User talk:Charles Essie

Hello, Charles Essie, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! CMD (talk) 13:34, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply] Getting started Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia Finding your way around Table of contents Department directory Editing articles How to develop an article Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles How you can help Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

Please stop converting navboxes back to the dots and away from the list formatting, per WP:HLIST. --IznoRepeat (talk) 17:19, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please stop changing the capitalization. That's generally inappropriate for navboxes. --IznoRepeat (talk) 17:01, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters: "Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization. Most capitalization is for proper names or for acronyms and initialisms. Wikipedia relies on sources to determine what is a proper name". Some of your recent edits to templates and article ledes may have to be reverted.

Note that unjustified removal of citations, links and sidebars (List of political parties in Venezuela, Anarchism, Fascism, List of ongoing military conflicts) could be construed as vandalism. Please explain your edits, either on talk pages or in edit summaries. Also don't remove red links; sometimes, those serve to indicate that an ambiguity is well-known, and a page needs to be written. --Omnipaedista (talk) 03:39, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I noted that you have renamed the template title (here) about the Colombia civil armed confict to 'Civil War'. Your edit has been reverted. Wikipedia relies on sources to determine what is a proper title in such cases. --04:27, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Do not bold-face foreign terms as you did here. Please read Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section#Foreign language: "Do not boldface foreign names not normally used in English, or variations included only to show etymology". --Omnipaedista (talk) 04:27, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You need to state why you believe it should be merged on the talk page of the article you want it merged to.Talk:Before_Watchmen#merge_discussion Dream Focus 22:20, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop deleting the hatnote from the top of the article. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:05, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please make sure to include an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! Jim1138 (talk) 04:00, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Liberalism in Russia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Party of Democratic Reform (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:03, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Charles, I reverted your headline changes in the article Namibia. There certainly could be better headline wording, but your choices did in my opinion not improve the article (e.g., prehistory is normally used for the time before human settlement, South African Namibia is an oxymoron because the South Africans were suppressing the name "Namibia", and under German colonialisation the name "Namibia" did not yet exist).

Please discuss such changes on the talk page first, particularly for top-importance Wikipedia articles. Cheers, Pgallert (talk) 03:59, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The state ideology of North Korea is Juche, the ideology of the Workers' Party of Korea is Kimilsungism-Kimjongilism. --TIAYN (talk) 20:43, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And [1] is about your VERY misguided efforts. --Niemti (talk) 03:04, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain why are you performing controversial moves without seeking consensus? A threat at the Administrator's noticeboard about you has been opened. I suggest you to please elaborate about such actions there. Thanks. — ṞṈ 03:05, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop moving pages without any sort of prior discussion, or even explanation, as to why. You recently moved 1991 uprisings in Iraq without any sort of discussion, and it appears to be something you've been doing elsewhere. Please stop this. In this case, go to the talk page of the article, and start a discussion, and only move it if you find consensus for the move. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 15:25, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are two sections on the Militaries by Country list. One is for countries and the other is for territores. So please leave it alone! tom991

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

First Liberian Civil War (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Liberian Civil War

First Sudanese Civil War (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Sudanese Civil War

Second Sudanese Civil War (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Sudanese Civil War

War in Darfur (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Sudanese Civil War

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Charles,

I revert to World Uygur Youth Congress, which is the organization which has been officially designated. We can not presume that World Uygur Congress is designated as well (or find a good reference that both names refer to the same group, not a subgroup). See http://www.china-embassy.org/eng/xw/t56257.htm Nicolas1981 (talk) 04:12, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Charles,

Thanks for your contributions to List of designated terrorist organizations! Unfortunately, two of the references you cited seem to not exist anymore: http://www.cdi.org http://www.guardiacivil.org/terrorismo/grupos/lista.jsp

If you could find where these pages have been moved that would be great! Meanwhile I had to revert.

