User talk:Allixpeeke

Archives

Talk for this user has been archived at Archive Talk #1 as of Monday, July 7, 2008.

Talk for this user has been archived at Archive Talk #2 as of Sunday, September 1, 2013.

Take pictures of Baltimore for Wikipedia on September 21

Hello there! You are invited to attend Wikipedia Takes Baltimore on Saturday, September 21 at 1 PM. The goal of Wikipedia Takes Baltimore is to take pictures of nationally-recognized historic sites to upload to Wikimedia Commons, so if you have a camera (even a cell phone camera!), meet us on the north side of the Washington Monument on North Charles Street in Baltimore. Feel free to bring a car, too, since some of the sites are spread out. To learn more and sign up, see the event page. You can also RSVP on our Meetup page. I hope to see you there! Harej (talk) 19:35, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

September 2013

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

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • and sentiment towards what happened at [[Virginia Tech]].<ref>''The Towerlight'' Special Edition ([http://www.baltimorestudentmedia.com/pdf/2007/041707.pdf .pdf) (17 April 2007)</ref><ref>[http://
  • </ref><ref>[http://www.thetowerlight.com/2007/04/letters-to-the-editor-61/ Letters to the Editor] ([http://www.baltimorestudentmedia.com/pdf/2007/043007.pdf .pdf), ''The Towerlight'' (30 April 2007),

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:27, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, BracketBot, for the helpful catch!
Cheers,
allixpeeke (talk) 20:43, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Straight quotes and apostrophes; WP:Trivia

Hi. Please review MOS:PUNCT and MOS:QUOTEMARKS, which explain that on Wikipedia we use straight quotes, like this: ", and apostrophes, like this: ', not curvy ones. This consistency throughout the encyclopedia aids in searches. Also, please see WP:TRIVIA. It is not helpful to add items to "cultural reference" sections (or elsewhere in an article) that are mere passing mentions of a term or work of art. If, for example, a Star Trek episode is about Sherlock Holmes, and the character is discussed at length, then the episode could be mentioned in the Sherlock Holmes article; but if Capt. Picard merely *mentions* Sherlock Holmes in an episode, then it is not appropriate to add a reference to the episode in the Sherlock Holmes article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:48, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Sorry - my mistake on the Len song. I didn't realize it was just a redirect. I've taken it off the disambig page. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:03, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Cools.  allixpeeke (talk) 05:08, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Happy editing! -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:12, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited AFI's 100 Years...100 Heroes & Villains, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dæmon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, DPL bot, for again discussing disambiguation links with me.  While, in the past, I have made changes based on your recommendations, DPL bot, I cannot at this time change the link.  Indeed, I thought about the disambiguation thing before adding that link, but added it anyway when I looked at the items featured on the disambiguation page.  Obviously, I couldn’t go with daemon (classical mythology) because the disambiguation page seemed to imply that daemon (classical mythology) was something benevolent.  Unclean spirit seemed to be closest to what I was looking for in describing Pazuzu, but since “unclean spirit” was such a weird term to use to describe a dæmon, I feared readers might infer an incorrect understanding of the phenomenon that took place in that film.  That’s why I went ahead and provided the disambiguation link—so that readers could find the disambiguation page and make their own judgment upon which link to click.  Cheers, allixpeeke (talk) 18:51, 24 December 2013 (UTC)   P. S.  If, DPL bot, you think you have compelling reason to alter the link (say, to unclean spirit), please do present your rationale here, and I will consider it as objectively as I can.[reply]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, DPL bot, for yet again discussing disambiguation links with me.  Just like last time, I am not going to change the link from bibble to anything else, since there is no wikipedia article that describes how bibble is a fictional caramel popcorn from the T. V. shows Victorious and Sam & Cat other than the disambiguation page.  But, if you, DPL bot, decide to create a page called bibble (fictional caramel popcorn), then I will happily change the link.  Cheers! allixpeeke (talk) 05:32, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Austrian economics sanctions

FYI, there are Austrian economics/General sanctions including Rothbard article so you might watch your # of reverts. Also an Arbitration that should be over in about a week. Check it out here. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 05:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rothbard talk

It is refreshing to read a new voice in these discussions. Alas, [1] suffers from TLDR. (That is, at least for the moment. I'll be looking at it more sometime tomorrow.) No matter how the discussion turns out, thank you for the contribution. – S. Rich (talk) 04:54, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.

