Loading AI tools
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Serialjoepsycho. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Hi Serialjoepsycho. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
- Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
- Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
- Rollback should never be used to edit war.
- If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
- Use common sense.
If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Beeblebrox (talk) 16:23, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, 2015. Legobot (talk) 00:06, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Death of Freddie Gray. Legobot (talk) 00:07, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers. Legobot (talk) 00:03, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Serb Democratic Party (Bosnia and Herzegovina). Legobot (talk) 00:04, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of ethnic minority politicians in the United Kingdom. Legobot (talk) 00:09, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Template:Fox Animated Shared Universe, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 02:21, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Just so you know, when you tagged this template for speedy deletion it was transcluded and all the articles containing the template showed up as nominated for speedy deletion. Not sure how to avoid that but it was definitely odd to see. --NeilN talk to me 15:38, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Succession to the Throne Act, 2013. Legobot (talk) 00:03, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Serialjoepsycho. I'm an arbitration clerk, which means I help manage and administer the arbitration process (on behalf of the committee). Thank you for making a statement in an arbitration request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Abuse of COIN. However, we ask all participants and commentators to limit the size of their initial statements to 500 words. Your statement significantly exceeds this limit. Please reduce the length of your statement when you are next online. If the case is accepted, you will have the opportunity to present more evidence; and concise, factual statements are much more likely to be understood and to influence the decisions of the Arbitrators.
For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 19:27, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Tony Abbott. Legobot (talk) 00:03, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
I self-analyzed and the one of hardest parts of the whole outing and COI thing was having to admit I had reached retirement age. Must be a woman-thing. 
Atsme📞📧 01:08, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
I am unaccustomed to such vehement attacks that are meritless. I don't know what else I can do besides what I'm doing now, SJP. I am preparing a case for ARBCOM because I have the necessary evidence. I am certainly willing to listen to any advice you want to offer. Atsme📞📧 21:17, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
- atsme Your agitated and it's reasonable. If you wish to go to arbcom I wish you the best of luck but I don't expect much. You could perhaps seek an interaction ban. You could probably none the less negotiate an interaction ban without arbcom. But ARBCOM will not restore a GA. You really need to stop a minute and take stock. Pretend for a moment that you are an uninvolved closer. Go back and review all of the comments related to content. Forget that you are being targeted and forget everything that is a comment not directly related to content. Forget the first reviewer thinks it passed. Just review whats being said directly about the article.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 21:37, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you for your advice. I actually do have some incriminating information that I'm not at liberty to share. I have asked for a private hearing. Of course there are two sides to everything, but I think in this case, the evidence will speak for itself, on both sides. There is no COI at Racz - never was. It's really sad because I was going to start working on an article JzG suggested - Peter Wilmshurst - and there was another article I was going to create - Francis Robicsek - but to hell with it. I'll contribute in other ways - like being an arm chair critic to help improve all the whitewashed promotional articles. I'll become more active in the "clean-up" department. That should prove interesting. I imagine we'll all wake up one day and realize the rate of article creation has dwindled to the point of urgency, and the same will apply to the number of editors, although I think WP will be just fine. Perhaps that's the big plan - a hostile take over of the encyclopedia to make it a lucrative platform for big money interests to persuade public opinion. I can certainly understand why the thought of paid editing would be inviting to a family man in need of the extra income, or even a college student who has tuition to pay. Just the concept that we have a cabal of editors overseeing a "suite" of articles is unnerving regardless of the advocacy. I think it's too late to stop it now. You can see it happening right under our noses with a few quick comparisons - look at Red Bull vs Kombucha, and if you're still not convinced, look at Gabor B. Racz vs David Gorski. It's a joke. Imagine what would have happened to Galileo or Einstein had they not broken the blockade of conventional. It's easy to criticize the work of others - those numbers are growing - but the number of editors who actually create and expand articles is dwindling. Do you remember My Space? *lol* I may or may not be successful in my attempts to expose the problems - only the ARBCOM case will determine that - but my conscience will not rest until I at least try. If it results in my demise as an editor on WP, or if they simply turn it down despite the damning evidence, so