Keep up the great work! Nicolas1981 (talk) 02:38, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Constant moves of historical and war articles by a single user with no consensus regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

I notice you moved Iraqi insurgency (post-U.S. withdrawal) to a new name without ANY FORM of discussion or consensus on the subject. You should go to the talk page of the article, start a discussion, and only move it if you find consensus for the move. I see from the messages above and your edit history that you are doing this a lot, so as a precaution I am adding your user name to the Administrator's noticeboard pending possible actions against the account. Skycycle (talk) 15:59, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please respond to the above at WP:ANI#Constant moves of historical and war articles by a single user with no consensus. Failure to respond could result in sanctions, including loss of editing privileges. KillerChihuahua 22:56, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for responding. Consider yourself under a self-imposed ban from moving articles. I suggest in the future you be more responsive to other editors' concerns; it should not take an ANI thread and an admin telling you that you risk losing editing privileges for you to respond to others. Try to work more with your fellow editors, respect their concerns, and discuss disagreements with them. KillerChihuahua 00:11, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please justify re-adding Benin to the infobox on the talk page, I justified removing it. --Golbez (talk) 01:33, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Similar issues as with a previous article above:

Please stop deleting the hatnote from the top of the article. Thank you.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please make sure to include an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks!

--Josh Triplett (talk) 04:34, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Appalling POV merging by Emmette Hernandez Coleman of Flag of WS/Flag of the SADR. Thank you. —Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 07:39, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's a discussion you might be interested in at Talk:Coat_of_arms_of_the_Sahrawi_Arab_Democratic_Republic#Move?. I'm telling you this because you were involved in Talk:Flag_of_Western_Sahara#Merger proposal and/or Talk:Flag_of_Western_Sahara#UNMERGING_ARTICLES. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 20:57, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	For editing Donghak Peasant Revolution, although not being a bot or AWB. Seonoo of Kim (ANSWER IN MY T.A.L.K. P.A.G.E!!!!!!!!!) 07:39, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Charles, I see you've added a bunch of articles to Category:Political parties in South Africa that are already members of Category:Defunct political parties in South Africa. The thing is, the "defunct" category is a subcategory of the main category, so articles in the "defunct" category shouldn't also be included in the main category. This is explained at Wikipedia:Categorization#Categorizing pages, which says, "In addition, each categorized page should be placed in all of the most specific categories to which it logically belongs. This means that if a page belongs to a subcategory of C (or a subcategory of a subcategory of C, and so on) then it is not normally placed directly into C." Regards - htonl (talk) 17:20, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, same with sub-categories of Category:Political parties in Egypt. Articles that are already members of Category:Coalitions of parties in Egypt, Category:Communist parties in Egypt‎ Category:Defunct political parties in Egypt‎, Category:Islamic parties in Egypt‎, or Category:Liberal parties in Egypt‎ should not additionally be directly included in the main category. Could you please revert your own edits to restore the old order. Thank you. Kind regards --RJFF (talk) 17:29, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Charles,

it has been explained to you more than once: please do not add higher level categories to an article, if the page is already in a sub-category of this category. If it is in the sub-category, it is automatically also in the superordinated category. Thank you. --RJFF (talk) 09:54, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have undone some of your edits, but I do not have the time to undo all of them. Could you please undo yourself? (Tunisian, Bulgarian and Iraqi parties) Thanks. --RJFF (talk) 09:55, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Again! Why are you doing this? Can you please stop? --RJFF (talk) 18:57, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not move hatnotes under maintenance templates. Per WP:Hatnote#Placement:

Hatnotes are placed at the very top of the article, before any other items such as images, navigational templates and maintenance templates (like the "cleanup", "unreferenced", and "POV" templates). Text-only browsers and screen readers present the page sequentially. If a reader has reached the wrong page, they typically want to know that first.

Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:38, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As the leading editor in terms of edit count of {{The Children of the Corn Series}}, I am alerting you to the discussion about the use of derivative works templates in author bio articles at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels#Derivative works and cultural references templates. We are discussing whether they should be removed from or collapsed or left alone in the author's articles.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:52, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Charles Essie

I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).

So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy the VisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.

What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.

The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with a list of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on the Feedback page.

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:01, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you added a bunch of items to the category "Category:Massacres in Afghanistan."

Massacres are an intentional or indiscriminate killing of a group of people who should not have been targeted. Accidents and fog-of-war incidents are not massacres. The sinking of the Titanic was not a massacre, no matter how much negligence one might want to attribute to it. Neither was the 2007 Shinwar shooting. These various incidents had all been investigated. Bad things happen in war, which is why legitimate armies wear uniforms, and why legitimate critics were supposed to demand that insurgents distinguish themselves from civilians.

