User talk:Tomsega
Duplicate images uploaded
[edit]Thanks for uploading Image:Sportsground.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Sportsground.JPG. The copy called Image:Sportsground.JPG has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.
This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 11:30, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Give me your opinion on what you think of his external links that I have change and made smaller? TennisAuthority 20:50, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Start Box Discussion!
[edit]I was just wanting to give you an opportunity to weight into the discussion about the validity of these start boxes, which the debate is going on, and here's is the link to participate! Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Tennis#Start_Boxes_Templates_for_Tennis_Player.3F TennisAuthority 18:22, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I took your words to heart, see here. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 22:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Action theory (philosophy), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Action theory. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally moving or duplicating content, please be sure you have followed the procedure at Wikipedia:Splitting by acknowledging the duplication of material in edit summary to preserve attribution history.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 22:12, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
- FYI, moving an article is a better way to go, rather than copy/pasting. It preserves the edit history. tedder (talk) 22:17, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Class
[edit]Thumbs up, the lede is starting to be banged into shape. I'd prefer the first or second sentence convey something of the vastness of classes and their totalising nature in class society. That's a thought, a second sentence for just that. Fifelfoo (talk) 16:11, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Fair. I understand (and believe) class is systemic; that ideology is on all levels often "unconscious" and unchosen in a Gramscian sense. But it's also important an article is really easy for a layman to understand, and important this article in particular has a holistic definition of class, not one purely related to Marxism. Weberian, feminist, postcolonial and global concepts, etc etc. --Tomsega (talk) 16:20, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
September 2009
[edit]
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary, as you forgot on your recent edit to Michel Foucault. Thank you. Law Lord (talk) 14:57, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Classical sociologists & key figures
[edit]Hi Tomsega, please, look at my contribution in Talk:Sociology before undoing my changes. -- €pa (talk) 21:55, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Labelling
[edit]Hi Thom,
I noticed that you recently added the sociology template to the article on labelling. I think it would be more appropriate on labeling theory. If you look at the two articles you will see the difference.
Something slightly annoying is that the labeling theory article has the American spelling, whereas the labelling article has the British spelling. This may have led to your misunderstanding.
Also, I notice that you classed the article as a start class on the talk page. This is probably true so I will remove the tag at the bottom of the article describing it as a stub.
Yaris678 (talk) 14:11, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Please see this...
[edit]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Modernity#Citations_and_recent_edits_-_revisited —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.102.198.95 (talk) 15:13, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
sociology and anthropology
[edit]Would you mind putting Cultural anthropology and Social anthropology on your watchlists, and commenting on the talk page as appropriate? Thanks, Slrubenstein | Talk 11:58, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Improving sociology idea
[edit]Inspired by this comment: if we can get a grad class to improve sociology for GA/FA, it should generate a flurry of activity :) GA reviews have big backlogs, educational project ones are rare and need to be expedited, but most others can wait for a few weeks (or months) - not that I think it is a good situation, but backlogs are backlogs... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 01:09, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Computational sociology
[edit]I've taken it as my mission to enhance the computational sociology article so that I can dethrone one of the crusty, aristocratic articles on the sociology template! It's telling that you hegemonic sociologists like using our pretty images to brand yourself, but resist our methods and conclusions! :) Madcoverboy (talk) 18:29, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Sociology you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 2-3 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:44, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
AfD nomination of 100 Greatest Britons
[edit]
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is 100 Greatest Britons. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/100 Greatest Britons (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
March 2010
[edit] Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Sociology of race and ethnic relations a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. Robofish (talk) 17:29, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
- That was an automated message, but to explain: last September, you moved the content of Race relations to the title Ethnic relations by cutting and pasting, and in December you did the same again to move it to its current title. This is undesirable as it prevents the whole history being easily viewed at once; the page move function should be used instead. I have asked an administrator to perform a history merge of these articles. Robofish (talk) 17:31, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Re: Sociology Nav Bar
[edit]
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hey, please see further response on my page. Cheers, DarwinPeacock (talk) 23:19, 7 April 2010 (UTC).
... and one more response. DarwinPeacock (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
I am not sure if I agree with the merger. There is enough content - and notability - to split it back, I think. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:25, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- The thing is, when 'positivism' alone is cited, one should mean the positivism starting with Comte and carrying on as a tradition through social science. 'Logical positivism' is what one would always say with respect to the analytical philosophical tradition. The old 'sociological positivism' page diluted all efforts and was pretty useless. I think it's appropriate to have one page for positivism, one page for logical positivism. I really think it's fine as it is! ;) --Tomsega (talk) 17:50, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I won't insist on the split for now. Btw, in the future - could you reply on my talkpage? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 22:10, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Sociology Newsletter: II (April 2010)
[edit]request for some help
[edit]Do you know much about Rousseau AND Durkheim? Slrubenstein | Talk 11:46, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hmmm.. depends on the question! They were in my opinion the premier French thinkers of the 18th and 19th centuries respectively so the relationship must be fairly strong.. --Tomsega (talk) 12:06, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I would think so too. The question is, do you know enough of their work, or the history of French social thought during this time period, to be able to explain how certain concepts of and questions about society developed in French socialthought from one to the other? I know enough to kind of fudge something, which is not good enough for Wikipedia, which is why I am looking for someone who knows their work and how they are used or have been discussed either by intellectual historians or historians of sociology... Slrubenstein | Talk 16:32, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Re: Positivism
[edit]You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Normal type
[edit]In this edit you deleted a "context" tag, and later I put another one there and wrote this edit summary:
-
- "Context" tag. I SUSPECT that this may be about types of PEOPLE, but I DON'T KNOW, even after reading the whole article!