betbe it. Whatever happens will speak volumes. I'll just chalk it up to another of life's experiences. The wheels at ARBCOM are in motion and there's no turning back. Atsme📞📧 23:48, 10 July 2015 (UTC)copy editing :-) 02:23, 11 July 2015 (UTC)- In the area of GA there's really nothing for ARBCOM to do as it relates to GA. GA status comes down to a content matter and not a conduct matter. It's very unlikely that in any action they take that they will say relist the article as a GA. You have plenty of reason to be pissed but if you ignore any legitimate criticism now you will very likely have to deal with it later. And if you would like to take a break from what you usually do go ahead. There's alot to do. Numerous noticeboards. Numerous RFC's. Article for creation. You get to choose what you do and no type of contribution is any less important than another.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 01:17, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- Thx, SJP. I wouldn't be filing at ARBCOM over a GA. The article itself is not that big a deal - it's the beehive behavior surrounding it. I went through a few of the edits and criticisms at the reassessment page and pointed out what was really going on. All the finger pointing at me is hogwash - part of the game they're playing. I've asked DGG to look at Gorski - it is a highly protected article so if you even try to add a NPOV tag, the team will descend upon you in a fury. I kept going back over there to see if DGG fixed the advocacy promotion - it doesn't matter if we agree with it - it's still promotional, while I was there I saw this: Scroll all down on the left side that was reverted and read was added. All I can say is WOW. There's no question that Gorski is a controversial blogger, but you won't see anything negative on his BLP. Anyway, the GA issue doesn't even start what was done to me at COIN, not counting the possibility of private emails that may prove it was retaliatory. That's all I can say at this point because I actually do respect another person's privacy. What you see on the surface isn't anywhere near what's happening behind the scenes and it's really heartbreaking but, oh well, that's how it goes when you're up against serious advocacies, paid or unpaid. Wikipedia has become a petrie dish for growing the advocacy fungus. The title of this article made me laugh: Atsme📞📧 01:38, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- In the area of GA there's really nothing for ARBCOM to do as it relates to GA. GA status comes down to a content matter and not a conduct matter. It's very unlikely that in any action they take that they will say relist the article as a GA. You have plenty of reason to be pissed but if you ignore any legitimate criticism now you will very likely have to deal with it later. And if you would like to take a break from what you usually do go ahead. There's alot to do. Numerous noticeboards. Numerous RFC's. Article for creation. You get to choose what you do and no type of contribution is any less important than another.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 01:17, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you for your advice. I actually do have some incriminating information that I'm not at liberty to share. I have asked for a private hearing. Of course there are two sides to everything, but I think in this case, the evidence will speak for itself, on both sides. There is no COI at Racz - never was. It's really sad because I was going to start working on an article JzG suggested - Peter Wilmshurst - and there was another article I was going to create - Francis Robicsek - but to hell with it. I'll contribute in other ways - like being an arm chair critic to help improve all the whitewashed promotional articles. I'll become more active in the "clean-up" department. That should prove interesting. I imagine we'll all wake up one day and realize the rate of article creation has dwindled to the point of urgency, and the same will apply to the number of editors, although I think WP will be just fine. Perhaps that's the big plan - a hostile take over of the encyclopedia to make it a lucrative platform for big money interests to persuade public opinion. I can certainly understand why the thought of paid editing would be inviting to a family man in need of the extra income, or even a college student who has tuition to pay. Just the concept that we have a cabal of editors overseeing a "suite" of articles is unnerving regardless of the advocacy. I think it's too late to stop it now. You can see it happening right under our noses with a few quick comparisons - look at Red Bull vs Kombucha, and if you're still not convinced, look at Gabor B. Racz vs David Gorski. It's a joke. Imagine what would have happened to Galileo or Einstein had they not broken the blockade of conventional. It's easy to criticize the work of others - those numbers are growing - but the number of editors who actually create and expand articles is dwindling. Do you remember My Space? *lol* I may or may not be successful in my attempts to expose the problems - only the ARBCOM case will determine that - but my conscience will not rest until I at least try. If it results in my demise as an editor on WP, or if they simply turn it down despite the damning evidence, so
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Palestine. Legobot (talk) 00:04, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Irreligion in Bangladesh. Legobot (talk) 00:03, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Christian egalitarianism. Legobot (talk) 00:02, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Metapolitefsi. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:United Nations. Legobot (talk) 00:02, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2015 Ankara bombings. Legobot (talk) 00:03, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Roger Waters. Legobot (talk) 00:03, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Political correctness. Legobot (talk) 00:02, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Gun laws in the United States by state. Legobot (talk) 00:05, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Marco Rubio. Legobot (talk) 00:02, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
I looked at WT:User pages and saw your informative replies. As I just posted, thanks for that effort. However, I noticed that you posted at User talk:Nableezy about the "When did you stop beating your wife?" response. In case you did not see the reply, please have another look at the context because as it was used, there is no problem with Nableezy's response which is a cliche to point out that a loaded question has been asked. Your comment should have been directed to the person who posed the loaded question. Johnuniq (talk) 09:04, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
