createdArmond Rizzo, a biography of a living person that is completely unsourced. The subject also appears to fail the relevantnotability guideline. Rather than tagging for deletion, I trust that you, an experienced editor, will know how to fix this. Please add some reliable sources that support the content. Thanks in advance.• Gene93k (talk)02:24, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I understand. This started out as a translation from the Spanish Wikipedia, but when I tried to save it I was warned that the sources were proscribed from English Wikipedia. I have tried to find sources, and will try again, but it will probably end up being deleted.Ground Zero |t17:06, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Happy Holidays and a Prosperous 2017 to you and yours.Quis separabit?23:08, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours!FWiW Bzuk (talk)22:05, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What you say is wrong. The correct name is Czechia. The article should be moved to Czechia.Eleni Kaltsi (talk)15:08, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have explained what Wikipedia policy is and how it applies, and how you can propose changes if you want to. But Wikipedia works on consensus. It isn't called Elenikaltsipedia, so you don't get to have your own way here. On your own webpage you can call it what you want. For the record, I hope that Czechia becomes commonly used in English as I prefer that to Czech Republic. When it does, I will support changing the Wikipedia usage.Ground Zero |t15:20, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The articleArmond Rizzo has beenproposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails PORNBIO and the GNG. No qualifying awards, just low-grade nominations. Atrocious BLP-violaing text whose only sources are award nomination announcements and a press release. Sadly not quite eligible to be speedied.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing{{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop theproposed deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. In particular, thespeedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, andarticles for deletion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion.The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk)23:40, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ground Zero! I saw you recently edited a page related to theGreen party and green politics. There is a new WikiProject that has been formed -WikiProject Green Politics and I thought this might be something you'd be interested in joining! So please head on over to theproject page and take a look! Thanks for your time.

Me-123567-Me (talk)18:22, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it pleasesubscribe. Yourfeedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate •Schwede66 •K6ka •Ealdgyth •Ferret •Cyberpower678 •Mz7 •Primefac •Dodger67

Briangotts •JeremyA •BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

• Adiscussion to workshop proposals to amend theadministrator inactivity policy atWikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementingPending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
• Followingan RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news

• When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
• Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, anRfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
• The Foundation hasannounced a newcommunity health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee releaseda response to the Wikimedia Foundation'sstatement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

• JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

13:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

the ip has not been warned - but it is close to third re-post of non encyclopediac materialJarrahTree12:11, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ha!. I considered making that same edit but I thought I'd give him a chance to find a usable ref first. He's already atWikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Conhui so it's not going to make much difference. I'm not even sure if the short-lived 2013 reincarnation even belong sin this article. I think it's more of a case of a former employee taking over a defunct name. Anyways, glad to have another set of eyes on it.Meters (talk)20:07, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It looked to me like he had added some text and added the "CN" tag to it himself, as if to say, "someone else should look this up for me". I could be wrong. But it looks like a conflict of interest situation (user name: Cdist07), so I think a firm hand is needed here. I'll keep my eyes on it too.Ground Zero |t20:20, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, one of the CNs had been there from 2012, and the other one I jsut added because I had removed the YouTube video he was trying to use as a ref. I've raisedWP:YOUTUBE on the article's talkpage.Meters (talk)20:36, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ground Zero. 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]

Hey! Based on your edits toNationStates, I thought maybe you would be interested that I started aseries of userboxes for the game. Feel free to add any or add your own!-🐦Do☭torWho42 (⭐)06:36, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

...to you and yours, from the Great White North!FWiW Bzuk (talk)04:53, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Nice work atGeorgetown, Ontario. Thank you.Magnolia677 (talk)19:29, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why, thank-you!Ground Zero |t19:34, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleKawartha Credit Union 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/Kawartha Credit Union 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.Drmies (talk)01:38, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ground Zero. 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]

