"You have new messages" was designed for a purpose: letting people know you have replied to them. I do not watch your talk page and I will likely IGNORE your reply if it is not copied to my page, as I will not be aware that you replied! Thank you.
Sorry I've been away for a good while; my computer's had keyboard issues that make it nearly useless, and I've always been hesitant to use my admin account on other computers. That's why I've been active with the backup account but not with this one.
In your edits of 8 March 2020, you completely deleted my changes to the Washington, Virginia entry, stating "Rv to last year: an encyclopedia article was replaced with a promotional brochure." I am a historian living in Rappahannock County, Virginia, for which Washington is the county seat. In 2018, I published a 300-page history of Washington, based on 3 years of research by me (Washington, Virginia, A History, 1735-2018; available for purchase through Amazon.com). The Wikipedia page was drawn from this research, and the text was documented with 24 references. The prior Wikipedia text was not only incomplete, it was inaccurate. My goal was to provide Wikipedia readers with an accurate history and description of the town of Washington. Is there a way that I could modify my text to suit your desires as a Wikipedia editor.Harriswoodville (talk) 19:09, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You have not yet responded to the message that I left on your talk page. This is probably because I had failed to create a User Page; please excuse my naivete. I have now created a User Page. I have consulted with two Virginia historians and they found my text on the history of the town of Washington, Virginia, to be accurate, well-referenced, and complete. I have also read Wikipedia pages on other towns in the Commonwealth of Virginia. These pages are quite similar to what I wrote on Washington, i.e., a full description of the history and characteristics of the town. As I requested above, "Is there a way that I can modify my text to suit your desires as a Wikipedia editor." Harriswoodville (talk) 19:55, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, who do I go to for this issue? This person removedcontent because it was not sourced. I clearly mentioned it and added a valid source. He's intentionally removingsourced content for no reason, yet he did the same when there was no source as mentioned above. He's clearly engaging in an unnecessary edit war, while I'm defending my position and reasoning for retaining my contributions here. Isn't this wiki meant to add valid sourced content to begin with? IND Concourse Express (talk) 07:15, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Magnolia House
You seem to be interested in historic buildings in Guilford County, North Carolina. I need someone to take a look at User:Vchimpanzee/Magnolia House because there are details missing such as coordinates and the number that should be used in the infobox.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:06, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Assistance in accessing Wikipedia Account
Hello Nyttend,
Due to computer swaps and automated password holders, I have lost my log-in credentials on Wikipedia. I don't remember my original username and when I have tried the several names I thought might be correct, I did not receive the password reset instructions. This indicates I'm sorta locked out. Can you help?
I have a new project I would like to propose, but need to get back into the system to recall how I edited previously.
I saw your back-up account's edits and wondered if this means you're returning. Your name was invoked in a recent discussion about an overly long bio that desperately needed pruning. LizRead!Talk! 04:30, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Kahiki
Hi - would you know about the Kahiki Supper Club, why you moved it from the Columbus NRHP list to the Franklin County one? Looking at the coordinates, it lies outside of Whitehall, and the NRHP nomination refers to it as being in Columbus a few times, with a map even that makes it evident where it stood. This 1955 USGS map and aerial photograph I just found seem to say the same. ɱ(talk) 16:24, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect 🇺🇸. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 7#🇺🇸 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Aasim (talk) 05:14, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
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 "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Nathan2055talk - contribs 19:30, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Deleted articles
As you are an administrator willing to provide copies of deleted articles, is it possible to provide a copy of these long deleted articles:
"Non-Islamic views of Muhammad"[1] and "Praise and veneration of Muhammad"[2]?Bless (talk) 01:25, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
January 2021
Hello, I'm Tbhotch. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) personon Mulyadi Tamsir, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! (CC)Tbhotch™ 20:43, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You may wish to read (1) the provided citation to which I referred, and (2) WP:DTTR. Nyttend (talk) 20:50, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, and happy new year! Re your edit on Did You Know today. I'm puzzled that you added an edit summary saying that a brig is not a ship, so you changed it to vessel, not ship. Your edit is fine, of course, and I'm not criticizing anything. I'm just puzzled. I have crewed on a brig, and it looked like a ship to me (as opposed to boat). So I wondered whether you could please explain? I always understood that a brig is so defined according to its rigging, and not according to its length overall or tonnage. However, although there is no real definition of a ship as far as I can see, people usually distinguish between boat and ship according to relative hull size. But I'm a Brit - maybe US definitions/distinctions are different? Storye book (talk) 10:44, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
See full-rigged ship. Most distinctively, a brig has two masts, and a ship has three. It looks like the citations include at least one British publication that makes this distinction, so I don't believe it's an ENGVAR issue. Nyttend (talk) 21:48, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, I thought I had signed my above comment. I have signed it now. I have had a look at the full-rigged-ship article, and it appears to me that the article does not define a ship as such. It defines a full-rigged ship, so it is an article about rigging only, as I see it. If we are taking definitions from WP, then if we look at the article Sail plan, the brig is called a ship in the US (as it is in England), and other sailing vessels with fewer than three masts are called ships. I had a quick look at a few dictiionaries: Chambers, Oxford, Collins. No doubt there are other examples, but broadly it appears that it's a general term for a large ship, but it can alternatively mean a full-rigged ship in the manner that you have described. I don't think there is a right or wrong here, so I believe that you are not wrong. However I think that other interpretations of the word can be right, too. I have come across this sort of thing before, regarding 19th-century sailing vessel terminology, because they were developing sea-going vessel construction and rigging constantly, for faster and better trading purposes, due to new ideas and constant competition and development. Anyway, I have enjoyed this conversation and I hope we have both learned from it. Thank you. Storye book (talk) 10:44, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Conference papers as sources
Hi Nyttend. Hope you are well, the covid madness notwithstanding.
