Misplaced Pages

User talk:GregJackP: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:03, 10 September 2010 view sourceGregJackP (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers24,867 edits →ANI Appeal: r← Previous edit Latest revision as of 00:18, 19 November 2024 view source MediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,135,661 edits →ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message: new sectionTag: MassMessage delivery 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{pp-protected|reason=Persistent ] Can be lifted if editor comes back|small=yes}}
{{WPMILHIST Review alerts}}

{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{semiretired}}
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}

|maxarchivesize = 70K

|counter = 8

|minthreadsleft = 4

|minthreadstoarchive = 1
== GAN Backlog Drive – January 2022 ==
|algo = old(7d)

|archive = User talk:GregJackP/Archive %(counter)d
{| style="border: 5px solid #ABCDEF ; background-color: #FFF; padding:10px 15px 0"
|style="padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em; font-size:130%" |'''] |''' <span style="font-size:85%">January 2022 Backlog Drive</span>
|rowspan=3|]
|-
|'''January 2022 Backlog Drive:'''
* On New Year's Day, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin.
* Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed.
* Interested in taking part? You can ''']'''.
|-
|colspan=2|'''Other ways to participate:'''
* ].
|-
|colspan=2 style="font-size:85%; padding-top:15px;"|You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive.

] and remove your username from the mailing list to opt out of any future messages.

--]
|}

{{small|Sent by ] (]) on behalf of ] at 21:18, 31 December 2021 (UTC).}}
<!-- Message sent by User:Reidgreg@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Good_articles/GAN_Backlog_Drives/Mailing_list&oldid=1060902800 -->

== 2022 thanks ==
{{User QAIbox
| title = ]
| image = Forest in snow, Engenhahn.jpg
| image_upright = 0.8
}} }}
Thank you for improving articles in January! --] (]) 23:28, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
{{AutoArchivingNotice|small=yes|age=3|dounreplied=yes|index=./Archive index|bot=MiszaBot III}}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=User talk:GregJackP/Archive index|mask=User talk:GregJackP/Archive <#>|indexhere=yes|template=User:GregJackP/indextemplate}}
{{archives|small=no|search=yes|index=/Archive index|image=]|collapsible=yes}}


==Happy First Edit Day!==
<!-- ##RW UNDERDATE## -->
<div class="boilerplate metadata" style="background-color:#E6E6FA; border: 1px solid #7D00B3; margin: 0.5em auto; padding: 0.5em; width:90%; text-align: center">]<span style="font-weight:bold;font-size:125%;">Happy First Edit Day!</span>]
Have a very happy first edit anniversary!


From the ], ]<sup>]</sup> 22:53, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
'''Please add new posts at the bottom of the page.'''
</div>


== Your account == == Precious anniversary ==
{{User QAIbox/auto|years=Nine}} - ] --] (]) 07:53, 10 March 2022 (UTC)


== Your RFA oppose ==
Hi. Could you explain why the logs show that you created this account at 02:29, 22 November 2006, yet didn't make your first edit until 14:36, 27 January 2010? I assume you were using another account during that time, correct? ] (]) 01:17, 30 August 2010 (UTC)


