User talk:Ne0Freedom

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Materialism. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 01:55, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I edit out any content, I only meant to rearrange the paragraphs and add more content. Can you please quote the piece of information that was edited out in my edits[1]? --Ne0Freedom 02:10, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Since you seem to have made your position on WP:NPOV clear[2] that your opinion is NPOV, I guess me trying to continue a discussion here will be useless. By the way, it is interesting that you censored your conversation with User:TigerShark in the archive[3] you are creating. --Ne0Freedom 23:20, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated Tejo Mahalya, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tejo Mahalya and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 11:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Sally Kern are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 14:13, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to use talk pages such as Talk:Sally Kern for inappropriate discussion, as described here, you may be blocked. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 14:21, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My comment was right on target![4] --Ne0Freedom 14:24, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Have you read the linked policy? Your comment was not related to the subject of writing that article; talk pages are for discussing how to write the article, and not for general discussion of the subject. If you just want to discuss your ideas about gay parents, there are many internet forums that provide space for such discussions, but at Wikipedia, we're just trying to write an encyclopedia. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 14:26, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its not about "gay parents" themselves! It's about the legitimacy of Sally Kern's quote and the effects gay parents have on adopted children:

To see if "2 yr olds" are affected by Sexual Homophile Propaganda in your state/country check the following links:

• LGBT adoption
• LGBT parenting

...raising children, by definition is indoctrination of values!

--Ne0Freedom 14:31, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

The article isn't about whether Sally Kern is right or wrong; that's outside the scope of an encyclopedia article. The article is just about what she has said and done, and what its effect has been on others, as verified by the best available sources. Discussion of whether she is right or wrong is opinion and analysis, and that's not what goes in an encyclopedia article. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 14:34, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then why not state her full quote? It's more "encyclopediac" that way.--Ne0Freedom 14:38, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, because her full quote is a longish speech. Have you often read the full texts of speeches in other encyclopedia articles? The article on Abraham Lincoln doesn't print the full text of the Gettysburg Address, and neither does the article on the Gettysburg Address. Are you familiar with the form of an encyclopedia article? I recommend the Encyclopedia Britannica as a place to get a feel for what they do, if you aren't familiar with this form of writing. An encyclopedia is a concise summing-up of what's most important about a subject, based entirely in fact and in verifiable sources. Including the full text of one speech, in an article about a person's whole career, wouldn't be at all encyclopedic. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:01, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Brain Trust (GetBackers), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Collectonian (talk) 00:23, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You added material to Dāna‎ which was a copyright violation (we say copyvio), as it was copied directly from [[5]]. Please see WP:COPYRIGHT. Normally I would suggest rewriting it so it is substantially changed and citing it, but in this case the article is not a reliable source -- see WP:RS, so that won't work either I'm afraid. Dougweller (talk) 05:33, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added material to Dāna‎ which was a not copyright violation (we say KOPIMI), as it was copied directly from Revision of Dāna as of 23:10, 29 November 2008. Unless you can prove the site in question had the information before Wikipedia, how can you know they haven't KOPIed from us. --Ne0Freedom 14:00, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

The date on that page is November 2006 (in the source), 2 years earlier, so we assume that whoever added it to that version of the article copied it from the website. Dougweller (talk) 14:59, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

since the site is down (atleast for me)and the only way to find that article is google catche, we should keep the content until the website is back up. Meanwhile the Author of the article should be contacted for permission to use his content.

