Here are some links I thought useful:
Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. How? The Wikipedia:Village pump is also a good place to go for quick answers to general questions. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.
Sam [Spade] 01:36, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Welcome! I noticed your question about public domain images on the New user log. You may be interested to read Public domain image resources, Public domain resources or the article public domain for clarification on what qualifies as public domain. If you upload any such images be sure to tag them with ((PD)) (see Image copyright tags). Oh and any mistakes you happen to make can be easily rectified, so don't be afriad to edit boldly. Hope this helps and happy editing! — Trilobite (Talk) 14:14, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Thank you, Sam Spade and Trilobite. I was mostly looking for pictures of scientists, and the Library of Congress is down today, so no luck. I did fix a link on one of the pages though. That must be a very common need here, isn't it?
Hi!
I certainly didnt mean to sugest your edit was vandalism... it was the annons edits after yours ( diff) which I objected to. In fact, I reverted to your version diff. I appologise for my ambiguous edit summary: it was inteneded to imply "rv to last version by spalding, due to anon vadalsim of that version". I hope that this apology satisfys you with out clogging up the page history further, but if you still feel it needs clarifying there, please drop me another line! cheers, Iain 08:39, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Hi, I just wanted to thank you for the link you added to assembly language. It's a very good site that I've read myself but had forgotten all about. Thanks again. Derrick Coetzee 06:47, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "((DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual))" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:
OR
Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "((DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual))" with "((MultiLicensePD))". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)
Could you clarify the license of the picture Image:Swiss Chard.jpg. Is it ((GFDL))?Rasbak 14:28, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
Can you vote for John Denver on the Article Collaboration Drive? Thanks. Carolaman 19:57, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your edit! SaraK 23:01, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the editorial work on the Pluhar article. I'm delighted to see that no one else seems to have noticed its existence. I've been engaged for a few months in a discussion of the problems of Wikipedia and the Pluhar article is an interesting experiment. Pluhar is sufficiently obscure to filter out nearly everyone who frequents this website but the article is still open to change. We'll see how things proceed.
Spalding, There is a factual error in the Watler A. Shewhart article which is similar to the one you corrected recently in the control chart article: "In 1938 his work came to the attention of physicists W. Edwards Deming and Raymond T. Birge. The two had been deeply intrigued by the issue of measurement error in science and had published a landmark paper in Reviews of Modern Physics in 1934. On reading of Shewhart's insights, they wrote to the journal to wholly recast their approach in the terms that Shewhart advocated." There may be some useful information in this reference mixed in with the factual errors. Deming didn't write to the journal because he had just discovered Shewhart's work. Whatever was written to the journal probably came about because of insights caused by Shewhart's lectures at USDA. Since there is no reference to a specific journal article this appears to be speculation. I would appreciate you views on this section of the article. Thanks. Leaders100 12:45, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
The article, now titled Bicycle and motorcycle dynamics, has been nominated for FA. Since you may have worked on it in the past, would you care take a look at it again? AndrewDressel 01:56, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Because you're a member of the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians, I'm notifying you that the inclusionist proposa Wikipedia:Non-notabilityl is in progress to define the role of notability in articles. Please help us make this successful! Also note the proposal Wikipedia:Importance is a deletionist proposla that seeks to officially introduce notabiltiy for the first time. Make sure this is defeated! --Ephilei 04:45, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
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 ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 21:48, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
What is your source RE the namesake for Eichenwald's book? Curious.--Utahredrock 04:06, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Please comment. --Karnesky 15:39, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
I think like most TLAs with multiple meanings the TLA itself should go to the disambig page. The reason is the user can then choose for themselves what they are looking for. I'll bet most direct queries here are people looking for India Pale Ale, and like me, are too lazy to type it out. I was going to be bold and just move it, but all the links here make that difficult or inadvisable. Any suggestions? Spalding 00:33, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
I recently cranked out a new and greatly improved version of Pi-unrolled.gif and (why not?) nominated it for FP. Since you commented on the workshop page of this graphic, I'd like to invite you to comment on the new nomination. Thank you. John Reid 04:35, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Hiya. Disambiguation statements should only be used if the Wikipedia user possibly came to the article looking for a different article. You are welcome to put these kind of links under a "See also" or "Further reading" section at the bottom, though, but the top of the article is only for quick navigation to the right article, not just further pedia-sploring. Learn more at WP:DAB. Camaro96 18:07, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Since you were curious, the previous version of the article was deleted because it was an essay, not an article. DS 17:33, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
It was mainly just a procedural thing. Your recreation of the article (a much better start than the direction taken by the old articel, BTW) counts as objecting to the deletion. I would have recreated it for you, but, quite frankly, I like where you're going with it. Good luck. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 02:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, the external links you added to the page Hardiness zone do not comply with our guidelines for external links. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Leuko 19:01, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Edward Tenner, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Edward Tenner seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Edward Tenner, please affix the template ((hangon)) to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 20:31, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Another editor has added the "((prod))" template to the article Human Factors for Highway Engineers (book), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the ((prod)) template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 17:44, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated Human Factors for Highway Engineers (book), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Human Factors for Highway Engineers (book). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. -- Atamachat 18:27, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated Wikipediaholic (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 20:11, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Selection error, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((dated prod))
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add ((db-author))
to the top of Selection error. Mattisse 00:42, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:P-chart
31 October 2008
Martin Segers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.239.157.3 (talk) 19:35, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Slaters 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 company or corporation, but it does not 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding ((hangon))
to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Age Happens (talk) 13:47, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi Spalding - I've done a few edits to Checklist over the last few days, just got back from a talk by Atul Gawande (author of Checklist Manifesto) and finally looked to find out who'd created the page in the first place. I don't have any pages I am currently feeling responsible for, and would be happy to adopt this one - I've got a lot of good content from other credible sources that I could add to it. And it connects with several of my passions (checklists & passions sounds strange, right? but its still true - I've also got a thing for rubrics and worksheets, but I haven't looked at those pages yet).
