User talk:Super Nintendo Chalmers

Edited as IP since around 2005. Finally registered in 2013.

/Sandbox

Just to let you know, I created a new section at the Rangers F.C. Talk page for your proposal about the lead section. It was relatively unrelated to the section you posted under and I thought it would generate more discussion in its own section. Cheers for helping improve the article, VanguardScot 22:24, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Please see File talk:Football4.png.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 00:30, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Super Nintendo Chalmers,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Winter Olympics (disambiguation) should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winter Olympics (disambiguation) .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Zzyzx11 (talk) 17:26, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

• On the Goal difference page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:33, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do not delete encylopedic information. If you think it is in the wrong place, move it. I have moved the European record to Progression of association football caps European record. jnestorius^(talk) 13:14, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Add Rhodes!!!!!!!!Roberto73c (talk) 14:00, 20 April 2015 (UTC) Put in this page 2015 Mediterranean Sea migrant shipwreck is a principal page!!! Add new recent shipwreck........only one page.Roberto73c (talk) 14:07, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Considers that even today there are dramas in place, I encourage you to not put the month before the title of the article. one page for all the dramatic events. This is a serious humanitarian emergency.Roberto73c (talk) 14:16, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Patrol this article, I have no time now to add informations, thanks for your contributions.Roberto73c (talk) 14:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the timely and well-referenced new article List of MPs who stood down at the United Kingdom general election, 2015. Must have taken you ages to collect all those references. Dai Pritchard (talk) 10:02, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I had to revert - Look at Alakzi's edit and you'll see why, Thanks.... –Davey2010^Talk 15:17, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Since you obviously have an interest in the subject matter (i.e., football stadia) and a feel for what's involved, perhaps you would care to help me out in revamping this article. IMHO, by previously stating (meaning previously to my starting my edits there and rewriting the lead-in text) that temporary seating was not to be included in the stated capacities of stadia, the article pretty well made itself redundant and out-of-date in most reader's minds before they ever started to read any further. Because most modern stadia worth their salt employ some form of movable and/or retractable seating, so such an article must be able to embrace and deftly cope with these modern concepts, and not simply brush them under the carpet and ignore them as if they were irrelevant, or didn't even exist, with an up-front caveat that classified reconfigurable seating as being merely "temporary" and thus not pertinent. Multiple uses of stadia can no longer be ignored in such an out-of-sight-out-of-mind manner.

Not that such a caveat has stopped folk over the years from entering the largest capacity numbers regardless for certain of the multi-use / multi-sized stadia. But since there is currently no means of indicating in that article (or at least there wasn't before my latest round of editing) what a stadium's stated capacity number represents, the fact that some of the stated capacities include reconfigurable seating in them while others don't now merely serves to beg the question. Does the XYZ Stadium entry I'm looking at support some sort of reconfigurable (= movable or retractable) option, and if so, is it reflected in the 70,512 capacity figure I've just read? To my mind, without the pertinent context for what the capacity number actually represents also being clearly defined, the stated number is rendered somewhat meaningless. It's analogous to stating how long a piece of string is. Cue Spinal Tap: this stadium goes to 11,000 ... :(

It's one thing to compare apples to apples and produce a sorted list of apples ordered on size, which is what this list purports to similarly do for European stadia (with a few thrown in from Russia, Israel, Turkey and Armenia for good measure - God bless Henry VIII). But it is another thing entirely to compare apples to oranges and then use the results to produce a sorted list of mixed fruit ordered on criteria that only apply to apples. Which is really what this list actually does (even if unintentionally) - with the multi-sport and safe standing venues being the metaphorical oranges. Need I point out that producing a sorted list of anything based on some key piece of data (in this case, capacity), when it is totally unclear to the reader what that key piece of data actually represents, is a totally meaningless and fruitless waste of time - nothing more than an exercise in fruitility! (puns very much intended, I suppose).

Anyway, that's the issue I was trying to solve with my recent editing efforts, but I fear that once again I might have bitten off more than I can chew. I've certainly bitten off more than I WANT to chew, and just like with my edits on the list of English football stadia, I'm now beginning to wish I had never started! Maybe with more than one brain working on the problem the exercise I have begun might be more easily completed. IMO it's a problem that still needs to be solved whether it is me or anyone else that solves it, and it is not confined to just this particular list. It applies to all such lists of large sporting venues, including the list of English football stadia - and it is especially pertinent if the current ground roots pressure to introduce safe standing into English football reaches the same point as it already has in Scottish football (which seems very likely).