See [6], [7] as quoted in Pitru Paksha. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 11:42, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia–Wikimedia Meetup
Kolkata, India

(view · edit · changes)

	The Original Barnstar
	For your contributions in Aakash (tablet). Rock n Roll :) Abdul rajaT 10:43, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I wasn't entirely clear. I meant a discussion on Talk:Knowledge so that others can join in. Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 20:14, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Appitalism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page App Store (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) 11:48, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

User:Ne0Freedom, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Ne0Freedom and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Ne0Freedom during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:11, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The result of the MfD discussion was keep - withdrawn by nominator. JohnCD (talk) 14:01, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ne0Freedom. The MfD on your userpage may have been out of order. I'm writing to find out. I am confused about User:Eternal-Entropy, which is what led me to your page. Please do tell me why you have other account(s), and how many there are. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:21, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

initially I created it to make articles in the user space[8], that was before I found about some obscure User Space rules. This January 13th it became an idea/concept account, that I use to upload images and other edits, ie. things I don't want to take the credit for personally. Appearently anything I do in the Wikimedia project offends someone.[9]. So basicaly User:Eternal-Entropy is an Idea, and I am it's supporter/promoter/representative, etc, etc.

ps. I use the nickname Ne0Freedom for the English projects, and Mukti for Indian language projects like Hindi, Bangla, Sanskrit, etc. --Ne0Freedom 18:40, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Okay. Thank you for the reply. I'm starting to understand. Just to be clear, Mukti, Eternal-Entropy, and Ne0Freedom are all your accounts. Are you using any other accounts? Many thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:47, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

no more accounts, atleast not in the Wikimedia Foundation. Why would I need more than two accounts at a time ? --Ne0 (talk) 04:51, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. I notice that you've used Eternal Entropy and this account to edit the same articles on a few occasions. It's probably best to avoid that. Also, would it be okay if you use a normal signature, i.e. four tildes? The unclickable signature you use now is a bit difficult for others. Best wishes, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:33, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Neel, I am just pointing out to you that please go through with the following Wikipedia policies page ( The general rule is one editor, one account.) ...

• Wikipedia:Multiple Accounts
• Wikipedia:Single-purpose account
• Wikipedia:Username policy

Thank you.--- Jayanta Nath ^{(Talk|Contrb)} 11:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your request for arbitration has been declined. At present, this is a case for the Wikimedia Commons community, and not an area the English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee has jurisdiction over. For the Arbitration Committee Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 13:14, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

...for the WP:99% guidelines.--Amadscientist (talk) 22:47, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Congratulations, Ne0Freedom, you've recently made your 1,000th edit to articles on English Wikipedia! Thank you for helping improve articles on politics and technology, and for all your contributions to the encyclopedia! Keep up the great work :) Maryana (WMF) (talk) 22:08, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, a software related article to be kept in WP must show notability be several references showing substantial coverage by independent third party reviews or other publications, but not blogs or short comments, or public relations or anything based on public relations. Nothing from the web site of the company counts.

I & another editor thought the article didn't even have a good indications of possible importance. But I am willing to restore it, and will then send it for a deletion discussion at WP:AFD, where the community will decide, based on the above criteria. My advice, however, is that you should wait until you do have some better references, because in its current state the community will almost certainly decide it should be deleted. If you want to try the present article , let me know. If you want to try a better one, just write it--you do not need permission if it is actually better. DGG ( talk ) 15:06, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

as requested, I have restored the article to your user space, as User:Ne0Freedom/Appitalism so you can work on finding additional references. Please ask me if you are unclear what to do. If you find you cannot remove it in a reasonable amount of time, let me know, & I will suggest further options.