:Nope, I was a lurker. Is there a reason for the question? I've already been through an SPI and cleared by checkuser, but based on the history in the CC area, I'm a little suspicious of your question. Regards, <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#ffc">]&nbsp;]</span> 02:17, 30 August 2010 (UTC) It is one thing to have your own idiosyncratic rules for how you vote on RFAs, and it is another to bait editors who say stupid things in response to your vote. Please don't make comments such as {{tq|I'll be happy to respond as soon as you post a legitimate reason for supporting the nomination. PS, I'll be the judge if your response is legitimate or not.}} on RFAs, even in response to people who don't have legitimate reasons to support the RFA. ] (powera, ], ]) 19:18, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
:There was nothing about my reply to his questioning my oppose !vote that was inappropriate. I'll be happy to listen to your advice when you question some of the less than adequate support !votes. Until then, you are free to have whatever opinion you want, but I'm not all that interested in hearing it. Regards, <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#fffff4">]&nbsp;]</span> 22:03, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
::Yes, there's a reason for my question, as I'm analyzing every account that is participating in the arbcom case. I don't understand why you would create an account in 2006 that you wouldn't use until 2010. Could you explain that to me? The simplest explanation is that you wanted to reserve the account name and were too busy to edit at the time. As for lurking, I can understand that, and for me, that's an adequate explanation. As for your friend Minor4th, his account has been quite active on climate change articles, while yours has been less so. Would that be an accurate observation? Sorry to bother you. ] (]) 03:07, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
**To be honest, I really feel bad and I was out of line to have called your criteria obtuse nor user antagonist words like “laughable” I violated my own oath to myself which is not to (speak) when i am upset. Myself & {{u|Ritchie333}} always butt heads but nonetheless they have always defended me whenever I was in trouble, we have a great deal of respect for each other, so when they mentioned that your criteria has remained the same over years, I paused for a minute and thought things over. I apologize for my rude comments, please do accept my apology. Even if I didn’t understand your criteria I could have engaged you in a more productive manner. If you choose to not to reply I perfectly understand & if you choose not to accept my apology I understand also, just know that I am indeed truly sorry for being rude to you. ''']''' (]) 16:14, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
:::I was scared to edit initially, afraid I would screw something up, so I lurked off an on for several years. As for Minor4th, you would have to ask him, but I do know that neither of us knew or cared about AGW/CC until we mentioned WMC in regards to administrator abuse in an ill-advised article I wrote. At that point the cabal turned on us, and due to the intensity and severity of the attacks, both of us became interested. Neither of us understood the underhanded methods that a number in the AGW alarmist camp would go to, and the complete mockery that they made of the WP rules. I have a natural affinity towards the oppressed, and Minor4th has a strong sense of justice, so he is interested in seeing AGW skeptics treated fairly. It's a tough row to hoe, but we feel that someone needs to stand up for what is fair and right. You're welcome to join us. Regards, <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#ffc">]&nbsp;]</span> 03:20, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
::::^^What he said. <b class="nounderlines" style="border:1px solid #999;background:#fff"><span style="font-family:papyrus,serif">]]</span></b> 03:39, 30 August 2010 (UTC) ::::{{u|Celestina007}} - that was very gracious, and I accept your apology, as I hope that you'll accept mine if I offended you. <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#fffff4">]&nbsp;]</span> 20:02, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
:::::Thank you for accepting my apology.{{smiley}} It does mean a lot to me, you didn’t offend me in any manner, it was I who acted irresponsibly. Once again thank you mate. ''']''' (]) 20:38, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
:::::This is consistent with something that I have long thought, which is that many Misplaced Pages editors view global warming contrarians as the scrappy underdogs fighting against the big bad scientific establishment. This is consistent with the oft-made observation that Misplaced Pages appeals to those of a libertarian, ] viewpoint. I don't mean this in any pejorative way; it's just that I like to try and understand where others are coming from. ] (]) 04:06, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
::::::I'm going to take an unpopular position and thank you for your oppose on the RFA. Not on the merits, because that's entirely between you and your higher power. I'm thanking you for your ]. In my RFA, the first person to oppose MY run was acting bravely. I think occasionally a senior user might feel the need to give permission for others to disagree with a clear consensus, just because. In this case invoking your completely reasonable personal criteria (which I'm glad I passed) helps others to not "go along to get along." All of us want more and better sysops. We can't do it unless RFA is allowed to work itself out. Thanks again. ] (]) 16:32, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
:::::::It is true that I usually pull for the underdog. I generally have no beef with the big bad scientific establishment, but there is what I perceive to be an imbalance and a pretty pervasive unfairness to those who are trying to edit anything other than the mainstream consensus view. <b class="nounderlines" style="border:1px solid #999;background:#fff"><span style="font-family:papyrus,serif">]]</span></b> 04:15, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
:::::::Thanks, {{u|BusterD}}. I appreciate your comments more than you realize. <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#fffff4">]&nbsp;]</span> 23:14, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
::::::::I and, I think, ATren have said something similar as to why we became involved in the topic also. ] (]) 04:24, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
:::::::::Thanks to both of you for your comments. ] (]) 04:37, 30 August 2010 (UTC)


