User talk:SBaker43

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Welcome
Hello, SBaker43! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Beagel (talk) 05:32, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines
The community
Writing articles
Miscellaneous



MU Nashville[edit]

When you get a moment, would you stop by the Nashville MU page and pick a month that works for you? Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 00:15, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Expandstats[edit]

I am checking around, and will tell you if I find anyone who does this sort of thing. I am half tempted to find the tools to do the analysis myself. Facts are always useful. But in this kind of debate opinions often override even the most obvious facts, as in the real world. Aymatth2 (talk) 02:52, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference[edit]

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) 19:35, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nierstein[edit]

Please stop vandalizing the Nierstein article. If you continue doing so, your account could become blocked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.116.187.243 (talk) 05:52, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi from Elizabetsyatbu[edit]

Hi, I just wanted to say thank-you for taking a look at my article on education policy in Brazil. I really appreciate the comments. I am hoping to do one last push before the end of the weekend, though the article will continue to be something I come back to, I'm sure. Let me know if you have any other comments. Thanks again for all your help. Elizabetsyatbu (talk) 21:00, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And from me too. Thanks, SBaker43, your help is greatly appreciated.  Chzz  ►  01:13, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You're both most welcome. This has been an exciting month watching the article grow. It fit in well with a growing interest in Brazil. I got started by adding a few edits to help others on Belo Monte Dam which taught me a lot. I then started doing clean-up on List of indigenous peoples in Brazil. My first pass on that is still incomplete, having been interrupted by other topics. :-) I was really impressed by Elizabetsyatbu's ability to make an article like this come together so quickly. As I commented before, I believe this could be an exemplar for a whole series of similar articles on national Education Policy. And User:Chzz, you have done a great job guiding this process. I'm proud to have been able to contribute a little to this effort. BTY, today's edits by me resulted from running the article through Microsoft Word's grammar & spell check. SBaker43 (talk) 02:07, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regrading the Webb School[edit]

Hello, this is iantolee. I see that you reverted edit by 96.33.122.18. I would like to let you know that it's quite true that Webb has lost its national recognition as a college prep school - I am a current student at Webb and very well aware of it. I am reverting your edit to that of 96.33.122.18 - if you have other concerns, please don't hesitate to contact with me. Thank you! Iantolee (talk) 01:01, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your assertion is a serious accusation (potentially libelous) and should be supported by an independent source.
The Care Team section was originally added on May 9th, 10 days before the date of the purported event; hence patently false. It was reverted 3 hours later and then the reverted material was immediately reinserted by a revert of the preceding reversion. This was tagged as a possible BLP issue or vandalism. Back and forth editing of valid material should occur in a sandbox or by using preview. The introduced material was almost immediately removed by a revert.
The Care Team section appeared again on 17 May; still patently false since the assertion precedes the event by two days. The Care Team section was reverted a few minutes later.
SBaker43 (talk) 02:49, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My bad. That incident happened on the 9th, not the 19th; It's a mere typo and I apologize. I will use preview or sandbox next time and be adding the CARE team section again as soon as I finish elaborating the CARE part section. The CARE team section can be supported by this article here: http://webbschooltn.blogspot.com/ Iantolee (talk) 04:09, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you![edit]

For your recent corpora work

Stuartyeates (talk) 23:28, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome and thanks for the kitten. I noticed a significant lack of categorization on a number of pages as I was looking at a linguistics article. That got me started. I'm not a linguist; my wife is much closer -- she was an English major.
  • I didn't find an infobox linguistic corpus. Given the number of corpora, it would seem that one is needed to help summarize the aspects of the content, the corpus metrics, availability and access, etc.
  • I don't see a List of linguistic corpora which could provide an alternative to infoboxes.
I assume this should be discussed (maybe it has been) at WT:LING. I'd be happy for you to raise these issues if you've got more perspective than me; it'd be very difficult for you to have less. :-)
SBaker43 (talk) 01:23, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Test page"[edit]

I deleted that talk page (in 2009) because it was just keyboard-pounding gibberish gher;sughsp;iuhpat;3uh;. Feel free to create a new talk page with actual content. DS (talk) 12:24, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Standard Interchange Protocol[edit]

This is a very minor point, but I wonder if you would reconsider your assessment of the class of this article. You assessed it as a "stub class" article but in my opinion it should be "start class" given that it is not "very short", has a useful structure, and is well-referenced. In fact it would only require a little expansion to be C-class.

