User talk:Kannie

Wikipedia ad for Wikipedia:Requests for comment
Wikipedia adsfile info – show another – #17

Please put your comments down on the bottom, sign with four tildes (~ ~ ~ ~ without the spaces), and I will reply on this talk page, and reply on yours with the {{talkback}} template. This page archived automanically by MiszaBot once a week.

Charles W. Harkness

What's your specific argument against Harkness so I might dissect it? Looking forward to a speedy and researched response,SLY111 (talk) 16:25, 28 January 2008 (UTC)SLY111.[reply]

Temple Hayes

Please help. I have edited this page and verified facts (specifically verified the baseball fact with Carlton Benton at ASA - The National Governing Body of Softball.) I changed the tone of first paragraph and deleted a sentence per the notes on the page and the email you left me. I have tried to adhere closely to AP style. Is there anything else I need to verify and/or is questionable to you. Please respond. Jane Kennedy (talk) 16:04, 29 January 2008 (UTC)Jane Kennedy[reply]

Hello! I have no idea what's going on! I've never edited Wikipedia in my life, and don't have an account or anything. Yet I've been accused of multiple vandalisms. I'm on my school's network. Is it possible that my computer selected an IP address that someone else used to vandalize the pages? 216.79.147.192 (talk) 23:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi The Quilliam Foundation edits have excluded weasel words - it's unclear why you have removed them. I have reverted as the edit appears fine and improves the article by stripping it of weasel words (eg critics say...). Let me know if not, and for my own benefit, why not. Thanks in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jk54 (talk • contribs) 19:56, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps

You can offer some input as to why you set the article on Henderson Jordan up for deletion when offered by a now defunct editor named Randazzo56 when another editor rewrote the article and it stays. Was this due to the quality of the initial article? thanks Custom500 (talk) 01:08, 4 August 2009 (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) 13:36, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New deal for page patrollers

Hi Kannie,

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]