It might also be a good idea for you to enable Wikipedia email. To do that , go to your user:Preferences page, and, in the User Profile section, enter your email address, click that you want to enable it, and then when you get an email message from WP about it, reply to enable it. This will let people send messages to your email without your having to tell them your email address first. DGG ( talk ) 04:05, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ne0, i've created the article which you requested at WP:OWS. benzband (talk) 17:47, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that was fast :) --Ne0 (talk) 02:19, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-namespace redirects can be speedily deleted (see criterion R2), and somebody asked. WilyD 07:21, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just because something can be deleted dosen't mean it should be. Why did you feel it needs to be deleted ? --Ne0 (talk) 01:13, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mostly, somebody asked - admin tools aren't for doing what I want to do, but for doing what other people want (with me, essentially, serving as a check that it's sensible/allowed). There's an essay here on why redirects from the mainspace to the project space are undesirable. WilyD 09:10, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't a redirect from the mainspace. It was a redirect from WikiProject: space to Wikipedia:WikiProject space --Ne0 (talk) 17:36, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Other such pseudo-namespace redirects exist (Wikiproject:Essex, Wikiproject:San Francisco 49ers WikiProject:Architecture, Wikiproject: Eurovision, WikiProject:Medicine) as well as many right out cross-namespace redirects which you can find here. As a side note, some other language wikis (e.g. french wp) have an actual separate namespace for projects. benzband (talk) 19:08, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please restore the redirect ? --Ne0 (talk) 13:03, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, but keep in mind that it's unlikely to survive a discussion if anyone else complains, which is, I think, likely. WilyD 06:33, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) --Ne0 (talk) 07:29, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ne0Freedom. You have new messages at Wikipedia_talk:Hinduism-related_topics_notice_board#Comparison_of_Hinduism_Branches.
Message added 11:36, 8 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Redtigerxyz ^Talk 11:36, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ne0Freedom I am new to wikipedia and no matter how hard I try I cant make sense of it =(( ... anyways I just wanted to request some information in an article you edited, the article is on Mr Arvind Kejriwal, and I would really appreciate it if you could add a link to his actual twitter and facebook page, as of late there has been a lot of misinformation being spread through his fake accounts

                                                               regards, HR  — Preceding unsigned comment added by PrometheusHR (talk • contribs) 21:37, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]  

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dāna, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Egoism (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) 11:40, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since you seem to be aware that there is already an ongoing discussion concerning the Aam Aadmi Party election symbol, the correct course of action should have been for you to join that discussion, not reinstate something that was removed on copyright grounds. - Sitush (talk) 16:10, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

the previous image File:AAPLogo.jpg has been deleted abruptly by a copyright facist, without any votes for deletion. (I have previous experience with him - I don't kill first, ask questions later, unlike him).

The copyright grounds is bogus: you just have to look at the the Wikipedia pages and websites of INC & BJP! they have "© All India Congress Committee" and "Copyright 2011 Bharatiya Janata Party." So, how are File:Indian National Congress.svg and File:Bharatiya Janata Party.svg both surviving ? Answer: Politics ! & Jameslwoodward is one of them "Wikipedia politicians". If there has been a precedence set, I follow that precedence, ask questions later.--Ne0 (talk) 16:41, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please go through the talk page of this article & comment your opinion on 'battery operated rickshaw driver's protest'

Summary of it is as below.

Topic- Which of the two versions be preferred to go into the protest section of 'Article'

Option A -

ADD - The AAP has supported various regulatory complaints raised by rickshaw operators in Delhi.

KEEP - the rest of the 'protest' section as it is.

Option B -

ADD - On 16 September 2013, Aam Aadmi Party supported e-rickshaw driver's demand in Delhi that there should be a policy on battery operated rickshaws in the capital city to stop their exploitation by Delhi Transport Department. Party also said that a subsidy should be given to manual rickshaw drivers who want to purchase e-rickshaws. Earlier in June 2013, the party had supported agitations of rickshaw drivers against ban on advertisements on auto rickshaws alleging that the ban is imposed because most rickshaw drivers supported Aam Aadmi party & carried their banners.

remove - On 10 June 2013, Kejriwal supported the agitation of Delhi auto rickshaw drivers, who were protesting the Delhi government's ban on advertisements on auto rickshaws. Kejriwal claimed that, auto rickshaw drivers supported his party and they carried AAP's advertisements on their auto rickshaws and this is the reason for Delhi Government's ban and he challenged that volunteers of AAP will put 10,000 advertisements on auto rickshaws as a protest.