Cheers,

Thparkth (talk) 16:12, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blanking of Future section of Politics of Texas[edit]

I encourage you to post the same message at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_United_States. The talk page on Texas doesn't get much traffic, and it's part of the United States project. There are more participants and more knowledgeable people there at WPUS. I've looked at what you're talking about, and it's always been reversed by an IP address. IMO it's vandalism. But what to do about it....ask over at the United States project, and you might get some constructive ideas. I did request temporary Page Protection for Politics of Texas, so we'll see if that gets approved. Maile66 (talk) 16:35, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done at WP:US Thanks. SBaker43 (talk) 17:06, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. Maile66 (talk) 17:11, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see HERE, it's been semi-protected for one month. I don't think they'll do a longer, or permanent protection unless the situation gets much worse. If you want to ask for the protection again later, at the top of the article page, one of the tabs says "RPP" or "Request Page Protection", or some variation of that, depending on which skin you use. Click the tab, and it gives you something to fill out to request the protection. Good luck. Maile66 (talk) 18:20, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That may resolve the issue. If not, maybe someone else more focused on Texas will address it. I try to avoid doing multiple consecutive reverts. SBaker43 (talk) 18:32, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See my response to your warning / threat[edit]

I almost certainly have far more edits than you and others here you are making reference to. And I understand the rules very, very well. Read: VERY, VERY WELL.

I would like you to stop confronting an anonymous editor who explains their reasoning, while those reverting the edits explain nothing at all about their reasoning.

I can easily tell you how this issue might end: Other editors in Arbitration telling you and me to assume good faith. But I don't. Editors who are full of themselves have reverted quite good edits in the Sluice article with no justification, and then have been pompous enough to make threats on my personal page. Shame on you, and shame on editors who are too busy racking up brownie points to actually spend time evaluating material or process. 76.102.1.193 (talk) 22:43, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, User S Baker, for butting in uninvited, but perhaps you might agree with me that an unregistered IP address cannot possibly be described as "my personal space" . Sincerely, Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 07:45, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your comment is certainly welcome. The word "personal" has little place in a collaborative environment. It is at best only a relative term since all material is released "under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL." User pages and sub-pages are not usually intended to be edited by others but are of course publicly available. User talk pages certainly are not personally owned since they are intended for multiple parties to exchange communication. This IP editor posted his complaint in multiple places. I chose to respond at his talk page. Neither User:Toddy1 nor I seem to have had any further disagreements with this editor.
I enjoyed looking at your User page. It reminds me of similarities between your childhood and mine. I spent my first 18 years on a farm in Perry County, Tennessee. When I was stationed in Germany in the late 1960s, I got to see part of England and Scotland during a train ride from London to Edinburg to attend a conference. I would have liked to see more of the British Isles.
Thanks for your observation. SBaker43 (talk) 20:58, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your detailed reply, both to me here and on the IP's Talk page, and for your kind comment regarding my user page. Having a dialogue with another user in another continent and finding empathy, is one of the aspects of editing Wikipedia that I enjoy most. Kind regards, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 21:21, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pop-Tarts[edit]

Hello, SBaker43. You have new messages at Carmichael's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback[edit]

Hello, SBaker43. You have new messages at Talk:I Could Fall in Love.
Message added 15:31, 7 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Revere, Massachusetts[edit]

I live in Revere Massachusetts. While we come close to the border of Melrose the town of Melrose does not actually border Revere Massachusetts. If you find evidence to the contrary can you please link me to it?

