Old notices from 2008 - 2012 have been moved to User talk:Skarz/Archive 1

you haven't given any feedback on the talk page of dcfldd, which you marked on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Computing I will be removing dcfldd from Wikipedia:WikiProject_Computing when 7 days pass, as needed references was added.

Swestlake (talk) 07:52, 8 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your help with the vital work of patrolling new pages! Since you appear to be relatively new user and have not been marking new pages you review as patrolled, I was just wondering if you knew about this facility and its purpose. At Special:Newpages, pages that have not been patrolled are shown in yellow highlight, to indicate they have not been reviewed (and as "unreviewed" when using Special:NewPagesFeed a/k/a page curation). It may be a good idea to use the "mark this page as patrolled" link at the bottom of the new page if you think you have performed the standard patrolling tasks and do not wish a second opinion. Where appropriate, doing so saves time and work by informing fellow patrollers of your review of the page, so that they do not duplicate efforts. Thanks again for volunteering your time at the new pages patrol project. I wasn't quite finished with the article I was posting and it's really the only know racing association in the whole state of missouri. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nottoshabby (talk • contribs) 19:44, 30 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:Rollback and use wisely. John Reaves 21:56, 30 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've looked through your contributions, and I've seen a good use of Igloo from you. Don't worry about your mistaken revert of one of my edits; mistakes happen, and I've made mistakes myself. Lugia2453 (talk) 20:12, 31 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm in the process of adding another image to that section (an early tour poster), and I found that quote particularly integral to the band's early years... I'd never seen the band's foundation described so well. The image worked well, but there's an even better image of the band performing in the following section... that image in question is by no means bad, but is less dynamic and is also rather far away. Thardin12 (talk) 20:38, 17 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Thardin12: Totally valid reasoning, thank you for responding. :) teratogen (talk) 20:51, 17 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your interest in passing this one, but it doesn't look ready for GA to me due to the lack of sourcing. In the future, please also keep in mind the instructions at GA: "Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article prior to a nomination."

I don't mean to be discouraging, though--this would be great to get to GA if you're interested in it! Good luck, -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:56, 19 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello,

I note that you are developing an interest in the assessment process. I have been a daily contributor to WP for 6 years, but only recently have decided to play the assessment game three months ago. I have just cleared a Featured Article through review and another through A Class aimed toward FA. I have a Featured List candidate about to pass that review. I also have another article that will be submitted to A Class within a week. Please let me share my insights.

The best way to learn about any step of the assessment process above B Class is to snoop on the reviews, then ease into some reviewing. Don't be afraid to lurk, watch, and learn. The assessors are very rigid on sourcing and citations, so you do best to learn an approved style.

Having said that, I would like to add that I never quite saw GA as worth pursuing. You can take an article from B Class to A Class to FA without a GA review, and I do.

Hope this is of some help to you. Please feel free to contact me if you think I may be of some help.

Georgejdorner (talk) 01:20, 30 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I've deprodded Federal prison but taken it to AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Federal prison. Hopefully the AfD nomination makes my thought process somewhat clear. Your input would be appreciated. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 06:30, 30 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi i have just rewritten the page on Permanent formwork after your speedy deletion could you be so kind as to have another look, kind regards Andrewlord (talk) 18:56, 16 December 2013 (UTC) Andrewlord comment added by Andrewlord (talk • contribs) 17:51, 13Reply[reply]

