User talk:Omnipaedista

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


If I left you a message on your talk page, please respond on your talk page. Comments which I find to be uncivil, flame baiting, or excessively rude may be deleted without response.


References and parenthesis[edit]

You moved a reference outside of a parenthetical statement over at Diana Schutz.

I understand the instinct, but per MOS:REFPUNCT, parentheticals are an exception to the usual reference-after-punctuation rules. If the reference is just for material inside the parentheses (as in this case it was), the reference also goes inside.

I've undone your edit.

Be well, be safe, and be comfortable! --Nat Gertler (talk) 05:03, 13 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for letting me know! --Omnipaedista (talk) 07:19, 13 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Modal logic[edit]

Hi! In modal logic#History, you edited a sentence that now reads:

C. I. Lewis founded modern modal logic in a series of scholarly articles beginning in 1912 with " ".[1]

Maybe you just forgot to complete that sentence and the reference? - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 18:20, 29 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  1. ^ .
Hi! I meant to add it immediately but something came up. Fixed it now! Thank you. --Omnipaedista (talk) 18:43, 29 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Armenia/Azerbaijan discretionary sanctions[edit]

Commons-emblem-notice.svg

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Cabayi (talk) 20:17, 1 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category name changes[edit]

Hello, Omnipaedista,

If you believe a category has the wrong name, please propose a name change at CFD or here for a speedy name change. Do not empty categories out of process. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 16:14, 9 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm really sorry about that. I will, from now on, follow the process. --Omnipaedista (talk) 16:43, 9 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

David Ray Griffin[edit]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:David Ray Griffin § Description and interests. Thank you. Roy McCoy (talk) 03:38, 10 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I notice you deleted the section following but left this one. I hope this suggests that you'll consider visiting and perhaps contributing to the Griffin discussion and article. I noticed you seemed to be familiar with Prof. Griffin, adding his influences – and also his main interests, which is largely what the present discussion is about. Thank you. –Roy McCoy (talk) 21:50, 18 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am afraid I do not have time for this. --Omnipaedista (talk) 08:24, 10 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RE: en.everybodywiki.com[edit]

Hello, I believe you endorsed my article Metabasis Paradox, now accepted. During the process, everybodywiki.com took both the Metabasis article and the same piece by another title (you may remember when I changed the title). The admin who controls everybodywiki.com, a Wikipedian username WikiMaster (?) got mad when I blanked both pages repeatedly while awaiting acceptance at Wikipedia. So he or she blocked me, and maye that's OK. But though WikiMaster has taken down Metabasis Paradox from everybodywiki, they seem reluctunt to take down Change of Fortune Paradox. Isn't everybodywiki.com not entitled to that article, since it is the same article, and now accepted at Wikipedia? I wonder if you know anyone who can help in this matter. If not, thanks for reading this and your other help.Cdg1072 (talk) 05:00, 10 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. --Omnipaedista (talk) 08:24, 10 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello! 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) 01:45, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

MOS:SIR[edit]

You've misinterpreted this guideline - "Sir"/"Dame" is part of the name. MOS:SIR: "The infobox heading includes pre-nominals, name and post-nominals as separate elements. The title is placed in bold in the first use of the name". I agree its a bit ambiguous but it would be better to raise this at the MOS talk page and get consensus for a mass change, rather than doing it piecemeal article by article and introducing inconsistencies within series. Ivar the Boneful (talk) 15:43, 15 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please see this. --Omnipaedista (talk) 15:46, 15 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please consider reverting yourself. --Omnipaedista (talk) 15:47, 15 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please read Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography#MOS:SIR: I have already mentioned you there and your arguments have been dismissed by others as a misinterpretation of the wikiwide MOS and violation of WP:OWN. --Omnipaedista (talk) 20:16, 5 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Al-Aajili[edit]

Hello,I would like to know why you canceled my changes ? The name العجيلي in arabic traducting by Al-aajili and not ujayla — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wajdi Ljl (talkcontribs) 09:35, 20 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Each person chooses to render their name as they wish. For example Shahla Ujayli chose to render her name this way as you can see in the link quoted in the article about her: https://www.arabicfiction.org/en/node/595. Please respect other people's wishes and please do not move articles or change transcriptions without first discussing such changes in the respective talk pages of the articles. --Omnipaedista (talk) 09:57, 20 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Robert Ennis" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Robert Ennis. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 24#Robert Ennis until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Narky Blert (talk) 10:35, 24 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Section order[edit]