This has been discussed before, and it was eventually decided to create a separate category for these other incidents. That's why we have the cat for "Category:Civilian casualties in the War in Afghanistan (2001–present)."

I realize that some people like to make moral judgments, and call a tragedy a "massacre" because it feels wrong when you don't look at the entire picture. But, if you'll notice, the same people who claim to care about these things had been unwilling to demand insurgents follow the laws of war. Had they cared enough to have done that, many of these very incidents would never have happened.

-- Randy2063 (talk) 23:54, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Background and causes of the Iranian Revolution may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)

Beheshti]], [[Mohammad-Javad Bahonar]], [[Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani]] and [[Mohammad Mofatteh]]), who later became the major leaders of the Islamic Republic. They used a cultural approach to the collapse of the shah's regime include the director-general of the French intelligence service (who claimed that American President [[Jimmy Carter]] `decided to replace` the Shah;<ref>Marenches, who claimed the U.S. `took the Shah by the tail, and threw him into exile like a dead rat,` <ref>[Air Force Commander Amir-Hossein Rabi'i quoted in Arjomand, Said Amir, ''The Turban for the Crown'',

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:20, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I entirely understand your grievance, could you please explain it to me. Charles Essie (talk) 17:25, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Timeline of the Iranian Revolution, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Beheshti and Mehr (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:41, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Charles! It would be very helpful if you could drop by Talk:2011_Kurdish_protests_in_Iraq#merge and give your input. Thanks! ~ Zirguezi 19:15, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Charles. Just thank you for creating Category:People of the Iranian Revolution. Cheers.Farhikht (talk) 09:01, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Charles, just want to inform you that I've been removing the category "Arab nationalists" from various articles, including that of Gamal Abdel Nasser, because it's redundant. Articles that already have cats such as "Arab nationalist blank" or "blank Arab nationalists" don't require the additional inclusion of the parent category, which is "Arab nationalists." With Nasser, because we already have "Arab nationalist heads of state", "Arab nationalist thinkers" and "Egyptian Arab nationalists," adding the parent cat would just be overkill. --Al Ameer (talk) 00:33, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What is your rationale for putting practically all Lebanese civil war militias into this category? What does it have to do with "rebellion"? Militias are not "rebels" by definition. FunkMonk (talk) 17:08, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

They were rebel groups because they did answer to the government and they fighting for their own vision of what the Lebanese state should be. Charles Essie (talk) 17:32, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But they did not fight the state (since there practically wasn't one), they fought each other. I have requested a rename, no sources I have ever encountered label these militias as "rebel groups". FunkMonk (talk) 17:36, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're entitled to remove them from the category, and maybe create a new category for the militias, but I would request keeping a separate rebel group category. Charles Essie (talk) 17:41, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But that's the point, there's nothing that could be put in that category. Apart from maybe Fatah al-Islam, but they were never labelled a rebel group by anyone, and they were not even Lebanese mostly. FunkMonk (talk) 17:44, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, fine, do whatever you want, I don't care anymore. Charles Essie (talk) 21:13, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What we want or care about is irrelevant, it is all about what's accurate and supported by sources. FunkMonk (talk) 21:24, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please make sure to include an edit summary with every edit. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! --RJFF (talk) 14:05, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1969 Libyan coup d'état, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Free Officers Movement (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:Romanian Revolution. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:Romanian Revolution redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). BDD (talk) 23:12, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Charles Essie

As a Wikipedian interested in African subjects and specifically Uganda, we thought you might be interested in the following opportunity.

WikiAfrica is looking for a Wikipedian in Community from Uganda to play a pivotal role in its Kumusha Takes Wiki project. This might be a position that you would consider. Or it could be the perfect opportunity for someone you know from this country, please spread the word! For more details, please look at this page: http://www.wikiafrica.net/call_for_wir_en/

If you have any questions about the above, please contact isla on isla [at] wikiafrica [dot] net : Isla Haddow (talk)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to United States support of authoritarian regimes may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *[[Ferdinand Marcos]] ([[Philippines]]) )1965–86)<ref>http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/publications/philippines/philippines.html</ref><ref>http://

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:46, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Communism in Vietnam may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Most notable were the organizations led by [[Hoang Co Minh|Hoàng Cơ Minh]] from the US, Võ Đại Tôn] from Australia, and Lê Quốc Túy from France. Hoàng Cơ Minh was killed during an ambush in Laos. Võ