I tell people to just let Greg have his say and ignore it, but do people listen to me? *sigh* Now, that out of the way, I'm going to disagree slightly with the "must have 2 GAs" criteria, simply because sometimes that might not actually be sufficient. All GAs are not equal, and on some niche subjects like obscure species of mushrooms or minor hurricanes in Antarctica, it may be possible to meet the "broad in coverage" part of the GA criteria without too much effort. While working on a ]-worthy subject to GA takes far more time and effort, ''and'' is more likely to be the place where you'll encounter disputes, petty MOS wonkery, and all the general things trying to maintain a popular article at GA status will throw at you (''especially'' if it involves living people or ongoing events - in fact, I would avoid taking any BLP to GA if you value your sanity). ] ] ] 20:03, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
Sorry to bring this up again, GregJackP, but after reviewing the old SPI and taking a closer look at both of your accounts, I had trouble finding overlapping edits indicating that you both just happened to be online at the same time. What I found instead, could be described as "meatpuppetry" if one assumes you are two different people, and "sockpuppetry" if one assumes you are same, such that one logs off and on using two different connections. I realize that the SPI was closed due to lack of evidence, and I also realize that for all intents and purposes you appear to be two different people with two separate accounts. However, I am concerned about the lack of overlapping edits, which I personally find strange considering you have both worked on the same articles at the same general time, yet you never manage to be online at exactly the same time or making edits close together subsequent to those edits. For example, today, you both made edits several minutes apart on NYB's talk page, but I noticed a pattern emerge in the contrib history, namely that whenever closely timed edits were made, one account would log off and another would continue editing such that two accounts would rarely be online at the same time ''after'' two closely edits were made. Would you say I'm crazy, or could there be another explanation? ] (]) 04:54, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
:You need to re-read the SPI, it was not closed for "lack of evidence," it was closed because we were cleared. You may also want to re-read the definition of meatpuppetry AND the discussion on the SPI. If you wish to continue this discussion, take it up at SPI or ANI. I'm tired of Global Warming alarmists trying to run off anyone that disagrees with them, and if you continue this course, I will seek sanctions based on personal attacks and harassment, especially since you have not read thoroughly the SPI (which addressed all of the points that you attempt to make). If you want to play your silly little AGW alarmist harassment games, do it with someone else - I won't tolerate it - nor will ArbCom. If you don't believe me, test the theory. Otherwise, stay off my talkpage. <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#ffc">]&nbsp;]</span> 05:08, 5 September 2010 (UTC) *{{tq|I tell people to just let Greg have his say and ignore it}} - this comment is the perfect response, IMO. Thanks {{u|Ritchie333}}. <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#fffff4">]&nbsp;]</span> 02:15, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
== Your RFA oppose (redux) ==
@Viriditas -- I'd say you're crazy. There were also several instances of simultaneous edits on the SPI. Not to mention the fact that I have been verified through ArbCom, so if V really wants a legitimate answer to this witch hunt, I suggest she speak with Rlevse, Roger Davies, and Risker, who can vouch for my identity on wiki and off -- they know my real identity and contact information (but will not disclose it) and can conclusively confirm that I am not Greg. I have also verified through Lar with proof of my real identity, IP's, location, etc. I have also verified information with Nuclear Warfare and Brandon on this issue. With that, I expect this line of questioning to stop. <b class="nounderlines" style="border:1px solid #999;background:#fff"><span style="font-family:papyrus,serif">]]</span></b> 05:19, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
I will say that you misgendered the candidate in your stint on Lozman; kindly correct to either she or they? ] (] • ]) (she/]) 04:47, 25 April 2022 (UTC) <small>it seems i confused the sections! ] (] • ]) (she/]) 04:48, 25 April 2022 (UTC)</small>
:I used generic pronouns in my response and will properly address her in the future. It was not an intentional slight, but I'm not inclined to go back and edit my post on something this minor. If she's offended, she can say so and I'll work out an amicable solution with her. Regards: <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#fffff4">]&nbsp;]</span> 04:54, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
::Please see my comment on the RfA page&mdash;I think you're mistaken about the Bluebook form for the article titles. Regards, ] (]) 10:07, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
:::Could be, I've been wrong before. I'll look at your comment and dig out my Bluebook. Thanks, <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#fffff4">]&nbsp;]</span> 15:14, 25 April 2022 (UTC)