I confess to be interested in authority control, and could do well without portal links. I the MoS binding, or could I reflect it in articles to which I contributed? In articles I write, I don't even have (distracting) portal links. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:49, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think that MOS:SECTIONORDER is a mandatory style guide. --Omnipaedista (talk) 16:23, 28 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy New Year![edit]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year}} to user talk pages.
Same to you --Omnipaedista (talk) 18:32, 31 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mundane science fiction edits[edit]

Given your latest edit comment "I am quoting the style guide itself, not a talk page" you apparently misunderstood my edit comment/revert reason. I wasn't suggesting you quoted the talk page - I believe the style guide you quoted doesn't mean what you think it means. The talk link wasn't my "source" - it is my way of inviting you to join the discussion, which, again, is at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section#BOLDSYN_(again...).

Best regards, CapnZapp (talk) 15:10, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, thanks for inviting me then! I'll definitely join the discussion there. --Omnipaedista (talk) 15:22, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Citations needed[edit]

I have been going around and adding "citation needed" for various foreign-language titles I find. It's not that I don't trust the translations or that I'm a fascist, but I have honestly seen edit-wars over the correct transliteration of something, and if there's one thing that can resolve an edit-war over such content, it's a reliable source that indicates what the actual term should be. I haven't been dropping talk-page messages for these, I am not sure they are strictly necessary for a single "cn" but forgive me if they are. Elizium23 (talk) 20:29, 18 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, you are basically right actually. --Omnipaedista (talk) 20:39, 18 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request for input on SpaceX Starship[edit]

Greetings Omnipaedista, I have started a discussion on the SpaceX Starship talk page about reoganizing the prototype section. I would really appreciate your input. Please take a look and leave a note. Many thanks. JaredHWood💬 01:35, 25 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am afraid I do not have time for this. --Omnipaedista (talk) 16:22, 28 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Redirect of Orthodox Church[edit]

Are you sure your redirect is not controversial? Both discussions you refer to do not seem to tackle this question directly. I personally am in favour of your redirect. Veverve (talk) 18:10, 30 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Maybe an RfC should have been created. On the other hand, the latest consensus is not in favor of this 2010 edit: see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 30#Orthodox Church. --Omnipaedista (talk) 19:09, 30 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have started a RM for Autocephaly, please come and give your feedback here. Veverve (talk) 19:14, 30 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sure, I'll chip in. --Omnipaedista (talk) 19:20, 30 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reference for death of Curtis Yarvin's wife[edit]

The ref you added is the same one that User:Jlevi had removed previously with a concern about its reliability. Is there a better source available? DMacks (talk) 07:44, 8 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not really. I just reverted myself. --Omnipaedista (talk) 07:49, 8 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for checking. I don't know anything about this specific detail either, it just appeared on my watchlist. DMacks (talk) 07:54, 8 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The source I added is Yarvin's blog. Anyway, editors should discuss this on the talk page rather than edit war in the article. --Omnipaedista (talk) 07:58, 8 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Late Wittgenstein[edit]

I see from guidelines that I probably should have started a talk with you first before undoing (I'm a relatively infrequent editor and have never had such a dispute before), but better late than never.

If you still think that my edit is incorrect and that my analysis (that the cited page does not actually define the term "late Ludwig Wittgenstein"), please let's discuss. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Presnick (talkcontribs) 21:31, 8 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re this: Wikipedia should define the terms 'early Wittgenstein' and 'late Wittgenstein.' There is a dilemma between having such definitions included in The New Wittgenstein and having them included in Ludwig Wittgenstein. That is all. I might as well move the definitions from the former article to the latter article. --Omnipaedista (talk) 21:38, 8 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I just did that. --Omnipaedista (talk) 10:47, 9 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Precious anniversary[edit]

Precious
Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg
Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:58, 9 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks a lot, Gerda! --Omnipaedista (talk) 10:47, 9 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

'Italics' template[edit]