- @Johnuniq:Well I certainly hope I didn't offend Nableezy though I don't expect I did. While the first question was loaded there's a clear reason for it. If the purpose of Nableezy's comments had been readily apparent I would have never bothered going to their talk page. Until Nableezy responded on their talk page I hadn't considered that either question was loaded. I was more focused on the suggestion that there was a COI when at best there was simple bias that really had no bearing or negative effect on the discussion.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 10:32, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Campus sexual assault. Legobot (talk) 00:03, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration 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 impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Monarchy of Canada. Legobot (talk) 00:04, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Again, thank you for helping me with the aspersion link. May I ask, for future reference, how I can find prior ArbCom cases in order to pinpoint a specific FoF, proposed principal, or remedy? Hope I never have to refer to them after the current case but I would like to know if you would be so kind as to advise me? Your in-depth knowledge about such things is commendable. Atsme📞📧 15:16, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Beyond that specific one you are going to have to dumpster dive into the archives, WP:ARB/I.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 17:40, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- That works for me. Thank you! Atsme📞📧 17:47, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Though alot of times if you already know the language you can try to throw a wp on the front of it, WP:aspersions, they like to make important aspects like this very accessible. You might also look at ANI or AN archives as well to see if and how they have handled an issue.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 17:52, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- That works for me. Thank you! Atsme📞📧 17:47, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
There is pending deletion review for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annie Butler (3rd nomination), filed 28 November 2015, which seeks to change the result of that AfD. Because you commented in the underlying AfD for the Annie Butler article, you are being notified of the DRV discussion @ Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2015 November 28, so that you may comment in the pending DRV if you so desire. For an explanation of the DRV process, please see Wikipedia:Deletion review.
Also, please be aware that there is also a related Request for Comment regarding the validity of "delete and redirect" for AfD !votes and outcomes, filed 30 November 2015. Because you commented in the underlying AfD which prompted the RfC, you are being notified of the RfC discussion @ Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy#RFC: delete and redirect. For an explanation of the RfC process, please see Wikipedia:Request for comment.
Thank you. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
SJP, I thought you would be interested to know that the Wikipedia:Guide to deletion explicitly recognizes "Delete then Redirect", stating "Redirect is a recommendation to keep the article's history but to blank the content and replace it with a redirect. Users who want to see the article's history destroyed should explicitly recommend Delete then Redirect." The Guide has incorporated such guidance regarding "Delete then Redirect" since September 2005; before that, it previously included the concept of "Delete and then re-create as Redirect". Anyone who is suggesting that "Delete and redirect" !votes and outcomes are either improper or unheard does not know our well-established AfD procedures. Moreover, anyone who suggests that there is a built-in policy preference for keeping and/or restoring article history after a consensus "delete" or "delete and redirect" AfD outcome needs to do some more reading; nowhere in either WP:Deletion policy or WP:Editing policy is such a preference for the preservation of article history (as opposed to article content -- not the same thing) actually stated. The Guide to Deletion recognizes the distinction recognizes the distinction between history and content, and the validity of an !vote to delete the history. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 06:41, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- I'm assuming the rfc is to change this is someway. My position is that we should preserve the history unless there is some over riding reason to delete it. Can I give an example of such justification? Beyond copyright, which would likely be taken care of else where, but I feel likely that there could be such a case. When I say that it should be decided by consensus I don't mean by popular vote. To me what is said is more important than what is popular.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 07:05, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi Joe, Thanks for keeping an eye on this article. Over the past few days two new IP accounts and a brand new user have either edited or commented in favor of Katie Jones (the woman whose domain name was used by the book publisher). In addition, one of the main commenters on the talk page from last year, John Alan Elson, has no user page and his user talk page was deleted on Aug 26, 2014 and I can't find a list of contributions for him. So something fishy here and we should keep our eyes open....... Also, I've made some content changes per WP:BLP and put a note on the talk page. I'd love to have your input. Thanks, -- — Keithbob • Talk • 17:00, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton email controversy. Legobot (talk) 00:07, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ben Carson. Legobot (talk) 00:02, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
If I might be so bold as to assume you are willing to take some advice from me, I think you would be better off just ignoring Jaak. All hes got left to do here is annoy people, and the only way that happens is if they let him. Right now, youre letting him. You do not need to get the last word in, especially because nobody is going to care what his last word is. nableezy - 23:25, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
- @Nableezy: I'm not actually annoyed. I'm honestly trying to discern whether they are actually incompetent or just simply tendentious, but yes I certainly should just walk away.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 01:47, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