Hi, it's Mary Feronia. I finally signed up for my own wikipedia account. Anarchafeminist (talk) 23:57, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cool.  allixpeeke (talk) 17:24, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been active at the article or talk page, so here's a note about Anarcho-capitalism

I have nominated Anarcho-capitalism for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Binksternet (talk) 18:15, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dickens's

I've removed "'s" once again from Template:A Christmas Carol. While some scholars seem to prefer that form, all sources I have looked into state that omitting the s is widely accepted and to only add it when ambiguity arises, or if such were pronounced in speech. Both are not the case, so the s is omitted. We do follow common practice rather than specific stylebooks. Please keep that in mind and do not try to make Wikipedia conform to one specific rule of grammar. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 11:10, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(1) It's not pronounced in speech?  Since when?  Granted, I don't say the name Charles Dickens very often, but if I were to find an occasion to say aloud the words "Charles Dickens's dog," I would say it with six syllables, not five.  I would worry that not doing so would elicit the question, "Who is Charles Dicken?"

(2) You implore that people "not try to make Wikipedia conform to one specific rule of grammar."  Should this be taken to mean that Wikipedia should conform to multiple rules of grammar, rules that may very well conflict with one another?  And, if so, to how many different, conflicting rules of grammar should Wikipedia conform?

If that sounds curt, my apologies.  I say this only to stress that there is a logical reason to have grammatical standards.

(3) You say that "all sources" (emphasis added) into which you've looked "state that omitting the s is widely accepted and to only add it when ambiguity arises, or if such were pronounced in speech."  In my edit, I cited Strunk's The Elements of Style and the Chicago Manual of Style, into neither of which you've apparently looked.

I'll start with the weaker of the two: the Chicago Manual of Style.  Here's what they say on their website:

Q.  When indicating possession of a word that ends in s, is it correct to repeat the s after using an apostrophe?  For example, which is correct: "Dickens' novel" or "Dickens's novel"?

A.  Either is correct, though we prefer the latter.

I disagree with them that "either" is correct, but I applaud them for realising that the latter is much more rational than the former.  In any event, that source clearly disagrees with any source that discourages the 's in "Dickens's."

Now, on to Strunk's The Elements of Style:

Follow this rule whatever the final consonant.  Thus write,

Charles's friend
Burns's poems
the witch's malice

This is the usage of the United States Government Printing Office and of the Oxford University Press.

Exceptions are the possessives of ancient proper names in -es and -is, the possessive Jesus' , and such forms as for conscience' sake, for righteousness' sake.

This is another source that source clearly disagrees with any source that discourages the 's in "Dickens's."

Now, maybe when you wrote "do not try to make Wikipedia conform to one specific rule of grammar," you were trying to say that I oughtn't take The Elements of Style as gospel.  If so, fear not: I don't.  As far as I am concerned, Strunk is completely wrong to suggest that it is in any way okay to write Jesus' (unless the author is referring to multiple people named Jesus who all happen to possess the same thing).

(4) You write, "and to only add it when ambiguity arises."  If you stick with my method, ambiguity never arises.  But, when the s is removed from a name, ambiguity is necessarily introduced into the situation.  The reader isn't sure if we're talking about about one person named Charles Dickens (in which case the writer obviously accidentally left off the s) or multiple people all with the same name who just happen to possess the same thing (in which case the writer correctly and intentionally left off the s).

As it stands, this is actually the case we now face.  Wikipedia is implying that there are multiple people all with the same name who happened to write A Christmas Carol together.  Wikipedia is currently wrong.

(5) Insofar as leaving-the-s-off-of-possessive-singular-nouns is a "common practice," as you so describe it, I would say that it is more accurate to call this a common mistake.

I look forward to the day when such things as (A) leaving the s off of singular possessive nouns, (B) prohibitions on splitting infinitives, and (C) the singular "they" are relegated to the dustbins of history.

Respectfully yours,
allixpeeke (talk) 12:27, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you do'n't agree, take this to WP:GRAMMAR. Also worth reading is WP:ENGVAR; we're dealing with a British subject, and they don't follow US style. I'm not going to adress each point, except to say that your premise to say that the current form somehow indicates a plural form is totally off. Were the noun plural, then the s would make sense. Omitting the s actually makes it dingular. The plural would be "Dickenses's".-- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 14:45, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No.  "The cat's toy" means there's a single cat possessing the cat toy.  "The cats' toy" means there are multiple cats possessing the cat toy.  "The cats's toy" means someone bearing the title "cats" possesses the toy.  "The Cats's toy" means someone named "The Cats" possesses the toy.  And "The Cats' toy" means that some family with the surname "Cat" possesses the toy.  And "The Catses' toy" means that some family with either the surname "Cats" or the surname "Catse" possesses the toy.