There is no conflict over the validity of citations.--ratastro (talk) 05:49, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Odroid 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:

• ! Odroid (2009

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:35, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I removed links from the see also section because according to the MoS "As a general rule, the 'See also' section should not repeat links that appear in the article's body or its navigation boxes". Why should that rule be broken in this case? - Shiftchange (talk) 08:02, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

hmmm... I think by navigation boxes it means the boxes on the side, not the bottom. I have seen lots of articles repeat links from the bottom Templates. --Ne0 (talk) 08:21, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It means both. Many article incorrectly list excess entries in the See also section. However we should always follow the Manual of Style unless there is a good and specific reason not to. - Shiftchange (talk) 08:51, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see --Ne0 (talk) 09:20, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Odroid, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Android and Ubuntu (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) 11:40, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited MicroXwin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Android. 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, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Microsoft Spyware 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/Microsoft Spyware 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. RJaguar3 | u | t 01:53, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Top OS in Aug 2015 by Country.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. RJaguar3 | u | t 15:46, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Microsoft Spyware 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/Microsoft Spyware (2nd nomination) 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. RJaguar3 | u | t 17:34, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

The article that was at Microsoft Spyware is now located as a draft at Draft:Microsoft privacy controversies for you to continue to work on. Thanks, RJaguar3 | u | t 12:05, 31 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) 13:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Authoritative females. Since you had some involvement with the Authoritative females redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so.  ‑ Iridescent 22:49, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for using the collections feature in Wikipedia beta! Due to technical and moderation issues, we will be turning off this experimental feature. Your collections will be available for viewing and export until March 1st. If you would like to save your collection as links on a special Wikipedia page, please fill out the following form. If you are interested in giving your feedback about Wikipedia Collections please do so here.

Thanks,

Jon Katz
Product manager, Wikimedia Foundation
Jkatz (WMF) (talk) 23:54, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I created an essay regarding the environmental impact of the Wikimedia movement on Meta and I am now looking for ideas regarding the project. I saw that you're interested in sustainability, so I'd love to hear your comments and maybe even have your support! Thanks, --Gnom (talk) 21:59, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your material stays off the page until the issue is resolved. If you want to engage in discussion, please play by Wikipedia's rules. See WP:BRD for more information. Serendi^podous 07:03, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are at 3RR now. Please use the talk page. I don't see you there at all yet. Please do not revert again. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:12, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Illuminati Bankers. Since you had some involvement with the Illuminati Bankers redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. The Traditionalist (talk) 01:22, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use talk pages for inappropriate discussions, as you did at Talk:New World Order (conspiracy theory). 8 years of warnings and you are still doing this? Doug Weller talk 13:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Taken right from the page you linked:

The purpose of an article's talk page (accessible via the talk or discussion tab) is to provide space for editors to discuss changes to its associated article or project page.

--Ne0 (talk) 04:39, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit didn't mention the article but your own theory.. Now of course you've started a subpage pushing fringe. Doug Weller talk 15:03, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When adding links to material on external sites, please ensure that the external site is not violating the creator's copyright. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website's operator has created or licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as YouTube or Sci-Hub, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates its creator's copyright. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. I deleted your link to a C-Span video, we can only use the official C-Span site. Doug Weller talk 20:29, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Under C-SPAN's copyright policy a license is generally not required to post a recording of C-SPAN's video coverage of federal government events online for non-commercial purposes so long as C-SPAN is attributed as the source of the video. Keeping a C-SPAN logo on the screen during the non-commercial use constitutes sufficient attribution under this policy. --Ne0 (talk) 21:17, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and that video is not coverage of a US Federal government events, and is thus a copyvio link. Doug Weller talk 09:31, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Global Anti-Semitism Review Act of 2004 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/Global Anti-Semitism Review Act of 2004 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. MSJapan (talk) 20:58, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to understand our policy on this, so it's a bit hard to understand why you would add, for instance, clearly copyvio links to MSNBC. Consider this your last warning. Doug Weller talk 13:08, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You added "atheists and Naxals" despite them not being mentioned in the source. Please don't do this again. Doug Weller talk 10:43, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That was obviously you. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for the logged out bit, but continue to add material not in the source and you are likely to be blocked. Doug Weller talk 05:31, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for IP sockpuppetry, evidently in an attempt to evade scrutiny in an edit war. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:22, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

