Jump to content

User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Yamamoto Ichiro (talk | contribs)
47,174 edits
No edit summary
Yamamoto Ichiro (talk | contribs)
47,174 edits
archive, too lazy to do the actual archiving
Tag: Replaced
Line 1: Line 1:
<!-- Please leave new messages at the very bottom of this page -->
<!-- Please leave new messages at the very bottom of this page -->

== Userfy request ==

Hi,
You just deleted Michael Idato. Could you please userfy that to me? I think this is close enough a bit of work will get it over the line. [[User:Hobit|Hobit]] ([[User talk:Hobit|talk]]) 04:15, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

:{{done}} [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 04:18, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

== AFD: List of potentially habitable moons ==

I am puzzled by your close at [[WP:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_potentially_habitable_moons]]. It was unanimous to get rid of it, except for the sockpuppeting votes of the article creator. That looks like consensus to me.

Initial steps of cleanup has left the article <u>completely unsourced</u>. One source was a '''Start Trek Fan website''', two sources didn't say what the article-creator claimed they said, and the other sources vanished when I removed the hypothetical and unconfirmed moons. The table rows are going to get nuked because I doubt there are reasonable sources referring to Pluto etc as habitable. Many table columns are going to get nuked because (1) they are essentially empty, and (2) things like "habitable zone composition" are unencyclopedic novel/fringe/speculative view of a single source. Googling "habitable zone composition" gives me 39 hits, one of which is that original source, nearly all of the other hits are blatantly copied from Wikipedia, and the hits that aren't blatant copies from Wikipedia are forums and other user-generated content that are almost certainly derived from Wikipedia. There's nothing to salvage there. [[User:Alsee|Alsee]] ([[User talk:Alsee|talk]]) 08:30, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

:There is a reason why votes deletion on Wikipedia is called a '''!vote''', not a '''vote''', the strength of arguments matters very much in a deletion debate, and arguments that are not directly references to our guidelines are simply not weighted. That being said, you have made a very convincing argument for deletion right now, had you used the same argument during the deletion debate, I would have closed as '''delete'''. [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 17:17, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

*'''Comment''' I think the close is fine, I have found sources now such as [http://www.astrobio.net/news-exclusive/two-suns-could-make-more-habitable-moons/] [http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/04/13/473380087/hot-on-the-trail-of-alien-moons NPR], and [http://spacenews.com/nasa-expands-frontiers-of-next-new-frontiers-competition/ Space News]. The NPR source appears to give a list of possible habitable moons. However, I do think this list may need to be rewritten. [[User:Valoem|<font color="DarkSlateGray">'''Valoem'''</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Valoem|'''<font color="blue">talk</font>''']]</sup> <sup>[[Special:Contributions/Valoem|'''<font color="Green">contrib</font>''']]</sup> 04:02, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
**In that case instead of opening up another AfD shouldn't we just [[WP:TNT]]? <span style="border:2px solid #090E0E;padding:0px;"><font style="color:#FFFFFF;background:#000000;">[[User:Davidbuddy9|Davidbuddy9]]</font>[[User:Davidbuddy9/talk|<font style="color:#000000;background:#FFFFFF;">&nbsp;Talk&nbsp;</font>]] </span> 00:55, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

== Question about deleting an article with little discussion ==

Hello, you deleted [[Wang NewOne]], which only had comments from myself (article stub creator) and one other person. I would like to hear more about the decision to delete an article with minimal input, as well as ideas on ways to improve the article. Thank you. [[User:Yellow Swans|Yellow Swans]] ([[User talk:Yellow Swans|talk]]) 04:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
: I have userfied your article to [[User:Yellow Swans/Wang NewOne]] so you can work on the issues that was brought up in the deletion discussion. The concerns with your article was that it lacks [[WP:N|notability]], namely, good [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] that we can [[WP:V|verify]] that covers your subject in a '''significant''' detail. Remember, deletions are not final and you are very much welcome to resubmit this article again once you address the issues with notability. [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 06:06, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

== Deleted Page [[Rui Delgado]] ==

You closed a Wikipedia page for [[Rui Delgado]] that I created. I believe I did not do a good job when it comes to adding the reference to prove notability. A lot of the information I have it's using physical newspapers from the Dominican Republic. How can I present this?