Sincerest thanks,

Michael Carter 882 Winthrop ave Revere,MA 02151 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.12.168.255 (talk) 14:37, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It took me a minute or so to regain the page context. The revert was based on the removal of Melrose without an edit-summary plus checking to confirm that Melrose,_Massachusetts#Geography says that Revere is adjacent to the southeast. The subsequent edit was to change the sequence so that there was a consistent clockwise progression in the naming sequence. I just did a little WP:OR and Google maps looks to me like the SE corner of Melrose (at the corner of Osprey Road and Frank Bennett Highway) meets the NW corner of Revere.
The original addition of Melrose appears to have been by an IP editor in March 2007. Corners can be contentious so you might want to raise the question on the article's talk page. I don't have any special knowledge of the area. You're certainly welcome to correct errors. If you would, please add a brief edit-summary and do the corresponding correction to the Melrose article. Since you're looking closely at this, you might want to add a summary to both talk pages for future reference by other editors.
Thanks for watching this closely.
SBaker43 (talk) 15:42, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

State adjutants general[edit]

Just a question about the above page. Could it not be merged with the adjutant general page, as it has a US section?. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 14:36, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps but it seems that the state adjutant general page is large enough and significant enough that it should be separate. The merger of the US page would overwhelm the worldwide page and create an unbalanced organizational structure. If the state page were merged then logically shouldn't the List of Adjutants General of the U.S. Army be merged also? Consider WP:SIZE and WP:MERGE.
The separation of federal and state level adjutants general appears consistent with the separation of the following U. S. main pages versus the U.S. summary in the world-wide pages.
SBaker43 (talk) 06:07, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's a fair point. Thanks for the response! --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 12:19, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pampa, Texas Notable People[edit]

This is the 98.225.44.41 user responding to your left message. Namely I apologize for the misconduct, but I deign to note that it has been a single person that has been monitoring and adding the Miles Bateman profile onto Wikipedia and I can only list reference for their actions and knowing them to be Miles Bateman from firsthand experience. As such having a citation for it is not exceptionally functional, though I might advise either a form of lock on that article or banning of the ip that keeps adding the entry.

Bateman is not a notable person, but he is adamant about his presence in media and I can note from personal experience and interaction with him he has a large interest in presenting himself and exaggerating both his popularity and control, often making grand comments on his readership that do not match up with real statistics.

So to repeat my point, I can only cite myself from firsthand experience on his behavior, knowing personally that it is him who is posting from the address that keeps adding the entry, and as such I am not able to cite that information. Though in light of the situation I do ask if you would have a means to prevent further vandalism by Bateman to that page. 98.225.44.41 (talk) 05:50, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your apology and response. I understand your frustration. Your addition of an edit summary helps reviewing editors understand your reasoning.
Since you don't appear to be a registered user, you may not be aware of one of Wikipedia's rules concerning reverting, Almost always it's best to avoid waring until another solution can be effected since there are significant sanctions involved. Other editors will likely review the change shortly. I am requesting intervention by an administrator since this is a persistent problems.
SBaker43 (talk) 23:02, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Request for page protection.
SBaker43 (talk) 23:33, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it did get protected, but he's still up on it. :p 98.225.44.41 (talk) 10:55, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

removal of links that follow precedence.[edit]

I received your message that you had removed my edit. I understand that you believed you where cleaning up "self promotion" however I would like to point out that the link I pointed to the adventist hospital is no different than the already existing external links.

Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery at NYU Langone Medical Center's Cardiac and Vascular Institute Cleveland Clinic page on coronary artery bypass surgery

on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronary_artery_bypass_surgery