As it so happens, although Wikipedia's official policy doesn't (unfortunately) take a position on the question of whether we should write "Dickens's novel" or "Dickens' novel (instead simply saying that we should be consistent within a given article), it does agree with me that plural nouns are made possessive by not adding the s after the apostrophe.  MOS:POSS says, "For a normal plural noun, ending with a pronounced s, form the possessive by adding just an apostrophe (my sons' wives, my nieces' weddings)."  Thus, I am correct when I say that "the cats' toy" implies a plurality of cats possessing the toy.

You write, "we're dealing with a British subject, and they don't follow US style."  I follow a consistent mixture of the two standards  Thus, I say "aluminium" instead of "aluminum" and "the team had its first victory" instead of "the team had their first victory," just as the English would say, but I still say "go to the hospital" instead of "go to hospital" and "head toward the university" instead of "head toward university."  I happily write "colour" and "fantasise" and "programme" and "fœtus" instead of "color" or "fantasize" or "program" or "fetus," but I still use "elevators" as opposed to "lifts" and "periods" as opposed to "full stops."  I always use the short scale for numbers, but I much prefer the metric system over the English system.  (That said, I still use the English system since it's a tad hard to escape.)  Just like the English, I list the day before the month before the year, since it seems utterly irrational to put the day between the month and the year, but I still use A.M. and P.M. when telling time.  (As an aside, I also look forward to the obliteration of Daylight Savings Time, but who doesn't?  Even farmers don't want it.)  But quotation marks is where it gets interesting.  The English will usually place a period or comma outside of the quotation marks in all instances safe for instances where the period or comma is part of the quote itself, while this is completely wrong in American English.  I tend to follow the American standard on this one even though the British standard is more rational; however, I do tend to follow the British standard when writing on Wikipedia.  Should the British standard on comma/period placement vis-à-vis quotation marks start to be accepted in these United States, I'll happily revert to their superior system on that one as well.  In any event, I have never heard or read anywhere anything saying that it's more appropriate to leave the s off of "Dickens's" in the Kingdom than it is in the States, so I am not entirely sure of the relevance of bringing up the fact that there are some standards vary internationally.

Best regards,
allixpeeke (talk) 02:06, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been randomly selected to take a very short survey by the Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team!

https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_9mNQICjn6DibxNr

This survey is intended to gauge community satisfaction with the technical support provided by the Wikimedia Foundation to Wikipedia, especially focusing on the needs of the core community. To learn more about this survey, please visit Research:Tech support satisfaction poll.

To opt-out of further notices concerning this survey, please remove your username from the subscription list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:57, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 30 October

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

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) 00:18, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Freedom Party of New York (2010)
added a link pointing to Freedom Party of New York
List of libertarian political parties
added a link pointing to Objectivism

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:47, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, DPL bot, for bringing this to my attention.  I went ahead and fixed the Objectivism one, but I intended for the Freedom Party of New York one to link to the disambiguation page.  Cheers, allixpeeke (talk) 09:56, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

United States presidential election, 2012
added links pointing to Reform Party, Jim Gray, KRMG and Socialist Workers Party

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:24, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, DPL bot, for bringing this to my attention.  I went ahead and fixed all four.  Cheers, allixpeeke (talk) 09:56, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please rescue the article on Mircea Itu

Hello,

Please help me with getting the article on Mircea Itu published on Wikipedia.

I highly appreciate your expertise and support. I strongly believe that this academic is notable to have a page on Wikipedia, despite some deletitionists' view.

[2]

Thank you in advance.

Clairec78 (talk) 21:34, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Clairec78, for bringing this to my attention.  I tossed in my two cents here.  Best, allixpeeke (talk) 17:48, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

JSTOR

You should have received an email from me with a link to a form to complete; could you please either complete it, or email me if you didn't get it? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:35, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Completed.  Thank you.  : )  allixpeeke (talk) 08:05, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nicknames for OUAT list of characters

Hello and I had read your message on the talk page.

Firstly, I understand your intentions of putting the nicknames into columns, but this page has been using its own style/format since the beginning and had been doing it like that. We use this style : Red Lucas/Red Riding Hood/Wolf as its used in their history section. It's like a title that these characters used on the show as it progresses.

Regina for example goes by as Regina Mills in her earlier life but then she became the Evil Queen and has never been reffered as Regina again by majority of the inhabitants.

Another example is Cora. She is Cora Mills and after her banishment to Wonderland, she becomes the Queen of Hearts and is referred as that during her time in Wonderland.

