This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

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) 02:48, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Denisarona (talk) is wishing a foaming mug of Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding ((subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20)) to your friends' talk pages.

Hi Ritchie! Thanks for the input, I've fixed these errors in the new update of the chart today. Cheers! ;) Impru20^talk 12:22, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Ritchie, I've a doubt regarding abstentions during the confidence votes. I think we shouldn't include them in the total amount of votes, in fact an abstained isn't considered in the computing of the majority. -- Nick.mon (talk) 11:03, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

@Nick.mon: In Conte II Cabinet#Investiture votes there was: voting 609, then "yes" 343 and "no" 263. The total didn't match up. So we either consider as "voting" only "yes" + "no", without abstentions (i.e. 606), or we consider the total as the total present (i.e. 609) and keep the abstentions (3/609). If we pick the first choice, then we should remove the abstentions row (which I am against) because otherwise it's very confusing to have composition bars with different totals (i.e. the "yes" and "no" as 343/606 and 263/606, and the "abstentions" as 3/609). So I think the best option would be to have everything with respect to the number of present members (609), and then write in the first column the correct majority needed (i.e. excluding the abstentions).

The option you had was instead the most misleading, because you put the abstentions over the total members (3/620), which makes no sense because we cannot say how many would have abstained if all members were present. --Ritchie92 (talk) 11:12, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Okok, you're right, let's keep your version. So, we have to modify also Draghi's investiture votes and Conte's January confidence votes. -- Nick.mon (talk) 11:19, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, this is not it.wiki, this is a foreign site about an Italian thing, so you should follow Italian way, since is the correct one. --Ekø (talk) 19:06, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ekø: A foreign site? "Follow Italian way"? What does that even mean? The Italian Constitution uses the version without the hyphen, and the consensus on this site is to use that version. So that's it. You have to find new consensus before changing that. --Ritchie92 (talk) 07:01, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Please, don't restore the tables on the page of the Italian parties, there is no agreement/consensus on them. I tried to find a compromise, but at the moment it is not possible. --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 07:31, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

There is an agreement on the tables, it is on the talk page. The tables stay there, that's what consensus decided. --Ritchie92 (talk) 07:33, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Unfortunately there is no agreement on their content and their form, just read the history and the talk page. I'm sorry to remove them too, but if they are to cause edit war, it's best to remove them. Please, don't restore them without previous agreement, above all with the ideologies.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 07:46, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Scia Della Cometa you need to learn to edit without edit warring. Do not insist on removing the tables, which were agreed upon weeks ago, and never challenged. If you wish, you can just remove the column of the ideologies, not the whole table. --Ritchie92 (talk) 07:52, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

As I already stated, it's ok for me to remove only the ideologies.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 08:45, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

To tell facts: from Eligendo (Interior Ministery site), Comune di NAPOLI (Prec. elez.: 05/06/2016) Sezioni sindaco: 883 / 884 - Sezioni consiglio: 883 / 884 Dato aggiornato al: 05/10/2021 - 10:57 Candidati Sindaco e Liste Voti % MANFREDI GAETANO 217.765 62,90 means that Manfredi alteady won, because only one section remaining to check, this cannot change the final result. In Italy, as soon as results are definitive, the Mayor is known. And all newspapers, as La Repubblica [1] say already that Manfredi won. --Arorae (talk) 10:44, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

@Arorae: I already wrote on your talk page, you could reply there. Anyway yes, let's wait for the definitive results. --Ritchie92 (talk) 10:46, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

I reply where I think it is better to reply. And you are wrong, sorry for you, let's wait, why ? You do not trust La Repubblica ? Bad for you.--Arorae (talk) 10:50, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Calm down. Now it's official and definitive, so I changed it accordingly in the Naples article. No need to behave like this. --Ritchie92 (talk) 10:53, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

The first ime great power is referred to Kingdom of Italy. The second time great power is referred to Republic of Italy.Msimoncinifideuram.it (talk) 15:03, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

@Msimoncinifideuram.it: OK. By the way, you should not tag as "minor edits" something like this or this. See WP:MINOR for more info. --Ritchie92 (talk) 15:46, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

OK).Msimoncinifideuram.it (talk) 16:14, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello! Thank you for explaining the edit taking the honorifics off of Mussolini's page. I'm still a little new to this so I'm learning as I go here. I do have one question if you can help me a little further. On the Duce page, it notes in the infobox that the style is His Excellency. I tagged that as needing citation, but what are your thoughts on just removing that? It would make sense to me to remove it based on that alone. Thanks again for your help. Spf121188 (talk) 14:06, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