As far as promoting that hospital. As an adventist in the health field (I am in mental health, in Albuquerque, not a hospital in portland) I find it frustrating that you would remove the link I shared but not the others. Will you please let me know how to proceed, because if you are holding the adventist health care system at a level that it does not "deserve" links the same way that these other hospitals do.. I will be removing all external links to any hospital procedure page and cite the edit reason as following your precedence. I apologize if I seem a bit frustrated, but I know what "spam" and "self promotion" is. and I am simply sharing a resource that is on par with what is already available. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsutter84 (talk • contribs) 21:58, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The addition of 3 links by User:173.163.243.109 for www.nwregionalheart.com (Adventist Medical Center, CABS, and Mitral valve repair) within a short span resembled what is sometimes 'self promotion'. I looked at the three changes. The external link for Adventist Medical Center seemed relevant since it links to part of Adventist.
Then I looked at the CABS link. There were already links to both Cleveland Clinic and Langone, both of which seem to be very well regarded in the CABS field. I didn't see any significant information in the NW Regional link that wasn't in the two existing links. I therefore reverted the link at CABS with conformance with WP:LINKFARM. Note that my edit-summary had question marks on both sides of 'promotional' indicating my concern, noted the lack of an edit-summary to explain the need for the link, and indicated that I didn't believe there was anything unique that could not be found in hundreds of other CABS links.
I looked at the Mitral valve repair link and the Adventist web page and decided that the Adventist page was relevant enough to remain because of what appeared to me to be leading-edge surgical work in mitral valve repair.
I'm sorry that you were frustrated by my revert.
Thanks for your interest in Wikipedia,
SBaker43 (talk) 02:45, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit by 123.243.116.120 to IBM zSystem[edit]

Hi, I made the edit in question because I considered that the presence of the Tux sticker on the zSystem unit in question could mislead readers into thinking that such a design was a standard part of the products appearance, or be construed as an endorsement by IBM of the Linux operating system. 123.243.116.120 (talk) 13:14, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your rationale for your IBM System z edit. It is a reasonable concern but the phrasing is problematic. The term "deface" usually refers to an action to damage, in some fashion, the object under discussion. The sentence "The top-right corner of the front of the case has been defaced with a Tux sticker." seems unduly negative toward Linux. I believe a more constructive approach would be to say that a Tux sticker has been added by the facility to indicate that Linux is the operating system currently running on the hardware. This explains the source and reason for the sticker's addition to the cabinet.
Thanks for thinking about the content of Wikipedia's pictures.
SBaker43 (talk) 11:17, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article Feedback deployment[edit]

Hey SBaker43; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:48, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Hasteur (talk) 20:52, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you marking my edits as vandalism?[edit]

They are not.TeeVeeed (talk) 12:23, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Heritage High School[edit]

I believe you have a mistake. I never touched anything from Heritage High School Wikipedia. I let a lot of people use my computer. Maybe that was the reason why that happened. Sorry, I'll keep a watch out next time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.177.191.143 (talk) 07:11, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your help desk question[edit]

I attempted a response.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:24, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. SBaker43 (talk) 20:54, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC Reviewer permission[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC Reviewer permission. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:28, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bed and Bed Frame[edit]

Thanks for trying to expedite the review. I care more about finding consensus than I do about having people agree with me, and having a proposal open for eight months is somewhat ridiculous. If nobody responds in a week, I'll be happy to withdraw the proposed merge. Andrew327 12:48, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I appreciate your attitude; we need more people like you. I'm also more concerned with doing something rather than leaving the proposal open indefinitely.
SBaker43 (talk) 17:29, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment[edit]

As you previously participated in related discussions you are invited to comment at the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC for AfC reviewer permission criteria. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:28, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Your submission at Articles for creation: Confidential Incident Reporting & Analysis System (CIRAS) (January 22)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Gauri Wur Sem (talk) 03:53, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Teahouse logo
Hello! SBaker43, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!

A page you started (Leslie Garland Bolling) has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating Leslie Garland Bolling, SBaker43!

Wikipedia editor Versace1608 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Great article and Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

To reply, leave a comment on Versace1608's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

DYK nomination of Leslie Garland Bolling[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Leslie Garland Bolling at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Green Giant (edits) (talk) 17:44, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done; see Green tickY's at end of each comment reflecting changes. Thanks. SBaker43 (talk) 04:03, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Leslie Garland Bolling[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 05:38, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC Confidential Incident Reporting & Analysis System (CIRAS) was accepted[edit]

Confidential Incident Reporting & Analysis System (CIRAS), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Fiddle Faddle 07:35, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Classification Tree Editor (June 14)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!
  • Please remember to link to the submission!
Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 05:44, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Errors on 27 June[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 28 June 2014 (UTC) checkY 03:16, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to WikiProject Poultry[edit]

