User talk:Volvlogia

Me

Hello, I'm Dcirovic. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Carl Grimes— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Dcirovic (talk) 18:02, 16 April 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 all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, 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.

Dervorguilla (talk) 06:14, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bofa? Maxdadax (talk) 14:07, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am the original author. Your edits /comment were not helpful. Camimack (talk) 16:51, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. There is no consensus for that tag, nor actionable justification for it. If you continue without talk page discussion ANI will be notified. -- GreenC 17:22, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Uncle Milty. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Jared Fogle have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. | Uncle Milty | talk | 16:03, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alonso Duralde, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages East Point and Georgia. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:57, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Volvlogia. 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]

Hello, I'm North Shoreman. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Pig War (1859) have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 02:28, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People who were shot by a U.S. Vice President, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Lwarrenwiki (talk) 20:51, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Owen's Scrapbook requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles 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. Pmedema (talk) 23:40, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:OwensScrapbook.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:56, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You said you created this as a joke--I deleted it as a pretty serious violation of WP:BLP. You can't go around calling someone's ----- a ------ -------- based on a YouTube video. Drmies (talk) 01:59, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I, Jamesjpk (talk), would like to invite you to join WikiProject YouTube! We're working on: Writing, cleaning up, and expanding articles about YouTube, in particular, these articles Putting {{WikiProject YouTube}} on the talk pages of articles involving YouTube, and assessing articles with the template. This helps to categorize articles! Sourcing BLP's affiliated with YouTube Updating the project page, and spreading word about the project and more! It seems you might be interested, so please stop by! Thank you. You were given this message because of your involvement in the MatPat Wikipedia Article (talk page).

I believe you were the first editor of James C. Mahan to refer to Donald Trump as the "presumptive nominee". I invite you to add any comment you may have to a discussion at Talk:Attempted assassination of Donald Trump#Presumptive nominee. —Anomalocaris (talk) 15:48, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on The Weekly Planet requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. PamD 07:29, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your recent edit to Hell, Michigan appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person or organization added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. John from Idegon (talk) 23:29, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited David Blumenthal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York (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) 11:10, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article Tyler O'Day has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability, no references to reliable sources that demonstrate notability, search does not reveal anything but brief mentions.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 00:50, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Tyler O'Day requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. TheWarOfArt (talk) 02:28, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Ianic Roy Richard requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. power~enwiki (π, ν) 22:23, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Although I'm not the person who deleted the article, I responded on the talk page to your comment on why it shouldn't be deleted. Just in case you didn't actually see it, I wanted to repost it here for context:

Being a "major player" on Medium is not a Wikipedia notability criterion in and of itself, and all of this article's sources are to his own content. A person gets a Wikipedia article by being the subject of reliable source coverage written by other people, not by being the author of his own sources.

In other words, to make a person notable enough for a Wikipedia article, it is not enough to use his own self-published sources to demonstrate that he exists. You need to use reliable sources that are independent of him to prove that media are paying attention to his accomplishments. Hope that clarifies things a bit. Bearcat (talk) 17:31, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that clarifies things for me. --Volvlogia (talk) 02:44, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Chuggaaconroy.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Train2104 (t • c) 16:54, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Jd22292. I noticed that you removed topically-relevant content from Yooka-Laylee. However, Wikipedia is not censored to remove content that might be considered objectionable. Please do not remove or censor information that directly relates to the subject of the article. If the content in question involves images, you have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide images that you may find offensive. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk • contribs) 00:40, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article John J. O'Brien (banker) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't meet WP:GNG or any SNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. power~enwiki (π, ν) 21:37, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Volvlogia. 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]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kyle Yunaska 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/Kyle Yunaska 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. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 09:00, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John R. Bolton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CPAC (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) 09:09, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article Mario J. Lanza has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. --Animalparty! (talk) 19:21, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article Mario J. Lanza has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I am unable to find significant discussion of this individual in multiple reliable sources per WP:GNG guidelines.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ... discospinster _talk 21:34, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mario J. Lanza. Since you had some involvement with the Mario J. Lanza redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. ... discospinster _talk 17:29, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you alter my ANI comments again, you'll be at 3RR-Do not alter others' comments. We hope (talk) 00:50, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are a hypocrite. --Volvlogia (talk) 00:52, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ever heard of the phrase, "make sure your own hands are clean"? You're complaining about another editor's behavior but violate WP:POLEMIC. Everything you do to poke other editors is going to be examined by the arbs should you go that route. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:22, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that and I regret some of my hotheadedness, but I think my few impolite statements pale in comparison to Cassianto consistent behavioral violations. --Volvlogia (talk) 02:25, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Given that your request is about Cassianto, they should probably be named as a party. You also need to notify We hope and provide the diff as you have named them as a party. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:53, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, stop canvassing editors you know will agree with you to give statements. --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:58, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was asking people who have had first-hand interactions with Cassianto to consider giving statements, as a layer would search for witnesses before appearing for a judge? Is that against the rules? If so, I will stop. --Volvlogia (talk) 03:03, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is. See WP:CANVASS. --Floquenbeam (talk) 03:04, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