Just for curiosity: why do you place {{italic title}} on top of an article where it will never need editing? I understand having date format there, because it will be helpful to avoid mistakes introduced by later editors. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:07, 18 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The documentation of 'italics' templates instructs that they be placed on top of the article – e.g., Template:Italic dab/doc explicitly says, "place this template in the article, normally at the top." Italics templates used to be the very first element of an article. Recently 'short description' became the very first element as per WP:SDPLACE (I had to make this edit so that the documentation reflects the new MoS). --Omnipaedista (talk) 08:15, 18 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, the documentation says so, but it's an extra line for some possibly new editor who enters editing the article and will have No Idea why that is there and what it does. We could just not follow the documentation if it doesn't make sense, no? Or we could change the documentation. It makes no sense once established to have it on top. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:20, 18 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, we could change it but this issue should be raised first in Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Layout. Actually, this issue has already been discussed there (Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Layout/Archive 14#DISPLAYTITLE) but discussion did not lead to any changes. --Omnipaedista (talk) 08:28, 18 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

Tireless Contributor Barnstar Hires.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
You are an amazing editor! K1ausMouse (talk) 01:21, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lead pronunciation: comma or semicolon?[edit]

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section#Usage in first sentence says Relevant foreign-language names, such as in an article on a person who does not themselves write their name in English, are encouraged. Separate languages should be divided by semicolons, and romanizations of non-Latin scripts by commas.

I see your point that it may be interpreted to consider IPA transcriptions in different languages no different from names in different languages, but take this into account: unlike IPA transcriptions, foreign names

  1. are not enclosed in square brackets or slashes;
  2. may include commas themselves (as in film titles etc.)
  3. may be spelled in a different alphabet and need a romanization, which as specified goes after a comma too.

This is usually not the case for pronunciations, and I have actually most of the time seen them separated by commas, especially when they are followed by a different name after a semicolon (e.g. hypothetically “Paris (/ˈpærɪs/, French: [paʁi]; Italian: Parigi)”). I believe this works better to suggest that the first list refers to the same spelling. I tried to find something more specific but neither MOS:LEADPRON nor MOS:PRON seem to treat this. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八[IvanScrooge98]会話 19:16, 2 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(I have also several times redacted leads in this fashion, as overtime I assumed that is how it is supposed to be. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八[IvanScrooge98]会話 19:18, 2 June 2021 (UTC))Reply[reply]

Zizek Bibliography: deletion of Russia Today publications[edit]

Hello Omnipaedista,

I write to you, because you have been editing the Slavoj Žižek Page. I'm editing the Zizek bibliography. Here I also mention the op-ed publications on Russia Today. There is a WP editor who holds the opinion, that these edits violate Wikipedia:RSP. I can't see how this is applicable. You can read my argument here. The editor doesn't respond.

If you have an interest in the subject, I would be happy, if you could contribute your opinion. If you don't have an interest, maybe you know someone else who might have?

With kind regards.

--Quin451 (talk) 13:38, 2 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

György Mihály Vajda[edit]

Hello! I think the name is confused for this person: György Mihály Vajda. He is called András Mihály Vajda (see also: hu:Vajda Mihály, but there really was a György Mihály Vajda, who was a literary historian and lived between 1914-2001 (György Mihály Vajda (Q108811146)). You renamed it in 2012 Is there any source that his third name was György? Thanks bye: 08:10, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

I am sorry; I mixed them up. I just fixed my mistake. --Omnipaedista (talk) 15:33, 11 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello! 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) 00:21, 23 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started[edit]

Hello, Omnipaedista

Thank you for creating Azali (tribe).

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Nice work!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:18, 26 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

List of wealthiest organisations[edit]

Hi Omnipaedista

My addition to the sub-list 'Religious organizations' in the list of wealthiest organizations has been removed without a reason by you. The citation is a verified one from Forbes. I hope you stop showing religious grudges and remember that this is a volunteer-run encyclopedia. If there was a genuine reason to remove it, I am all ears. https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=List_of_wealthiest_organizations

Vroomair (talk) 16:39, 11 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The reason was in the edit summary: WP:FORBESCON. --Omnipaedista (talk) 17:06, 11 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Requesting some article expansion help[edit]

Greetings,

Hi, I am User:Bookku, I find information and knowledge gaps create Drafts, try to recruit draft expanding editors and promote drafts articles for further expansion.

Requesting your visit to following drafts and help expand the same if any of these interests you.