Part 1 — I came across a section citing a conference paper as a source, which I don't think I have seen before. Firstly, could you give me a short take on the use of such as sources. Secondly, if acceptable by virtue of being presented by reputable writers and observing academic rigour, how does one then reject others which do not meet these standards, but are still for all intents and purposes conference papers?
I can imagine that the tone of conferences — and therefore the papers presented — can vary widely, depending on the occasion/ event and audience — for example a conference coinciding with the celebration of 100 years of the construction of a town's bridge, and open to the general public. The source in question sounds very much like 'coffee table' chat.
Part 2 — the same source been added 19 times here and there by an editor using a number of IP addresses, such as 1, 2, 3. He is the author of one of the papers and also writes books commercially example here. To remove these, rather than a lengthy explanation in the edit summaries, is there one central where I could post the reasoning and then at each page just a "see en.wiki ...etc"?
This recent edit spoils the approved hook which was deliberately worded for humorous effect. As the edit has been made through protection without consensus, this is a violation of WP:PREFER, "Protected pages may not be edited except to make changes that are uncontroversial or for which there is clear consensus." Please revert. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:57, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To help get this resolved quickly, the issue has been raised at WP:ERRORS. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:26, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Im contacting you today attempting to find source material for the Sommerheim park article; I have been unsuccessful finding the original reference material in any online medium and also am wondering if you have additional sources pertaining to the initial excavations and point types found there. Im trying to find relevant info surrounding the context of these points to other finds in the area and any help with the sources you used would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! LarsTheFirst (talk) 01:04, 16 April 2021 (UTC)LarsTheFirst[reply]
Wright Cycle Company Offices
In the caption of the photo File:Wright Cycle Company Offices.jpg someone wrote "Building was not owned by the Wright Brothers, nor built in 1895, as incorrectly stated in the File History 'comment' below." Since you uploaded the file, I am bringing this to you attention so that you might correct it. Regards– Gilliam (talk) 15:05, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nyttend, my info is always accurate! I use Fight Box their broadcaster or Kickboxing Z the largest independent kickboxing news website. Other, must be collected from their official site or official social media. We don't have many other alternatives.
GFC 7 moved from 13th May to 24th June. Due to the pandemic are these changes! See their last post, it says 24th June and it is the same poster as it was for 13th of May. And in Bucharest. Ciocoiu, Morari, Boapeah, Cebuc and Cătinaș were announced by the promotion on Facebook. In the last post of Jan Kaffa it is announced he will fight in Romania at GFC, the event which was rescheduled. Ostoia and Fila were confirmed by the ARJ Trainingen gym.
You should also know there is not more coverage for kickboxing, including Glory (kickboxing) is announcing the same online.
Colosseum Tournament 25 released the posters with those fighters, including main and individual.
Feel free to ask anything! I am doing this with accuracy. Nobody has accused me of fake info all over the years. UFC is not different than my work, using the same independent journalism with long time before it is announced the official card. This is how Wikipedia also gets more views, being a primary, main source of information.