Hello, SBaker43. You are invited to join WikiProject Poultry. Check out the project at WP:POULTRY and feel free to join if interested. NorthAmerica1000 06:00, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Prod?[edit]

I'm wondering why didn't you CSD New page wikipedia under A10, "Recently created article that duplicates an existing topic". It's a POV fork of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir which is a valid POV redirect to Azad Kashmir. The user has been pov pushing to rename at Talk:Azad Kashmir since weeks and now created a fork after failure to achieve consensus. --lTopGunl (talk) 07:10, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Caution; I'm new at WP:CURATE. I probably should have spent a few more minutes looking at speedy. This clearly shouldn't become a redirect; I take it you don't believe the A10 statement, "This criterion should only be used if its title could be speedy deleted as a redirect." isn't an obstacle to an A10 in this situation.
Thanks for the question. SBaker43 (talk) 07:27, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No problem and ofcourse, who in their right mind would redirect the title "New page wikipedia‎" to a territory article :) --lTopGunl (talk) 07:30, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • @TopGun: I believe you've not come to any concensus with anyone in the Azad Kashmir page and due to the fact Azad Kashmir is not the land which wholey represents Pakistan Occupied Kashmir region, i've created this page. I hope you can continue expanding Azad Kashmir page with your Pakistani POV and remove the redirect of 'Pakistan Occupied Kashmir' from Azad Kashmir page, which is what you've also suggested and everyone agreed in that Talkpage.
  • @SBaker43:, We're discussing about this in Azad Kashmir page for more than a month and if you read this page's Talkpage, you'll understand the reason behind creating this page. I need your help in naming this page as 'Pakistan Occupied Kashmir'.
  • The 1/6th of world population in India and a lot of world media, world organizations believes and knows what is Pakistan occupied Kashmir when J&K acceded to India. So, the land or region called Azad Kashmir, Gilgit–Baltistan and Aksai Chin are together called as Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, per Indian Government and perception of Indian people and rest of the world. But, there's no place to read information about the term Pakistan Occupied Kashmir in Wikipedia. I've raised this issue in Azad Kashmir page, which is a small region part of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir or the rest of the originally princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. Due to the fact the region Pakistan Occupied Kashmir or POK comprises all three regions and none of these regions has any word attributing to the fact or term 'Occupied' anywhere in these pages, I strongly felt there's a need to have a dedicated page called Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. Hence created this new page. I'm planning to expand this page in due course.Jinishans (talk) 07:41, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Mutants (2016 film)[edit]

Hello SBaker43. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Mutants (2016 film) to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question - there was enough context to tell what it was about (this movie), and WP:CSD#A7 does not apply to films. JohnCD (talk) 11:17, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback horawgt:

There is no reason to delete the entry for "The 100 Greatest Christmas Hits of All Time." One of the sources of data on that particular radio special was an Envision press release which was issued for consumer and industry informational purposes and deliberately placed is in the public domain. It was never copyrighted nor intended to be copyrighted. -- HorarwgtHorarwgt (talk) 15:50, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do I need more citations and links?[edit]

Hello SBaker, I added more links and citations to the wikipedia page that I created https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaul_Knaz trying to fix the issues posted on the page. I would like to know from you if it is enough or the article still needs additional citations for verification and more links to other articles to help integrate it into the encyclopedia. Thank you, Krokamaora (talk) 14:39, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Krokamaora, Thanks for working on this article. One of the great things about Wikipedia is that a variety of editors will contribute improvements to an article once it's started. I would encourage you to be alert for additional information and sources relevant to this article and revisit it every few months. I try to look at articles I've done significant work on a few times a year to keep them up to date and add material I may have missed previously.

I don't know if you're fluent in Hebrew; I'm not, I just use Google Translate to rough check pages. There appears to be additional biographical material in he:שאול קנז that is unrelated to his painting. I've added a {{Commons cat}} template to the article to link to the category on Commons. Talk:Shaul Knaz indicates that a {{Persondata}} template needs to be added at the end of the article and an appropriate biographical Infobox could also be added; either the default {{Infobox person}} or perhaps {{Infobox artist}}, see MOS:INFOBOX. Shaul Knaz is an WP:Orphan; no English Wikipedia articles link to him; there's only one in the Hebrew article.

