User talk:Edward130603

Retired
This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.
User:Thehelpfulone/Awards
User:Thehelpfulone/Awards
Homepage
Talk
Awards
Random
Fun

From Thehelpfulone

Hi there!

Welcome to Wikipedia - I see that you made some edits on my userpage and I was wondering what's up?

Hope to hear from you soon!

The Helpful One 22:56, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!
Sorry, I was just messing around. I already undid the edits.
--Edward130603 (talk) 22:59, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Warnings

February 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page User:Editorofthewiki/Sandbox has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. BoomerAB (talk) 21:06, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That page was a Sandbox page!--Edward130603 (talk) 21:08, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Signatures

--Edward130603 (talk) 01:38, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--Edward130603 (talk) 01:52, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your request for rollback

After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

  • Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
  • Rollback can be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
  • Rollback may be removed at any time.

If you no longer want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Happy editing! — Aitias // discussion 20:32, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiLove

-TheZdrok (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Your rollback

Excuse me, why did you undo my edits? I saved all the facts and removed fan service and useless information about the characther and non wikiable content. Can you tell me a reason why? DragonZero (talk) 01:32, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relationships are nor wikiable for character articles. Abilities, that explains itself. The plot was shortened and compressed. DragonZero (talk) 01:33, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is that so? Sorry then...Just revert my edits back to the way they were. Next time, in your edit summary, say what you said above instead of just removing it. Thanks! --Edward130603 (talk) 01:35, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DragonZero (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.


Tamara Movie Page

Hey, no problem on the Tamara movie page, it doesn't look that much better since I didn't cut down the actual article but I think the forematting looks more wiki acceptable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.239.97.131 (talk) 00:13, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bubble tea!

-download | sign! has given you a bubble tea! Bubble teas promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a bubble tea, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:bubble tea}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or drink this bubble tea on the giver's talk page with {{subst:slurp}}!

Centre/Center

Sorry but I changed it back to "centre" which it was initially and which is the original English spelling probably used in all countries except the U.S. (and maybe Canada I don't know). But if you insist to enforce the American spelling...well I changed it back to "center" and "neighbor" (instead of the correct "neighbour".

Thanks for letting me know. Next time, remember to add an edit summary to make sure others don't mistake it for vandalism. In addition, sign your comments :D--Edward130603 (talk) 12:14, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I just changed some more spelling into the american "catalysed" to "catalyzed" etc. Sorry I didn't read your comment before I submitted it so I didn't exactly "add an edit summary". I will do it next time! Thanks for the advice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiSeyd (talk • contribs) 12:18, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Autoblocked

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Autoblock #1360030 lifted or expired.

Request handled by:  Sandstein  21:03, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

My room mates must have gotten on my computer and created a account. Please lift this block. I did not create User:Amoebaprotist.--Edward130603 (talk) 19:58, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You're lucky it's just an autoblock; see WP:GOTHACKED.  Sandstein  21:03, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not vandalism

He'd signed up for it. ResMar 22:56, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry then!--Edward130603 (talk) 22:57, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment of Nocturnes Op. 37 (Chopin)

Hey, saw you rated Nocturnes Op. 37 (Chopin) as a start class. Any suggestions on how to improve it to a C-Class or a B-Class? I think the sources are quite sufficient and both quality of the prose and MOS compliance are fine. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR talk // contribs 14:05, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NocturneNoir, you're right! I have changed it to C-class. See talk page for more info.--Edward130603 (talk) 15:49, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Automatic processing of your editor review

This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 21 April 2009 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. End of line. DustyBot (talk) 03:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notice to Members of Wikiproject Aquarium Fishes

Notice to Members of Wikiproject Aquarium Fishes If you have recieved this notice it is because you signed up for the WP:AQF mothly newsletter, and have made a contribution to wikipedia within the last month. Wikiproject Aquarium Fish has seen a decline in member involvement over the past several months. This project is neary dead. I am trying to revive this project. Anyone who is still interested in working on this project please reply back to Drew R. Smith (talk) 23:20, 26 April 2009 (UTC)). If you know of any active members who have not contributed recently and might be interested in the project please forward this message to them. If no reply is given member will be removed from member list. Thank you. Drew R. Smith (talk) 23:20, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. It does not need to be top priority. I was just trying to update the member list, it is overcrowded with ancient members who haven't posted in years.Drew R. Smith (talk) 23:07, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

choctawhatchee/choctawhatchie

Yep, I misspelled it. Sorry about that. It took me a while to figure that out. As far as I am concerned, the two pages need to be combined.