Regardless of how the safe standing issue politically pans out, WHU's move to the Olympic Stadium in 2016 will introduces the first multi-use stadium into the Premier League, thus making the English Wikipedia's current inability to properly handle movable seating alternatives in such "ordered on capacity" situations very apparent to many more Wikipedia users than it currently is today. So if you would do me the courtesy of taking a gander at the said article and letting me know your thoughts I would very much appreciate it. Thanks. 66.16.144.18 (talk) 06:04, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Will have a look at this User:66.16.144.18, though may be on a timescale of a few days to a week! --Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 10:49, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. It is because I have my own restrictions on available time that I am seeking some help. But this is a two stage process IMO. First, I just want your feedback and opinion - no editing effort necessary. Obviously you'll have to spend some time reading prior edits and delving around a bit, etc. Mostly, I'm looking for someone to bounce some ideas off and have them say, "Yeah, I agree that needs fixing / enhancing" or "No way, I wouldn't touch that with a bargepole; you'll just get everybody bent out of shape if you try and do that." That sort of thing.

There is more wrong with the table than just its prior inability to cope with reconfigurable seating. Here is a quick list of issues (off the top of my head) for you to consider when you do put some time in - I might add to it later if I think of any others ...

• The first and main issue is, of course, the moveable / retractable seating one. I think I have that theoretically solved between my updates to the lead-in text and the 3 main example stadia I chose to do as a template for others to copy - (1) Dortmund's Signal Iduna Park (single sport use, retractable seating only); (2) Stade de France (multi-sport use, moveable seating only); and (3) Schalke's Veltins-Arena (multi-sport use, multiple forms of retractable seating plus movable seating). I think that covers all the options. To my mind all stadia will fall into one of those 3 categories or the default fourth one - (4) most traditional stadia (single sport use, fixed seating only - plus fixed standing outside the top 2 tiers in English football). But it is that sort of assumption I want you to try and throw rocks at. I don't want to get 75% of the way through updating the table to suddenly discover that there are really five, or even six options, and that a total rethink is required - not to mention edit reversions!
• Things to consider about what I've done already ...

• (a) Is my approach too complicated; am I expecting too much from other editors to create the sort of notes that I have done?
• (b) Is my terminology confusing? Some forms of "retractable seating" move (e.g., fold-away seats) while most forms of what I'm calling "movable seating" retract in some way (e.g., the bottom tier of seats at the Stade de France retracts under the second tier to reveal the running track). Can you think of better, clearer terminology?
• (c) To my mind, "moveable seating" is deployed over some part of the arena's largest playing area to bring the spectators closer to the action of one of the supported multi-sports. When deployed, it increases capacity because it simply adds more seats to the existing base of fixed seats in the stands. In contrast, "retractable seating" plays around with the numbers of spectators that can be squeezed into traditional stand space. When deployed, it normally decreases capacity because it assigns available standing space to less dense seating. Or am I missing something? That's something else I would like you to think about and try and find fault with.

• Other problems with the table ...

• (d) There needs to be an upfront definition (i.e., in the lead text before the table) of which competitions, IF ANY, are worthy of being added to the "Tenant" column. In fact, there is the problem right there. "Tenant" is NOT the same as "Venue" or "Event"! That column was only ever intended by the article's original author(s) to contain the names of the various sport teams that called that stadium their home ground. In the case of multi-sport and ground share stadia that list could run to 4 or 5 names. But somebody along the way probably entered something along the lines of "1996 Olympics team" as the home athletics team based in a national athletics stadium and then natural tribal football competition kicked in. Many editors edit in a monkey-see, monkey-do fashion and just copy other things they see have been done without even thinking whether what they are copying and propagating makes any sense - such as adding competition events and venues in a column labeled "Tenant".