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:09, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Revolutionary terror, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page White Terror (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That link was already pointed to the disambiguation page, I just changed the spelling a little bit. Charles Essie (talk) 14:41, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, this notice is to let you know that numerous categories which you created have been nominated for deletion. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 December 23#Fooian revolutionaries. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:52, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Charles, I notice you have made maintenance edits on LGBT rights articles, adding categories (which is good) and removing blank lines. I don't really see why you are removing these lines, since it does not make any visual difference, while having such blank lines in the source code increases readability of the code. Now the references, templates and categories right after each other, which is less readable. Regards, SPQRobin (talk) 17:46, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Red Cossacks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ukrainian Republic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I made no such link, excuse me, but where are getting information? Charles Essie (talk) 16:35, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

i see you edited the Zhi Xian Party, i wonder if the party is banned and if so it must be said in the article, i found this: http://www.forbes.com/sites/hengshao/2013/12/17/bizarre-china-report-the-grand-wedding-power-play-smog-inspired-creativity/ founders of a brand political new party filed a lawsuit against the beijing ministry of civil affairs last week after the ministry suprisingly declared zhixian-or supreme consittution party, violated existing laws by carrying out activities as an ungregistred social organisation........founders of the zhiaxian party were clearly displeased with their party a political enitity being labeled as a mere "social organisation" in a bold power play zhixian party issued a formal announcement rescinding the ministry attemlpt to outlaw the party. chinese constution olny prohibits opposition to the ccp one one the founders said but not the establishment of new political parties which manifestly is a downright diffrent matter......Not hard to guess what the official response would be, but let’s quote the spokesman for the mysterious United Front Work Department of the CCP Central Committee, at a Q&A session in 2011: “The Communist Party of China and eight democratic parties essentially represent all social classes and groups. The multiparty cooperation system has a broad coverage. Therefore there is no need to establish new political parties.” does this mean that the party is banned? and if so it must be said in the article, can you please help me? Ionchari (talk) 08:50, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, were you proposing to merge the revolution article "into" or "from" the 2 others? Because i checked the tag in all 3 articles and all say "into", which sounds a bit weird. Can you please check back? Thanks. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 22:30, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Charles Essie (talk) 22:33, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 23:30, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Egyptian Revolution of 2013 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Egyptian Revolution of 2013 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.GreyShark (dibra) 19:30, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2011–13 Russian protests, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Communism in Russia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ukraine without Kuchma, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Berkut (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Beavis and Butt-head may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Head are working the late shift at Burger World) and also having him almost say the forbidden word (such as one time when he sang "Liar, liar, pants on..." and pausing before "fire" (''Liar! Liar!'').

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:18, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Governance of the Gaza Strip may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Minister]].<ref>{{cite news| title = Hamas battles for control of Gaza | publisher= [The Guardian]]. 16 June 2007|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/jun/16/israel.comment | location=

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:44, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I commented there, also on your question on the Russian revolution. 83.83.1.229 (talk) 22:52, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Eurasian Economic Union may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• The Eurasian Commission can take decisions on not only the customs policy]p of the union but also on the macro-economy, the competition regulations, the energy policy and

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:09, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mansoor Hekmat may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• [[Category:Iranian communists]]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:46, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Federation of Democrats (South Africa) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * http://www.federationofdemocrats.co.za/ Federation of Democrats Official Site]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:54, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A little imprecise definition. Laws and the state power always work so, in almost all countries. So, <Putinism> is something else than only <for friends - everything, for enemies - the law>. The lema <Putinism>, but also its positive position moments. So, for example, for himself Mr. Pesident Putin, as a real man expects nothing other than described here <Putinism>.Pinochet22 (talk) 09:01, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm SummerPhD. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Wolverine (character), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. SummerPhD (talk) 03:20, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Sarah Connor Chronicles has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. - adamstom97 (talk) 07:43, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I undid your recent category change to the Pirate Party of Berlin page in which you changed the category from "Political parties in Germany to "Libertarian parties in Germany". The Pirate Party Germany characterizes itself (according to their website) as "social-liberal-progressive". Do you have anything that states explicitly that the party aligns itself with libertarianism (used here, as in the category, in the American sense of the term)? Interestingly, the only other party in the category is the Party of Reason, a small-government/free market party. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ljpernic (talk • contribs) 14:37, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please state your reasons for describing MAK as "Right to Extreme right". Thank you. Cdh1984 (talk) 14:43, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't do that. All I did was remove Category:Left-wing parties in Algeria because I saw the label "Right to Extreme right". Charles Essie (talk) 15:52, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. I've looked again and will put the same question to the person who changed it from "Center-left/left-wing". thanks Cdh1984 (talk) 12:50, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