== Turned on you? == == A barnstar for you! ==


{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
''neither of us knew or cared about AGW/CC until we mentioned WMC in regards to administrator abuse in an ill-advised article I wrote. At that point the cabal turned on us'' - that sounds exciting, yet doesn't match any memories of mine. What is the article in quesiton? ] (]) 07:56, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ]
::It's been deleted, and Greg's language is a little dramatic, but the basic information is accurate. We were both blocked for "BLP violations" and both subjected to an SPI because we sourced an article about Wiki administrators with the Solomon bit about your actions in the global warming topic area. You know the one ;) At that time, neither Greg or I had ever heard of you or Solomon for that matter, but that article drew many of the CC editors from out of the ether in support of you. How were we to know you were some sort of untouchable icon around here? By any other standards the Solomon article would have been considered a reliable source -- so we were at a complete loss as to why we were both blocked for BLP violations and without even an explanation. <b class="nounderlines" style="border:1px solid #999;background:#fff"><span style="font-family:papyrus,serif">]]</span></b> 08:16, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Barnstar of Diligence'''
::: Ah, so when GJP says ''At that point the cabal turned on us'' what he means is that people voted to delete his nice article? That seems a little more inflated that "over dramatic". As to LS... he has written quite a few hopelessly inaccurate articles about me, so I don't know which you mean. Is it the one ref'd here ? Certianly, no, none of LS's articles are RS's - they are all riddled with errors ] (]) 08:42, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
|-
::::The reason they are not considered RSs is because the POV pushers who own this topic area reject it based solely on their dislike of Solomon and his views, even while accepting far less reliable stuff elsewhere. ] (]) 14:40, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | I've seen you from time to time vote in RfAs, and I want to applaud you for sticking to your principles and not changing your stance in the face of adversity. I've been striving to do that myself lately, so seeing an example of that in practice is very refreshing and encouraging. ] (]) 21:06, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
::Greg, don't take the bait. ] (]) 09:03, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
|}
::::: Actually no: LS's articles aren't RS's because they are junk. Now we know the "mystery article" its possible to find some of the stuff GJP wrote, based on LS. Stuff like "Connolley used his administrator privileges to create or rewrite over 5,200 articles, removed over 500 articles, and blocked over 2,000 individuals who, according to the Financial Post, took positions that he disapproved of." This is twaddle - unless you're actually agreeing its true. Are you? ] (]) 15:20, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

::::::No, that particular claim is not true in the numbers -- he obviously misinterpreted the results of an edit counter -- but misinterpreting the intricacies of Misplaced Pages edit counters doesn't completely discredit him as a source -- do we discredit ''all sources'' which have made errors, because if so, there's a certain we will need to purge. And anyway, regardless of his errors reading Misplaced Pages output, the thrust of his claims had merit, and he was dead right on the Singer-Martian issue, wouldn't you agree? ] (]) 16:12, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
== June 2022 Good Article Nominations backlog drive ==
::::::: Its a bit of a shame you can't be honest even here; that LS was writing utter tripe is obvious to any competent wiki editor. And no, he was wrong about the Martians too ] (]) 18:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

::::::::And that's precisely why you shouldn't be editing BLPs, because still don't recognize the wrong that was committed with that Martian stuff. ] (]) 19:23, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
{| style="border: 5px solid #ABCDEF ; background-color: #FFF; padding:10px 15px 0"
::: A distinct lack of AGF on your part, Cla. But I hope GJP can provide a coherent account - I've still no idea what this deleted article is. Perhaps you know? ] (]) 13:10, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
|style="padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em; font-size:130%" |'''] |''' <span style="font-size:85%">June 2022 Backlog Drive</span>
::::The article was ] (], ]). It was theoretically well-sourced, but not at all deserving of an article here. '''<font color="navy">]</font>''' ''(<font color="green">]</font>)'' 14:16, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
|-
|]
* On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin.
* Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed.
* Interested in taking part? ''']'''!
|-
|colspan=2 style="font-size:85%; padding-top:15px;"|You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives.<br> ] to opt out of any future messages.

(] &#183; ]) ''']''' 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
|}
<!-- Message sent by User:Buidhe@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Good_articles/GAN_Backlog_Drives/Mailing_list&oldid=1090143622 -->

== Your ] nomination of ] ==
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article ] you nominated for ]-status according to the ]. ] This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. <!-- Template:GANotice --> <small>Message delivered by ], on behalf of ]</small> -- ] (]) 07:01, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

==184.101.12.14 disruptive edits==

Hi this IP continues to make disruptive edits and he has already broken the 3 revert rule. Please if you could take action it would be much appreciated. thanks. ] (]) 15:42, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

::{{Ping|Oz346}} You'll need to contact an administrator or one of the notice boards on this, I'm just an editor like you. <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#fffff4">]&nbsp;]</span> 16:38, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