While I don't think it was Spamming, I only intended to contact those 3 who were prominently involved, but for the sake of the Arbitration's integrity I won't continue. --Volvlogia (talk) 03:10, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Volvlogia: a bit of advice as the person who was the filing party in the last ArbCom case: the people who are involved with the dispute will be well aware of what is going on, so there is no need to inform anyone who hasn't been named a party (with how watchlists work, I promise you that will serve as notification enough for anyone who is at all interested, and it also addresses Floquenbeam's concern.) If the case is accepted committee can add anyone they think should be a party, so there is no need for you to ask someone to co-sign with you. As the filing party, you probably could get away with naming more parties to the case now, but I wouldn't: you're a relatively inexperienced user filing a case in what is probably the most complex environment on Wikipedia. Answer the committee's questions when they have them, be transparent, and civil, and try not to get too frustrated when the request and/or case gets overly complex or heated. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:52, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I appreciate the advice. I intend to fully cooperate with the arbitration process, keep things civil and out and the open, and pursue a resolution in an ethical, proper, and official way. I have nothing to hide. I appreciate your advice and promise to go along with this process to the best of my ability. --Volvlogia (talk) 03:55, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Volvlogia, this is a friendly request; please stop pinging me. I'm finding it really irritating getting these notifications when I'm the one actually going about trying to improve the project. I'm really not interested in this loony drama you seem to have created at the prompt of absolutely nothing, so you can do what you like; but please, I don't want to be a party to it. Thanks. Cassianto^Talk 08:18, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your statement in your case request, the first paragraph ("Especially in recent months...") makes multiple assertions about another editor without linking to diffs which evidence those assertions. You need to provide diffs which demonstrate what you say. I have removed this paragraph, but would like you please to re-add it with diffs evidencing what you say. GoldenRing (talk) 14:16, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you have restored your statement with some links to talk page discussions. This is still not really sufficient as evidence. Each point in your statement should be backed up by diffs that demonstrate the behaviour about which you are complaining. Please add diffs evidence your complaint or it is likely to be removed again. GoldenRing (talk) 11:23, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[1] - Seriously. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:09, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. We hope (talk) 22:28, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility in infobox discussions. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility in infobox discussions/Evidence. Please add your evidence by February 17, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility in infobox discussions/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:50, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:07, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Volvlogia, in the open Civility in infobox discussions arbitration case, a remedy or finding of fact has been proposed which relates to you.  Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 19:33, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from one or more pages into another page. 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. NeilN ^{talk to me} 05:13, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you still want to split the article please fix the attribution. And please use edit summaries explaining what you are doing. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 05:16, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, clicked w/o a summary. I intended to leave one. --Volvlogia (talk) 05:17, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An arbitration case regarding civility in infobox discussions has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

1. Any uninvolved administrator may apply infobox probation as a discretionary sanction. See the full decision for details of infobox probation.
2. Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes.
3. Cassianto is indefinitely placed on infobox probation.
4. The Arbitration Committee recommends that well-publicized community discussions be held to address whether to adopt a policy or guideline addressing what factors should weigh in favor of or against including an infobox in a given article and how those factors should be weighted.
5. All editors are reminded to maintain decorum and civility when engaged in discussions about infoboxes, and to not turn discussions about a single article's infobox into a discussion about infoboxes in general.
6. For canvassing editors to this case, Volvlogia (talk · contribs) is admonished. They are warned that any further instances of canvassing related to arbitration processes will likely result in sanctions.