@Spf121188: Hi! I am no expert on the criteria about honorifics, I think one should carefully read MOS:HONORIFIC to see what is the policy about His Excellency in the Duce infobox. However in general if a citation needed is there since August 2021, one could wait a bit more before removing it altogether: August 2021 is not that far in the past. --Ritchie92 (talk) 14:16, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your input! On a side note, I also noticed you took the honorifics off of Giorgio Napolitano. I don't object to that or anything, but I did notice that his predecessors have the same prefixes in their infoboxes. Just wanted to bring it to your attention in case they needed to be removed. Spf121188 (talk) 15:03, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Ritchie92 Hello! I wasn't sure if you saw my above message, but I am seeing that there are several articles that list Senator for life as an honorific prefix. On the Senators for life in Italy page it has a list, where I noticed the prefixes as I went down the list. Should these be removed? Just wanted to ask before making the edits. Thank you! Spf121188 (talk) 19:27, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

@Spf121188: "Senator for Life" is a position like "Senator", it's not a title. So yes, whenever they are cited as an honorific title it should be removed. --Ritchie92 (talk) 23:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello! I'm sorry to bother you on your talk page; I wanted to see if you could help me with userboxes on my userpage. Is there a tutorial or a resource I can use to learn how to add other userboxes on my page? I was able to copy a few templates, but there are a few I'd like to add that I can't figure out how to. I appreciate any help you can provide. Thank you!! Spf121188 (talk) 18:50, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Spf121188: I think what you are looking for is in Wikipedia:Userboxes. In there you can find also a search tool for userboxes to find the ones that you like the most. In Wikipedia:Userboxes/Galleries the userboxes are divided by category, if you want to find inspiration. Cheers, Ritchie92 (talk) 20:42, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Ritchie92 Thank you so much! I appreciate your help! Spf121188 (talk) 22:22, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Do you want to stop or not? So you evaluate my work unnecessarily, how can you evaluate something you haven't seen?--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 12:28, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Scia Della Cometa: You need to stop forcing your way of editing on others. If something you are doing is disputed and you clearly do not have a consensus to proceed, then you need to stop and discuss in the talk page. Please follow WP:BRD. --Yakme (talk) 12:30, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

You did not answer, how do you evaluate before seeing the finished work? Are you able to answer? --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 12:33, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Because you are blocking changes before they are completed.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 12:34, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Furthermore, since when does a region correspond to a seat?--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 12:36, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

It does not matter what I think. You should stop edit warring and explain in the talk page. --Yakme (talk) 12:39, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Do you rollback the edits of other users without knowing the reason? I have already explained on the talk page that I reinsert those tables, with your rollbacks you cancel the improvements to the table of presidents and to the infobox, used inappropriately.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 12:42, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Infoboxes must be used appropriately, and regions are not seats.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 12:45, 27 October 2021 (UTC) ps. the infobox you are defending is absolutely ridiculous.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 12:46, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Scia Della Cometa: you are creating your own reality: I did not defend any infobox. Anyway this discussion should be in the proper place, i.e. the talk page of those articles you are edit warring on. --Yakme (talk) 12:55, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

No own reality: in your chain rollbacks, you have also restored the necessary changes to the infobox, which are currently used inappropriately.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 13:01, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

And of course in your chain edit war you did not only add those changes to the infobox, but also removed 80% of the articles. --Yakme (talk) 13:02, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

80% of article that I had already stated that I would reintroduce in a short time.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 13:07, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

• Calabria (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello Yakme. Your name was mentioned at WT:AN3#Where do I report slo-mo EW?. Per the discussion at Talk:Calabria#Bring disputes here it seems possible that there could be a problem of WP:CIR by the other party. If that is the case, negotiations will probably reveal that soon. As a first step, you might begin by explaining one of your recent reverts on the article talk page. That would provide a reference point in case administrators need to take an interest. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 17:58, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Yakme! Excuse me if I'm writing you, but I'd need your help with Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of prime ministers of Italy/archive2. I sincerly don't know how to solve the "Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)" section. You're far more expert than me with these stuffs so, I'd be extremely glad if you could give me a hand with that. Thanks :) -- Nick.mon (talk) 17:27, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

@Nick.mon: Ok, I will have a look. --Yakme (talk) 21:12, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much!! :) -- Nick.mon (talk) 22:45, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Not at all! --Yakme (talk) 22:47, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Yakme! What do you think about the new comments on the FL candidacy? I sincerely don't know what that comment about the ! scope="row" means... -- Nick.mon (talk) 12:28, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

I read it, I will try to solve it soon. --Yakme (talk) 09:04, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