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 12:05, 16 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Classical Hollywood cinema[edit]

Hey fella correct me if I am wrong, but this lists - [1], and [2] should be taken off of from the Classical Hollywood cinema article right? due to WP:LINKFARM. Greetings and I await for a response, I am asking this cause I tried to take both of them off a long time ago, but there is an user in there who wants to re-add it and re-add it again and again. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 07:17, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would like them removed from there as per WP:LINKFARM (see also Template:Excessive examples). But there seems to be an ongoing discussion on the talk page right now (Talk:Classical Hollywood cinema#Criteria for inclusion of Major Figures from Classic Hollywood Cinema; I might chip in soon. --Omnipaedista (talk) 23:20, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nairi and Proto-Armenian[edit]

Nowhere on the Diaehi page are the sources that are placed on Nairi's page. They were deleted a long time ago because these sources are from 2 Armenian historians and nowhere was it written that was an proto Armenian state. A non-Armenian source is also required for the reliability of the source to confirm this information. CeRcVa13 (talk) 11:10, 9 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Precious anniversary[edit]

Precious
Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg
Eight years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:59, 9 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What is etymology?[edit]

Hello. I am contacting you because of a discussion about etymology on another website, Final Fantasy Fandom. That wiki gives a definition of etymology, followed by a link to Wikipedia etymology page (their page here), and then features 2700 etymologies (list here), almost all of them being similar to these three:

  • Etymology of absolute zero: Absolute zero is the coldest possible temperature. More formally, it is the temperature at which entropy reaches its minimum value.
  • Etymology of fire: Fire is the rapid oxidation of a material in the exothermic chemical process of combustion, releasing heat, light, and various reaction products.
  • Etymology of Shiva: Shiva (also spelled Śiva) is a Hindu god. The Hindu Shiva once saved the world by consuming poison, giving him blue skin around the area of the neck and throat. [etc. etc.]

Are these three examples etymologies, or not? Since you are an active member of Wikipedia Linguistics Project and Wikipedia Etymology Task Force, your opinion could solve the discussion (if you prefer to avoid any involvement, just write it, I will understand). Thank you in advance for your time and attention. --Abacos (talk) 11:58, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

These are not etymologies, these are mere dictionary definitions. --Omnipaedista (talk) 16:01, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for your kind answer. For your information, I agree with you, while the Final Fantasy Fandom states that etymology means "detailing the origins of terminology used in the series in regards to real world culture and history". --Abacos (talk) 13:24, 27 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Post town in capitals[edit]

Hi @Omnipaedista:.
I have noticed that you have been changing infoboxes so that the post town is written in all capitals, rather than in sentence case. Per the outcome of this discussion, the preference is now not to use all capitals.
Best wishes Mertbiol (talk) 11:37, 2 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up! --Omnipaedista (talk) 18:40, 2 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Scott Williams (comics)[edit]

Hi. I have reverted your edit to the article. As a veteran editor, I assume you know by now that sources must be cited in the article, per WP:V, WP:CS, et al. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 16:14, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, but the relevant VIAF information is to be found at the bottom of the article under Authority Control. In any case, I just added a direct link to preserve WP:INTEGRITY. --Omnipaedista (talk) 16:26, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Confusing edit[edit]

Why did you do this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Action_Comics_1&type=revision&diff=1111794864&oldid=1111130910? ―Justin (koavf)TCM 00:23, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please see H:BR. --Omnipaedista (talk) 00:28, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nice. Thanks. Seems like a serious issue for a narrow problem. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 00:51, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Licentia docendi[edit]

Hello, Omnipaedista,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Joseywales1961, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I have tagged Licentia docendi for deletion, because it doesn't appear to contain any encyclopedic content. You may find our guide for writing quality articles to be extremely informative. Also, you may want to consider working on future articles in draft space first, where they cannot be deleted for lacking content.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Joseywales1961}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Josey Wales Parley 17:53, 15 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The page was blanked by another editor just a few minutes before you tagged it. --Omnipaedista (talk) 18:04, 15 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Im not saying you are wrong with your edit here, I just want input from the community first as I remember why the template was placed. It would sail through a future WP:TfD if it is indeed useless. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:45, 23 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fair enough! --Omnipaedista (talk) 12:30, 24 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The page Natural intelligence (disambiguation) has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it was an orphaned disambiguation page which either

  • disambiguated only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ended in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
  • disambiguated zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
  • was a redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that did not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion Review. Liz Read! Talk! 09:03, 6 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg

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) 00:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"French rationalism" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect French rationalism and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 16 § French rationalism until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 21:58, 16 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy New Year, Omnipaedista![edit]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Moops T 00:07, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Education Studies" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Education Studies and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 4 § Education Studies until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 19:38, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]