== August thanks ==
{{User QAIbox
| title = ]<!-- ]-->
| image = Sunflowers above Rhine, Lorch.jpg
| image_upright = 0.8
}}
Thank you for improving articles in August! -- ] (]) 13:28, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Such as below! Will you take it to DYK? Should I? --] (]) 14:49, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

:Already have nominated for DYK. Once SCOTUS rules, I'll take it to FA. Thanks, <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#fffff4">]&nbsp;]</span> 15:27, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
:: That's a great plan! --] (]) 16:05, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

== Your ] nomination of ] ==
The article ] you nominated as a ] has passed ]; see ] for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a '''bold link''' under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can ] within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility.<!-- Template:GANotice result=pass --> <small>Message delivered by ], on behalf of ]</small> -- ] (]) 02:02, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

==DYK for Haaland v. Brackeen==
{{ivmbox
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|text = On ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that a pending case at the ], ''''']''''', "could completely erase ]"?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ]. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page <small>(], )</small>, and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to ]. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the ].
}}<!-- Template:UpdatedDYK --> ] (]) 00:02, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
{{DYK views|7,508|625.7|September 2022|Haaland v. Brackeen}} ] (] • ]) (she/her) 03:01, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
{{User QAIbox
| title = ]
| image = Pfaffenhütchen, Ehrenbach.jpg
| image_upright = 0.8
}}
Thank you for the article in November while . --] (]) 13:59, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

== ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message ==

<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px;">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2022|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. 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 ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2022/Coordination/MM/02&oldid=1124425183 -->

== January music ==
{{User QAIbox
| title = ]
| image = Winter jasmine, Walluf.jpg
| image_upright = 0.8
| bold = ]
}}
-- ] (]) 09:10, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I was on vacation, click on songs for images. - ] died, RIP - the ] is 10 years old OTD ;) --] (]) 13:52, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

{{-}}
==Happy Seventeenth First Edit Day!==
<!-- ##RW UNDERDATE## -->
{| style="width: 80%; margin: 4px auto; padding: .2em; border: 2px dashed #FF0000; background-color: gold;"
| style="text-align:center;" |]
| style="text-align:center;" width="100%"|<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS; color:darkblue">Hey, '''GregJackP'''. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the ]!<br />Have a great day!</span> <span class="nowrap" style="font-family:copperplate gothic light;">] (])</span> 16:10, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
| style="text-align:right;" |]
|}

== Always precious ==
]
Ten years ago, ] were found precious. That's what you are, always. --] (]) 06:46, 10 March 2023 (UTC)


== Requesting inputs ==

* Requesting inputs @ ]
* This request has been made to you since you seem to have page Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style/Legal

] (]) 17:37, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

== ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message ==

<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px; max-width: 100px">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2023|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. 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 ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2023/Coordination/MM/02&oldid=1187132049 -->
==Happy First Edit Day!==
<!-- ##RW UNDERDATE## -->
{{ombox
| name = First Edit Day
| image = ]
| imageright = ]
| style = border: 2px solid CornflowerBlue; background: repeating-linear-gradient(300deg, MistyRose, AntiqueWhite, Ivory, Honeydew, Azure, GhostWhite, MistyRose 50%);
| textstyle = padding: 0.75em; text-align:center;
| plainlinks = yes
| text = <big>'''Happy First Edit Day!'''</big><br />Hi GregJackP! On behalf of the ], I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made and became a Wikipedian! ] (]) 11:07, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
}}


== Joseph Redding ==
WMC: Your track record on answering questions is abysmal. You have no standing to ask questions of anyone else until that improves substantially. Go bait someone else. ++]: ]/] 14:36, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
: Ooooh Lar, isn't that just a teensy bit of a give-away that you're far too involved in this to pretend to be uninvolved? You too need to AGF - there is no baiting here, jsut a request for information. But I'm sure that GJP can answer for himself ] (]) 15:20, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
:: Baiting me won't work either. Go bait someone else. Or better yet, stop baiting completely. ++]: ]/] 15:25, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
:::There's a pun there just waiting to be made, but ... <b class="nounderlines" style="border:1px solid #999;background:#fff"><span style="font-family:papyrus,serif">]]</span></b> 16:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
::::Something to do with how good WMC is at it? ++]: ]/] 16:57, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
::::: Come on Lar, you *can* completely ruin any pretence that you're objective, I know it. Just a few more comments and you're there ] (]) 18:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)