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) 00:49, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Howdy. This is English Wikipedia, not Italian Wikipedia. We've had the Italian presidents numbered in their infoboxes for years, just like we have them numbered in their intros. Now, it's all questioned by you? Honestly, you're arguing that you don't number the presidents, yet you number the prime ministers? GoodDay (talk) 20:32, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@GoodDay: Hi. English Wikipedia is based on sources. No sources, nor common practices, have Italian presidents (nor Prime Ministers) counted in order of service. Italy has not a similar tradition as the USA, where presidents are even commonly called 44th, 45th etc. yet you number the prime ministers I personally have never added a numbering for prime ministers. Actually for PMs it's even more problematic to add a counting. So these should also be removed. --Yakme (talk) 20:35, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Read up on WP:BRD next time, as I was reverting your bold deletions. I noticed that you've a history of edit-warring & therefore, won't be re-adding the numberings. Even though you should've discussed about removing the numberings first. PS: Be careful whose edits you describe as vandalism, too. There are other editors, who don't have my kinda patience. GoodDay (talk) 20:42, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@GoodDay: I am really sorry to read this. I see that you are not assuming good faith on my side, and that is a pity. I also do not see where you can imply that I have a history of edit warring. Indeed I have never boldly removed the numberings in the first place, but in the past (I don't even remember how long ago) I was only applying BRD to other editors who were boldly adding them in the first place. I am also sorry for this, I was too hastily reacting to your immediate revert of my revert, shouldn't have done that. Have a nice day, Yakme (talk) 20:57, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello! I've added the 2022 year, in the Opinion polling in the next Italian general election page. It is now January 6, 2022, and there is no avaliable the polling things, you know, the political parties, like Lega, Brothers of Italy, Democratic Party (Italy), Five Star Movement, and the other Italian political parties. Just like in the 2022 Norwegian opinion polling thing. So, if the opinion polling source will be avaliable, you will fixing the page ? I just asking about it. And also in Hungary, the 2022 Hungarian parliamentary election will come in April, or May, but first, the Presidential election coming in Hungary, in March, 2022, and János Áder is can't be elected anymore, because of the limits, just like in the USA, and the other countries. So, you will fixing the 2022 opinion polling thing, in the Next Italian general election ? --TomFZ67 (talk) 22:07, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@TomFZ67: I will try my best. Anyway there are many users who constantly update the Opinion polling for the next Italian general election tables. Thanks, Yakme (talk) 23:49, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@Yakme: No problem, anytime! And Happy New Year! --TomFZ67 (talk) 05:41, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

On 11 January 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article David Sassoli, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Spencer^T•C 15:45, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Buon pomeriggio da Coreca, ti scrivo per salutarti e sapere come stai, io sto abbastanza bene. Ti scrivo per chiederti un piccolo aiutino in questo abbozzo e nella pagina di Rai Isoradio, giusto una decina di minuti per migliorarla e ampliarla. Io cercherò di fare qualcosa in più migliorandolo in italiano per Dado Coletti, ma per Isoradio ti chiedo di tradurre almeno qualche altra righina in più. Non ho un buon inglese come il tuo, ma mi sforzo di dare il meglio. Per il resto spero che vada tutto bene lì da te. Se posso fare qualcosa chiedi pure. grazie ancora.--Luigi Salvatore Vadacchino (talk) 16:41, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For your continued correction of crucial polling data on the opinion polling for the next Italian general election. FireFlyingly (talk) 18:42, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Avevo già detto che l'articolo era scritto in una maniera fuorviante, non c'è una ragione per cancellare la mia modifica. Veramenteimpartial (talk) 11:36, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

This is en.wiki, you should please write and discuss in English. Your edit provides a partial point of view, and it's written in a bad English. It also includes personal comments like explaining why some people are pro or against some restrictions, which is not supported by sources. It is also not appropriate to have a list of specific objections to some statement right in the beginning of the article about COVID lockdowns. Finally, please read WP:OR and WP:RS, which are founding principles of Wikipedia. Yakme (talk) 11:46, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Can you please stop changing the abbreviations to non-bold writing? Charlieo308 (talk) 06:43, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

@Charlieo308: Non-bold is the standard on Wikipedia. It is you who changed all abbreviations of right-wing or fascist parties to bold, without any reason. So please stop making them bold in infoboxes. Yakme (talk) 06:44, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Wow. I have never seen someone go that far off the deep end into the pit of madness. I think the word would be lunatic, but there really isn't anything that sums that level of crazy up entirely. If they reappear by evading the block, revert everything and report at AIV, referencing the Charlieo308 account. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 14:41, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

@Mako001 thanks for intervening and for your advice. I was also surprised by the sudden mental breakdown that took place here. Thanks again, Yakme (talk) 19:37, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding List of political parties in Italy. The thread is Disruption_of_consensus_building_process_on_List_of_political_parties_in_Italy. Thank you. — Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Join WP:FINANCE! 12:51, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Why did you cancel the section "Evolution and Growth" with the following excuse?

→‎Evolution & Growth: self-referential section (probably written by a member of the party) based on primary sources only)

The added section, which you removed, contained up-to-date information about the political party, and it was fully referenced.