Perthis edit, what should the reaction be? I reverted it first, then undid my edit due to my unsure thinking. The links don't need to be changed, they were fine as is, and this is a controversial edit, I feel, per the current consensus on changing Czech Republic to Czechia, being that it should be automatically reverted. This user is aware of this, and has been involved in discussuons on this, yet did not use an edit summary, and marked the edit as minor. I'm confused on what the thinking is on edits like these and how to proceed. -R9tgokunks⭕04:44, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you foryour contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to giveToronto Vote 2000 a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into2000 Toronto municipal election. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits thepage history, which islegally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to bemoved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account isfour days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the"Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may behidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates aredirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions atrequested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them atWikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you.Bsherr (talk)02:11, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That was 14 years ago tomorrow. I have learned a few thinks about editing in Wikipedia since then.Ground Zero |t03:36, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administratorsmust secure their accounts The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised. Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website,exposed, or weak Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following arecent motion. Thank you for your attention. For theArbitration Committee,Cameron1159802:25, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they arerequired to "have strong passwords andfollow appropriate personal security practices." We haveupdated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular,two-factor authentication remains anoptional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron1159821:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirectJohn H. Cox presidential campagin 2008. Since you had some involvement with theJohn H. Cox presidential campagin 2008 redirect, you might want to participate inthe redirect discussion if you wish to do so.Dicklyon (talk)03:29, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I created a page 6 weeks ago. It was rejected a number of times, but was since updated a bunch of times, most recently by a senior editor and is now good to go. It's just awaiting someone to review it. I went to the Admin List to ask someone to take a peek and think your name is pretty cool so thought would ping you to see if you're able to assist.If so, it'sDraft:LightricksMaskedSinger (talk)15:40, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hi Ground Zero! Since you were the creator of theNo Frills Supermarkets article, just giving you a note that a merge discussion is currently underway regarding it. With only three locations and a few sources, the article does not meet notability guidelines. The small amount of content in the lead can be merged into the article relating to its parent company,SpartanNash. I'll leave this deletion discussion open for one week (until 9 January 2020). Please post any comments or concerns onTalk:SpartanNash#Proposed merge with No Frills Supermarkets. Have a great day!Daylen (talk)22:28, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Because you were a major contributor to both articles, I would just like to let you know that I've opened adiscussion about merging both articles (I find the districts too similar for seperate articles).Username⁶⁸⁹²15:52, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am also proposing mergingGatineau (electoral district) withGatineau—La Lievre for the same reason, please discusshere.Username⁶⁸⁹²16:48, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The articleBritish Columbia Citizens Alliance Now has beenproposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable political party.

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing{{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop theproposed deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. In particular, thespeedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, andarticles for deletion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion.Psiĥedelisto (talk •contribs)^{pleasealwaysping!}12:56, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a veryZero happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes,CAPTAIN RAJU^(T)05:33, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WishingGround Zero a veryZero happy adminship anniversary on behalf of theBirthday Committee! Best wishes!Megan Barris(Lets talk📧)07:21, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)01:14, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome

Ten years!

Good wisheson my talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk)08:52, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I was looking through some unreferenced articles and it looks like you've created many of them, such as1911 Ontario general election,1919 Ontario general election, etc (asKevintoronto). Do you have any idea where you got this data from, when you created the articles? I've been unable to find good sources on the subject.Elliot321 (talk |contribs)05:20, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Elliot321 That was 15 years ago now, when Wikipedia was much less fussy about requiring references to reliable sources, so unfortunately I did not include the source. I expect that the information came fromElections Ontario, but they have reconfigured their website, so the information may no longer be available in the same format.Ground Zero |t06:02, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I've managed to find the info on that site and added the relevant refs to the articles. Nice to see so many{{unreferenced}} tags disappear after so long, eh?Elliot321 (talk |contribs)06:27, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good work! And happy new year.Ground Zero |t06:29, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The articleParti conscience universelle has beenproposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No demonstrated notability. Short-lived political party (FR wiki page shows it's defunct) that never ran any candidates.

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing{{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop theproposed deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. In particular, thespeedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, andarticles for deletion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion. —Kawnhr (talk)23:56, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleDominion Automobile Association 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/Dominion Automobile Association 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.

JayJay^{What did I do?}03:30, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleParti conscience universelle 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/Parti conscience universelle 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.

Seagull123 Φ21:55, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From theBirthday Committee,CAPTAIN RAJU^(T)19:23, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am here to give you a heads up on an potential threat, on the article for Omar Mateen there was a pending revision by the IP address 38.142.176.26 stating this: "(OPENLY DEGRADING AN AMERICAN CITIZEN OF MUSLIM FAITH BY STATING HOMESEXUAL TENDENCIES AND ACTS, COMPLETELY UNTRUE AND PATHETIC. CHANGE THIS IMMEDIATELY OR I WILL ATTACK WIKI AND DELETE ALL FILES.)". I am sure that this threat by the user is empty but I thought that I should go ahead and alert an admin either way just incase.Discount Horde (talk)14:56, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirectCIA activities by region: Near East, North Africa, South and Southwest Asia. The discussion will occur atWikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 1#CIA activities by region: Near East, North Africa, South and Southwest Asia until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄)01:19, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship	from theBirthday Committee
WishingGround Zero a veryZerohappy adminship anniversary on behalf of theWikipedia Birthday Committee! --CAPTAIN RAJU(T)21:00, 20 August 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)00:08, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Arecently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to removeAutopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as withEdit Filter Manager, choose toself-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit theAdministrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an adminwill still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working onbetter tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you canread more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you cansubscribe tothe weekly technical newsletter.