Anastasia is another example. After she came to Wonderland, she married the Red King and became the Red Queen and later the White King.

Besides that, these titles are not really nicknames as its official titles given to the characters. Nicknames are as follow :

1) Emma who uses Princess Leia when she came to the past Ehcnhanted Forest. She uses it as an alias and is not an official name nor title she has. The Savior or The Dark Swan is also some titles which isn't an official thing as that isn't something she is based as. These titles refers to who/what they became later in life. Like Killian Jones became Captain Hook after Liam's death and decides to leave the King.

2) Hook uses another alias Prince Charles as well. That is also a nickname or alias. Something fake.

Nicknames can also be considered as short form names. Example: Lilith Page. Her nickname is Lily or Prince David who's nicknamed as Charming.

Therefore, in the columns, we only put their original names and sometimes nicknames like this : Lilith "Lily" Page or place the nickname in a reference way like Charming.

And I say again, that way is more organized as some characters don't have names and only titles. The Huntsmans, Red King etc. titles are as important their name as it is used by them and the inhabitants as well. It's a systematic way which had been used and followed throughout the years.

I however would like to apologize if you feel offended or hurt in any way when I said your edits are unorganized nor messy. It's just that it's better and better organized when " / " is used in between of the names and titles.

Edit : I forgot to mentions or reply to these stuffs.

1) Belle French. I understand your intentions here, but her Real World name isn't Belle French. During the First curse, it was never known what her name was but when Regina turned Belle to her cursed self, she is Lacey, but I will agree 100% with you to but Belle Frech but in the Land With Magic column as that's her name back in her land.

2){N/A or Unknown.I know you are trying to tell that they have a Real World counterpart but we have chosen N/A} instead of the other because we will never know their counterpart unless stated otherwise. Besides that N/A} is easier as there are some characters which we don't know whether they were in the Real World during the first curse, such as Glinda, Blackbeard, King Midas so {N/A fits perfectly for all the characters in the list. In the history section, it's already noted that they were brought by the curse, so us viewers have to assumed that they had a Real World counterpart. Entirely, we don't know if they even had a counterpart. Take a look at Jefferson or Granny. Both got their same names from their land as their counterpart and Regina chose to use her own name as her counterpart, meaning not entirely everyone got a new persona during their time in the Real World. So, if we put "Unknown" it's kinda speculation that we are trying to say that they had a counterpart

Naveenruben97 (talk) 05:46, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Response here.  allixpeeke (talk) 00:41, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Worlds page had been deleted/moved/redirect

Hey, I know we have had our differences before regarding some matter, but I would like to ask for your help. The world's page for ONCE UPON A TIME is gone as it's stated that the list is "just a list of unsourced fan stuff" by the user who redirected it. I stated at the above of the page that some (meaning location names) was taken there, but the user got rid of the entire page as he thinks everything is "unsourced fan stuff". Here's a conversation I started with the user = User talk:Drmies#The world's page would you like to help me out and give your own thoughts about the situation in the link provided? Thanks :) Naveenruben97 (talk) 08:02, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See User_talk:Rtkat3#Worlds_page_had_been_deleted.2Fmoved.2Fredirect. Naveenruben97, beware of [[WP:CANVASS}]. Drmies (talk) 13:59, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies, I am not a victim of canvassing at this time.  Canvassing is something that is done "with the intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way," and since Naveenruben97 has no way of knowing whether or not I will agree with her or him on this topic, she or he cannot be accused of trying to influence the outcome of the discussion.  Naveenruben97 targeted me specifically because she or he knows that I have opinions regarding articles related to Once Upon a Time, and therefore we must conclude that Naveenruben97 was merely attempting to "improve the quality of the discussion by broadening participation to more fully achieve consensus," which, according to WP:CAN, is "perfectly acceptable."  Regards, allixpeeke (talk) 01:44, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Naveenruben97, thank you for bringing this to my attention.  I shan't respond on Drmies's talk page since she or he had deleted the conversation you began there.  Fortunately, I can read it here.  Further, I see the discussion has been moved here.  I shall place my response there.  Again, thanks for bringing this to my attention.  Yours, allixpeeke (talk) 01:44, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies, I am not asking allixpeeke to support me in any way, I'm just telling him/her to give his/her thoughts in the problem. I'm only asking him/her to include his/herself into the discussion as he/she is one of the active users whom edits the page and deserves the rights to know what had happened to the page and what is the ongoing discussion for the page. Naveenruben97 (talk) 03:16, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2016 Libertarian National Convention, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kevin McCormick. 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) 09:28, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Libertarian Review, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ed Crane. 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) 09:39, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you, DPL bot.  It is now fixed.  allixpeeke (talk) 13:57, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Old MacDonald Had a Farm, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hens. 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) 11:26, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you, DPL bot.  It is now fixed.  allixpeeke (talk) 22:11, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Allixpeeke. You have new messages at Talk:Alexander Hamilton.
Message added 22:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Shearonink (talk) 22:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know you're an experienced editor and that you don't really need the following but thought it might be useful...