I fixed and trimmed most of the information that seemed trivial and unnecessary. It seems I wasn't fast enough in doing so. I would appreciate any help you can give me so I can become a better contributor to Wikipedia. Thanks! Here's the link: [[Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rui_Delgado]] -- [[User:Torchbit|Torchbit]] ([[User talk:Torchbit#top|talk]]) 21:44, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
:'''Userfied''' your page onto [[User:Torchbit/Rui_Delgado]]. Feel free to move it back to [[Rui Delgado]] whenever you've found adequate sources for the subject. [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 02:13, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doombot]] ==

Hi, could you reconsider this closure? I see a consensus not to maintain this as a separate article, whether by merger or deletion. That's because of the three "keep" opinions, two did not address the issue of sources, but merely asserted that these were important fictional characters in-universe, which is not relevant according to our inclusion guidelines. And the third "keep" did cite sources, but did not reply to the question how much these covered the topic. I'd close this as a redirect, with editors then having to determine what to merge. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sandstein|<span style="color:white;background:blue;font-family:sans-serif;">'''&nbsp;Sandstein&nbsp;'''</span>]]</span></small> 12:54, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
: I potentially see that too, I just usually prefer not to get involved in cases like this since it's not a matter related to deletion which is what [[WP:AFD]] is designed to handle, as AFD is strictly related to deletion matters, whereas deciding keep vs merge is more of an editorial choice that doesn't require administrator intervention compared to deletion. I mean I could change the article to a redirect right now and you could do it too if you want, even an anon IP editor can do it, but I don't see how that ultimately relates to a process that is designed for article deletion, or even requires me changing the outcome of the closure. [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 13:03, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
::Well, AfDs can have merge or redirect as an outcome, and in cases such as these, I consider it better to close them with a result that makes clear (as here) the consensus not to keep the article. That gives a clearer direction than just "no consensus", which isn't strictly true here - we have no consensus to delete, but we do have consensus to not keep. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sandstein|<span style="color:white;background:blue;font-family:sans-serif;">'''&nbsp;Sandstein&nbsp;'''</span>]]</span></small> 13:11, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
:::I think in the context of XfD's, by default, no consensus will almost always mean there's no consensus to delete since that's what the process is for, and this is definitely not the same thing as a '''keep''' close. Even when an AfD is closed as keep, sometimes they get merged if the editorial consensus changes after an AfD, sometimes if AfD is closed as redirect/merge, they get changed back to a separate article later on. This is done without the closing admin's intervention, and it rightly shouldn't need to involve the previous AfD's closing admin since it's not a deletion related matter. I guess in the end we just fundamentally disagree wether if AfD should be used to decide redirect/keep if no deletion consensus exist. I don't agree with the fact that closing admin should decide the editorial fate of the article if no consensus to delete has been determined, since I prefer closing admin's job to be limited in scope as possible to avoid making controversial decisions without consensus, unless the vote to redirect is unanimous or something. That being said, I did change the [[Doombot]] page to a redirect, not in the capacity as the closing admin, but as a regular editor. [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 15:20, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

==Tora==
Hi Yamamoto Ichiro. I'd like to ask you to reconsider your close of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tora (band) (2nd nomination)|this]] afd. There is no consensus to keep. All keep argument were refuted. Close ten minutes after shaidar's reply give no chance of further discussion. [[User:Duffbeerforme|duffbeerforme]] ([[User talk:Duffbeerforme|talk]]) 13:42, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
:Two of the deletion !votes are non-valid arguments, you are the only one who made valid arguments but didn't provide much evidence to support your argument. If you want to claim it fails [[WP:RS]] you should really expand on that, especially if there is a lot of sources. I could relist it for another week if you wish though. [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 13:57, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
::A relist would be good. would allow me to reply properly to shaidar. [[User:Duffbeerforme|duffbeerforme]] ([[User talk:Duffbeerforme|talk]]) 12:56, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

== [[Anthony Rodriguez (pianist)]]==
Hi you deleted [[Anthony Rodriguez (pianist)]] Is there any chance you can help me create a stub for the Article you deleted?[[User:StrongWik|StrongWik]] ([[User talk:StrongWik|talk]]) 18:01, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
:Hey there, I moved your article to [[Draft:Anthony Rodriguez (pianist)]] so you can work and improve on the article. Whenever you feel the article is ready, feel free to move it back to the article [[WP:NS|namespace]]. [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 18:07, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
::Hi again, i turned the Article into a stub page. Does that help to restore the Article?[[User:StrongWik|StrongWik]] ([[User talk:StrongWik|talk]]) 19:39, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
:::If you can source it properly such that [[WP:BIO]] or [[WP:NMUSIC]] is followed then yes. You want your article to have significant coverage in sources that we consider to be [[WP:RS|reliable]]. [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 19:42, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
::::::::I was reading the [[Wikipedia:NMUSIC]] and this reference of [[Kean University]] about [[Anthony Rodriguez (pianist)]] seems to fit the requirement. Here see under Arts and Entertainment [http://www.kean.edu/~thetower/towerpdfs/100808_Tower_FINAL_Singles.pdf The Tower - Kean University] - And as the producer of a film's soundtrack which is in the movie database in [[IMDb]] [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443663/fullcredits Tangy Song Telly Award Film] What you think?[[User:StrongWik|StrongWik]] ([[User talk:StrongWik|talk]]) 19:58, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Florence Devouard (3rd nomination)]] ==