While it is understood that we're all flying from one article to another surrounding current events, edit summaries such as this are not appreciated as they are WP:UNCIVIL. You should have typed in the correct title of the article rather than a red link. Thank you for your time. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 05:13, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm terribly sorry. I didn't intend for that to come off as rude or demeaning. I was just trying to point out that the article 2013–14 Ukrainian Crisis did infact exist. I'll be more careful in the future. Charles Essie (talk) 14:40, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not to worry. I was reading high on the temper scale when I whined here. Sorry to have been so indignated when I know you to be a good editor. I'll keep a glass of cold water on hand to throw in my own face when I get hot under the collar! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:49, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All right. Charles Essie (talk) 01:29, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Conflict in the Niger Delta , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Catlemur (talk) 20:42, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If 2014 Hungarian Internet tax protests is expanded to justify the move, send me a heads-up and I will change my vote to Support (or if I don't for some reason, as I do have another life which sometimes keeps me away from Wikipedia, feel free to link to this comment and deem my vote to be changed). Andrewa (talk) 20:03, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed the contributions you've made to the American Left article on and off over the past few years. I like that you added a "lead too short" template [2] , and the other small changes you've made just seem like helpful uncontroversial formatting improvements and small additions that indicate goodwill in a bizarre editing environment.

I found a simple verification failure in the leading reference of the American Left article [3]. As a result, the first sentence or two of the lead changed from one side of falsehood through a day or two of an actual correct and well-referenced description of the American Left before passing over to the other side of falsehood which I point out at [4]. I'm writing about it here because I thought you might find it interesting and funny. There isn't much I can do about it, and I'm not recommending that you try to engage with certain other editors there. They seem to be too far gone down a path away from building an encyclopedia in my view. Flying Jazz (talk) 01:10, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Charles. Could you stop removing articles from Category:Political parties in Israel? The sub-categories you are putting them into contain both extant and defunct parties, so the top level category is still required as an indicator of current status.

Also, I saw you added Agudat Yisrael and Degel HaTorah to Category:Far-right political parties in Israel and Category:Religious Zionist political parties in Israel. Neither of these parties fit either category (particularly not the Religious Zionist one!) - could you be a bit more careful? Cheers, Number 57 18:40, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. I'll stop. Charles Essie (talk) 19:08, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, thanks! Number 57 20:05, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Charles. I noticed that you removed Rally for Democracy and Socialism from Category:Political parties in Burkina Faso, I guess because it is also in Category:Socialist parties in Burkina Faso. Can I make the same request ask above? Socialist parties categories contain both active and defunct parties, so active parties always need to be kept in the top level category. Cheers, Number 57 10:00, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User Ridland changed the title of the article from 2014 to 2013 unilaterally, without discussion and less than 10 days after we agreed with a majority consensus to name it as it was (per WP policy at least a month has to pass since the last consensus). Can you ask an administrator at the noticeboard to review the issue and re-redirect the article back to 2014 if he sees it to be proper? EkoGraf (talk) 20:30, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You see my message? EkoGraf (talk) 05:21, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've never done this before. Can you tell me what to do? Charles Essie (talk) 13:02, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, didn't see your reply. Seems to be OK now, an admin redirected it back to 2014 on his own. EkoGraf (talk) 17:25, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Shu'ubiyya, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Persians. 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) 09:05, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you reverted my edit in Iraq category. Iraq is not an Arab republic but a Republic. Its official name is Republic of Iraq not Arab Republic of Iraq like Egypt. --Helmoony (talk) 19:06, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Iraq is a member of the Arab League, which makes them an Arab state. They're also a republic, which makes them an Arab republic. Charles Essie (talk) 19:48, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you just take one minute and open the article Arab republic. Arab republics are republics based on ethnic origin. A republic member of the Arab league is not necessary an Arab republic. --Helmoony (talk) 03:46, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I guess. Charles Essie (talk) 13:27, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Eagle of Saladin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arab Socialist Union. 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) 09:46, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Cambodian–Vietnamese War