...Tired of the big guy is always right policy of Wikipedia. Most of the existing articles at Wikipedia are already censored and monitored by some authority. New articles are deleted with biased opinions. So, what does it matter whether this block is appealed ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.145.197.12 (talk) 12:00, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ne0Freedom. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

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

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Climate change, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 12:43, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ne0Freedom. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Microsoft privacy controversies".

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

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. 1989 (talk) 23:07, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Boston Gazette, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thomas Hutchinson. 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) 10:05, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Hutchinson Letters Affair into Boston Gazette. 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, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. 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) 22:05, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fiber optics doesn't use silicon as an optical medium. The articles you moved to Category:Silicon Photonics didn't belong there, except for Silicon photonics itself. I removed the articles that didn't belong, and then emptied the category as it doesn't appear to be viable. It will be deleted eventually.--Srleffler (talk) 01:05, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Then you do NOT know the 1st thing about Fiber optics !!! Do read up on Optical fiber and Silicon dioxide, to increase your knowledge :) --Ne0 (talk) 05:47, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that might be where you were confused. Silica (silicon dioxide) is not silicon. Silicon photonics uses silicon as a medium, not silicon dioxide.--Srleffler (talk) 01:10, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

moving discussion to Talk:Silicon_photonics#Fiber_Optics_.26_Silicon_photonics --Ne0 (talk) 04:59, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You probably got confused as it said "non-volatile memory" instead of "non-volatile storage". But, those two terms are used synonymously nowadays as you can see on non-volatile memory. Regardless of that, I've changed the wording to non-volatile storage on HDD article, and removed the category altogether for the lack of a better one. Though, what you did at Non-volatile memory makes no sense to me as the paragraph in question explicitly states hard disk can be categorized as Non-volatile data storage; I don't know what exactly made you say "mechanical memory is NOT NVM", because by saying is NOT NVM you apparently are suggesting mechanical storage devices like HDDs are volatile, which is inaccurate of course (gotta look out for those double negatives). -- ChamithN (talk) 11:33, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hard disk is NOT memory chip, Hard disk is a disk. Hard drive can be traditionally categorized as mechanical memory, or in modern words Mechanical storage. Mechanical storage/memory is NEVER VOLATILE. Non-Volatile Memory refers to Memory Chips that can store info without continuous power, in contrast to Volatile memory chips where data vanishes along with the power. It is also called flash memory or flash storage. The most extensive list of Non-Volatile Memory/Storage, that I found so-far is, http://www.crifan.com/___flash_memory_nand_eeprom_nvram_and_others_zt/

From your 1st source :"Non-Volatile Memory (NVM) is an emerging storage class technology which ... is non-volatile (persistent) like hard disks". Meaning Non-Volatile Memory (NVM) is a newer non-volatile storage class than hard disks(Non-Volatile Memory (NVM) is NOT hard disks or vice-versa).

From your 2nd source: "Non-volatile memory eradicates the need for relatively slow types of secondary storage systems, including hard disks. "--Ne0 (talk) 05:37, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Eh, I don't think crifan could be consider a reliable source. Anyhow, nobody said hard disk is "a memory chip". Sure, it's not, it's only a memory type. Hard Disk is not volatile, and I'm well aware of what Non-volatile means. What I disagree with is your claim "Non-Volatile Memory refers to Memory Chips". Sure, it does refer to memory chips, but not only memory chips. Like I said, Non-volatile memory and non-volatile storage are used interchangeably; for example, as you can see in this: hard disk is described as a NVS in the prose while it's described under NVM in the sidebar. To add, Patterson also calls hard disk "a form of non-volatile secondary memory" in the same sidebar. And, as you've probably noticed non-volatile storage redirects to non-volatile storage.