19:55, 29 April 2009 (UTC)~ Qippyquote 4-29-09 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qippyquote (talk • contribs) 19:55, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Aquarium Fishes WikiProject Newsletter
Issue XI - May 2009
News
Discussions & Collaborations
  • Hippocampus kuda has been significanty expanded, however more input would be great.
Other
  • Activity in Wikiproject Aquarium fish has slowed to a crawl, it seems. We still have a few dedicated editors plus a few new faces (myself included). Any participation is appreciated, however we really can't tackle big projects with this level of activity. Give us a shout if you want to become active again!

Nocturnes Op. 37 (Chopin)

I have added some more specific feedback, as you requested, in Wikipedia:Requests for feedback#Nocturnes Op. 37 (Chopin).  Chzz  ►  03:40, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling ("analyses")

[1] FYI, "Analyses" is actually the plural of "analysis". It's a moot point, since at the moment there was only one link, but if there were links to more than one analysis, it should indeed be "analyses". Stevage 00:59, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I never knew that! Also, I think it would be better if the information in the external link is incorporated into the article. If I remember correctly, external links should be kept at a minimum in articles.--Edward130603 (talk) 01:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, it's better to incorporate some information, then cite it. But failing that (time being finite), imho it's much better to simply link to the external analysis. Stevage 01:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Alright--Edward130603 (talk) 01:28, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]



yowa

hey! i asked for help yo not some steeyoupeed generical idiot thin gimme real help yo! Shadow grin (talk) 15:16, 24 July 2009 (UTC)shadow grin[reply]

Hold on, I'll come to your page. Please refrain from signing your name 3 times for one comment.--Edward130603 (talk) 15:20, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FLG archives

You'd be interested to read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Academic_views_on_Falun_Gong&oldid=136958147

Archives from that article that we are proposing to be deleted. It's not actually badly written, but over the course of the last year, it was almost blanked entirely. You'd find it amusing. Colipon+(T) 04:04, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, the article was much better then, than it is now. The archive had much more information and I certainly would not have nominated it for deletion if that were the case. The archive only needed a bit of cleanup (cite errors...).--Edward130603 (talk) 11:34, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for fixing this: [2] --HappyInGeneral (talk) 06:57, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem!--Edward130603 (talk) 10:45, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration enforcement

Are you online for the next few hours? I want to bring this edit to Arbcom/enforcement. Would appreciate some help. Colipon+(Talk) 14:38, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm right here.--Edward130603 (talk) 14:58, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you have time, could you please look up edits on the main Falun Gong article, its family of articles, and all talk pages (as well as all previous RfC's, Admin Noticeboards, Content/NPOV noticeboards etc.) for the numerous diffs of POV/disruptive editing by this user? These are very important. Colipon+(Talk) 15:07, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That would be pretty hard. Olaf is tricky.--Edward130603 (talk) 15:08, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed that it's hard and he is tricky, but that's precisely why I need help. I've began editing an arbitration enforcement request. I have already gathered a few diffs myself - they are not that hard to find. One way to do it is just do a search of all "Wikipedia talk" pages. Colipon+(Talk) 15:12, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All WP talk pages? I don't understand.--Edward130603 (talk) 15:15, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like Olaf hasn't done much until recently...--Edward130603 (talk) 15:20, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Most of the complaints in the past were filed against either asdfg or dilip rajeev. By "WP talk pages" I just meant go and search all the former complaints and see if you can get diffs there. I know PCPP had a few solid diffs but PCPP himself had also gotten in trouble with edit-warring. Colipon+(Talk) 15:26, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've archived the page here. Please edit it as you see fit. Colipon+(Talk) 15:30, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
PCPP: Haven't asked him yet. He's quite "pro-CCP" though, it seems. He also hasn't been on since Aug 4. I want to get this out today. Colipon+(Talk) 16:17, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm relatively new to this FLG stuff...so I think you could probably get more from asking people such as Mrund, PerEdman, and Ohconfucius.--Edward130603 (talk) 16:19, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am quite glad Olaf reacted. Now it's visible so more editors can pitch in. Olaf's antics on the talk pages and articles is pretty obvious to anyone who just passes by and takes a 3-second look at the page. Anyway, do you have e-mail? Colipon+(Talk) 21:23, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Do you?--Edward130603 (talk) 21:24, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seb az86556 (talk) 01:56, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey thanks for giving me the cookie. I have decided to turn over a new leaf and have joined the Wikiproject about films.