Again thanks for your work on this article. You're welcome to ask me questions; I'll try to refer you to Wikipedia policy or guidelines or to other people who may have more experience or a better answer.
SBaker43 (talk) 23:39, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your support and your help! Krokamaora (talk) 07:27, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Incomplete DYK nomination[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/James Royce Shannon at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 07:45, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/James Royce Shannon[edit]

This nomination has issues; you can resolve them. --George Ho (talk) 11:42, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Keep an eye out for this other IP user[edit]

This guy Apart from the edit you pointed out did two other really pointless edits to the articles on "anaconda" and "peafowl". None of them seem actually malicious, but the person does not seem to be a likely candidate for "best new editor". Just letting you know. 190.109.207.3 (talk) 17:38, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

190.109.207.3 thanks for fixing these. Malice isn't required to produce damage; a little self-centered experimentation can also. SBaker43 (talk) 20:57, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Standard Offer unblock request for Technophant[edit]

Technophant (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Technophant has requested an unblock under the standard offer. As one of about 60 editors who has contributed to User talk:Technophant you may have an interest in this request. Sent by user:PBS via -- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:48, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Paterson (missionary), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scottish. 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) 09:09, 21 August 2015 (UTC) checkY 16:07, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GEHLEN ORG - Stop whitewashing Gehlen, the US, and West German intelligence[edit]

9/14/2015 - You have reverted the article to its original condition. This article was written incorrectly and it was changed again. You have kept the original content that implied Soviet intelligence was composed of and established by ex-Nazis and ex-SS, when this is completely false. What is true is that West German intelligence was founded by ex-Nazis.

Nazi collaborators and ex-SS fled from the Soviet Union to the American occupied zones at the end of WW2. They were recruited after Gehlen surrendered and was then hired by US intelligence. These collaborators spoke the languages of Eastern Europe and the ex-Nazis were previously engaged in their own intelligence operations against the Soviet Union and leftists during the war.

The old Nazis and the collaborators were put to use in radio stations, paramilitary operations (such as parachuting into countries or crossing the borders, to incite and support uprisings), creating the new police and intelligence networks in Western Europe, and sabotaging Western Europe's post-WW2 elections, which were at that time dominated by popular fronts and left movements.

The fate of ex-Nazis in Eastern Europe was in fact a very different story. They were imprisoned and tried for their war crimes. Many did not return to West Germany until their sentences were up in the 1950s. This is a far cry from what the article suggests - that East German intelligence was run by ex-Nazis. In fact, the East German government and its intelligence came from the Germans, mostly exiles forced to flee Nazi Germany, who fought with the Soviet forces and then came home after the victory over Nazi Germany.

As you can see, the article is clearly wrong and it whitewashes Gehlen, the US, and West German intelligence. The real history is there. Gehlen was an ex-Nazi and he recruited his old pals, men he had worked with during WW2.


starting at 33:22 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfeOF0tiPPE This is a basic summary. Listing all sources would take up more space than the size of the article itself! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.65.97.166 (talk) 18:01, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Don Cook[edit]

Dear SBaker43: I see that you have made an edit to Draft:Don Cook today. I notice, though, that another editor copy-pasted this text, with some format improvements, to Don Cook (journalist) back in June. I'd like to do a history merge to reconnect the two pages, but the edit that you made would cause overlapping histories. Would you mind reverting your edit? —Anne Delong (talk) 10:11, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Anne Delong Done. No rush. Thanks. SBaker43 (talk) 14:44, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, SBaker43. I've done the merge, and the result is at Don Cook (journalist). If any of your changes were lost, you may wish to add them to that article.—Anne Delong (talk) 23:32, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

PC reviewer[edit]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Changes to my talk page[edit]

I've been trying to signal attention and did leave notes in the comments, Czar has ruined some pages. I found out about this from [1] and the Orb3d page (I've encountered before) AND another Nvidia demo. You'll note the user I mentioned (Czar) left bad redirects (bad in the sense of "a link to Nvidia's page" when there's a category of tech demos.