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility in infobox discussions closed

For the arbitration committee, GoldenRing (talk) 08:57, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Volvlogia. I would like to request one thing: the ArbCom case that you filed only closed very recently, and I would like to ask you to be very cautious with adding Infoboxes to articles that could potentially be contentious (common knowledge indicates liberal arts biographies); as the situation is very volatile, please propose on talk pages prior to adding any Infoboxes; be specific with your proposal, such as which parameters would benefit the reader, content wise. Infoboxes are optional by nature, and without discussion your edits may eventually be considered as disruptive. Regards, Alex Shih (talk) 15:32, 28 March 2018 (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 discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes, 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.

Frank Matcham --RexxS (talk) 20:00, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've tagged your article Flynn Mitchell for the proposed deletion as not meeting WP guidelines for bios or sports people. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 17:06, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Volvlogia, I see you added two new companies into the Dan Wagner article, without consensus. Why did you add them in particularly without any sources? scope_creep (talk) 16:11, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't recall. Oops. --Volvlogia (talk) 19:45, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Volvlogia. I see that you changed the infobox photo in the Dwight D. Eisenhower article without discussing it first, and that you gave no reason for making the change. This being the case, I have reverted your edit. Please, in the future, discuss such changes beforehand, and always leave a note about your change in the summary section on the edit page. Cheers. Drdpw (talk) 20:10, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Vovlogia. There's really no need to mention the lack of a White House Communications Director, as it's clearly implied (and plainly stated, too); once the President appoints a new director (well, if he does so), the page will be updated to reflect that. While the President may choose to not have a communications director, the lack of one doesn't merit its own box (see, for instance, the Carter presidency, the time between Koehler and Griscom, etc.). Likewise, the usage of "Ongoing" under the "Term duration" heading really doesn't fit, for consistency purposes. As such, I've reverted your edit; I hope you don't mind. Also, I'm not sure how Visual editing works, but please don't forget to add an edit summary. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Javert2113 (talk • contribs) 17:56, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is another deletion discussion on List of YouTubers. If you would like to weigh in, you can do so by checking out the discussion here. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 05:59, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on DJTJ, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it 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 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 23:39, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Percy Jackson Portrait.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:38, 31 May 2018 (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 all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, 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.

- MrX 🖋 13:36, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Toddst1. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Linda Cardellini, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Toddst1 (talk) 04:02, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Linda Cardellini. Toddst1 (talk) 04:06, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I sourced from IMDB, is that not reliable? --Volvlogia (talk) 04:07, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No it isn't. Toddst1 (talk) 04:08, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I did. --Volvlogia (talk) 04:10, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB is the poster child for unreliable references. See WP:IMDBREF and the article's talk page. Toddst1 (talk) 04:11, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alright fine, but you didn't have to be a jerk about it. Maybe take a swing by WP:AGF while your perusing the 'pedia. --Volvlogia (talk) 04:13, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe take a swing by the Template:uw-biog1 before you revert after receiving a warning, and check the personal attacks. Toddst1 (talk) 04:17, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Would this be enough for you: The woman was born on June 25, 1975. --Volvlogia (talk) 04:20, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Let's see: Which one of those isn't a WP:CIRCULAR reposting of a previous, unsourced version of June 25? Hint: none of them. Think about it. There are sources and reliable sources. Toddst1 (talk) 04:30, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you incorrectly moved "List of Brie Larson performances" to "Brie Larson filmography". If you take a look at the tables in the page, it is not just a listing of her film and television appearances, but also of her stage appearances and work as a singer. As such, "list of performances" is most accurate for the page, per such titles as List of Amy Adams performances, List of Kate Winslet performances, etc. Cheers! --Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:29, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Volvlogia. 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]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:03, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Thank you. Tsumikiria (T/C) 22:49, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Tsumikiria, Can you elaborate on that! --Volvlogia (talk) 23:09, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Silent No More (Corsi book), does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 09:40, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Ojeda 2020.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:33, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article Faiz Shakir has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Per WP:N. There are a few sources available, but it seems like he is WP:INHERITing notability from the people he's worked for. Maybe the political director role for ACLU is enough?