If you wish to add your contribution to detail any information further you are more than welcome, and opening a fair discussion it would be beneficial for the readers.

We appreciate your time in reading this, and hope we can have a fair liaising together. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BertieTheBrain (talk • contribs) 19:26, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, simple references are not enough: that section was based on primary sources only. On the other hand, Wikipedia is based on secondary sources. Also, that paragraph was giving WP:UNDUE weight to the results of a few opinion polls, and was directly implying originally researched statements like the fact that the party has grown in support. --Yakme (talk) 09:00, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

References we added are taken from official sources such as Italian registered newspaper. I want to remind you that the page is written in English language which is not your mother tongue language. Your Italian culture is different from Anglo-Saxon culture, what is not relevant to you is very relevant in our culture. You wrote in the history log of the page the following sentence:

“definitely not a relevant achievement, it's not like the guy has been listed in the Time 100 people of the year”

Do you know what BIAS is? You are still changing our legitimate contributions. You do not seem to be a fair Wikipedia’s contributor as your dashboard would suggest. I see here people complaining about your attitude and behaviour.

We do not think you have to belisted “Time 100 people of the year” to be listed on Wikipedia. The person is listed because is a key person of the organisation of a political party and if you keep removing our contributions, we consider your attitude discriminatory and a form of violence for preventing the exercise of a political right.

Also, we have been informed from solicitors located in Italy, that using violence for preventing the exercise of a political right (48–54 Cost.) is a criminal offence (Art. 294 Criminal Code)

You should keep yourself focused on your language and be very respectful of other cultures and languages.

Therefore, there will be no further notice to you. If you keep deleting our contributions, we will request our English Wikipedia Community to take proper actions against you, and any Italian administrator, sysop, steward, or editor who would support you in this form of violence. All your accounts would be blacklisted and reported across the English language press services.

Moreover, our correspondent in Europe would file a charge against you to the Italian Postal Police. Anonymous (talk) 12:44, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Great, you just threatened legal action, and therefore you got yourself a report to ANI. Yakme (talk) 13:06, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Yakme, The telegraph article has no mention of any political position...to leave it in is dishonest.

the washington post's only political position is her support of draghi

im working on the third article

Unnecessarily (talk) 22:07, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Both Washington Post and The Conversation have the words "far-right" literally in the title. So I think they are justified, nothing "dishonest". I removed the Telegraph source. Yakme (talk) 22:12, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

yes they have those words in the title. that means nothing....read the articles.... Unnecessarily (talk) 22:14, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

they are being used to reference political positions

not name calling Unnecessarily (talk) 22:14, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

the only political position in the wapo article is the support of draghi Unnecessarily (talk) 22:17, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

far right is in the title, but there is nothing in the articles to demonstrate this Unnecessarily (talk) 22:15, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Then you should remove the whole sentence, not change its meaning by stating that she's far right because of her position supporting Draghi (which makes zero sense). Yakme (talk) 22:20, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

good solution, but i was waiting to finish the third article in case there is any mention of political position....... Unnecessarily (talk) 22:27, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Right. Or if you believe that the claim is not complete bonkers (like I tend to believe), another solution is to mark the sentence with ((Better source needed)) or remove those sources and add ((Citation needed)). Yakme (talk) 22:39, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

also a very good solution. It is hard to find any english source that does not call her far right, which seems to be used now to describe anything right of center! Unnecessarily (talk) 23:12, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

An article you recently created, Opinion polling for the next Italian general election, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. (t · c) buidhe 02:48, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed an inappropriate comment you made on Giorgia Meloni and post-ideologies. As a socialist, you should know the difference between fascism/communism and post-fascism/post-communism. Fascist and communist regimes implied authoritarian, antidemocratic and revolutionary methods (still present in neo-fascism), while their post-ideologic equivalents respect democratic elections and repel authoritarianism. The same happened with neo-communism. As an Italian, you should also know that Togliatti, Nenni and Bordiga (leaders of PCI, PSI and PCInt) explicitly recognized post-fascism right after the war, knowing the difference, and later they even made an alliance with MSI. That's it, very simple difference. Regards, a fellow socialist. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 05:04, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

@Est. 2021 I don't understand your tone about this issue, but anyway your statements have nothing to do with what I edited. I was just pointing out that the MSI is widely defined as neo-fascist by multiple WP:RS, also academic ones, so in my opinion we should not end up mitigating this attribute by replacing "neo-fascist" with "post-fascist". Yakme (talk) 12:15, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Opinion polling for the next Italian general election, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

— Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 11:53, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Hallo Yakme, if you have time and lust could you please comment here? The problem is not related to Columbus only, but is general. Alex2006 (talk) 11:16, 23 March 2023 (UTC)