P.S. I have also decided to do more work on other wikis, particularly that of Runescape.

P.S.S. What did you mean by turn the next page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Valkyrie Red (talk • contribs) 17:29, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yay, good job Valkyrie!--Edward130603 (talk) 20:31, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dilip rajeev enforcement case

Kindly note that an Enforcement case has just been filed against Dilip rajeev here. You might like to comment. Please note that this is a permalink; any commenting should be done only after clicking on the 'Project page' tab. Ohconfucius (talk) 03:10, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Human Rights Torch Relay

If you have some time please provide us with an input at this RFC on 2008 Summer Olympics torch relay article and this Merger Contest. Thank You! --HappyInGeneral (talk) 23:57, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for inviting me to comment. I have already looked at the RFC and I'll probably comment on the merger soon.--Edward130603 (talk) 00:51, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reports of organ harvesting from Falun Gong practitioners in China

I have restored the above article for the duration of the Poll. If you have any questions about this, please get in touch with me. SilkTork *YES! 21:23, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi, glad you liked the example. I hate the cheap leaps in logic some of these people make (whether pro or anti). I don't know if they are purposeful lame attempts at trying to bamboozle us or if these mental black holes actually exist in these people's everyday thought. Either way, they assume the average reader to be idiots.

I'm new at wiki, please forgive if this reply has been written in an inappropriate place. Bedbug1122 (talk) 22:58, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Featured article candidates

Hello! I noticed that you've been reviewing nominations at Featured article candidates. Thank you for your help, and I hope you will continue to contribute! You may already be familiar with the FAC criteria by now, but in case you aren't, you can check out the Featured article criteria. Also, the following dispatches are useful for reviewing nominations:

The best way to learn is by doing, but here is a quick reference of the things to check for each nomination you review:

Quick reference
A featured article exemplifies Wikipedia's very best work and is distinguished by professional standards of writing, presentation, and sourcing. In addition to meeting the policies regarding content for all Wikipedia articles, it has the following attributes.
  1. It is:
    1. well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard;
    2. comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context;
    3. well-researched: it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature; claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported by inline citations where appropriate;
    4. neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias;
    5. stable: it is not subject to ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process; and
    6. compliant with Wikipedia's copyright policy and free of plagiarism or too-close paraphrasing.
  2. It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of:
    1. a lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections;
    2. appropriate structure: a substantial but not overwhelming system of hierarchical section headings; and
    3. consistent citations: where required by criterion 1c, consistently formatted inline citations using footnotes—see citing sources for suggestions on formatting references. Citation templates are not required.
  3. Media. It has images and other media, where appropriate, with succinct captions and acceptable copyright status. Images follow the image use policy. Non-free images or media must satisfy the criteria for inclusion of non-free content and be labeled accordingly.
  4. Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style where appropriate.

Useful links

Featured articles • Featured article candidates • Featured article review • Featured article log

Thanks again for your help! I look forward to continuing to work with you at FAC, and if you have any questions don't hesitate to ask me or anyone else at FAC. Now get to reviewing some noms! ~~~~

Thank you for your help at WP:FAC -- your efforts are much appreciated! Karanacs (talk) 18:55, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

meow

⊂ Andyzweb ⊃ (Talk) has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Happy WikiBirthday!