So rather than see that entry as a home team designation some later editor saw it as an event designation ... and well, if the athletics stadia are going to boast about Olympics events staged there, then I should add that a FIFA World Cup was staged at the stadium I'm updating. Then someone else took it to the next level ... if we are going to mention FIFA World Cups we should also mention FIFA Confederation Cups ... and why stop at FIFA international events, surely UEFA Euros are pretty major too ... and then UEFA CL and EL cup finals started to be added ... and then domestic cup finals (I just removed "venue for the finals of the KNVB Beker" from the entry for the De Kuip stadium after it had triggered the same instinct in me and I was about to update Wembley with a list of all the domestic rugby league, rugby union and soccer cup finals it normally hosts on an annual basis, which on top of past Olympics, rugby union, rugby league and soccer WCs, Euros, Tri-Nations, Five/Six Nations, Champions League and UEFA Cup finals, etc. tournaments would have made it nearly a 10-line entry!) and even events yet to be staged in the future such as the 2015 Rugby World Cup, 2017 Confederations Cup and 2018 World Cup in Russia.

• (e) So that free-form "Tenant" field now contains all sorts of info. that has absolutely nothing to do with the current stadium "tenants". I have just complicated this situation a whole lot more by using that same column to hold my movable / retractable seating designation, but at least that info. is pertinent to defining the stadium's true capacity so that its various components can be better understood, but more importantly, so that its entry can be correctly sorted in the table list. All that event/venue info. is more about chauvinistic one-upmanship between the various sporting interests / national backgrounds of the editors. It's all very interesting stuff but it really all belongs in a separate article in a much more codified / less busy format. So there's something else for you to consider and give me your feedback on.
• (f) The table is not meant to be sport- nor nationality-specific ... it is merely meant to be a list of the largest European stadia ordered on capacity, regardless of what goes on there. With the 25,000 threshold cut-off it tends to eliminate certain pretty popular spectator sports such as tennis (Wimbledon's Centre Court is ~15,000, I believe, and that must be one of the biggest tennis stadia in the world). That's not a bias based on sport, it's just a consequence of how much bigger the venues of all the other sports represented in the listed stadia are compared to tennis. Nevertheless, despite this natural bias in its favour, the table still appears to have been taken over by soccer interests. Most of the event/venue info. entered is soccer related (rather than rugby, cricket or athletics oriented), and the final "Category" column is purely soccer specific. If it were kept as a truly multi-sport embracing table then we might need a "Category" column for each sport represented. And imagine what would happen to the table if people with cricket, hurling and camogie interests started listing all the important events of their sport in the "Tenant" column of the relevant stadia! So there is a strong argument for creating two versions of this article - one for purely soccer, and one for everything else. That's something else for you to ponder before getting back to me.

P.S. Do you have any idea why my IP moniker shows up red in your post? And, when you reply here, could you please ping me in your response so that I'm notified and don't have to keep checking back, Thanks. 66.16.144.18 (talk) 02:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

• On the Tour de France page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have opened a review of the article, and put it on hold for a week to allow time for the referencing to be improved, as indicated on the review page. I'll leave reviewing the text until that is sorted out. Happy to expand on any point if wanted. Tim riley talk 15:28, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I appreciate your work on the Barrow-in-Furness article and nominating it towards 'Good Article' status, however the changes made to the opening paragraphs were extreme and disorganised. Having contributed significantly to the article since 2006 I was surprised to find the opening paragraphs virtually unrecognisable, besides from the fact they had copied and pasted sentences from elsewhere in the article that I myself wrote. I do not believe such detailed history or nicknames are relevant in an opening paragraph when they are included within the section immediately following. If you feel the need to make such drastic changes again I would like to be informed. Thank you Stevvvv4444 (talk) 21:41, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article Barrow-in-Furness you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Barrow-in-Furness for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 22:21, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed that you have separated articles for WSL 1 and WSL 2. You made a redirect to FA WSL1 on the FA WSL1 page but actually FA WSL 1 is the official name. Should we delete the FA WSL1 page and the redirect, and rename the FA WSL1 page? Please join the discussion here. Thanks a lot! User:Immback (talk) 09:04, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

• On the London mayoral election, 2016 page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You need to put a notice of the afd discussion on all the affected articles. I don't yet see one on most of the league articles affected. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 09:23, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks J, you're correct that I missed two of them. --Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 10:24, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Peter Whittle 2015.jpg, which you've attributed to United Kingdom Independence Party. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [email protected], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [email protected].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 19:14, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, there is currently a discussion that might be of interest to you at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Team positions in team tables, since you have been updating such articles.