We havetwo suggested ways this identity could work.We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You canlet us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From theBirthday Committee,Chris Troutman (talk)14:32, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day! Hi Ground Zero! On behalf of theBirthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you madeyour first edit and became a Wikipedian!𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊 (talk)20:50, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊 (talk)20:50, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

22:52, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Happy adminship anniversary! Hi Ground Zero! On behalf of theBirthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of yoursuccessful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day!Chris Troutman (talk)23:00, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a very notable milestone, you should be proud of the work you've accomplished on wiki. We don't often get told so, but it's important to do what we do, allowing knowledge to spread into the world.Oaktree b (talk)20:06, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Ground Zero,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyableNew Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
—Moops^⋠T⋡02:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

—Moops^⋠T⋡02:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:LegSeats2 has beennominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion atthe entry on the Templates for discussion page. –Jonesey95 (talk)17:03, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy adminship anniversary! Hi Ground Zero! On behalf of theBirthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of yoursuccessful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day!Edward-Woodrow :)[talk]16:47, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I hope you’re doing well.

I have become a frequent editor on WP and have written several articles, but I do not have administrator rights. Yesterday I came across the edit history ofJeff Rupert and found some past edits that appeared defamatory in nature. Although they were reverted for the current revision of the article, they are still relatively accessible and contain content that highly personal and targeting in nature. SHB said that you have admin rights, so I wondered if you could delete all the revisions of that article by Rupertlover123. Thanks!--Comment bySelfie City (talk about mycontributions)11:51, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Done.Ground Zero |t12:14, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks! I really appreciate it.--Comment bySelfie City (talk about mycontributions)20:03, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day! Hi Ground Zero! On behalf of theBirthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you madeyour first edit and became a Wikipedian!The Herald (Benison) (talk)02:37, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ten years ago,you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk)07:22, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleRadical chrétien 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/Radical chrétien 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.

Helpful Raccoon (talk)20:52, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason Twinkle's auto-generated notifications are being put inUser talk:Ground Zero/Archive 2. Do you know why that's happening?Helpful Raccoon (talk)21:15, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what Twinkle is. I don't see any notifications in that archive.Ground Zero |t01:24, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy adminship anniversary! Hi Ground Zero! On behalf of theBirthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of yoursuccessful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day!The Herald (Benison) (talk)06:33, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in thisanonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on itsMeta page and view itsprivacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk)19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on itsMeta page and view itsprivacy statement.

Take the surveyhere.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk)00:17, 13 November 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)00:09, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The articleProgressive Nationalist Party of British Columbia has beenproposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Defunct provincial political party with insignificant results in elections it contested and, accordingly, no reliable, in-depth coverage.

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing{{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop theproposed deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. In particular, thespeedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, andarticles for deletion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion.Yue🌙00:00, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The articlePlatinum Party of Employers Who Think and Act to Increase Awareness has beenproposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Defunct provincial political party with insignificant results in elections it contested and, accordingly, no reliable, in-depth coverage.

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing{{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop theproposed deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. In particular, thespeedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, andarticles for deletion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion.Yue🌙00:01, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The articleBritish Columbia Youth Coalition has beenproposed for deletion because of the following concern:

FailsWP:ORG. A search through Google and provincial archives yielded no in-depth coverage byreliable sources. Electoral results in 2005 were insignificant.

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing{{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop theproposed deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. In particular, thespeedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, andarticles for deletion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion.Yue🌙02:47, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleProgressive Nationalist Party of British Columbia 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/Progressive Nationalist Party of British Columbia 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.

Yue🌙21:51, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleBritish Columbia Patriot Party 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/British Columbia Patriot Party 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.

Yue🌙01:20, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleBritish Columbia Youth Coalition 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/British Columbia Youth Coalition 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.

Yue🌙00:27, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day! Hi Ground Zero! On behalf of theBirthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you madeyour first edit and became a Wikipedian!DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk)03:13, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey,Ground Zero. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of theWikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day!Randompersonediting (✍️•📚)07:04, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Pages with missing files