Adding references can be easy

Just follow the steps 1, 2 and 3 as shown and fill in the details

Hello! Here's how to add references from reliable sources for the content you add to Wikipedia. This helps maintain the Wikipedia policy of verifiability.

Adding well formatted references is actually quite easy:

  1. While editing any article or a wikipage, on the top of the edit window you will see a toolbar which says "Cite". Click on it.
  2. Then click on "Templates".
  3. Choose the most appropriate template and fill in as many details as you can. This will add a well formatted reference that is helpful in case the web URL (or "website link") becomes inactive in the future.
  4. Click on Preview when you're done filling out the 'Cite (web/news/book/journal)' to make sure that the reference is correct.
  5. Click on Insert to insert the reference into your editing window content.
  6. Click on Show preview to Preview all your editing changes.
  • Before clicking on Save page, check that a References header   ==References==   is near the end of the article.
  • And check that   {{Reflist}}    is directly underneath that header.
7.  Click on Save page. ...and you've just added a complete reference to a Wikipedia article.

You can read more about this on Help:Edit toolbar or see this video File:RefTools.ogv.
Hope this helps, --Shearonink (talk) 15:30, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • I noticed you were going back later to fill in references at "Alexander Hamilton and slavery" so thought this maybe could help. Please delete this information if it is unwanted. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 15:30, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A WikiCookie for you!

For not only improving the article about Alexander Hamilton but also quickly changing tack and spinning out that content into a new article at my urging. That's pretty awesome. Chris Troutman (talk) 02:45, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Scrumptious.  Thank you.  allixpeeke (talk) 02:59, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge

You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here!

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:38, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Allixpeeke. 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]

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

Sphinx
added links pointing to Tomorrow and Order
Ancient Egyptian deities in popular culture
added a link pointing to Guilt

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:01, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, DPL bot, for the heads up, once again.  So, I went ahead and changed the links to tomorrow and guilt to tomorrow (time) and guilt (emotion) respectively, but I left the link to order as is.  Dost thou haveth any thoughts thereupon, DPL bot?

Yours sincerely,
allixpeeke (talk) 15:29, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

P. S.  I've been meaning to ask you this, DPL bot:  You write, "We noticed."  Who exactly is the "we" in that sentence?  Are there multiple humans that were involved in this noticing, and if so, who?  (Obviously, you can't be referring to yourself in saying that since, well, you are not capable of noticing.  Oh, sure, you're capable of detecting, but noticing is something that requires a mind, which, as far as I am aware, you do not possess.)

3.14159265358979323846 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 3.14159265358979323846. Since you had some involvement with the 3.14159265358979323846 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Mr. Guye (talk) 22:41, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of 3.14159265358979

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on 3.14159265358979, 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 debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, 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 removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Mr. Guye (talk) 22:45, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

3.1415926535897932385 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 3.1415926535897932385. Since you had some involvement with the 3.1415926535897932385 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Mr. Guye (talk) 22:46, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

3.141592653589793238 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 3.141592653589793238. Since you had some involvement with the 3.141592653589793238 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Mr. Guye (talk) 22:46, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

3.14159265358979324 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 3.14159265358979324. Since you had some involvement with the 3.14159265358979324 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Mr. Guye (talk) 22:46, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

3.1415926535897932 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 3.1415926535897932. Since you had some involvement with the 3.1415926535897932 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Mr. Guye (talk) 22:47, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

3.141592653589793 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 3.141592653589793. Since you had some involvement with the 3.141592653589793 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Mr. Guye (talk) 22:49, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

3.1415926535898 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 3.1415926535898. Since you had some involvement with the 3.1415926535898 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Mr. Guye (talk) 22:50, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of The Zeta Project episodes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rob Davies. 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) 09:55, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, again, DPL bot.  I went ahead and disambiguated the link.  allixpeeke (talk) 22:34, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of 2.7

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as 2.7, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