I saw from here that it's been exactly one year since you joined the project. Happy WikiBirthday! -Avicennasis @ 07:40, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, thanks! --Edward130603 (talk) 13:19, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Arbitration Enforcement case: Dilip rajeev

Kindly note the WP:AE case above has just been filed. Ohconfucius ¡digame! 05:40, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Warning Vandals

Thanks for your advice. --IANVS (talk) 01:57, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gettysburg

Edward, you can do the edit but he'll revert it within an hour or so. You and I can tag-team on him in the discussion page (though there's this other user named Buster who'll aid him. Good luck tomorrow!--Valkyrie Red (talk) 03:40, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lol....Wikipedia is not a battleground.--Edward130603 (talk) 20:50, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Newsletter

The Aquarium Fishes WikiProject Newsletter
Issue XII - May 2010
News
Discussions & Collaborations
Other
  • Activity in Wikiproject Aquarium fish has slowed to a crawl, it seems. We still have a few dedicated editors plus a few new faces (myself included). Any participation is appreciated, however we really can't tackle big projects with this level of activity. Give us a shout if you want to become active again!
  • We are now ready to restart the awards program, but no one has done it yet. If you are up for the chalenge plese come forward.

"further meaningful opposition"

Implying that my arguments are meaningless isn't a good way to build consensus, and is quite rude. Please don't do that again. --Akhilleus (talk) 03:31, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What you said in response to me wasn't really meaningful...umm yea, basically saying that you have the ability to edit war. As far as opposition goes, I think it should be judged by quality not quantity, so if you weren't saying anything of quality, then that opposition is indeed meaningless. Next time, write something like what you did a few hours after that, not something like "I wish you wouldn't, because I (or someone else) will remove it." Thank you. --Edward130603 (talk) 17:44, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Edward130603, I had already written several substantial posts explaining why I think there should be no infobox. So it should have been clear to you that there was already meaningful opposition, and there was no consensus to include the infobox. Under those circumstances, saying "If there is no further opposition, I (or someone else) will reinsert the infobox" looks like a statement of intent to do something that you knew would be opposed by other editors, which is more or less saying that you're going to start an edit war. Not exactly a quality way to behave. --Akhilleus (talk) 04:35, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Through personal experience, I know that such arguments can drag on for weeks if no one decides to take any action. Most people generally won't consider my edit outrageous. Did my edit really offend you that much? BTW, I don't need a lesson on behavior from you.--Edward130603 (talk) 12:38, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Newsletter

The Aquarium Fishes WikiProject Newsletter
Issue XII - August 2010
News
Discussions & Collaborations
Other
  • Activity in Wikiproject Aquarium fish has slowed to a crawl, it seems. We still have a few dedicated editors plus a few new faces. Any participation is appreciated, however we really can't tackle big projects with this level of activity. Give us a shout if you want to become active again!
  • We are now ready to restart the awards program, but no one has done it yet. If you are up for the challenge please come forward.
  • I made a mistake when distributing the last newsletter, sending it only to those who are on the non member newsletter list. Sorry.
  • An automatic newsletter bot would be appreciated.

New ubox and top-icon for WikiGryphons


Fresh Start

Hey dude, I decided to come back to Wikipedia as a fresh start. I really want to get along well with everyone, so would it be all right if I tagged along with you on any arguments you come across? Thanks!--Valkyrie Red (talk) 15:12, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can tag along on any "argument", since this is Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. However, it would be better to try to work cooperatively more, instead of finding arguments. Best of luck...Edward130603 (talk) 01:20, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where is your common sense??

hey, where did u lost your common sense —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.56.46.89 (talk) 10:54, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure, want to help me find it? --Edward130603 (talk) 04:55, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Newsletter

The Aquarium Fishes WikiProject Newsletter
Issue XII - January 2011
News
Discussions & Collaborations
Other
  • Happy New Year!
  • We are now ready to restart the awards program, but no one has done it yet. If you are up for the challenge please come forward.

License tagging for File:Niehs building 101..jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Niehs building 101..jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 16:05, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2009 New Zealand Music Awards

When reverting someone, you should always give an explanation. What was the point of this revert? Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:04, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Edward130603! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New deal for page patrollers

Hi Edward130603,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

  1. Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
  2. Editor-focused central editing dashboard
  3. "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
  4. Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
  5. Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:MRI toxic encephalopathy.gif

Notice

The file File:MRI toxic encephalopathy.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]