Is making a thing like that clear too much of a challenge? Michael Hardy (talk) 11:45, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
social theory question
[edit]Tom, do you know the work of Rousseau and Durkheim well enough to address the tradition that links them, or the ways they together mark important positions in French social theory? (apologies if i have asked you this already) Slrubenstein | Talk 16:12, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- Well, his philosophy (like most classical political philosophy) emphasised strongly the idea of a social body or organism, and he described solitude as 'unnatural' and association as being beneficial. Alluding to the ideas of organic solidarity and anomie in Durkheim. Rouseau emphasised the idea of a general 'will' for men to do good, yet thought our social institutions often ruin us. I haven't really read Rousseau in enough depth but he was very much a humanist in the sense of believing humans to be natural good... I disagree. He made it apparent he thought that, if the majority of people believe something, then it must be right. Clearly writing before totalitarianism as it arrived in modernity! Specific to Durkheim.. can't really think of much else right now, sorry! --Tomsega (talk) 16:24, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I am not sure I agree with Rousseau either .. but I am trying to work out a (small) way to improve the culture article and I wish I knew someone who really felt comfortabl with French social theory, spanning from Rousseau and Compte to Durkheim and Mauss. Slrubenstein | Talk 17:14, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
A favor
[edit]Hey Tomsega, It's been great editing the Sociology page with you. I want to ask you for a favor though: could you please put more info in your edit summaries? Just a word or two per edit would make it much easier to follow what you are doing without having to look through the page history. Thanks a lot--and good work on all the Soc pages.DarwinPeacock (talk) 19:25, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
You are now a Reviewer
[edit]
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) 17:33, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Sociology: Positivism section
[edit]The Anti-Positivism section has two very long quotes and I thought that for balance the Positivism section needed a long quote. The quote by Ward adds interesting and important information not available elsewhere in the article, namely that Sociology is the least positivist of all the sciences and that it is also the most complex of the sciences. This information is important to a young student exploring Sociology for the first time. Longsun (talk) 12:20, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I have corrected your anti-positivism bias in the Sociology article. Durkheim would agree with me. Longsun (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:35, 12 November 2010 (UTC).
WikiProject Sociology Newsletter: III (December 2010)
[edit]List of tallest buildings and structures in London
[edit]I disagree with the inclusion of the Shard in the main list whilst it's still far from complete, it introduces obvious inconsistencies and to my perception it is out of place. Do you have any argument to offer in support of keeping it? The UK list has so far resisted including the Shard in the main section, which is entitled 'Tallest completed buildings'. Do you see any reason why the London list should take a different approach? Paravane (talk) 20:08, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- I share the view that planned and unfinished buildings should not be included on the list, for obvious reasons... with the exception of buildings which have already surpassed the height of the current tallest building, and even then they should only be included as "-" rather than "1st" on the list - this style has been followed by the List of tallest structures in Tokyo page and I think it's quite effective. --Tomsega (talk) 07:25, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. I note that your edits of the List of tallest buildings and structures in London have so far been almost exclusively devoted to amending details of the Shard. I have removed the Shard once again from the main list, pending further discussion, and given some reasons on the article's talk page.Paravane (talk) 23:40, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
How to move a page
[edit]This may be not relevant any more, but please avoid copy and paste moves like you did in 2009 (see Talk:Sociological_theory#Cut_.26_paste_repair). For proper moving pages, use the move button, and if it is not available, WP:RM procedure. See WP:MOVE for more info. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:40, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Tomsega: Willing to help with some Wikipedia-related research?
[edit]Hi! I'm a first-year PhD student working on a system to help improve the quality of Wikipedia articles on scientific topics by providing easier access to relevant scientific publications. I was hoping to speak with some editors who work on scientific articles in order to solicit requirements for my system in order to better satisfy the needs of the Wikipedia community. I noticed that you have been a caretaker for a number of pages on topics about sociology, and I would really appreciate your input. If you are interested, please let me know on my talk page (talk). Thanks! —Preceding undated comment added 23:31, 27 May 2011 (UTC).
ASA Las Vegas
[edit]Will you be attending it? There will be a Wikipedia booth, and ASA new president wants to cooperate with Wikipedia. It would be great if a group of WikiProject Sociology editors could meet there. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 15:42, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
We're in a bit of a pickle in the Wagner discussion page. The issues concerns Social class (sociology) and the phrase supposedly common Germanic past and has now been dismissed by some editors as inconsequential.
At the end of the Wagner discussion page (under Edit War solution topic) there issome suggested courses of action that I was requested to list, from my point of view. Please help. Just take fast look. Thank you
In the introduction, removed as non consequential
- In his own era he furthermore provided the newly emerged middle class with a medium to transfer its familial and political conflicts into a myth of supposedly common Germanic past.