And also, regarding this: nowhere in the source it says that "Non-Volatile Memory (NVM) is a newer non-volatile storage class than hard disks". I'm gonna say that's purely a synthesis from your part. I think by "it" the source meant the abstract "NVM as primary storage for DBMS". Anyways, what I'm trying to say is that non-volatile memory and non-volatile storage are both used to describe non-volatile memory types, hence, both described by the same article. Hard disk was described as a Non-volatile data storage on Non-volatile memory. Regardless the aforementioned, your justification "Mechanical memory isn't NVM" is not actually valid as the prose never said HDD is NVM, it only said that HDD can be categorized under Non-volatile storage devices. So, if you really want to push your opinion Non-volatile memory and Non-volatile storage are two different things, what you should be doing is requesting a move to separate out the content to two articles, not outright delete the content. -- ChamithN (talk) 07:02, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding my 2nd citation: the same article claims non-volatile memory is also referred to as non-volatile storage. And in another article of theirs, hard disks are mentioned among the non-volatile storage devices. So, what they are actually saying is that "non-volatile memory eradicates the need of non-volatile storage devices like hard disks, but non-volatile memory is the same as non-volatile storage". That is definitely contradictory. Looks like it's not just the two of us. -- ChamithN (talk) 06:55, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What's up with this one? "Undid revision by ChamithN, Hard disks are NOT NVM"? Well, can't you see it said non-volatile storage, not non-volatile memory? Are you now even disagreeing that it should be called non-volatile storage? I changed the wording specifically because I thought you had a problem with calling hard disk NVM instead of NVS. -- ChamithN (talk) 07:15, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

After skimming through the page history I found that you replaced "HDDs are a type of non-volatile storage, retaining stored data even when powered off" (which called HDDs a type of NVS, not NVM) with "HDDs are a type of non-volatile storage, known as disk storage" with the edit summary "Undid revision by ChamithN, Hard disks are NOT NVM", which is rather confusing. But, given that we both agree on calling HDDs NVS (I think), now it's a matter of preference. I personally prefer explaining what non-volatile storage is in the lead, instead of mentioning to what category of NVS it falls into. Considering that it's the first occurrence of "NVS" in the article, it's better to ease the burden on a general reader of visiting another article. -- ChamithN (talk) 07:52, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

added a note about the distinctions between NVM & NVS. --Ne0 (talk) 05:08, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Did not see the changes you made up until now. Now, that's much better. Thank you. -- ChamithN (talk) 09:15, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Militant capitalists requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

As stated below, this a POV title and has no sources to back it up - it seems to be WP:OR

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Steve Quinn (talk) 05:35, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Militant capitalists. Since you had some involvement with the Militant capitalists redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. ~ GB fan 10:03, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ne0Freedom. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

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

Hello, Ne0Freedom. You are invited to join WikiProject Food and drink, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of food, drink and cuisine topics. Please check out the project, and if interested feel free to join by adding your name to the member list. You can also sign up to receive project newsletters and notifications at the notifications list, even if you choose not to join. North America1000 07:11, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RSN. The current text is unambiguously inappropriate. You proved nothing, incidentally. Guy (Help!) 16:27, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Guy (Help!) 16:40, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Food irradiation. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. --Jayron32 16:51, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing—Dahi (curd)—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Phonet (talk) 23:11, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 14:08, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed your additions on the 21:9 page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21:9_aspect_ratio I don't think that resolutions should be in that table. This page is about the aspect ratio, and not so much about the resolutions that implement it. There is a section below, that lists the relevant resolutions in the industry standard CTA-861. The resolutions you added, however, are mostly non-standard (such as manufacturer specific display panel resolutions), have no references, and add a lot of confusing data to the table (e.g. there are now three rows for different resolution "flavors" of 21:9).