Are you sure that this close was correct? Nobody in the discussion offered any sources that indicate a pass of the general notability guideline, and the position of ''chevalier'' in the ''[[Ordre national du Mérite]]'' is, as I said in the discussion, the rough equivalent of an [[MBE]] in the UK, which has always been taken to be at least two levels below the level required for notability. My father was an MBE, but it would be ridiculous to claim notability on this basis, as he was given that position by virtue of local voluntary work. There are well over 100,000 such ''chevaliers'' in France. [[Special:Contributions/86.17.222.157|86.17.222.157]] ([[User talk:86.17.222.157|talk]]) 19:50, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
:Repeating your argument that you have already made does not make it any more or less valid. The point being, in a AfD discussion, you have the burden to prove that the article does not meet the notability standard, [[Ordre national du Mérite]] is nowhere on [[WP:N]] or [[WP:BIO]]. [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 19:56, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
::Sorry, but I don't understand what you are saying. It looks like that you are agreeing that being a ''chevalier'' in the ''[[Ordre national du Mérite]]'' doesn't meet the notability guidelines. The claim that it does was the only claim made by those supporting keeping. Nobody provided any evidence that the subject meets any notability guideline other than that, so I don't see how you can claim that there was a policy-based consensus for keeping. Please explain what is invalid in the argument the I made in the discussion, which includes the unanswered claim that there are no "independent reliable sources that actually write anything substantial about Florence Devouard rather than just quote her" to be found. [[Special:Contributions/86.17.222.157|86.17.222.157]] ([[User talk:86.17.222.157|talk]]) 20:22, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
:::I was hoping the you would continue this conversation. If you choose not to then I will take this to deletion review, with a recommendation to relist because nearly all of the discussion was about editor behaviour rather than the notability of the subject. [[Special:Contributions/86.17.222.157|86.17.222.157]] ([[User talk:86.17.222.157|talk]]) 20:45, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
:::The arguments of keep !votes doesn't matter so much if the deletion arguments is a bunch of [[WP:POLICYWAVE]] without expanding on the reasoning behind it, if you are claiming failing [[WP:GNG]] you should provide clear evidence why that is the case. Also, the deletion !votes on this AfD are casted by SPA's and do not form consensus. [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 13:56, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
::::The only [[WP:POLICYWAVE]]s were from those arguing for keeping, which stated that the article should be kept without providing any evidence. And I am certainly not an SPA. Please look at my contributions and retract that statement. ''And'' your demand for proof that the subject ''doesn't'' pass the general notability guideline is impossible to meet for any subject. All that we can do is look for independent reliable sources with significant coverage and say whether we can find any. Nobody in this discussion found any. [[Special:Contributions/86.17.222.157|86.17.222.157]] ([[User talk:86.17.222.157|talk]]) 17:31, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
::::This is now at [[Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2016 April 21|deletion review]]. [[Special:Contributions/86.17.222.157|86.17.222.157]] ([[User talk:86.17.222.157|talk]]) 17:49, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

== Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katie Rodan closure ==

Re: closure of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katie Rodan]], you did not state an "informative deletion reason" for the closure per steps outlined in [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion of biographies of living people#Deleting_and_undeleting|WP:BLPPROD]]. Can you update? [[User:Hmlarson|Hmlarson]] ([[User talk:Hmlarson|talk]]) 22:39, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
:[[WP:BLPPROD]] does not apply to [[WP:AFD]], where closure is determined by a consensus in a deletion discussion rather than a [[WP:PROD]] tagging, this only applies to [[WP:BLP]] articles that was undergoing [[WP:PROD]]. [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 02:55, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

== [[Anthony Rodriguez (pianist)|Modified Anthony Rodriguez (pianist)]] ==

Hi!! I think you will like this modification. I removed and changed a few things. I hope this is great for a stub page and as time passes more details will be added. What you think?[[User:StrongWik|StrongWik]] ([[User talk:StrongWik|talk]]) 02:51, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
: It looks okay, but you should get a second opinion just in case. As long as you make sure the article does not contain information that would be considered [[WP:OR|original research]], aka. facts that you cannot infer from [[WP:RS|your sources]], you should be fine. [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 02:57, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
:: I went there to [[Wikipedia:Original research]] to request an opinion. <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:StrongWik|StrongWik]] ([[User talk:StrongWik|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/StrongWik|contribs]]) 03:13, 20 April 2016 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Concerning your close of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christian Distefano]] ==