In the Biography chapter removed as non consequential
- Richard Wagner was born into a lower middle class family
User:Major Torp (talk) 15:20, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Ilfracombe
[edit]Message added -- Trevj (talk) 10:51, 5 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
|
The Sociology Barnstar | |
| For your work in sociology-related topics, on behalf of our WikiProject. Keep up the good work! Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 19:16, 1 February 2012 (UTC) | ||
| this WikiAward was given to Tomsega by Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me on 19:16, 1 February 2012 (UTC) |
Positivism
[edit]Hi Tomsega - in Seoul, ...interested in sociology, and a number of other things, seems you could find this interesting. I wonder whether you'd be tempted to offer an occasional posting (like once a month, relaxed, no pressure) at http://positivists.org/blog/ The could be a look at your present environment, reflections of reality as it is perceived around you (I remember some things that startled me about Seoul. The blog is new, and I am presently trying to gather about 30 people from all cultures who - most of them - are presently living elsewhere and would have similar profiles.) I'd be delighted if you'd find this intriguing. Best, --Olaf Simons (talk) 22:43, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Comments on Structuration theory would be appreciated!
[edit]Hi! My name is MJ. I'm fairly new to editing on Wikipedia, but I've just concluded some fairly large-scale changes to Structuration theory. I saw that you've commented on Anthony Giddens's Talk page, and I thought that your comments on the clarity, comprehensiveness, and usefulness of the information that I've provided would be really helpful on the Structuration Talk page. You are clearly an influential, experienced, and knowledgeable Wikipedian and I could really use your help! The page was listed as "Highly Important" for the Sociology WikiProject and I want to make sure that the content I've provided is true to Giddens and helpful to the WikiProject. Please let me know if you have any suggestions! Thanks for your time! Mjscheer (talk) 00:04, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
In case you'd miss it, I left a comment there. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 22:23, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
WP Sociology in the Signpost
[edit]The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Sociology for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:39, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
Notification of automated file description generation
[edit]Your upload of File:Bbuilding.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.
This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 13:01, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 25
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2013–14 Premier League, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Hull and Stoke (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) 09:06, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Apologies (if needed)
[edit]Hi there TOM, AL from Portugal,
i was browsing through Miguel Ángel Nadal's article, when i saw some summaries of mine and also i wrote you a message (please see here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tomsega&diff=next&oldid=297021094). Seing that it was summarily removed without any reply and that you engage in conversation with other users, was i aggressive or unpolite in my "briefing"? I apologize if i was viewed as such, never my intention.
Yes, nearly FIVE years ago, but only noticed it now, otherwise i would have presented my "defense" much earlier than now. Sorry for any inconvenience, keep up the good work and happy weekend --AL (talk) 17:33, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
May 2014
[edit]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Economy of France may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"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.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- | work=BBC| title=European Economy: How French and German States Compare | date=14 February}}</ref>
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:08, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 26
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gareth Bale, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 2013-14 Champions League (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) 08:59, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Wiki Ed Sociology Handout -- Feedback welcome!
[edit]Hello, I'm with the Wiki Education Foundation, and we're developing a brochure for students interested in editing Wikipedia. We're hoping that students can use this brochure as a guide for quality contributions to Sociology-related articles. As an active sociology article editor, I was hoping you might have a look at the proposed text (you can find it here) and send any feedback my way. Ideally, this would occur by the end of the week. Thanks very much!
Eryk (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:41, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 15
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Birmingham, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page German Luftwaffe. 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) 09:30, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, Tomsega. 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)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Tomsega. 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)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Tomsega. 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)
December 2018
[edit]
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Eden Hazard, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Mattythewhite (talk) 16:33, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
[edit] | Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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 |
The file File:Bham uni.JPG has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
[edit] | 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 |
The Metropolis and Mental Life
[edit]I am a journalist working on a nonfiction book and I'll be discussing Georg Simmel's work. It looks like you created the page for The Metropolis and Mental Life and added much of the information I'm interested in. I'm hoping to track down a source.
The information I'm interested in is: “Simmel was originally asked to lecture on the role of intellectual (or scholarly) life in the big city, but he reversed the topic in order to analyze the effects of the big city on the mind of the individual. As a result, when the lectures were published as essays in a book, to fill the gap, the series editor had to supply an essay on the original topic himself.”
Could you tell me where you found this information?
Thank you! JxSimms (talk) 19:28, 29 December 2020 (UTC)JxSimms
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
[edit] | 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 |
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
[edit]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) 00:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Sociology has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 23:24, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics
[edit]
You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.
-- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 09:34, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
[edit]Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
[edit]Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
a social work book collection
[edit]i recently found a website started by a social worker academic which is a database of open source (freely available) social work textbooks on every course a social worker would need to take from entry all the way to an advanced practice degree. will be useful for building Wikipedia articles. also please spread the word if any social workers you know would benefit. URL: https://opensocialwork.org/textbooks/ RJJ4y7 (talk) 12:53, 20 September 2024 (UTC)