added a link pointing to Third Indochina War

Insurgency in Laos

added a link pointing to Third Indochina War

Sino-Vietnamese War

added a link pointing to Third Indochina War

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:47, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please help to edit it. Saifeng3 (talk) 09:11, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Charles. I was rather surprised to see these categories suddenly deleted (I don't watchlist categories I create). The whole purpose of creating them was to separate extant and defunct alliances, so that defunct ones would appear as a sub-category of "Defunct political parties in Fooland". Now there is no way of knowing from their categorisation whether they are extant or not. Half of the comments in the discussion are either unaware of (or simply ignore) the fact that we have the Defunct parties category...

I really would have appreciated you discussing with me why I created them first before you nominated them for deletion, so I could have explained why there is a need for them. Please consider this in future. Thanks, Number 57 12:44, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry. I guess I figured that you would join the conversation. It was wrong of me to make that assumption. Charles Essie (talk) 13:44, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, lesson learnt from my point of view too. I already have nearly 9,500 articles on my watchlist, and had never bothered with categories, so perhaps I will in future. Cheers, Number 57 13:58, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization – Democratic Party for Macedonian National Unity may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)

University Press, 2003</ref><ref>{{cite book| author = Jonathan P. Stein| coauthors = N. Y.) Eastwest Institute (New York| title = The Politics of National Minority Participation in Post-Communist Europe: State- [[Category:Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization|Democratic Party for Macedonian National Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization|Democratic Party for Macedonian National Unity}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:57, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted for technical reasons. Sometimes, this works, but others it doesn't. --B.Lameira (talk) 00:39, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Charles Essie (talk) 00:57, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Charles. I'm sure I've asked a couple of times before, but could you please stop removing extant political parties from the main "Political parties in Fooland" categories. The subcategories contain both extant and defunct parties, so the main category is the only place where all the extant parties can be listed (as opposed to the Defunct category). Thanks, Number 57 21:03, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to remember this time. Charles Essie (talk) 21:35, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Number 57 21:41, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

• Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Communism in Russia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Red Guards. 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) 10:26, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Charles Essie ! Just for the record of my renamed / deleted categories, could you notify me on my talk page ? Stefanomione (talk) 22:53, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, I'll try to remember to do that in the future. Charles Essie (talk) 15:29, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Muammar Gaddafi into Federation of Arab Republics. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa (talk) 20:55, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Does this also apply when creating a draft page that hasn't yet been made into an article? Charles Essie (talk) 17:37, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Russian nationalism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rodina. 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) 09:56, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Charles, I'd like to explain to you in good faith why I restored my removal on the Slobodan Milošević article. Essentially, when an editor takes something off, he is left with emptiness in the spot where the statement once stood and as such, there is no place to add sources. You say that the "experts" claimed Milošević was a nationalist. In fact, when you think about it, there is no "expert knowledge" required when labelling a nationalist. Despite its bad coverage, the individual merely adopts the ideology and from here, he projects his own self as a nationalist. There are a lot of nationalists in modern-day Serbian politics, the President Toma Nikolić identifies as one, and famously there is Vojislav Šešelj and a host of high profile figures, none with anything they would even wish to hide: there is a far-left and far-right more or less in every society.

With regards Milošević, it is indeed the case that from early on, his international opponents in western Europe and the United States labelled him a "nationalist", and it is also the case that many mainstream sources (i.e. those the community call "reliable") frequently parroted the label. None of this though explores the concept of Serbian nationalism, and if anything, most have proven that they are not even sure what Serbian nationalism entails in the first place. The most common ideology is one of Greater Serbia, and Milošević's name was linked to this concept right from 1991 until very recent years: although many knew this was never the case, even the modern scholars seem to have conceded this notion now, particularly after the disclosures in the thousands-of-pages judgement on Radovan Karadžić which just about deemed the connection beetween Milošević and Greater Serbia an absurdity (though not in such direct words).