Hi GregJackP. I notice you worked on the ] case. I just created an article on the lawyer involved in that case, ]. I was more interested in Redding as an opera composer and librettist, and as a person involved in the founding of the ]. I thought you might like to assist on building out content on his law career. Apparently he was also a polymathic chess expert (see https://www.readex.com/readex-report/issues/volume-7-issue-2/untold-talent-joseph-redding-profiling-polymathic-chess) ] (]) 16:27, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
::::::Well, we're all good at baiting but who's the master baiter? (Sorry, I couldn't resist!) ] (]) 19:47, 5 September 2010 (UTC)


== Good article reassessment for ] ==
== Fraynework ==
] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 01:29, 18 October 2024 (UTC)


== Invitation to participate in a research ==
Hi GregJackP,


Hello,
Please review the ] page, let me know if I'm missing anything. Thanks


The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this ''''''.
] (]) 05:57, 8 September 2010 (UTC)


You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
== Proposed FoF ==


The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ] .
Formally, I think, I ought to inform you of ] ] (]) 21:49, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
:Thank you, I was aware that this had been added. Regards, <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#ffc">]&nbsp;]</span> 21:52, 8 September 2010 (UTC)


Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.
== Joseph "Nanmankoi" Newman ==


Kind Regards,
Previous declined CSD was an A7 that didn't fit. It's clearly G3 though. <span style="color:green">Ten Pound Hammer</span>, ] and a clue-bat • <sup>(])</sup> 02:20, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


]
Works for me. :D <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#ffc">]&nbsp;]</span> 02:25, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 19:26, 23 October 2024 (UTC) </bdi>
== ] ==
<!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Potential_Admins&oldid=27650229 -->


== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==
This is ridiculous. You are going probably going to cite this action as an example of my abusing my admin tools or something, but: consider yourself banned from ]. When the author of a source says that you are wrong, you should step back and listen, not continue to edit war because you read the paper differently. Doing so otherwise is blatant disruption. '''<font color="navy">]</font>''' ''(<font color="green">]</font>)'' 12:33, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
:I would suggest that you lift the ban. You are showing blatant favoritism. WMC has reverted 4 times in that article, while I on the other hand have made no further edits to the page, limiting myself to discussion of the matter on talk pages. Please advise how arguing for inclusion of a source is disruptive - that is what we are supposed to do, to take it to talk pages. This is a punitive measure solely due to your bias for WMC and to cover up the fact that no one is taking action on his 3RR violation. I have violated no rule or restriction, nor have I been previously warned, as required by CC probation. I strongly recommend that you reconsider your position. <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#ffc">]&nbsp;]</span> 12:59, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
:: The mistake you are making is the same that AQFK has made: the ban was not imposed based on edit count. See ] (]) 13:44, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
*A trivial carification, but the block for refactoring comments was taken to ANI , not by WMC. . . ], ] 18:25, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
::Got it - already struck that part of my comments. I know we are not always on the same side of the content issues, but I would appreciate your thoughts on the ban - not necessarily at ANI (although that would also be welcome, regardless of your position for or against). E-mail would also be fine if you don't want to say anything publicly. I'm having a real difficult time understanding the logic of this, if it doesn't involve bias. I stayed off of the article and confined myself to discussion pages deliberately, so that I would not be involved in edit warring. Thanks, <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#ffc">]&nbsp;]</span> 18:32, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
== ANI Appeal ==
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. 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 ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
I have placed a question at ] that I would appreciate an answer to. I don't think it's required, but it would be nice. -''']''' <sup>]</sup> 19:22, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
:Why? The lynch mob is already forming. I took the matter to the talk pages, for discussion, and did not go back to edit the article because I was trying to do the right thing. NW doesn't take any action against the pro-AGW bunch, just those he disagrees with. For example, when SA completely misrepresented 3 refs as peer-review and stating "denier" instead of what they really said in a BLP, I sent him a copy of the article that was behind a paywall. Nothing happened, SA was on the "right" side. In addition, no one will ever stand up and say that WMC is wrong, so do whatever it is that you wish to do to me. <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#ffc">]&nbsp;]</span> 20:23, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
::That's fine. The atmosphere is now somewhat harsher now than when I asked the question, so I can't blame you for not wanting to fan the flames. --''']''' <sup>]</sup> 20:28, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:18, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
* Would you be satisfied to leave the status quo? If you can go off and edit some other articles productives (you are currently only banned from one), then you could come back and request that the sanction be lifted. The situation now is very heated, and we need to let everyone regain composure. We also need ArbCom to finish their work. Some time ago I had requested that editors involved in these disputes voluntarily cease editing in the area. That advice is still relevant. I'd really rather not ban you or anybody else. ] <sup>]</sup> 15:41, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
::I would, on one small condition. If it is made clear that I was not trying to misrepresent a source (or alternatively, that my interpretation was consistent with that of other published sources that cited the article), I would be happy to accept a voluntary article ban on ] for 6 months (based on what seemed to be the overwhelming time frame picked). I don't want to fight on this, I just feel like I have to stand up for myself. I didn't want to fight on the ref either, I was trying to do the right thing by taking it to the talk pages. <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#ffc">]&nbsp;]</span> 15:48, 10 September 2010 (UTC)


