The process will have a one week call for candidates phase, a one week pause to set up SecurePoll, a three-day period of public discussion, followed by 7 days of no public discussion and a private vote using SecurePoll.
The outcomes of this process are identical to making requests for adminship. There is no official difference between an administrator appointed through RFA or administrator elections.
Ask any questions about the process at the talk page. A separate user talk message will be sent to official candidates with additional information about the process.
To avoid sending too many messages, this will be the last mass message sent about administrator elections. If you are interested in the process, please make sure to watchlist the appropriate pages. A watchlist notice will be added when the discussion phase opens, and again when the voting phase opens.
You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.
On October 25, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close again to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.
Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").
Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.
You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.
In the voting phase, the candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyone who qualifies for a vote will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.
Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").
Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.
You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.
Mass deletions done with the Nuke tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. T366068
Hi Willuconquerto! That's a pretty broad question - I'd suggest having a look at the links that Gerda Arendt left on your talk page, which will take you to a guide that explains the basics of editing. My best advice is to go out there and make small changes to articles you're interested in, discuss with & listen to feedback from other editors. If you're looking for something to do, the Task Center might inspire you. Let me know if you have any other questions! :) WindTempos(talk • contribs)17:28, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question from Mjdonatelli (00:21, 8 November 2024)
Hi Mjdonatelli! I'd suggest giving Your first article a read. Creating an article is hard - you'll need to be able to demonstrate that the subject of the article is notable, while writing about it in a neutral way.
If you've read the above and are confident enough to go ahead, your best bet is to go through the Article wizard which will guide you through the processs. I'd strongly suggest trying some of the less daunting suggestions at the Task Center to get yourself used to editing first. WindTempos(talk • contribs)09:52, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bulron! Wikipedia has pretty firm criteria when it comes to how we determine whether or not a musician, song, or other music-related topic is suitable for inclusion on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is also not the right place to promote your own music, and it's heavily discouraged to write about yourself (because it's hard to be neutral and objective!)
Hi Olivia Hartung, thanks for your edits! It looks like someone may have changed Endangered Species (1982 film) further since then, because it looks like some of the formatting got a bit broken in the process.
If you're not already doing so, I'd suggest checking your edits before you publish them (because in most cases, they will be visible to everyone straight away!) by clicking the "Show preview" button. You also have a sandbox that you can use to practice editing. Finally, the links at Help:Introduction may help you with adding citations.
Thanks for your reply. My correction appeared, but later disappeared and went back to the inaccurate production notes. Though IMDB is not an acceptable citation source, in the box on the right of the page, Woods and Klinger are correctly listed with the other two screenwriters, Rudolph and Binder. In the production section they are referred to as journalist/researchers. Olivia Hartung (talk) 04:23, 17 November 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.
Good catch. Honestly, this one shouldn't have been a standard rollback, since it could have been reasonably construed to have been in good faith, even if it should have been reverted one way or another. WindTemposthey(talk • contribs)16:10, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question from Bookformatter (15:51, 3 December 2024)
Hi I recently joined Wikipedia, and i want to create page for Top CEO's of Pakistan's company, Can you please let me know the roadmap to create Wikipedia page? --Bookformatter (talk) 15:51, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bookformatter (and sorry for being slow to get back to you!), I'd suggest giving Your first article a read - it's a pretty good starting point. I would like to mention, though, that your article subject sounds like it could be quite opinionated, so while it's totally fine to start writing your draft, it may not be suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The Wikipedia:Task center has a list of other things you could try doing as you learn the basics of editing. WindTemposthey(talk • contribs)22:50, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Following an RFC, the policy on restoration of adminship has been updated. All former administrators may now only regain the tools following a request at the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard within 5 years of their most recent admin action. Previously this applied only to administrators deysopped for inactivity.
Following a request for comment, a new speedy deletion criterion, T5, has been enacted. This applies to template subpages that are no longer used.
Doubt I'll ever be using this (and I never have I suppose) but hello new mentor! Glad you're someone who's willing to volunteer and help others, about all I have to say. Setergh (talk) 19:19, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Theofunny! This really depends on the context, and there's pretty in depth guidance at MOS:LINK. I'd typically lean towards the latter as it's clearer where each link takes you, but you should consider whether you absolutely need to link both, or either (those terms may have been linked previously in the article, for example). WindTemposthey(talk • contribs)16:11, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey GoldRomean!
Thanks for being my mentor. I see you are away, so I will speak with WindTempos.
I'm looking forward to contributing to articles in a meaningful way. My other goal is to write an official wikipedia page for the former CTO of 343 Industries (they wrote the halo games). His other family members have pages, he does not.