I think it's best to just fix the archive bot. Look at my talk page for a quick fix. Set it to 91 days and the archive counter to 3 and the bot should run. Maybe get rid of the other code underneath the archive bot code. Sir Joseph (talk) 22:53, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Statewide opinion polling for the Democratic Party presidential primaries, 2016. Legobot (talk) 00:07, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Hope the next one is filled with happy surprises. Atsme📞📧 16:11, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your response. That page does not state that users below 500 edits cannot edit it. Where is the source? Thanks. Nayef (talk) 13:33, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Canada. Legobot (talk) 00:05, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Cold War II. Legobot (talk) 00:02, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion. Legobot (talk) 00:03, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ethnocracy. Legobot (talk) 00:08, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Catalonia. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Statewide opinion polling for the Republican Party presidential primaries, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Hey, Joe! Out of curiosity, do you know if there is a specific 500/30 template that could be used to alert editors? If there isn't, it would be a good idea to make one. Thanks, GABHello! 22:35, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
- @GeneralizationsAreBad: there isn't but if you go check out WP:ARBPIA you'll see that WP:PIA3 is a part of it. The main thing about that template I used is that it does log the warning for a year. You could probably make one or get one made though.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 23:05, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
- Sure, I'll make one. GABHello! 23:07, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
- might be apt to just modify the one we have.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 23:11, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
- Sure, I'll make one. GABHello! 23:07, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of state leaders in 2015. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hadith of Jesus Praying Behind Mahdi. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
You closed a case as resolved when Oshwah was awaiting a response from CombatWombat42. Could you reopen it so we can get some feedback? Part of the issue is that Combat doesn't respond on talk pages and Oshwah was specifically asking what his intent was going forward. Could you reopen it and press Combat to answer? Thanks for your consideration. Leitmotiv (talk) 04:39, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- The matters still looks to be resolved. Articles have talk pages. If he reverts you go there, check for a discussion or start one, and if he fails to respond but continues to revert go to WP:AN/3RR. If he does respond and y'all can't come to some form of consensus then seek some form of dispute resolution such as WP:RFC. You are both aware of the policy on edit warring at this point. There's nothing left to talk about.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 05:06, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- The initial matter is resolved, but the secondary matter of how I can't get him to talk on talk pages is not. Everyone is suggesting we talk about our differences, and I agree, but he refuses to, and I think we need an answer regarding that. That's why I would like the case to be reopened to see what his response is. Oshwah directly asked Combat a question that has not been answered yet, and can't be, because you prematurely closed the case. Leitmotiv (talk) 05:09, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- Magic the gathering right?-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 05:26, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I don't understand the question. Oshwah asked Combat these questions: "How do you plan on communicating with Leitmotiv regarding the dispute? Do you plan on communicating or collaborating with him at all about it? Where at? On the article's talk page?" So far Combat pretty much refuses to talk anywhere and I'd like to get a concrete answer from him on how we can talk things through going forward, rather than getting no response at all. Leitmotiv (talk) 05:30, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- Where is the article that you two are having issues at? Magic: The Gathering? The inclusion of the misogyny related to the game?-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 05:34, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, the current issue is at Magic: The Gathering though there have been issues with Combat in the past at Collectible Card Game too. I have no problem with misogyny being in the article, but the content inserted into Wiki is not directly supported by the cited source. It appears most of the article talks about the over-sexualization of women, rather than misogyny, and the part that may apply, directly refers to third-party game mats when the Wiki article specifically mentioned cards. Leitmotiv (talk) 05:40, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- Ok so you violated 3RR in this content dispute. You've been reprimanded and understand that the policy and etc. You posted on their talk page [] to discuss it on the talk page but you did it after violating 3RR. Now reaching out is likely what saved you from the block. And I think you understand the problem with your behavior in this. So how do you fix this? So here's what I recommend. With Combatwombat, go to the article talk page. Start a discussion. If they revert you or you are about to revert them do this first. Then when you revert make it clear that there's a talkpage discussion or just link the discussion, however you like. Now will either respond or revert you. Now if they revert you but fail to respond you can revert again you have a few options. You might seek a WP:3PO. You might take it to WP:AN3. You might revert them again and reiterate that you have started a talk page discussion.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 06:06, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- That's the issue at hand though. I have started talks on the talk page and they are ignored. I will definitely use your advice. It seems like there is some flexibility on starting a talk, even without getting a response, and be able to revert until the talk is resolved. Leitmotiv (talk) 06:19, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- @Leitmotiv:, so do you see how that works now?