You stated in your close that "the sources is somewhat debatable in terms of reliability and a case can be made for either way" however, nobody made an argument that the sources were sufficient, and even if that were the case, all that does is [[WP:GNG|give a ''presumption'' of notability]]; articles can have sourcing and still fail to be notable. Given that your close reflected [[WP:SUPERVOTE|your opinion of the article]] rather than a consensus of the discussion, before it's taken to [[WP:DELREV]] would you be willing to consider re-closing [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christian Distefano]] to reflect consensus? - [[User:Aoidh|Aoidh]] ([[User talk:Aoidh|talk]]) 06:50, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
:Please read [[WP:SUPERVOTE]] more closely. No consensus close are considered to be non-prejudicial you can revery my close and relist it for another week if you wish, it's usually a waste of time to go through [[WP:DELREV]] for any '''no consensus''' without prejudice closes since it's not really considered to be a proper close with an outcome. It's almost always better to relist or re-start a AfD instead. '''keep''' results on the other hand should go through [[WP:DELREV]]. [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 06:59, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
::I'll do that, thank you. - [[User:Aoidh|Aoidh]] ([[User talk:Aoidh|talk]]) 07:04, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

== About an article for deletion ==

you have recently relisted an afd for a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Is there any way in which we (users) can request admins to share their opinion about a particular afd? [[Special:Contributions/122.177.216.113|122.177.216.113]] ([[User talk:122.177.216.113|talk]]) 11:50, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

== [[Sharfadin]] ==

Saw you deleted this page. Thanks! Also, please note that [[Special:Contributions/Menan_akc|a sock puppet]] (most probably of this farm: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jinodare], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism&diff=prev&oldid=712348180]) has appeared and recreated this page under "[[Şerfedîn]]". If you have spare time, please use your admin tools there as appropriate. --[[User:Dorpater|Dorpater]] ([[User talk:Dorpater|talk]]) 17:19, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

==Deletion review for [[Katie Rodan]]==
[[User:Hmlarson]] has asked for a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2016 April 20#Katie Rodan|deletion review]] of [[Katie Rodan]]. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. <!-- This originally was from the template {{subst:DRVNote|PAGE_NAME}} ~~~~ --> —[[User:Cryptic|Cryptic]] 19:34, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

== Request for rollback ==


Dear Ichiro,

I am a 22 year old female User who would like rollback rights to make vandal-fighting a bit quicker and more efficient. I have been an active vandalfighter for sometime now. Thank you for your time and consideration. ([[User:Mona778|Mona778]] ([[User talk:Mona778|talk]]) 20:16, 22 April 2016 (UTC))

{{done}} [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 20:42, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

== fruits ==

'''<big>Apple, Bananas and Oranges for you</big><br />
[[File:Red Apple.jpg|250px]]
[[File:3 Bananas.jpg|250px]]
[[File:Orange-Whole-&-Split.jpg|300px]]<br />
<big>'''For your contribution to Wikipedia'''</big> --[[User:BenLrove|BenLrove]] ([[User talk:BenLrove|talk]]) 22:11, 22 April 2016 (UTC)'''

== A [[Dobos torte]] for you! ==

{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | [[File:Dobos cake (Gerbeaud Confectionery Budapest Hungary).jpg|120px]]
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | [[User:Mona778|Mona778]] ([[User talk:Mona778|talk]]) has given you a [[Dobos torte]] to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.



To give a Dobos torte and spread the [[Wikipedia:WikiLove|WikiLove]], just place {{tls|Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
|} Thank you for placing your trust and confidence in me. ([[User:Mona778|Mona778]] ([[User talk:Mona778|talk]]) 23:03, 22 April 2016 (UTC))

== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Mary's Jacobite Syrian Church Vettithara]] ==

I request that you reconsider your close of the above linked AfD. Firstly, although one participant provided sources, they were not enough to convince the other participants to reconsider their vote, and most of the participants wishing to keep the article offered no proven arguments for the church's notability or otherwise significance. These arguments include assertions that the church was "important" and contained relic(s) that were "enshrined in only a few churches in the world", as one participant remarked. Furthermore, most of the sources presented either were a short mention (or even ''no mention'' at all!) and not [[WP:SIGCOV|significant coverage]], or [[WP:SPS|self-published]] and unreliable. Below is an analysis of the sources in the article itself and the sources presented at the AfD:

=== Presented at AfD ===
*http://www.mathrubhumi.com/ernakulam/malayalam-news/piravam-1.833005 - [[Mathrubhumi]] is likely a reliable source. However, it only announces services to be held at the church at a specific date, and does not cover the church itself. The following is a translation of the source via Google Translate:
{{cot}}
Martha, Mary's Jacobite Syrian Orthodox Church of the Holy വെട്ടിത്തറ Kodiyeri on 31 86th major at the festival.
St. Mary's and Youth Association of the Silver Jubilee celebrations of the trustee shall also be conducted in Wilson PA, the festival committee and office bearers Bibin Jacob, ഷൈൻസൺ, സമാപനവും Arun Varkey said.
The Eucharist on Sunday morning, the vicar at 10.30. Paul എരമംഗലത്ത് banners. The devotees of the organizations to be held at 7.45 pm The annual meeting will be inaugurated by the District Sunday School Association പൂത്തൃക്ക Inspector Thomas Peter.
On the morning of February 8 കുർബാനയുണ്ട്. On the night procession of 8.30.
The festival will be held on Tuesday at 8.45 in the morning, the Eucharist മൂന്നിന്മേൽ Metropolitan, Dr. Parish. Rev. Mathews Mar will be the morning.
Following the conclusion of the meeting of the Metropolitan Youth Association will inaugurate the Silver Jubilee to be held at 10.30. 12 കുരിശിങ്കലേക്ക് on the lower orbit, Madurai orchestras across the concert at 7 pm.
{{cob}}
:Whether this source passes the level of "significant coverage" is arguable, as it only acts as a ''schedule'' of the church's activity on one day. Although this may boost a claim of notability, it does not boost it by much.
*http://syrianyouthvoice.blogspot.com/2012/01/blog-post_29.html?m=1 - Blog with no apparent factchecking.
*http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-features/tp-fridayreview/the-revered-relic/article5097889.ece - This article from an apparently reliable source does not cover the church that was nominated for AfD itself. Instead, it covers a relic stored in a church called "Mor Gregorios Jacobite Syrian Orthodox Cathedral Mettuguda" and mentions a Syrian church named (the church under debate was in India), "St. Mary’s Soonoro Syriac Orthodox Church". In addition, even if this article covered this church, it would be a weak case of significant coverage, as they focus most discussion on the ''relic'' itself, spending only one or two sentences about where this relic was held.
*http://sana.sy/en/?p=10227 - Same as above, covers the relic, but does not discuss this church ''at all'', instead covering another church in Syria.
*http://www.soc-wus.org/page.php?id=109 - Yet the same; does not mention this church at all.

=== In article ===
(some of the sources were already addressed above)
*http://www.vettitharakochupally.org/ - Official website of this church, non-independent source.
*http://thuruthel.org/ - Affiliated with this church.

To sum it all up: only one source weakly contributes to this church's notability, and most of the sources presented and in the article do not even cover the church itself! Per the above, I believe that it fails [[WP:GNG]] by a wide margin. '''''[[User:Esquivalience|<span style="color: #33BBFF; font-family:Lato, monospace'">Esquivalience</span>]]'' <sup>[[User talk:Esquivalience|<span style="color:#00B88A;">t</span>]]</sup>''' 02:19, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

:Thanks for brining this to my attention, will relist the discussion for further discussion [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 05:17, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

== Extended confirmed protection ==

{{ivmbox|1=Hello, Yamamoto Ichiro. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

[[WP:BLUELOCK|Extended confirmed protection]] (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned [[WP:EXTENDEDCONFIRMED|"extended confirmed" user right]] was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 129#New usergroup with autopromotion to implement arbitration "30-500" bans as a page protection|this community discussion]] with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, [[WP:ECP2016|a request for comment]] established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:
* '''Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective'''. It should not be used as a first resort.
* '''A bot will post a notification at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard]] of each use'''. MusikBot currently does this by updating [[User:MusikBot/ECPMonitor/Report|a report]], which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.
Please review [[Wikipedia:Protection policy#Extended confirmed protection|the protection policy]] carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you. <br><small>This message was sent to the administrators' [[Wikipedia:Administrators/Message list|mass message list]]. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)</small> |2=Padlock-blue.svg}}
<!--Message sent following discussion at WT:PP-->
<!-- Message sent by User:Xaosflux@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators/Message_list&oldid=737471142 -->

== hixxy page deleted ==

Hi, how do i request that a page is un-deleted? You have deleted a page about myself that has been used a viewed by many people to get information about my history and achievements as an artist & DJ - the page was full of correct information as i understood it & i had many other links across the wikipedia site where my artist name is mentioned for other notable works i had done & on other artists pages on here.
I'm completely new to this site so i hope i'm using it correct ly to contact you this way. best regard <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Irhhxy|Irhhxy]] ([[User talk:Irhhxy#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Irhhxy|contribs]]) 17:09, 11 October 2016 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins ==