</div>
:::Okay. The only way to end this mess is to get editors to volunarily agree to behave better. I very much dislike blocks and bans. (Check my logs, I'm all bark, not much bite. I usually only apply indef blocks when an editor is really hopeless, which is not the case with any of the CC participants.) I speak for myself, not for other admins, so we'll have to post something and hope they go along with it. ] <sup>]</sup> 16:01, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
</div>
::::Thank you, how do we proceed? Should I wait for you to post and then agree or what? I'm open and agreeable to however you want to handle it. <span style="border:1px solid #900;padding:2px;background:#ffc">]&nbsp;]</span> 16:03, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/02&oldid=1258243447 -->

Latest revision as of 00:18, 19 November 2024

SEMI-RETIRED This user is no longer very active on Misplaced Pages.



GAN Backlog Drive – January 2022

Good article nominations | January 2022 Backlog Drive
January 2022 Backlog Drive:
  • On New Year's Day, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed.
  • Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate:
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive.

Click here and remove your username from the mailing list to opt out of any future messages.

--Usernameunique

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Good articles at 21:18, 31 December 2021 (UTC).

2022 thanks

January songs

Thank you for improving articles in January! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:28, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU 22:53, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Nine years!

- Prayer for Ukraine --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:53, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Your RFA oppose

It is one thing to have your own idiosyncratic rules for how you vote on RFAs, and it is another to bait editors who say stupid things in response to your vote. Please don't make comments such as I'll be happy to respond as soon as you post a legitimate reason for supporting the nomination. PS, I'll be the judge if your response is legitimate or not. on RFAs, even in response to people who don't have legitimate reasons to support the RFA. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 19:18, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

There was nothing about my reply to his questioning my oppose !vote that was inappropriate. I'll be happy to listen to your advice when you question some of the less than adequate support !votes. Until then, you are free to have whatever opinion you want, but I'm not all that interested in hearing it. Regards, GregJackP Boomer! 22:03, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
    • To be honest, I really feel bad and I was out of line to have called your criteria obtuse nor user antagonist words like “laughable” I violated my own oath to myself which is not to (speak) when i am upset. Myself & Ritchie333 always butt heads but nonetheless they have always defended me whenever I was in trouble, we have a great deal of respect for each other, so when they mentioned that your criteria has remained the same over years, I paused for a minute and thought things over. I apologize for my rude comments, please do accept my apology. Even if I didn’t understand your criteria I could have engaged you in a more productive manner. If you choose to not to reply I perfectly understand & if you choose not to accept my apology I understand also, just know that I am indeed truly sorry for being rude to you. Celestina007 (talk) 16:14, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
Celestina007 - that was very gracious, and I accept your apology, as I hope that you'll accept mine if I offended you. GregJackP Boomer! 20:02, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for accepting my apology. It does mean a lot to me, you didn’t offend me in any manner, it was I who acted irresponsibly. Once again thank you mate. Celestina007 (talk) 20:38, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
I'm going to take an unpopular position and thank you for your oppose on the RFA. Not on the merits, because that's entirely between you and your higher power. I'm thanking you for your WP:BOLD. In my RFA, the first person to oppose MY run was acting bravely. I think occasionally a senior user might feel the need to give permission for others to disagree with a clear consensus, just because. In this case invoking your completely reasonable personal criteria (which I'm glad I passed) helps others to not "go along to get along." All of us want more and better sysops. We can't do it unless RFA is allowed to work itself out. Thanks again. BusterD (talk) 16:32, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, BusterD. I appreciate your comments more than you realize. GregJackP Boomer! 23:14, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

