User talk:Fetch dickson

Notability of Hansen Nichols[edit]

A tag has been placed on Hansen Nichols requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Alexf⁴² 15:14, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Van Pojas[edit]

A tag has been placed on Van Pojas requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. The Helpful One ^(Review) 18:13, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Claudine Barreto[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Claudine Barreto, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Claudine Barretto. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 05:01, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirected[edit]

I have redirected the page to the preexisting one. Thanks! --mboverload @ 05:05, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Hansen Nichols[edit]

A tag has been placed on Hansen Nichols requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Quanticle (talk) 05:53, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license[edit]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Juday001.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Juday001.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 08:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Piolo001.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Piolo001.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 08:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Krisaquino002.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Krisaquino002.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 08:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Krisaquino001.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Krisaquino001.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 08:13, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Claudine001.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Claudine001.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 08:13, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nasaan Ka Man[edit]

You keep removing the "unreferenced" tag from the article, although the article still lacks references. Would you like to discuss this on the article's talk page? Movingboxes (talk) 09:34, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license[edit]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Nasaankaman001.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Nasaankaman001.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 09:45, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Toni001.JPG[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Toni001.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:23, 22 August 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. bluemask ^(talk) 10:23, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Echo001.JPG[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Echo001.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:24, 22 August 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. bluemask ^(talk) 10:24, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license[edit]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Milan001.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Milan001.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 11:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Got2believe001.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Got2believe001.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 11:19, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Sam001.JPG[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Sam001.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. bluemask ^(talk) 15:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image Problems[edit]

Hi Fetch dickson. I've just deleted 3 of the images you uploaded as they came from commercial websites and am looking at the rest. You may not have realized it but we cannot accept images from websites, only ones with free licences - preferably images you took yourself with your camera. Can you tell me, so we can get this sorted, whether the rest of the images came from websites - I can delete them and walk you through how image uploads work here then - Peripitus (Talk) 04:29, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't delete the images that I just uploaded. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fetch dickson (talk • contribs) 05:13, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Fetch but I have deleted all but the DVD/video covers. I found that all came from sources on the web and, by our term, are copyright violations. You should only upload images you own, you cannot take images from the internet and just edit/post them here - Peripitus (Talk) 05:17, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How come? Claudine's photo is in my folder and I edited it by myself as well as with Piolo and Toni's. I admit Kris' and Sam's were got from commercial websites. Who are you? Are you a Filipino? Do you know anything about these celebrities?

Claudine's photo appeared to be from a 2008 commercial photoshoot whose copyright is owned by Sasha Manuel. I'm not Filipino and know nothing of the people in the photos at all. All I can see is someone, with the best of intentions, adding images to articles. These images, as with most found on the web, are not freely licensed. For living people Wikipedia only accepts free images, that is those uploaded by a person who took the image. Editing the image does not affect the copyright ownership - it is still owned by the person who originally took the photo - Peripitus (Talk) 06:31, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well how come other Filipino celebrities' photos posted here were also posted in other sites? Are you the moderator of this site? How were you able to check that those images I've uploaded were owned by somebody else? What country are you from though? I am a supporter of those personalities so its kinda annoying when those facts I'm entering here is edited or deleted.

I'm not a moderator, just a normal editor with administrator buttons. I was able to check the source of the images through google image searching - through this you can often find the original source of images. The photos are posted on many sites as those sites do not enforce copyright the way that Wikipedia does. I understand that you are annoyed about your edits being removed or changed—There is a policy here called Biographies of living persons that may help you as to why. As so where I'm from; Australia - Peripitus (Talk) 07:16, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your edits on Angel Locsin[edit]

Please do not make images in the article smaller as what you did to Angel Locsin.ZMaxim (talk) 04:45, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Biographies of living persons[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions, including your edits to Claudine Barretto‎. However, please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information about living persons must not be libelous. Any controversial statements about a living person added to an article, or any other Wikipedia page, must include proper sources. Thank you. Jons63 (talk) 06:57, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did to Claudine Barretto‎. Thank you. Jons63 (talk) 07:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Claudine Barretto‎ reply[edit]

In reply to your message on my talk page. I removed them because they are controversial. Maybe not the marriage portion but the rest and they are not sourced. Any information about a living person that someone feels is controversial must be sourced or it will be removed on site. Do not readd this info unless you have a source. Jons63 (talk) 07:14, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Part of the section is Controversies which is unsourced. There is a description of her controversial breakup, also unsourced. I wouldn't object to the Marriage, but someone else objected to it. When I added a unferenced tag to that section, you deleted it. You are already in violation of the three revert rule as I explained also already. You also talk about someone else and downward spiral which is controversial and unsourced. Jons63 (talk) 07:37, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If material about a living person is negative or can appear to be negative and is unsourced, the material will be removed. The information I removed is either negative or appears to be negative and if you place it back in again without a source, I will remove it. I hope this clears things up. Jons63 (talk) 07:55, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you continue violating WP:BLP by adding unsourced, critical information, you will be blocked from editing. Dreadstar † 17:18, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Three Revert Rule[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Claudine Barretto‎. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Jons63 (talk) 07:26, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 07:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Hansen Nichols[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Hansen Nichols, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. CultureDrone (talk) 14:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Hansen Nichols[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Hansen Nichols, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hansen Nichols. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? CultureDrone (talk) 06:56, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flagicons in infoboxes[edit]

I have reverted the flagicon you added to "Ronnie Liang's infobox. Please read Wikipedia:Manual of Style (flags) before adding any more flagicons to infoboxes. In particular please pay close attention to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (flags)#Not for use in locations of birth and death. Aspects (talk) 01:41, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

August 2008[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Hansen Nichols. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. This also applies to the afd template deletion on Van Pojas. Aspects (talk) 05:44, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Hansen Nichols. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 05:44, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hansen Nichols article[edit]

Re the AfD for this article - I suggest you aquaint yourself with Wikipedia's policy for notability of people - WP:BIO. Just because someone was a contestant on a game show does not make them notable. In addition, Wikipedia does have a set of checks and balances - the AfD will garner a consensus of opinion from other editors - if they disagree with my proposal, then the AfD will fail. CultureDrone (talk) 09:13, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

September 2008[edit]

Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Van Pojas. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you. This also applies to the afd template deletion on Hansen Nichols. Aspects (talk) 01:58, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Calm down, please[edit]

Hi Fetch. Looking through your contributions, I can see that you've put a substantial amount of work into improving a lot of articles, and I appreciate it. You also put a good bit of work into Hansen Nichols, and it is understandable that having it AfD'd annoys you, but you are reacting to it badly. If you want to succeed, you should explain why you have done things, sign your edits, and not edit-war. Best wishes, Looie496 (talk) 04:05, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia image placeholders[edit]

The placeholder you put back into Kailangan Kita is for the purpose of requesting freely licensed images. Given that Kailangan Kita is a 2002 film, any image suitable for the inbox (promotional poster, DVD cover etc) is very likely to be non-free. Category:Wikipedia image placeholders may contain an appropriate alternative if you really think it's necessary. Thank you. --62.164.255.93 (talk) 06:24, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That placeholder remains inappropriate for that article. Once again, I ask you to look for an alternative here:

Category:Wikipedia image placeholders

Thank you. --62.164.255.93 (talk) 07:16, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 13:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hansen Nichols for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hansen Nichols 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/Hansen Nichols (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. power~enwiki (π, ν) 06:02, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]