-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 02:36, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Do I see how what works? I see a trend of questions here where you are vague and there is no context. If you are referring to how a talk is started, yeah, that's elementary and it's been noted in the past that I've attempted those with the conflict party. I'm still not happy with your premature closing of discussion on the 3RR because as you can see Combat doesn't like to use talk pages. So even if I know [how it works] it also doesn't do me any good with an editor who likes to edit unilaterally and this is despite admins telling him/her to take it to the talk page. Why doesn't Combat use talk pages? Does Combat intend to use talk pages? I guess we'll never know, because the thread is closed. Leitmotiv (talk) 15:17, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- They seem to have been blocked for failure to use the talk page and continuing the prior edit war. Will they use the talk page? They didn't have to answer the question at ANI. It's not even an important question. Do they have to stop editwarring and use the talk page? That answer is yes. Or they can simply walk away from the article after reverting.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 15:52, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- All good points, but having Combat answer for their actions would have been nice, as well as, knowing how to work with that individual in the future. Now there is no obligation for an answer. Leitmotiv (talk) 19:31, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- They wouldn't have actually had to answer that question. They were warned not to edit war. They have been blocked for it. They will now either talk or get blocked again or leave the article alone. You can take them to WP:AN3 of use some form of WP:DR to get a consensus.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 23:56, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- All good points, but having Combat answer for their actions would have been nice, as well as, knowing how to work with that individual in the future. Now there is no obligation for an answer. Leitmotiv (talk) 19:31, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- They seem to have been blocked for failure to use the talk page and continuing the prior edit war. Will they use the talk page? They didn't have to answer the question at ANI. It's not even an important question. Do they have to stop editwarring and use the talk page? That answer is yes. Or they can simply walk away from the article after reverting.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 15:52, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Do I see how what works? I see a trend of questions here where you are vague and there is no context. If you are referring to how a talk is started, yeah, that's elementary and it's been noted in the past that I've attempted those with the conflict party. I'm still not happy with your premature closing of discussion on the 3RR because as you can see Combat doesn't like to use talk pages. So even if I know [how it works] it also doesn't do me any good with an editor who likes to edit unilaterally and this is despite admins telling him/her to take it to the talk page. Why doesn't Combat use talk pages? Does Combat intend to use talk pages? I guess we'll never know, because the thread is closed. Leitmotiv (talk) 15:17, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- @Leitmotiv:, so do you see how that works now?-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 02:36, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- That's the issue at hand though. I have started talks on the talk page and they are ignored. I will definitely use your advice. It seems like there is some flexibility on starting a talk, even without getting a response, and be able to revert until the talk is resolved. Leitmotiv (talk) 06:19, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- Ok so you violated 3RR in this content dispute. You've been reprimanded and understand that the policy and etc. You posted on their talk page [] to discuss it on the talk page but you did it after violating 3RR. Now reaching out is likely what saved you from the block. And I think you understand the problem with your behavior in this. So how do you fix this? So here's what I recommend. With Combatwombat, go to the article talk page. Start a discussion. If they revert you or you are about to revert them do this first. Then when you revert make it clear that there's a talkpage discussion or just link the discussion, however you like. Now will either respond or revert you. Now if they revert you but fail to respond you can revert again you have a few options. You might seek a WP:3PO. You might take it to WP:AN3. You might revert them again and reiterate that you have started a talk page discussion.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 06:06, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, the current issue is at Magic: The Gathering though there have been issues with Combat in the past at Collectible Card Game too. I have no problem with misogyny being in the article, but the content inserted into Wiki is not directly supported by the cited source. It appears most of the article talks about the over-sexualization of women, rather than misogyny, and the part that may apply, directly refers to third-party game mats when the Wiki article specifically mentioned cards. Leitmotiv (talk) 05:40, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- Where is the article that you two are having issues at? Magic: The Gathering? The inclusion of the misogyny related to the game?-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 05:34, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I don't understand the question. Oshwah asked Combat these questions: "How do you plan on communicating with Leitmotiv regarding the dispute? Do you plan on communicating or collaborating with him at all about it? Where at? On the article's talk page?" So far Combat pretty much refuses to talk anywhere and I'd like to get a concrete answer from him on how we can talk things through going forward, rather than getting no response at all. Leitmotiv (talk) 05:30, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- Magic the gathering right?-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 05:26, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- The initial matter is resolved, but the secondary matter of how I can't get him to talk on talk pages is not. Everyone is suggesting we talk about our differences, and I agree, but he refuses to, and I think we need an answer regarding that. That's why I would like the case to be reopened to see what his response is. Oshwah directly asked Combat a question that has not been answered yet, and can't be, because you prematurely closed the case. Leitmotiv (talk) 05:09, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of current state leaders by date of assumption of office. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Gibraltar sovereignty referendum, 2002. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of state leaders in 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Corporal punishment. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Haven't read any of your smiling prose of late. Hope all is all well. Atsme📞📧 02:52, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Atsme: I'm still kicking along. You ever get Racz article leveled out?-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 02:56, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, thank you. It was scrutinized with a fine tooth comb and recently promoted. I actually think that despite the hostility that was lurking behind that "take-down", the result was improvement; suffice it to say we made lemonade out of all the lemons. 😀 Atsme📞📧 03:37, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- It's a pleasure to hear from you. You might have some tasty lemonade when it's done.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 03:50, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, thank you. It was scrutinized with a fine tooth comb and recently promoted. I actually think that despite the hostility that was lurking behind that "take-down", the result was improvement; suffice it to say we made lemonade out of all the lemons. 😀 Atsme📞📧 03:37, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Democratic Party presidential primaries, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sex offender registries in the United States. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
At AE, I misunderstand part of your statement: "However with that said my talkpage, contentwise is outside of his ban. He however is banned from bringing an ARBPIA related discussion to my page". I do not recall bringing discussion to your page. Could your clarify it. Thanks. Chesdovi (talk) 16:07, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:National Rifle Association. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Tamils. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ford Pinto. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Genocides in history. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bernie Sanders. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Education of the British Royal Family. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:United States. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Republic of Venice. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jeremy Searle. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Infobox Canadian leadership election. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Draft talk:Austin Petersen presidential campaign, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Photography. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2016 Orlando nightclub shooting. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Opinion polling for the United Kingdom European Union membership referendum. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton email controversy. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2016 shooting of Dallas police officers. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2016 shooting of Dallas police officers. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Philippines v. China. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ajamu Baraka. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi SJP - do you know if there's a topicon for DYK like there is for FA & GA? Any tips on how to best research these things would be greatly appreciated. Best Atsme📞📧 16:35, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Atsme: You mean for your use page or for the articles talk page? There's both.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 16:40, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
- User page - at the top - all I could find was :File:Updated DYK query.svg but I was hoping for something a bit more sophisticated so one could add info as we do with the other topicons. Atsme📞📧 16:42, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
- There was at one time a ? mark that was used to symbolize it. There's nothing of course stopping you from making your own. Should be relatively simple to code.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 16:45, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
- I thought so, too, but can't seem to find it. Thought maybe you knew, or could point me in the right direction to find it. I tried Wiki's search using DYK topicon, and I looked in templates but there are so many! I was hoping for a shortcut. Thank you for the quick reply. Atsme📞📧 17:03, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
- Create your own shortcut, just use the FA or GA's version as a base code. Test it in your sandbox. Then you can make find where ever to host it, either in your use space or in some set aside mainspace location.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 17:13, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
- I thought so, too, but can't seem to find it. Thought maybe you knew, or could point me in the right direction to find it. I tried Wiki's search using DYK topicon, and I looked in templates but there are so many! I was hoping for a shortcut. Thank you for the quick reply. Atsme📞📧 17:03, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jill Stein. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kaine (disambiguation). Legobot (talk) 04:26, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Murder of Milly Dowler. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Gamergate draft. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2016 India–Pakistan military confrontation. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of Hillary Clinton presidential campaign endorsements, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of Hillary Clinton presidential campaign endorsements, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ron McKinnon (politician). Legobot (talk) 04:27, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Singapore. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Conservative Party of Canada leadership election, 2017. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump sexual misconduct allegations. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ronald Reagan. Legobot (talk) 04:37, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Serialjoepsycho. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Goa Opinion Poll. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:United States presidential elections in which the winner lost the popular vote. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sciences Po. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2016 South Korean protests. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of American police officers killed in the line of duty. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Southern Poverty Law Center. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello,