However you look at it, Milošević's detractors needed a "strong case" to oppose him, and to be honest and say that he was simply a hardliner who was not willing to give up Yugoslavia wasn't "corrupt" enough for them, so they created a number of fanciful theories as to how the remaining Pan-Slavic state with Montenegro and the support for Serb breakaway states in Bosnia and Croatia somehow amounted to a "Greater Serbia" on the bottleneck premise of "one man giving the orders across this vast area". In fact, not only did Milošević eventually sign the Dayton Accords (which he did not have to do as he was not a Bosnian Serb), he never interfered with or tried to influence the four failed peace talks prior to Dayton which dated back to 1992. I should add that two of these were agreed by the Serbian representatives and on neither occasion did Milošević's hammer come down. I should note that even regarding the two peace talks that the Serbs rejected, they still attended and considered a proposal which they knew in advance would result in a sovereign Bosnia and Herzegovina, something no right-minded Serbian nationalist would consider (which when you reflect, even raises question marks now just how nationalistic the Bosnian Serb leadership was). Another thing is that it is impossible to equate Serbian nationalism with the continuation of Serbia in a Pan-Slavic union with Montenegro, a region claimed as "Serb" by nationalists and not "independent of it". Other inconsistencies include the peaceful withdrawal from Macedonia (another Serbian heartland to the nationalists), and the creation of FR Yugoslavia in 1992 singularly excluding Serb-held territories in Croatia and Bosnia. It would have been far easier for a nationalist to declare a "Serb state" to include all desires areas, and eradicate a Montenegrin entity. However, it had been Montenegrins representing a Montenegrin interest that kept Montenegro united with Serbia.

That said, this is my own analysis. What you might like to know is that the combintation of Milošević with "nationalism" has been discussed among scholars and publishers, and just as some do call him nationalistic, others - and not necessarily all complimentary ones - state clearly that he was not nationalistic. Here are some:

• Read after the highlighted paragraph
• Article on Warsaw Voice
• Branding by avowed nationalist Šešelj as "worst traitor" in Serbian history
• Opinion on Milošević from Momčilo Đujić
• cannot find link - Warren Zimmermann is on record as confessing Milošević was not a nationalist, though he did call him an "opportunist".

So as you can see, this one really is not as simple as calling "Adolf Hitler" a definite "nazi". I hope you see my point here. --OJ (talk) 11:42, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Charles. I noticed you created this category, but I'm not sure it's necessary. The articles in Category:Opinion polling by country are pretty much exclusively for elections. It might have been better to rename the existing categories (perhaps Category:Electoral opinion polling by country etc) rather than create a duplicate that all articles are in twice. Do you have any objections to me suggesting the new category is deleted? Cheers, Number 57 19:27, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here's my suggestion. We delete my page but we move Category:Opinion polling by country to my page's title (for consistency with Category:Opinion polling for future elections and move all the subcategories accordingly (example; Category:Opinion polling in Australia to Category:Opinion polling for elections in Australia). Charles Essie (talk) 19:36, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Left you a reply at the article's talk page, but also letting you know here I started in my sandbox [5] a rough skeleton of the central article and if you wish you can also help by editing and expanding it while I will also do the same and we will move it to an official article when we done. EkoGraf (talk) 18:39, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know where to start. I don't have much experience in creating big articles from scratch. Is there any way we could get more people in on this? Charles Essie (talk) 19:59, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I offered Coltsfan over on the talk page to help out if he wants as well. I got one more editor in mind to ask for help. You can also see if anybody else wants to. EkoGraf (talk) 20:24, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm taking some content from the other articles, moving it into this one, cutting down and summarizing it. I think I finished the prelude and 2003 invasion sections, and have moved some content to the insurgency section, but haven't cut it down yet. You can check and see if you can cut it down yourself, or in fact change the wording both in the first two sections I already finished as well as in the 3rd I'm currently on. EkoGraf (talk) 21:05, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Can you please explain to me what is achieved by putting people such as Nicolae Iorga in both the Category:Democratic Nationalist Party (Romania) politicians and the parent Category:Romanian nationalists? Dahn (talk) 08:22, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just FYI, if you create categories like Category:Communists by nationality and political party by mistake, the best way to get them deleted is not to blank them but to add the {{db-self}} template, which will put them into the deletion process directly rather than relying on another editor to do it for you... <g> Le Deluge (talk) 16:59, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Charles Essie (talk) 17:08, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]