You can't find what you want in combat sports. Even if you want. This is how you build the history of any combat sport. If you find me better sources I will do it. .karellian-24D 20:20, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Friend, there is no such sources as academic, scholarly, governmental and top-tier market research in kickboxing! Very rarely. I gave you the example of Bellator MMA in 2020: mmafighting.com, mmajunkie.com, MMA Weekly, MMAmania etc. 2nd MMA promotion in the world, Bellator MMA from the US, does not have on Wikipedia any other sources than mmafighting.com, mmajunkie.com, MMA Weekly, MMAmania etc. Plus the site of Bellator, you can check. Secondly how not to be accepted OFFICIAL FACEBOOK? If they are using Facebook and nothing is written on the site. Sometimes in Romania they use Facebook instead of the official site, but it is accurate. .karellian-24D 20:47, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
But you are not reading what I am telling you, how are mmafighting.com, mmajunkie.com, MMA Weekly, MMAmania etc reliable on Bellator MMA in 2020? 95% are those sources, the other is the official site of Bellator. Do you have something against Romania? Because the Romanian kickboxing circuit is known as top in the world and Europe, as it is the British one for boxing. So basically I can continue without too much KickboxingZ you say? I inform you I will revert some of your material which is good, but I will bring different sources than KickboxingZ then. Do you allow me to do that? To know. Because I cannot give up on writing and what it is confirmed on more reliable sources. .karellian-24D 20:57, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I did my best now, it's written. And KickboxingZ is not so mentioned anymore. I even brought sources from Prosport. I thought it is better only with English language sources. I also use the Tapology of the UFC. .karellian-24D 21:53, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:ANI-notice
Hi Nyttend, I'm working on clearing unsubstituted transclusions of certain templates to prepare them for auto substitution. Could you substitute the transclusion of Template:ANI-notice at User talk:Nyttend/Archive 38 please? --Bsherr (talk) 21:17, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be more direct: I was very hurt by what you said. I woke up to find a message from an administrator who I can't recall having any quarrel with, saying "You're utterly clueless" over, of all things, a minor disagreement at RfD. RfD is the only part of projectspace I routinely engage in, specifically because it's generally free of the incivility one finds in many other fora. In the three months since I resumed editing at a high rate, in which I've !voted in hundreds of RfDs, I've come into conflict with users there a handful of times, but none has behaved in a way I'd call outright incivil, and certainly none has levied against me the kind of personal attack that, coming from a newer user, I'd respond to with a templated ((uw-npa)).I'm a fairly sensitive person. Direct insults make me cry, if they're not in a category I deliberately harden myself against (like insults from vandals). Wikipedia isn't always the best place for sensitive people, which is why I deliberately tailor my editing to avoid high-conflict areas, and only engage in conflict when I'm sure I can handle it. The only way for that to go wrong is if someone blindsides me with an insult, which is what happened here. I was left upset for days, questioning whether I want to keep contributing my time to a project where administrators behave this way, and where I don't feel safe from out-of-the-blue personal attacks from people I respect. I understand that Wikipedia is not a "safe space", but I do expect it to be a space free of gross incivility.Maybe you were having a bad day. I have bad days too, have edits I wish I could take back. But after a polite objection like I registered above, I would expect some sort of explanation from anyone, let alone an administrator. And so I will politely inquire whether you think that this is acceptable behavior from an administrator.-- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 20:08, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK, let me be clear: when you continued claiming that this redirect used a niche term, you demonstrated that you didn't understand that this is the standard way to refer to such an item, even though I had already shown that it was the case. This isn't a matter of commenting on the content, because the problem is that your actions were attempting (not maliciously, of course!) to get rid of something useful, and you persisted despite my polite explanation with links. See WP:RANDY; I'm happy to explain that someone misunderstands standard terminology, but someone who rejects that explanation and persists is disruptive. Moreover, as you didn't ask for an explanation, I wasn't aware you were expecting one; I figured you were just making a comment. Nyttend backup (talk) 20:48, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To the contrary, I think you missed my point. I know what a monograph is. My nom begins Unlike the article/paper nomination below, in this case the disambiguation is at least correct: Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties is indeed a monograph. My point was that it's a niche term ("niche" as in "not used by the average person searching Wikipedia", not as in "nonstandard") and thus unlikely to be used as a qualifier in an ((r from predictable disambiguation)). El cid explained it even better than I had: we could also make a page at Fuck (treatise), Fuck (discourse), &c. But just because it is technically accurate does not mean a DAB is needed. To that I would add Fuck (tome), Fuck (codex), Fuck (volume), and any number of other terms. When I said it was a term that no one's ever applied specifically to this particular book, my point was that if there were a notable instance of someone saying, perhaps in a review or some other general-public-facing context, "Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties is a wonderful monograph", that would change the analysis. Otherwise "monograph" is just one of many synonyms, all valid, all improbable search terms.My point here not being to parallelly litigate the RfD, but to show that the reason I was "persist[ing] despite [your] polite explanation" was because you were explaining something I already knew, that I had explained I knew in my nom, that two other experienced users clearly understood, and that I had reïterated that I knew when you first misunderstood me.None of that, though, really ought to matter. "You're fucking clueless" would not be an acceptable thing to say even to someone who did misunderstand and had persisted in doing so for all of one comment. It would not be an acceptable thing for me to say to you, even though you misunderstood my meaning despite a polite explanation. Because it's rude. You're an admin. No user should speak that way, especially not over something so trivial, especially not over something where they're the one failing to grasp the point... But especially not an administrator.So I'll pose my question again: Do you view that as an acceptable way for an adminsitrator to behave?-- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 21:12, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winterthur, Delaware 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.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murrays Crossroads, Georgia 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.