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. A412 (Talk • C) 23:51, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decimal approximations of irrational numbers are now deemed "inappropriate"?  allixpeeke (talk) 09:20, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Two witnesses, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sumerian. 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) 10:07, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, tell you what, DPL bot: I was just about to go fix that, per your reasoned suggestion, when I discovered that it had already been fixed by one Egsan Bacon.  Thus, all is good.  Cheers, allixpeeke (talk) 11:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

Information icon Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from List of Alfred Hitchcock Presents episodes into List of Alfred Hitchcock Presents (1985 TV series) episodes. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:08, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up and for adding the notation within the edit summaries.  I added the {{copied}} template to the talk page.  Cheers, allixpeeke (talk) 13:53, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a webhost

Hi Allixpeeke. This is a friendly reminder that your 32 sub pages are a violation of WP:NOTWEBHOST. Please nominate them for deletion. May I suggest that you create your own server and host MediaWiki. That way you can host whatever material you want. Thank you David.moreno72 05:45, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  1. I do not have 32 subpages.  Half of those are redirects.  (E.g., lists/ redirects to lists.)
  2. I removed the plurals subpage.  I was using it to improve my own edits to Wikipedia by making my edits more accurate in their use of plurals (see, e.g., the effort discussed here at incorporating accurate pluralisations), and while I think it could also be useful to other users in the same pursuit, I went ahead and deleted its content as a show of good faith.
  3. My subpages are not a violation of WP:NOTWEBHOST.
    1. My subpages do not serve as personal webpages.  For the most part, they are as useful to other users as they are to me.

      (Moreover, what few exceptions to this do not encapsulate any entire page.  Although my list of lists subpage, e.g., does contain a couple lists that are not of great use to other users (e.g., lists#List of stupid slang), those inserts are small and do not greatly detract from the overall purpose of the list, which is to aid me in developing lists that will later be turned into Wikipedia articles.

      By contrast, my lists#List of films featuring the Statue of Liberty (which is also on that list of lists) is a work in progress that I intend to eventually turn directly into an article titled List of films featuring the Statue of Liberty, and which will complement the List of films featuring the World Trade Center.

      Indeed, almost all of the lists on that list of lists are intended to eventually be turned into articles, or at least be used as aids in the construction of articles.)

    2. My subpages do not serve as blogs.  (That's probably obvious.  I shan't belabour that point.)
    3. Although my subpages are repositories for large amounts of material, they are not repositories for large amounts of material irrelevant to collaborating on Wikipedia.  Not one of my subpages lack material relevant to collaborating on Wikipedia, and the vast majority of the content 'on' said pages are directly relevant to collaborating on Wikipedia.

      (Take, e.g., my art subpage.  Obviously, the purpose of the page is to help me to know which of the various famous works of art that should have articles written about them currently lack articles (along with other information and sources that would be helpful in the construction of said articles).  It also embodies the collaborative element in that anyone looking at that list can use it for this purpose.

      Or, take, as another example, this list of books in the Judeo-Christian Bible.  This list (which is sortable: one can sort the books by the religion/denomination one needs) is obviously also useful for the augmentation (and even creation) of articles pertaining to decisions made by religious authorities as to the texts they deem canonical and the comparative orders of their respective canons, and of articles pertaining to comparative religious studies generally.

      Ultimately, the purpose of all of my subpages (with the exception of my sandbox, the main purpose of which is to test wiki-based coding) is to facilitate article creation and augmentation.  Thus, my subpages are within the purview of acceptable purposes for subpages on Wikipedia.  (And even my sandbox does contain some material that I intend to turn into a bona fide article, viz., the information about The Independents.))

    4. I have no need to use Wikipedia in order to post a résumé, nor as a personal webpage.  I have a personal website for that sort of thing.  My every subpage is used in order to aid Wikipedia.
    5. None of my subpages are used for social networking, nor have I a single webpage dedicated to amusement.  My every subpage is used in order to aid Wikipedia.
    6. I have not uploaded files to Wikipedia is nearly a decade.  Rather, I upload them in the appropriate place: Wikimedia Commons.
    7. I do not use my subpages as a dating service.  I do not use them as memorial pages.  And every subpage of mine contains content for projects related to Wikipedia.
In summation, my subpages are all valid.

Respectfully yours,
allixpeeke (talk) 06:33, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Allixpeeke. 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 Singles: Original Motion Picture Soundtrack, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Andrew Wood (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) 09:11, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, DPL bot, for bringing this to my attention.  I was just about to go fix it, but I see Rodw has already fixed it.  Thus, my thanks also to Rodw for this fix.  Cheers, allixpeeke (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Alexander Hamilton and slavery

Notice

The article Alexander Hamilton and slavery has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This WP:POVFORK article relies so heavily on unreliable sources that it is worthy of deletion.