I tell people to just let Greg have his say and ignore it, but do people listen to me? *sigh* Now, that out of the way, I'm going to disagree slightly with the "must have 2 GAs" criteria, simply because sometimes that might not actually be sufficient. All GAs are not equal, and on some niche subjects like obscure species of mushrooms or minor hurricanes in Antarctica, it may be possible to meet the "broad in coverage" part of the GA criteria without too much effort. While working on a Million award-worthy subject to GA takes far more time and effort, and is more likely to be the place where you'll encounter disputes, petty MOS wonkery, and all the general things trying to maintain a popular article at GA status will throw at you (especially if it involves living people or ongoing events - in fact, I would avoid taking any BLP to GA if you value your sanity). Ritchie333 20:03, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Your RFA oppose (redux)

I will say that you misgendered the candidate in your stint on Lozman; kindly correct to either she or they? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 04:47, 25 April 2022 (UTC) it seems i confused the sections! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 04:48, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

I used generic pronouns in my response and will properly address her in the future. It was not an intentional slight, but I'm not inclined to go back and edit my post on something this minor. If she's offended, she can say so and I'll work out an amicable solution with her. Regards: GregJackP Boomer! 04:54, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Please see my comment on the RfA page—I think you're mistaken about the Bluebook form for the article titles. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 10:07, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Could be, I've been wrong before. I'll look at your comment and dig out my Bluebook. Thanks, GregJackP Boomer! 15:14, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence
I've seen you from time to time vote in RfAs, and I want to applaud you for sticking to your principles and not changing your stance in the face of adversity. I've been striving to do that myself lately, so seeing an example of that in practice is very refreshing and encouraging. Steel1943 (talk) 21:06, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

June 2022 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive
  • On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives.
Click here to opt out of any future messages.

(t · c) buidhe 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Haaland v. Brackeen

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Haaland v. Brackeen you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vice regent -- Vice regent (talk) 07:01, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

184.101.12.14 disruptive edits

Hi this IP continues to make disruptive edits and he has already broken the 3 revert rule. Please if you could take action it would be much appreciated. thanks. Oz346 (talk) 15:42, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

@Oz346: You'll need to contact an administrator or one of the notice boards on this, I'm just an editor like you. GregJackP Boomer! 16:38, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

August thanks

August songs

Thank you for improving articles in August! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:28, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Such as below! Will you take it to DYK? Should I? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:49, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Already have nominated for DYK. Once SCOTUS rules, I'll take it to FA. Thanks, GregJackP Boomer! 15:27, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
That's a great plan! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:05, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Haaland v. Brackeen

The article Haaland v. Brackeen you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Haaland v. Brackeen for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vice regent -- Vice regent (talk) 02:02, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Haaland v. Brackeen

On 4 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Haaland v. Brackeen, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a pending case at the United States Supreme Court, Haaland v. Brackeen, "could completely erase tribal sovereignty"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Haaland v. Brackeen. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Haaland v. Brackeen), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Hook update
Your hook reached 7,508 views (625.7 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of September 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 03:01, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

November songs

Thank you for the article in November while I was on vacation. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:59, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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 Misplaced Pages 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) 00:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

January music

January songs
happy new year

-- Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:10, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I was on vacation, click on songs for images. - Melitta Muszely died, RIP - the other story is 10 years old OTD ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:52, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Happy Seventeenth First Edit Day!

Hey, GregJackP. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Misplaced Pages Birthday Committee!
Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 16:10, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Always precious

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:46, 10 March 2023 (UTC)


Requesting inputs

Bookku (talk) 17:37, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

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 Misplaced Pages 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) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Calendar emojiHappy First Edit Day!
Hi GregJackP! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! The Herald (Benison) (talk) 11:07, 27 January 2024 (UTC) 		Party popper emoji

Joseph Redding

Hi GregJackP. I notice you worked on the United States v. Kagama case. I just created an article on the lawyer involved in that case, Joseph Redding. I was more interested in Redding as an opera composer and librettist, and as a person involved in the founding of the San Francisco Symphony. I thought you might like to assist on building out content on his law career. Apparently he was also a polymathic chess expert (see https://www.readex.com/readex-report/issues/volume-7-issue-2/untold-talent-joseph-redding-profiling-polymathic-chess) 4meter4 (talk) 16:27, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Berghuis v. Thompkins

Berghuis v. Thompkins 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. Z1720 (talk) 01:29, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:26, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

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 Misplaced Pages 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) 00:18, 19 November 2024 (UTC)