I am profoundly impressed with what wikipedia had already accomplished and have high hopes for its continued growth and the influence it can have to help promote positive change in the world. I'm checking in here because I haven't been an active member of the wikipedia editing community yet - just an occasional interloper (although I have managed to teach >40 undergrads how to edit wikipedia pages for their first time). Would love to connect and learn more about how best my skills can support the wikimedia hivemind. Pop me a message when you can? Melissaganus (talk) 06:12, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello Spalding! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 893 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the ((unreferencedBLP)) tag. Here is the article:
Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 20:08, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 17:57, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.
On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true
. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false
in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being minor in the usual way.
For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. With the script in place, you can continue with this functionality indefinitely (its use is governed by WP:MINOR). If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.
Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 18:33, 15 March 2011 (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 Nielsen Norman Group 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 an organization or company, but it does not 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 04:39, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote, David Boyle (author), has been recently tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be merged, redirected, or deleted. Please consider adding reliable, secondary sources to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources: Find sources: "David Boyle (author)" – news · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images. Thank you for editing Wikipedia! VoxelBot 16:35, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Description error 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/Description error until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. --Mdann52talk to me! 12:20, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Yay! The article was improved and therefore saved. A nice example of Wikipedia in action. Maybe deletionists aren't ALL bad. :) Spalding (talk) 13:41, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Description error may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:52, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Multichannel code, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Matrix, Acoustic and Audio compression (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:43, 1 December 2013 (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) 12:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
The article Mental Models has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated))
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated))
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 04:34, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mental Models 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/Mental Models until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 23:19, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. Been a while since I revamped Kenneth Craik article, but would be interested in your interest. Photo of KC would be nice if doable; more critique on his pioneering 1943 thesis (section on book?) on mental models awesome. (Latter article in great need of improvement, esp. 75+year history of evolving concept, & linkage.) Let me know your particular interest - some matter available for scholarly purposes. -- Paulscrawl (talk) 02:25, 25 February 2016 (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 Effie Award 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 an organization or company, but it 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 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. Drmies (talk) 19:44, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Spalding. 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.
Hello, Spalding. 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)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chuck Prophet 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/Chuck Prophet until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Atsme📞📧 14:52, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Spalding. 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)
Hello, Spalding. 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)
The article Mr. Know-It-All has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Ueferenced article about a TV show's segment. The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. No objection to bold redirecting like has been done with most other similar plot summaries seen at Template:The Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle and Friends.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated))
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated))
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:17, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
The article Islands of automation has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Entirely unsourced, and not even a dictionary definition, since it tells us that the phrase 'islands of automation' has been used to describe two different things. A Google search finds some usage, but nonthing to suggest this is more than vague IT-market-speak jargon. Arriving at any sort of overarching definition would require WP:OR. The last sentence is unadulterated waffle.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated))
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated))
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:43, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
The article User expectations has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
No evidence of notability. Seems like a rehash of parts of user experience.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated))
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated))
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 21:39, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
The article User expectations has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated))
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated))
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:06, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
The article David Boyle (author) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
No significant coverage in secondary sources (WP:BASIC).
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated))
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated))
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Liam McM 17:23, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
The article Water spot has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
no sources for a decade, not encyclopedic
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated))
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated))
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TarkusABtalk/contrib 19:45, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
The article Information sign has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Are not all signs supposed to be informative by definition?
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated))
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated))
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:13, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Information sign until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.