I just want to say thanks for the support, it's good to know that someone understands what we are doing. i believe there's a lot more to just what people say about Nigeria and that is what am trying to show here. thank you once again Margaretver (talk) 01:57, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on File talk:Conscription map of the world.svg. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the help at ANI. Because Softlavender has interjected both at ANI and the article talk page, without endorsing your suggestion of and RfC, I'm waiting for the dust to settle. What do you think of User:Ronz/notes#RFC.2FELN, and why do you prefer RfC over ELN? --Ronz (talk) 00:06, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
- ELN is fine. When I looked before I saw the first posts timestamp. November 28. It seemed deadier than it actually is.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 08:02, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future.[1] The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey.[2] The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.
You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.
Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 19:19, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:William McKinley. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Not sure what happened...but my 1st & only mentoree was blocked. Atsme📞📧 01:58, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
- Sock puppetry. This should probably be investigated more but eh I'm not doing it. I suspect there's more to the story but the admins are not interested.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 02:20, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Eurodac. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:James O'Keefe. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:United States presidential election, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Taiwan. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Demagogue. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.
If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again.
About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF). About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 08:15, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sean Spicer. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jewish diaspora. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Immigration to Sweden. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of United States presidential assassination attempts and plots. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:/r/The Donald. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of United States presidential assassination attempts and plots. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Political appointments by Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Zapad-2017 exercise. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Far-right politics. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Dina Powell. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Josh Sugarmann. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Right of return. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Wondered how you were doing, SJP...hope all is well. Atsme📞📧 19:37, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- peachy. Yourself?-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 01:58, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Theresa May. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2017 Berkeley protests. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Patriot Prayer. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Abdullah II of Jordan. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Democratic Party (United States). Legobot (talk) 04:28, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Republican Party (United States). Legobot (talk) 04:24, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:New Israel Fund. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Infobox country. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Murder of Reuven Shmerling. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 Me: Squash. |
|
Two pilgrims go out hunting. One has two blunderbusses (guns). |
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Serialjoepsycho. Voting in the 2017 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.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Patriot Prayer. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Vice-President of Zimbabwe. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Useful idiot. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:United States recognition of Jerusalem. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Mexico–United States border. Legobot (talk) 04:45, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump–Russia dossier. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Russian presidential election, 2018. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Pink tide. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Turkey. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility in infobox discussions. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility in infobox discussions/Evidence. Please add your evidence by February 17, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility in infobox discussions/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:49, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Justice Party (South Korea). Legobot (talk) 04:31, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ben Shapiro. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Far-right politics. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Andrew Jackson on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:31, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Universal suffrage on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Sinn Féin on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:31, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Brothers of Italy on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:31, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Wikiwand in your browser!
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.