Hello,

Please note that [[Time-based One-time Password Algorithm|TOTP]] based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your [[Special:Preferences|preferences page]] in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the [[Help:Two-factor authentication|developing help page]] for additional information. '''Important''': Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Two-Factor_Authentication_now_available_for_admins|thread on the administrators' noticeboard]]. [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Mike V@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Mike_V/All_admins&oldid=749162175 -->

== A new user right for New Page Patrollers ==

Hi {{BASEPAGENAME}}.

A new user group, [[Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Reviewers|'''New Page Reviewer''']], has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at [[Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/New page reviewer|PERM]]. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available [[Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Templates|here]] but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at [[WT:NPR]]. <small>''(Sent to all admins)''</small>.[[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 13:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Kudpung@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators/Message_list&oldid=748418714 -->

== [[WP:ACE2016|ArbCom Elections 2016]]: Voting now open! ==

{{Ivmbox|Hello, Yamamoto Ichiro. Voting in the '''[[WP:ACE2016|2016 Arbitration Committee elections]]''' is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The [[WP:ARBCOM|Arbitration Committee]] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration|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 [[WP:BAN|site bans]], [[WP:TBAN|topic bans]], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy|arbitration policy]] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2016/Candidates|the candidates' statements]] and submit your choices on '''[[Special:SecurePoll/vote/399|the voting page]]'''. [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
|Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}}
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52 bot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Mdann52_bot/spamlist/7&oldid=750547185 -->

==Rodd Wolff AfD closing==

Hi [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro]]: I have a question for you and I don’t ask it to be argumentative or insulting, but as a Wikipedia newbie I just want to understand what the final process was. I was reading at “Wikipedia:Guide to deletion,” which stated "''A good administrator will transparently explain how the decision (for Closure) was reached.''” When you closed the Rodd Wolff AfD, there was no mention of how the decision was met,or what the process was that you went through. May I ask if you just counted the Delete votes and then closed the AfD, or did you “''review the article, carefully read the discussion, weigh all the facts, evidence and arguments presented and determine if consensus was reached on the fate of the article.''” I realize as the author of this page I am biased, but the arguments for the Delete votes were extremely weak and ineffective, with no backup support. All Delete argument were completely refuted, I explained in great detail how this subject met the Wikipedia requirements for Notability. Thanks, [[User:Zootsuit1941|Zootsuit1941]] ([[User talk:Zootsuit1941|talk]]) 03:23, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
:I have not given a reason for this closure because the consensus of the discussion is very self evident here. Just because you have countered their points, does not mean you have refuted their claims, nor does it mean your interpretation of the deletion policy was correct. Now if you truly believe this article can be made to comply with the Wikipedia's [[WP:N|notability]] guidelines, I can restore the article as a draft again so you can work on it. [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 04:27, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
::Hi [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro]]: Based on your above comment it’s obvious to me you only did a vote count and did not read any of the comments in the AfD, as yes many if not all of the Delete claims were refuted, not all by me, several by other editors. I’m reluctant to write more on this since it seems as though you have a closed mind. But here are a few examples. One voter for a Delete by the name of Jergling based his rational on “''The only sources that mention him significantly are self-published.''” Not only did I refute this but another editor by the name of DGG also refuted it with his comment of “''it is not self-published, and I cannot imagine where that view came from.''” Another voter for a Delete by the name of Lemongirl942 based her vote on “''We require reliable secondary sources and it is very clear that there aren't here.''” The two McFarland references in the article are clearly reliable secondary sources, her statement was entirley wrong, there can be no question on that.

::As far as my interpretation of the deletion policy not being correct, it is more correct than the nominator's. For example, one of the reasons for his nomination was “''he's literally only a background stuntman whose IMDb lists trivial works and, as we know, these people rarely get actual attention…''” Another editor by the name of 86.17.222.157 commented “''The nominators statement that "these people rarely get actual attention" may be true, but in this particular case this person has got actual attention from the book published by McFarland cited in the article''.” And the nominator follows up with “''Even then, that one book is still not going to establish notability, ... unless there's literally national and international attention.” “National and international attention?''" National and international attention is NOT a Wikipedia requirement! If so, where is that written? So you tell me who has a better interpretation of the deletion policy. Plus I added many more references during the AfD process which the nominator failed to knowledge.