  • Michelle DuRoss is the most heavily cited and quoted single source for this page. She is identified here as a history professor and as a historian. Her publication is cited 29 times as footnote 9, and 7 more times as footnote 23.
DuRoss's list of publications on Google Scholar is a total of two, the other one being her dissertation. As it turns out, DuRoss seems to have been either a Ph.D. student at SUNY Albany, or a very recent Ph.D. graduate, when the cited article was written. She was definitely not a professor when it was written.
If we look at the journal that published her article, Early America Review, we find that it wasn't exactly a peer-reviewed scholarly publication, per WP:SCHOLARSHIP. It was an Internet journal (see From the Publisher). I saw no indication that this journal even had an editor; submissions were directed to the publisher (see submission guidelines), and it appeared to be a one-man operation.
  • Ishmael Reed is cited here for two articles, both extensively quoted here. The first article by Reed is cited 10 times (footnote 10), and the second is cited 4 times (footnote 14). In both of them, Reed in turn quotes and relies upon "Professor Michelle Duross, of the University at Albany, State University of New York", which he writes out in full both times, inflating her appearance of authority to bolster his own. The reliability of these two Reed references can be judged (per WP:NOTRELIABLE and WP:BIASED) by reading Wikipedia's article on CounterPunch, the magazine in which they were both published.
  • Allan McLane Hamilton, cited here 5 times (footnote 1), may be the original source of all allegations that Hamilton owned slaves, and is relied on by other cited references. He wrote a biography of his grandfather, whom he never knew personally. Dr. Hamilton was a psychiatrist and medical doctor, but it is misleading to identify him as a "historian" as this article does. Dr. Hamilton looked at his grandfather's business ledgers, and characterized several cryptic entries as evidence that Hamilton had purchased a slave for himself. It appears that unless Hamilton clearly identified that a particular purchase was done on behalf of a named legal client or family member (such as John Barker Church), his grandson simply assumed without proof that Hamilton was buying a slave for himself. (There are no citations to any of Hamilton's correspondence or writings that would indicate that he owned slaves, and no cited evidence of slaves in Hamilton's will or in lists of his assets.)
Original research or synthesis
  • Footnotes 37, 38, and 41 appear to be original research.
  • Primary sources are cited at footnotes 16, 21, 22, 26-28, 30, 39, and 40. The passages that rely on them may be impermissible synthesis, or may be missing the citation to their actual source.
Self-published sources

For at least those reasons, I propose deleting Alexander Hamilton and slavery. Lwarrenwiki (talk) 22:23, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

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. Lwarrenwiki (talk) 22:23, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Alexander Hamilton and slavery for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alexander Hamilton and slavery 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/Alexander Hamilton and slavery 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. Lwarrenwiki (talk) 22:26, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:People and slavery

Template:People and slavery has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. --woodensuperman 09:58, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Allixpeeke. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 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]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Allixpeeke. 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]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Are You Afraid of the Dark? episodes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bluebell (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Divine Invasion, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Godhead (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) 09:01, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Lucifer (season 1)

Hello, Allixpeeke. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Lucifer".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. CptViraj (Talk) 15:01, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Huh?  I created a draft for Lucifer (season 1)?  Are you sure?  allixpeeke (talk) 07:25, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alliance of the Libertarian Left listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Alliance of the Libertarian Left. Since you had some involvement with the Alliance of the Libertarian Left redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:01, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.  allixpeeke (talk) 07:35, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of religious ideas in science fiction, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Adversary (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). (Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:29, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it seemed the only truly appropriate selection.  Linking directly to Satan would have been both redundant and nonelucidatory.  allixpeeke (talk) 07:57, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

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) 00:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

Information icon Hello, I'm Andrzejbanas. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Castle Freak, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. . We require sources for these release dates. Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:59, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Lucifer (season 1)

Hello, Allixpeeke. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Lucifer".