Basically it is if we should display teams on same position if they have the same points and tiebreakers, during the tournament and before. For example

Alternative 1: 1) CHI 2) COL; 3) ECU, 4) URU, 5) PAR; 6) VEN; 7) ARG, 8) BOL; 9) BRA; 10) PER. Alternative 2: 1) CHI 1) COL; 1) ECU, 1) URU, 5) PAR; 6) VEN; 7) ARG, 7) BOL; 7) BRA; 7) PER.

The exampel is for Template:2018 FIFA World Cup qualification – CONMEBOL table where 4 of the teams won 2-0 and they have exact same tiebreaker.

So should they all be listed at same position and should we list all teams at same position before any match is played? Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Team positions in team tables. Qed237 (talk) 13:07, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Super Nintendo Chalmers. Some time ago, a file you uploaded — File:Peter Whittle 2015.jpg — was tagged with {{OTRS pending}}, indicating that you (or perhaps the copyright holder if you did not create this image) submitted a statement of permission to [email protected]. Though there is often a backlog processing messages received at this address, we should have received your message by now.

• If you have not submitted (or forwarded) a statement of permission, please send it immediately to [email protected] and let us know at the OTRS noticeboard that you have done so.

• If you have already sent this message, it is possible that there was a problem receiving it. Please re-send it to [email protected] and let us know at the OTRS noticeboard that you have done so.

If we don't hear from you within one week, the file will be deleted. If we can help you, please feel free to ask at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 14:33, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Thank you, keep happy editing! 333-blue 12:07, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well thank you very much for taking the time to do this @333-blue:! Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 09:31, 25 November 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) 16:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

• On the Football page, your edit caused an empty citation error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Would appreciated it if you request closure for List of state leaders RfC at a time of your choosing. Thank you. Spirit Ethanol (talk) 18:58, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would just like to inform you that the above user did not attempt to form a local consensus before starting the Rfc. Section 1 of WP:RFC states that "editors are normally expected to make a reasonable attempt to working out their disputes before seeking help from others", something that SE did not do & hence jumping the gun.--Neve–selbert 20:41, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	For efforts made at finding a compromise solution in a delicate matter with rigid intransigent editors. Spirit Ethanol (talk) 15:14, 18 February 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 Israel and Palestine, 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 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 20:15, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the changes made it is much clearer. If you think it is relevant to have a dedicated sub section for accessibility, you can find intel on www.london-stadium.com

I agree for the stadium name, unfortunately we cannot use the word Olympic without paying fees to the IOC. Anyway the stadium should have a new name with a naming rights partner to be selected. Do you have recommendations on how to manage this: should we create a separate page like New Wembley did, or should we change the name of the stadium in the header?

Re. the name of the stadium operator 1) the actual operator is London Stadium 185 ltd a fully owned subsidiary of VINCI Concessions. Could we amend the name accordingly? http://www.vinci-concessions.com/en/what-we-do/stadiums/ 2) Re. adding a link like it is the case for West Ham, could we use http://www.vinci-concessions.com/en/what-we-do/stadiums/

Thank you Best Etienne EtienneSoumoy (talk) 07:38, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure contesting the CSD is the right procedure, but the Kuwait article should be moved to IOA since they are competing as such due to the suspension of the NOC. Smartyllama (talk) 23:25, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, just read the full notice. Smartyllama (talk) 23:27, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I promised not to comment on it again, but yet another debate has been closed as delete, so you may want to add that for further weight. Cheers, Number 57 19:24, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message and advice. Really helpful. I'm very conscious of trying to adhere to the CIPR's advice about making contributions to Wikipedia and respecting community rules. I think both my contributions so far have done that although I was really torn on the second one. Following your advice I'll use the talk section next time for something that length. Thanks once again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Ben Hall (talk • contribs) 15:51, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, just thought I'd let you know I've edited a note in Leicester City's European record. I've tried to strengthen it descriptively but as you mentioned previously, this time I've tried to not make it as wordy. However, if my edit is still not quite right, feel free to change it again. I've also moved the note beneath the table. Thanks. A99 Wiki (talk) 16:52, 3 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by A99 Wiki (talk • contribs) [reply]