::And don’t get me started on the nominator SwisterTwister. He initially tried to get this article deleted with a Proposed deletion (PROD) and the rules for a PROD state “''is a way to suggest an article for uncontroversial deletion. It is an easier method of removing articles than the articles for deletion process (AfD).''” “''PROD must only be used if no opposition to the deletion is expected''.” Why would this article be an uncontroversial deletion, it was already approved by two othe editors (Robert McClenon and Shadowowl). Also, the PROD requirement states “''The article's creator should ideally be left a message at their talk page(s) informing them of the proposed article deletio''n.” This was not done! SwisterTwister was just hoping to have this article deleted without anyone having a chance to object. By the way (and slightly off topic), I’ve noticed on many of the new AfDs that most of them should never have been created, it appears to me that many nominators are being deceitful in their write-ups. For what reasons I don’t know, maybe they get some kind of Wikipedia credit for being having articles deleted?

::As far as your comment that you would restore the article again as a draft to make bring the article into comlince with the Wikipedia’s notability guidelines, this article already meets the necessary guidelines. Remember, it was initially accepted by two other editors. And at that time it had only 2 or 3 references as I recall. In this AfD process I have improved the article even more, to the point where it had 15 references when it was finally deleted. As I stated in the AfD (and I recognize I’m not suppose to repeat stuff out of the AfD at this talk page, but I’m going to,

::the subject of this article definitely meets or exceeds the notability requirements of Wikipedia based on the following four Notability-for-People sub-topics (i.e., 4 of 6, but you only necessarily need to meet one I believe):
:::(1) the subject has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions,
:::(2) the subject has received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject,
:::(3) the subject has received a well-known and significant award or honor, and
:::(4) the subject has an entry in the Dictionary of National Biography or similar publication

::Based on the what happen in the AfD and your poor review of the AfD, I think it would only be a waste of time to put this back as a draft, so I will pass on that offer even though I appreciate you making the offer. Plus I couldn’t put up with any more of the personal insults that I suffered in that AfD process. I’ve learned that Wikipedia editors can be extremely nasty people.

::That's my last vent, my apologies for another "Wall of Text," to paraphrase Lemongirl942. :o) This matter is closed for me. [[User:Zootsuit1941|Zootsuit1941]] ([[User talk:Zootsuit1941|talk]]) 18:15, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

== Season's Greetings! ==

<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#FF4646; background-color:#F6F0F7; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:7px; border-radius: 1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);<!--
-->;" class="plainlinks">[[File:Happy Holidays (2135831016).jpg|217px|left]][[File:Arbuckle Bros. (3093003361).jpg|190px|right]][[File:Season's Greetings, Christmas Card from 320 Ranch.jpg|217px|left]]{{Center|[[File:Happy Holidays text.png|301px]]}}
'''Hello Yamamoto Ichiro:''' Enjoy the '''[[Christmas and holiday season|holiday season]]''' and '''[[winter solstice]]''' if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand [[Wikipedia]]. Cheers, [[User:Mona778|Mona778]] ([[User talk:Mona778|talk]]) 03:13, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
[[File:A book of country clouds and sunshine (1897), cropped.jpg|center|500px]]{{paragraph break}}
</div>
{{paragraph break}}
:<div style="float:left">''{{resize|88%|Spread the WikiLove; use {{tls|Season's Greetings}} to send this message}}''</div>{{-}}

== Administrators' newsletter - February 2017 ==

[[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter|News and updates for administrators]] from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please [[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter/Subscribe|subscribe]]. Your [[Wikipedia talk:Administrators' newsletter|feedback]] is welcomed.

[[File:Admin mop.PNG|20px]] '''Administrator changes'''
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-add.svg|20px]] [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/NinjaRobotPirate|NinjaRobotPirate]] • [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Schwede66|Schwede66]] • [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/K6ka|K6ka]] • [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ealdgyth|Ealdgyth]] • [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ferret|Ferret]] • [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Cyberpower678 2|Cyberpower678]] • [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Mz7|Mz7]] • [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Primefac 2|Primefac]] • [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Dodger67 2|Dodger67]]
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg|20px]] [[Wikipedia:Inactive administrators/2017#January 2017|Briangotts]] • [[Wikipedia:Inactive administrators/2017#January 2017|JeremyA]] • [[Special:Permalink/762731058#Desysop request|BU Rob13]]

[[File:Green check.svg|20px]] '''Guideline and policy news'''
:*A [[Wikipedia talk:Administrators#Workshopping an RfC on the inactivity policy|discussion]] to workshop proposals to amend the [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Lengthy inactivity|administrator inactivity policy]] at [[Wikipedia talk:Administrators]] has been in process since late December 2016.
:*[[Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016]] closed with no consensus for implementing [[Wikipedia:Pending changes#Effect of various protection levels|Pending changes level 2]] with new criteria for use.
:*Following [[Wikipedia talk:Bot policy#Activity requirements|an RfC]], an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