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. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 04:41, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, Liz, you're saying I created a draft of Lucifer (season 1) six months ago and forgot about it?  What was the contents of this alleged draft?  (I genuinely have no recollection of this.)  Please let me know.  (Also, if the draft seemed basically complete, you have my blessing to just publish it.)  Thanks in advance, allixpeeke (talk) 09:55, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Dungeonmaster, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages African and Beast.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

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

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the 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) 00:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Christmas-themed literature

Template:Christmas-themed literature has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. --woodensuperman 13:21, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for letting me know, woodensuperman.  I have responded as follows:
  • Keep—Very useful aid for navigating through the various Christmas-themed works of literature, particularly useful to any Wikipedian looking to research said works of literature.  Template is narrowly confined to Christmas literature, excluding Christmas songs, films, television, and paintings.  Works included are more than just "tangentially related"; said works often include (besides Christmas itself) other similar and overlapping themes, too, such as giving, kindness, and magic, if not similar settings (Winter, snow), characters (Santa), and other motifs rarely found outside of Christmas-themed literature.

    Template is no more inexhaustible than any other media-based template; by this I mean to say that, while more Christmas-themed novels may be written over time and thus added, the same can be said of, e.g., Foo Fighters songs being added over time to Template:Foo Fighters, and I do not believe Christmas-themed novels are being written as rapidly as Foo Fighters songs.  (If it is protested that Template:Foo Fighters, e.g., is shorter than Template:Christmas-themed literature, it should be recognized that, even though Christmas has been around for one-hundred-times as long as Foo Fighters, the template is only twice-as-long.)

    Whereas something like Template:Literature with dogs or Template:Literature about love certainly would be far too inexhaustible to be useful, this is not; Christmas-themed literature is far more narrowly delimited, and certainly sufficiently delimited to make it not-too inexhaustible.  Christmas-themed works include so many recurring motifs that said works are easily related to one another, which would not be the case with Template:Literature with dogs or Template:Literature about love.

    allixpeeke (talk) 19:12, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

allixpeeke (talk) 19:18, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for creating the navbox. I've asked the closer to reconsider closing the little-attended nomination (please see User talk:Explicit and maybe comment, thanks). The problem with the navbox was including the authors, which bloated it, but it is a very good navbox and should be both kept and used on the pages. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:37, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My edits for brevity User:Randy Kryn/Christmas literature navbox. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:03, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Agorism.info" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Agorism.info has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 20 § Agorism.info until a consensus is reached. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:25, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Anarchism checking in

Hey there! I noticed you're on the WikiProject Anarchism members list, but you don't appear to have edited in this subject area for some time. Just in case you're still interested, here's a little update:

  • In the past couple years, we have brought four articles to Featured status, including the ones on Nestor Makhno, La Salute è in voi, The May Pamphlet and "The Day Before the Revolution". We're likely to get even more to this status in the near future, so stay tuned to the front page for some of our best articles on the platform.
  • A number of our most vital articles have been reviewed and achieved Good Article status, including ones on Gaetano Bresci, Camilo Cienfuegos, Joseph Déjacque, Luigi Galleani, Paul Goodman, and the Kronstadt rebellion. As these "vital articles" are generally considered among the most important on the platform, we aim to get as many as possible to GA and FA status over the coming years.
  • We recently hit the first milestone for our stub-expansion project, getting the number of stubs down to under 1/5th of our total articles. This means that the vast majority of our articles are now relatively substantial, as we expand and add greater detail to the articles that lack sufficient information. We hope to narrow this number down even further, so more articles have the information they deserve.
  • We just started a cleanup drive, in which we are aiming to resolve the problematic parts of our articles, from finding citations for unsourced sections to fixing up formatting errors. In doing this, we intend to make sure our articles provide the best possible reading experience, without unsourced claims or ugly tags littering the page.

If you want to get more involved in the project, please feel free! We always need an extra pair of hands to help out with our ever-growing project. If you want to help out with one of the above efforts, go right ahead. If you want to keep more up to date with the project's activities, consider adding our noticeboard to your watchlist or adding your name to our mailing list. On the other hand, if you think you're time with the project is over, then consider removing your name from the members list, but we do hope you're still interested in our wee project.

All the best to you, whatever your future plans are. Regards, --Grnrchst (talk) 10:07, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Varies/doc

Template:Varies/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 14:58, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sub Pop 200

I seriously doubt anyone will (or could, given WP notability policies) create an article for Chemistry Set, the Thrown Ups, et al, but thanks for trying. Funny thing, I seem to recall that the band Swallow did indeed have an WP article at one time, and I'd guess they met notability requirements. Did that somehow get deleted? (For what it's worth, I was a Seattle punk kid and remember these bands from long ago.) CAVincent (talk) 07:33, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the 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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gary Mallaber's wiki page

Hello. We are working with Mr. Mallaber and has asked to have his wiki page updated. I have an extensive amount of info to add. How can I do this? Rosemarie2025 (talk) 18:57, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

never mind. figured it out Rosemarie2025 (talk) 19:00, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]