Hello, I saw you reverted all the edits I made on I made on Zippo. Looking at them I realize that they could be written better, but I don't see any wrong information. Why not just edit and improve them? I'm brand new to editing wikipedia(but not to wikis in general). User:7cardcha —Preceding undated comment added 20:48, 10 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@7cardcha: The software I was using at the time only allowed me to rollback or revert changes, not edit them. Your edits were not disruptive hence why I labeled them "good faith" edits as opposed to vandalism. Now my two main issues with your edits were 1) No spaces between the parentheses: "...Zippo BLU in 2005(It wasn't..." and no references. Any time you add new information to Wikipedia, especially when pertaining to specific dates or details regarding product release, you should add references to those claims to help with Wikipedia verifiability. That is all. Welcome to Wikipedia and I'll be glad to assist you! teratogen (talk) 20:58, 10 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks a lot. That makes sense. Is there a list of stylistic techniques for Wikipedia? I would have added references except that the stuff I changed did not have references in the first place. Also, what constitutes a valid reference? In one, I noted that the spring toggle lever is often called a cam. Everybody I know, everybody I've seen on YouTube, and every time it is mentioned on a forum it is called a cam, but I doubt there is an official reference calling it a cam. Thank you -User:7cardcha —Preceding undated comment added 17:46, 12 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@7cardcha: As a matter of fact, there is... It's over at Wikipedia:Manual of Style - that's only a reference, though! Don't read it all the way through haha. Just reference it any time you are unsure. As far as what constitues a "reliable source," take a brief glance at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources and that should help you out. Also don't be afraid to ask over at the Help Desk! teratogen (talk) 20:08, 12 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Skarz, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Information about STiki, including: Using STiki and its hotkeys Comparison with other tools Information about vandalism on Wikipedia Here are some pages which are a little more fun: The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users! Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes! We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and Pratyya (Hello!) 06:08, 11 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for notifying me of your decision concerning the merger proposal relating to the Federal Bureau of Prisons article. I had quite frankly forgotten about that I made that proposal, and in retrospect, I agree with your decision to close the discussion in opposition to merging the article. --TommyBoy (talk) 15:08, 13 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Skarz, I'm moving Francesco Gonzaga to Francesco Gonzaga (1538-1566) , because there are at least 7 people with that name, and I was making a disambiguation page of Francesco Gonzaga, which seems alright to me. Regards, Filiep.

@Filiep: Don't you think you should get a consensus before you make such a drastic change to the article? At least start the discussion on the talk or page or ask for some outside input at the Teahouse! Skarz (talk) 07:28, 15 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Answered in User_talk:Altenmann//#Federal_prison. If you have further question, please continue the disussion in the afrticle talk page. - Altenmann >t 02:57, 16 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Skarz. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by —Anne Delong (talk) 04:30, 16 December 2013 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((teahouse talkback)) template).Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on File:Banio en reformas.jpeg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

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. 레비Revi^con 09:17, 23 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
	Thanks for your efforts in getting us those quality images of the penitentiary!! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:45, 23 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As stated on my user page, Alcatraz Federal Penitentiary is the article I'm proudest of writing. I'd be interested in helping you expand the New Mexico one in the new year. And Merry Christmas!♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:46, 23 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. I'm fairly certain that when last I looked at the article on Cobain (though our articles do change a lot), it mentioned that in his teens he became an evangelical Christian but that he later denounced the religion. Thanks! Sbrianhicks (talk) 05:59, 24 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Skarz,

Thanks for your message. Please note that my edit made changes to ensure the correctness of grammar. According to the Chicago Manual of Style, quotation marks should not be used when text appears in an epigraph or block quotation. Also, there was an improper use of a comma: there should not be a comma after "The 12th-century Jewish legal scholar ..." Thus, I encourage a partial revert to make room for these two edits. Thanks again! --Precision123 (talk) 23:26, 24 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Precision123: That's great, and I appreciate your effort - but Wikipedia does not use the Chicago Manual of Style. For guidelines on how to format quotations, please visit WP:QUOTE. Skarz (talk) 17:57, 25 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Remembering Never - God Save Us.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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:50, 6 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, in october 2014 you put a drive-by template on the What.CD article. I have since added additional sources for most stuff except one alinea which is marked with a ^{[original research?]} tag, so I have removed the template. I just thought I would let you know out of politeness. Cheers! 09I500 (talk) 19:44, 13 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Kershaw Knives Logo.png. 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:31, 19 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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) 16:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Skarz. 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)Reply[reply]

Hello, Skarz. 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)Reply[reply]

Hello, Skarz. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Skarz! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access to AutoWikiBrowser may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from the CheckPage. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! — MusikBot II ^talk 17:18, 6 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Google Hummingbird Logo.png. 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:50, 8 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Skartz. Please review our policy on Biographies of Living People before reposing allegations about Raz Simone --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 23:54, 10 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Guerillero: Can you specifically mention which part of that policy I should review? I did not see anything about using video as a reliable source, nor does it suggest that using video as a source constitutes an allegation. --Skarz (talk) 01:06, 11 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. It relates to this BLP violation. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 01:36, 11 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The first paragraph of the lead, WP:BLPPRIMARY, WP:BLPSPS, and WP:BLPREMOVE should cover it. ~Swarm~ ^{sting} 22:10, 13 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Skarz, Twitter is not a reliable source. You cannot advance such a serious claim using it for attribution. That is defamatory. Please don't do that again. El_C 02:05, 11 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@El C: What is Wikipedia's policy on using video whether posted to YouTube, Facebook, or Twitter? Is video not a reliable source? --Skarz (talk) 02:17, 11 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, not about claims of illegal activity. Absolutely not. El_C 02:20, 11 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