Now I lived through the era when these demos became a fad on covers of magazines, but I don't expect you to go "oh now you've said that it's okay" but it doesn't mean the entire thing should be destroyed!

I've made a note on the talk pages of the demos asking why we cannot upload pictures, I'm sure I could find something. Please do get back to me, and do investigate these reports. Did I use the vandal template correctly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.204.46 (talk) 16:55, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

John Warwick Montgomery[edit]

Point one- This is an effort to remove unproven allegations from a third party which were printed in the L.A. Times article in spite of the fact that both parties refused to comment (confirm) to the L.A. Times (see the article). The fact is that the controversy over the School and its dean was amicably settled through Christian mediation service, and the settlement requires that neither side further discuss the issues cited in public (see the article). It is patently unjust to refer to the unproven allegations when neither side is able to discuss it under legal agreement. Furthermore, the L.A. Times (tabloid style) article is only one of several articles on the topic. Unfortunately these articles require subscription to view, something the average Wiki viewer cannot do. It is unjust to only select the most erroneous article which is easy to view, violating Wiki NPOV. (see Randy Frame, Problems Derail Law School Founder, Christianity Today, March 17, 1989, 48. Nicole Brodeur, Beleagured founder agrees to leave Christian law school, The Orange County Register, Jan 12,1989, B4.)

Point two- There were subsequent inquiries into the issues regarding the controversy by an independant group- WELS (an even more Conservative religious body than Montgomery’s own) and those inquiries resulted in a published article publically exonerating John Warwick Montgomery. ( News, Allegations Not Proved, WELS Forward in Christ,Volume 76, Number 19 Issue: November 1989. Weblink: http://wels.prometdev.com/news-events/forward-in-christ/november-1989/allegations-not-proved (subscription required)Ignoring this also violate Wiki NPOV.

Point three- one of the parties in the controversy is deceased, and cannot be contacted, the remaining family members request not to participate in the Wiki article by choice, doing so against their will violates Wiki BLP policy. Furthermore, marital controversies were examined and settled in the courts and not in Newspapers. John Warwick Montgomery published a response 3 years later (Simon Greenleaf: What Can Be Learned When A Christian Institution Falls from Greatness, The Christian News, Oct 5, 1992, 10-12.) John Warwick Montgomery was exonerated by an impartial (if not more Conservative) inquiry (as stated above), so the current Law School, Trinity School of Law, (renamed) still publically cites John Warwick Montgomery as its founder (http://lawschool.tiu.edu/who-we-are/about/ ). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.214.242.26 (talk) 21:20, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic History[edit]

Make sure you know at least a single thing about Arabic History before editing the pages concerning that topic. Edit : I will take note of what you said in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.111.98.92 (talk) 19:23, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There was no edit summary to explain the 'why'; the Commons source used "Patriarchal" for this period. Editors who explain the 'why' of edits help others to better understand whether or not an edit is constructive. I apologize for reverting what appears to be a valid name and I hope you'll continue to contribute to Wikipedia.
SBaker43 (talk) 02:45, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship[edit]

Re: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll:

The only possible reasons I can see you not getting the bit are

  • There may be too many people who have "litmus tests" that you fail. For example, some people want to see a lot more conversations in Wikipedia: and Wikipedia_talk: space, and others would want to see more than a handful of non-stub new articles.
  • [As with anyone] if you've ticked off enough people or you've ticked off someone who is willing and able to canvas non-regulars or sway regulars to oppose you (in my brief foray through your history, I see no evidence of this, and the conciliatory tone of this recent edit indicates there probably won't be any).
  • The fact that you've got a lot of cross-wiki experience and (as far as I can tell briefly skimming only at the English-language projects) you don't have a habit of exhibiting poor judgment will increase your chances of passing.

davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:02, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You pass User:Ritchie333/Why admins should create content for Leslie Garland Bolling, but your CSD log and AfD stats are minimal, and I would expect some to oppose on that. However, that's not fatal and is easy to cure by calling more CSDs and AfDs. Have a look at User:Kudpung/RfA criteria to get some idea of what's expected at RfA. As a pragmatist, I think we have to work with what we're given at RfA rather than hope any miraculous change of process would occur. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:30, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited All Hands Volunteers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 2015 Nepal earthquake. 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. checkY 14:42, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

something odd about your edit to Meriwether Lewis[edit]

I reverted your edit plus the previous edit which I expect you were trying to refine. But something went horribly wrong with the content it introduced. Maybe you should try again? —EncMstr (talk) 04:22, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

EncMstr, Thanks for keeping a close watch. I was trying to clarify the age statement. I'm having a problem finding what went wrong. Was it in the sub-section I was editing or somewhere else? I've looked at both the change and revision.
Thanks, SBaker43 (talk) 13:29, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Did you look at the diff link I provided? It shows that you added When they left Fort Mandan in April 2005 they.... Perhaps you meant 1805? That alone cast doubt on the validity of your edit. Changing Sacagawea's age from 15 to 16 is so minor, I wouldn't doubt the change. —EncMstr (talk) 02:04, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
EncMstr, Thanks for pointing me to the "2005". I had looked at the diff several times today and couldn't see the date problem. I think I was looking for something that was eye-catching and was reading what I meant; not what I typed. Thanks again.
SBaker43 (talk) 04:10, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 14:28, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:John Green (meteorologist) concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:John Green (meteorologist), a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 22:29, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ORCP[edit]

Hi, I’ve just been having another look at your entry at WP:ORCP. It may well be time for you to take a serious decision now. Let me know what you think. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:45, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge[edit]

You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here!

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:41, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, SBaker43. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to rename poetry categories[edit]

Please see my proposals to rename or merge categories Category:1000s in poetry to Category:1900s in poetry etc Hugo999 (talk) 23:22, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Investment[edit]

I'd like to invite you to join the Investment WikiProject. There are a lot of Investment related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help get this project off the ground and a few Investment pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks!

Draft:John Green (meteorologist) concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:John Green (meteorologist), a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, SBaker43. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:John Green (meteorologist)[edit]

Hello, SBaker43. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "John Green".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 16:01, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Emmy Noether[edit]

Thanks for adding Emmy Noether to Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/July 26. However, there are two problems. One is that the article already appears on Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/March 23 for her birthday, and thus is not eligible for inclusion here. Although I would be willing to bend the rules for a 100th anniversary, I can't do it because of the second problem: neither the act of her presenting the paper nor the date of 26 July 1918 do not appear anywhere in the article (there are two 1918 articles listed, but the first one actually has a publication date of December 1917, and I could not access the second one to check the date, although that would be the publication date, not the date of the presentation, so that's kind of moot). We could also feature Noether's theorem instead, except there is a section without references (and it's rather technical, so maybe not the best choice). So if you can add the fact/date to the article and cite it, we will be good to go. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 18:20, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Howcheng: I moved an External Links article to Selected works and expanded a paragraph to cite the original German text which has the date of presentation (German) on the first page. The Tavel translation omits this heading. Hope this helps. Thanks for your guidance. [2]
SBaker43 (talk) 02:03, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"External links"[edit]

Greetings, Is there a reason you added the "External links" section when adding commons cat? Otr500 (talk) 11:56, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, SBaker43. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

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

Edit-a-thon at Vanderbilt for REAL Symposium[edit]

Hope you can join us this Saturday!--Heathart (talk) 18:44, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:New Tech Network[edit]

Hello, SBaker43. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "New Tech Network".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! JMHamo (talk) 17:15, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinators and help needed[edit]

Hi, if you are active on Wikipedia and are still interested in helping out with urgent tasks on our large Schools Project, please let us know here. We look forward to hearing from you.

Sent to project members 13:58, 29 August 2021 (UTC). You can opt of messages here.

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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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) 01:11, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SBaker43&oldid=1138272460"