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Comatmebro (talk) 20:42, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've already made 3 reverts on the article today so I'm not going to make any additional reverts, so I figured I'd give you a heads-up regarding this edit – the |children= parameter is actually intended for listing notable children (and similar with other familial infobox parameters), and not just the number of children an individual has. Mélencron (talk) 00:18, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On 13 March 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Faiz Shakir, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Faiz Shakir is the first Muslim and first American of Pakistani descent to manage a United States presidential campaign? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Faiz Shakir. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Faiz Shakir), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain your rationale for this edit? ViperSnake151  Talk  20:11, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Volvlogia. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, Draft:Silent No More (Corsi book).

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If 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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:26, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Ojeda 2020.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:52, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect MarioPlex. Since you had some involvement with the MarioPlex redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 14:31, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Mark Burnett, you may be blocked from editing. Please lay off the Trump-bashing. Youv'e been warned about this before. Drmies (talk) 19:30, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Drmies What??? I made an extremely neutral edit. There are allegations of a racist Trump tape, so I retitled that section "Racist Trump tape allegations". The subtitle "Suggested connection regarding President" makes absolutely no sense, like those four words in that order mean absolutely no thing. Where is my so-called history of Trump bashing. Totally out of left field warning. Absurd. --Volvlogia (talk) 19:34, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Joseph D. Early Jr., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Interstate 495 (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) 07:39, 8 November 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) 00:19, 19 November 2019 (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 discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes. 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.

- SchroCat (talk) 07:36, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joseph D. Early Jr. 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/Joseph D. Early Jr. until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:29, 1 August 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) 02:48, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Ofrit Liviatan requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://scholar.harvard.edu/oliviatan/home. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. 82.132.212.254 (talk) 06:42, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You probably weren't aware, but NBA bios of living people generally use their most recent taken picture per WP:NBAIMAGE. Feel free to discuss at WT:NBA if you have any concerns.—Bagumba (talk) 10:08, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gentle reminder. I reverted your change at David Robinson to restore the 2006 image instead of 1988.—Bagumba (talk) 08:29, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Guy Montag (Michael B. Jordan).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:10, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chuggaaconroy 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/Chuggaaconroy until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

— Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 11:20, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. Please do not make further edits on Joe Biden or Kamala Harris without consensus. MogasTheThird (talk) 00:02, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Derek Chauvin. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 02:53, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dwyane Wade, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ryan Smith.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 17 April 2021 (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-1992 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.

― Tartan357 ^Talk 02:52, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. Thanks! SK2242 (talk) 00:32, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. The winners lists are already sortable by team. The individual winners do not need to be duplicated in the table listing the teams with the most winners. You've been reverted a few times before, but you are still making the same style changes in new lists. Feel free to establish consensus for your changes at WT:NBA if you disagree. Thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 05:59, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Chuggaaconroy requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chuggaaconroy. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it 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 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:58, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elections lost by presidents of the United States 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/Elections lost by presidents of the United States until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 11:19, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Volvlogia! Thank you for your edits to Topsy Hartsel. It looks like you've copied or moved text from Connie Mack into that page, and while you are welcome to re-use the content, Wikipedia's licensing requires that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied 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. If you've copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thanks! DanCherek (talk) 04:08, 19 November 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) 00:48, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited From Russia with Love (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dr. No.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]