I don't want to just remove your new columns without talking about this. Please let me know what your thoughts are about this.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scarabaeus23 (talk • contribs) 00:12, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thanks for taking the time to discuss. I think giving resolutions in the same table as aspect ratio helps people get an idea about the size. I can move the "21:9" data down to 'Consumer Devices' section if you like. Also, we now have 32:9 (3.555:1) and 32:10 (3.2:1) monitors, as well as 3.6:1 anamorphic video format (36:10); I have temporarily added them as hidden text. --Ne0 (talk) 05:55, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you. Yes, moving that data elsewhere would be great! Maybe a new section (or even page) on ultra-wide computer monitors. Because this 21:9 page is primarily about cinematic content on consumer televisions, and not so much about extra wide desktops on IT displays.

So, restore the Table at the top to what is was (Format and Aspect Ratio columns only, and showing that "21:9" sits comfortably inbetween the classical and modern cinematic wide screen ratios), then add a new section listing computer monitors and their resolutions and aspect ratios. Thanks. Christian Wolff (talk) 13:59, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I had some time and started on the move. Please review, and modify if necessary. Thank you. Christian Wolff (talk) 14:47, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

creating Talk:21:9 aspect ratio/Ultrawide formats, your input would be appreciated.--Ne0 (talk) 11:00, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:StatCounter Monthly Windows map.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 06:01, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on MicroXwin, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Ahunt (talk) 19:15, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Ultrawide formats, Ne0Freedom!

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

Could you please provide a sourced summary statement for the lede? (I'm not even sure my current condensed version is correct) The previous content would be fine if it was a) sourced and b) present in the article body (as the lede is supposed to merely summarize). Cheers!

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

Learn more about page curation.

Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:33, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ne0Freedom. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

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

Hello. I just noticed that you reverted my edit regarding the website of the Pixel Qi Corporation. By inserting Tripuso's website as a replacement, that creates a strong implication that Pixel Qi Corporation is now doing business as Tripuso (or has been bought out by Tripuso). This is false, since Pixel Qi Corporation has simply ceased to exist.

While Tripuso may have rights to manufacture the Pixel Qi technology, Tripuso's website is not the new website of the now-defunct Pixel Qi Corporation. Since the article is about the corporation, and not about its technology, I feel adding Tripuso's website to the infobox misrepresents the situation. Tripuso and Pixel Qi Corporation are not interchangeable nor contiguous in any way.

the distinction between Pixel Qi and Tripsuo is already given in the article: "By 2015, PixelQi's team and offices were unreachable, and the company is presumed defunct. The intellectual property is now owned by the original investor of Pixel Qi, while the right to manufacture Pixel Qi technology contractually rests with Tripuso Display Solutions." --Ne0 (talk) 09:46, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ne0Freedom: You are invited to vote on Pineapple juice.Catfurball (talk) 18:54, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Doug Weller. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Vaccine hesitancy‎ that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Your edit summary called an editor's edit vandalism. That's a personal attack and not acceptable, particularly for someone who's been around quite a while. Doug Weller talk 17:00, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in pseudoscience and fringe science. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 17:00, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 17:02, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:21, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Tea. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. You didn't provide a source for your edit. It's disputable without one. Do not edit war, WP:WAR. Zefr (talk) 05:19, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Cyber Anakin § A mountain out of molehill? and Talk:Cyber Anakin#Starting_over. 129.205.183.52 (talk) 15:40, 3 October 2022 (UTC) 189.233.56.185 (talk) 18:38, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Wiki table has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 18 § Wiki table until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 10:38, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ne0Freedom

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username MPGuy2824 and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've asked for a discussion about the redirect Alpha Omega Mu, created by you. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 20 § Alpha Omega Mu.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 15:37, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]