<ec>In most cases, no - it's too subject to interpretation, editing and general mischief. For serious accusations of this kind, we demand significant coverage in secondary sources with a reputation for fact-checking, both to make the appropriate judgment and to establish that the material is sufficiently significant for inclusion - no video, no interpretation by editors of primary sources. Acroterion (talk) 02:23, 11 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note that WP:RSP explicitly states that: Twitter should never be used for third-party claims related to living persons. El_C 02:35, 11 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why are we relying on a Chinese source for so much of this article? Doesn't seem appropriate - surely there must be sources closer to Seattle? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coretteket (talk • contribs) 15:30, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

It's because this is not a legitimate movement, it's largely seen as a joke, hence why no one is covering it - You

LMAO In the last four hours there's been articles by MyNorthwest.com, KOMO News, AND the Seattle Times... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:600:9680:C750:79C5:2824:2172:A3EC (talk) 06:08, 11 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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) 01:40, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in COVID-19, broadly construed. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

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

User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 17:56, 9 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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) 00:15, 23 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Thomas Goodrich (author) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Isi96 (talk) 00:15, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Thomas Goodrich (author). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:02, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your recent editing history at Hellstorm (film) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Doug Weller talk 14:34, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, I have already reported the edit war. skarz (talk) 14:38, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

interviews are not independent sources and IMDb is not a reliable source because it is user edited.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Thomas Goodrich (author) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 17:04, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Skarz! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Theroadislong (talk) 17:04, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
24		Spectre Circuit Simulator (talk)	Add sources
15		Persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses in the United States (talk)	Add sources
42		Angle of arrival (talk)	Add sources
59		FM broadcasting in the United States (talk)	Add sources
185		People's Park (Berkeley) (talk)	Add sources
151		Tritium radioluminescence (talk)	Add sources
2,666		Demon (talk)	Cleanup
268		Programmable logic device (talk)	Cleanup
22		Political forecasting (talk)	Cleanup
65		Alexander Brandon (talk)	Expand
154		Patriot Prayer (talk)	Expand
128		Hurricane Sally (talk)	Expand
7		Jednorożec (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
960		RIM-66 Standard (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
22		Location awareness (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
18		HomePlug Powerline Alliance (talk)	Merge
360		Disney Branded Television (talk)	Merge
355		Antisemitism in the United States (talk)	Merge
73		Gandy Bridge (talk)	Wikify
29		Orb (software) (talk)	Wikify
765		KRISS Vector (talk)	Wikify
6		Embedded instrumentation (talk)	Orphan
3		Offgrid (talk)	Orphan
1		Olav Bolland (talk)	Orphan
11		Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly (talk)	Stub
3		Niavaran Park (talk)	Stub
346		Hanlim Multi Art School (talk)	Stub
10		Ministry of Justice (Austria) (talk)	Stub
31		Afro rock (talk)	Stub
104		Pandora Peaks (talk)	Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:02, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Skarz. Thanks for patrolling new pages. I've declined your deletion request for a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. Please take a moment to read the new tutorial for patrollers, criteria for speedy deletion, and particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion or proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. Thanks! 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:DDC7:75BD:E444:D6B6 (talk) 21:20, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Thomas Goodrich (author) instead.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Two copies of this page have been created, in draft space and in article space. It is not necessary to create two copies of the same page, and it annoys the reviewers. This is sometimes done in order to bypass Articles for Creation review. However, if a submitter is ready to have the article in article space, it can be moved into article space, rather than creating a copy. It is common for a page that has been duplicated in draft space and in article space to be nominated for deletion or proposed for deletion.

If the article is kept, this draft should be redirected to the article. If the article is deleted, this draft may be kept for future improvement.

This draft is either essentially the same as the article with the same name, or a subset of the article with the same name. The draft will be replaced by a redirect from draft space to the article.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Thomas Goodrich (author) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 17:49, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Korea Minting and Security Printing Corporation, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:03, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]