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tubbs Corner, Texas is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tubbs Corner, Texas 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.
In 2018 you blocked Carmaker1 for adding a hoax and edit warring to keep in in an article. A proposed topic can and indef ban have been made at the ANI post above, if you would like to weigh in now is the time. TomStar81 (Talk) 23:14, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination of Tetlin Junction, Alaska for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tetlin Junction, Alaska is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tetlin Junction, Alaska 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.
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
2017 Deleted Page
I was going through the List of unicorn startup companies and am planning to create pages for those who don't have one. Snyk is on the list - you deleted a page for it https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&title=snyk in November 2017. From what I looked up, I believe 4 years later it's now notable enough to deserve its own page. Anyhow, the instruction said to first contact the user who performed the action listed below so here I am :) What do you think? If you think it doesn't satisfy notability, I won't waste my time.MaskedSinger (talk) 09:38, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure when you will see this given your break, but please ignore. After consulting with the help page, I'm going to start a new page from scratch. No need to refer to the 4 year old deleted page which most likely have minimal value. MaskedSinger (talk) 14:27, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting user profile page! I would also identify as a Calvinist and a Presbyterian, have Scottish ancestry, am a stickler for use of the subjunctive, and haven't owned a TV set since 1983 (fortunately I have had accommodating friends and neighbors). As for the IPA, I'm slowly picking up bits and pieces of the basics and am learning to like it.
I have roots and relatives in Amelia County, and for the last couple of weeks have found myself binge-editing articles about the various mostly forgotten communities that dot the countryside there (probably I'm driven by grief at my inability the last few years to carry on the decades-long tradition of visiting the relatives there over the holidays). This item goes back a while, but am wondering about Winterham. If I'm reading the revision history correctly, you're the one who put in mention of "Ham" as an alternative moniker. I can't find it on the Web, and my informal survey of the relatives also turned up no attestation (OK, actually I just asked one of my parents, who had never heard of such). Am curious where you found it.
While we're at it, I'd be interested in your recommendations for some good sources to research the origins of some of these place-names...I'm not a historian.
-- 2603:6081:8004:DD5:6451:2AC4:EB73:1BE (talk) 07:36, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-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 the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:School City of Hobart logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:School City of Hobart logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
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 admin will 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 on better tools to help.
We have two 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 can let 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.
I appreciate allowing "even you" ME! TO CONTRIBUTE!!
Thank for making it hinges not so hard
To explore info and retrieve only what I need to reaserch so thanks to all!! Lol 2603:6011:E601:CDCF:7C78:3CAC:C234:FEED (talk) 19:05, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello!
Hi, Nyttend,
I just ran into your name in a page history and realized it has been a long time since I had seen you or Nyttend backup editing. I hope you are okay and just busy with life. I also hope you can return one day when circumstances change. Be well! LizRead!Talk! 21:17, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination of Index of Albania-related articles for deletion
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Index of Albania-related articles until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
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 "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. LizRead!Talk! 20:45, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Belle Center Ohio
In 2011, Nyttend removed my reference to Betty White’s residency in Belle Center and said it had to be false because it would have been more publicized. I see now it has been verified on Belle Center’s page Cpwnyc (talk) 21:56, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:
Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period
Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.
22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
Pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have not made any edits or logged actions in the preceding twelve months. Because you have been inactive, your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to activity within the next month.
Inactive administrators are encouraged to rejoin the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to rejoin the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.
Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:08, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Template:ValdezCordovaAK-geo-stub has been 