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

• On the List of athletes who competed in both the Summer and Winter Olympic games page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Colin Campbell (Olympian), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Middle-distance. 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, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Super Nintendo Chalmers. 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]

Template:Infobox Olympics Refugees has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 17:17, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for making the table look better.--Navops47 (talk) 15:59, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article London mayoral election, 2016 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 19:41, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Super Nintendo Chalmers. You have new messages at Talk:2016 London mayoral election/GA1.
Message added 23:18, 30 December 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

There are some serious copyright violations in this article, but its "bones" seem generally good. It would be great if it could be improved to GA-status. Shearonink (talk) 23:18, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On 4 January Tahc redirected List of state leaders in 2016 and List of state leaders in 2017 to List of state leaders in the 21st century without any reason. Neither I, nor you, nor other contributors of these articles expressed the accord to these action which I consider abusive. Please sustain me in the action for annulment of this action,express your protest to TAHC and ask the reversion of redirections. Thank you Bogdan Uleia (talk)

Hello, Super Nintendo Chalmers. You have new messages at Talk:2016 London mayoral election/GA1.
Message added 04:17, 11 January 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks for cleaning up the previous issues. I've done some further reviewing. Shearonink (talk) 04:17, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please please begin a WP:Requests for comment regarding Merge into List of state leaders in the 21st century? tahc ^chat 17:59, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Super Nintendo Chalmers. You have new messages at Talk:2016 London mayoral election/GA1.
Message added 14:56, 24 January 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Everything else looks fine except the linking within the Opinion polls tables (Section 8). Shearonink (talk) 14:56, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

	Congratulations, it's a...
	...Wikipedia Good Article!! Shearonink (talk) 15:08, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article London mayoral election, 2016 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:London mayoral election, 2016 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 15:21, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	For your contribution to Bids for the 2024 and 2028 Summer Olympics. Mr RD 16:51, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Super Nintendo Chalmers. 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]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Payphone, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hull (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:23, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Super Nintendo Chalmers. 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]

 You are invited to join the discussion at WT:FOOTY#Bhutan national football team. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:35, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Super Nintendo Chalmers. I've added a link to this FOOTY discussion as a courtesy because you were one of the participants in Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 66#Application of WP:NFC#UUI #17. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:36, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've skipped edit summaries too and my personal favorite for use is "re" Can't please everyone! Hell in a Bucket (talk) 20:37, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2019–20 FA Cup qualifying rounds, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page EFL (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 19:58, 10 July 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) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Britpop, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Travis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:43, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020–21 National League, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page EFL (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:24, 25 June 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) 02:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for identifying the source of the material in your edit.

This type of edit does get picked up by Copy Patrol and a good edit summary helps to make sure we don't accidentally revert it. However, for future use, would you note the best practices wording as outlined at Wikipedia:Copying_within_Wikipedia? In particular, adding the phrase "see that page's history for attribution" helps ensure that proper attribution is preserved.

I've noticed that this guideline is not very well known, even among editors with tens of thousands of edits, so it isn't surprising that I point this out to some veteran editors, but there are some t's that you need to be crossed.S Philbrick(Talk) 13:20, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I have pinged you to join a discussion about your redirect please go there and allow a concensus to be reached on your redirect of County Durham district article before it is either chosen to be kept or redirected...regards RailwayJG (talk) 23:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it is misleading to have a bullet entry for Great Britain as a "FIFA-unaffiliated state" together with Micronesia, Monaco, etc. The situation is not quite the same since Great Britain is represented by the teams of its constituent countries. In a strict sense you're correct that the UK as a state is not affiliated to FIFA, but the section as you left it can confuse people unfamiliar with the subject matter. That's why I made the proposed change. I believe my way is way clearer and easier for the unitiated to understand. Ladril (talk) 17:21, 29 September 2021 (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) 00:37, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of career achievements by Mark Cavendish, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sean Kelly.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 18 March 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) 01:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Cheviot, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Town Moor.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article World Football Elo Ratings, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Football Elo Ratings (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]