[[File:Octicons-tools.svg|20px]] '''Technical news'''
:*When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. ([[Phab:T34950|T34950]])
:*Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Make PC2 no longer available to admins|RfC]] closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. ([[Phab:T156448|T156448]])
:* The Foundation has [[:mailarchive:wikimedia-l/2017-January/086013.html|announced]] a new [[meta:Community health initiative|community health initiative]] to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

[[File:Scale of justice 2.svg|20px]] '''Arbitration'''
:*The Arbitration Committee released [[Special:Permalink/762120256#Response to the Wikimedia Foundation statement on paid editing and outing|a response]] to the Wikimedia Foundation's [[Wikipedia:Wikimedia Foundation statement on paid editing and outing|statement on paid editing and outing]].

[[File:Nuvola apps knewsticker.png|20px]] '''Obituaries'''
:* [[User:JohnCD|JohnCD]] (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

----
{{center|[[Wikipedia talk:Administrators' newsletter/17/1|Discuss this newsletter]] • [[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter/Subscribe|Subscribe]] • [[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter/Archive|Archive]]}}

13:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Samwalton9@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_newsletter/First_issue&oldid=763126991 -->

==Katie Rodan==
I created [[Katie Rodan]] today (over the redirect), without realising that there had been an AfD last year, for which you were the closing admin. It looks like the AfD was close run. How should I best proceed? [[User:Edwardx|Edwardx]] ([[User talk:Edwardx|talk]]) 14:39, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Academician Zan Mitrev]] ==

Would you please re-open this discussion? There were few !votes and one of them was the obvious-fan-of-the-subject who created the article. Thanks. [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 01:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
:I would recommend re-nom over relisting to be honest, as I doubt you'll get a much different result should I relist anyways, that being said, I'll relist it if you wish since this is somewhat of a borderline case on the relist/close decision. I would generally advise a re-nom somewhere down the line at the right time so you can get more people participating. Are you sure you want to have this relisted again? [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 01:08, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

== Page Recreation ==

Yamamoto Ichiro, I just recently recreated a page with the name Corey Mills; this is with updated information.
[[User:CoreyMills|MisterSir]] ([[User talk:CoreyMills|talk]]) 19:24, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

== ArbCom 2017 election voter message ==

{{Ivmbox|Hello, Yamamoto Ichiro. Voting in the '''[[WP:ACE2017|2017 Arbitration Committee elections]]''' is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The [[WP:ARBCOM|Arbitration Committee]] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration|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 [[WP:BAN|site bans]], [[WP:TBAN|topic bans]], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy|arbitration policy]] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2017/Candidates|the candidates]] and submit your choices on the '''[[Special:SecurePoll/vote/400|voting page]]'''. [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
|Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}}
<!-- Message sent by User:Xaosflux@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2017/Coordination/MMS/12&oldid=813413851 -->

== If you're still around... ==

Please see [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#Los_Angeles_Lakers|this request]]. I note that there has been no activity from this account for almost a year, but on the off chance you are still monitoring your talk page, I am making this notification as a courtesy. Thank you. [[User:Eggishorn|Eggishorn]] [[User talk:Eggishorn|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Eggishorn|(contrib)]]

== Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity ==


[[File:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]]
Following a [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/suspend sysop rights of inactive admins|community discussion]] in June 2011, consensus was reached to [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Procedural removal for inactive administrators|provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year]] (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed&#32;if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated&#32;should this occur, please post to the [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard]] and the userright will be restored per the [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats#Resysopping|re-sysopping process]] (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time, and that you have not been inactive from administrative tasks for a five year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at [[WP:RFA]]. Further, following a [[Special:PermanentLink/828861169#RFC: Slight tweak to lengthy inactivity policy|community discussion in March of 2018]], Administrators suspended for inactivity who have not had any logged administrative activity for five years will need to request reinstatement at [[WP:RFA]]. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. <!-- Template:Inactive admin -->—&thinsp;[[User:JJMC89 bot|JJMC89 '''bot''']] 00:03, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

== Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity ==


[[File:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]]
Following a [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/suspend sysop rights of inactive admins|community discussion]] in June 2011, consensus was reached to [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Procedural removal for inactive administrators|provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year]] (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed&#32;if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated&#32;should this occur, please post to the [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard]] and the userright will be restored per the [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats#Resysopping|re-sysopping process]] (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time, and that you have not been inactive from administrative tasks for a five year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at [[WP:RFA]]. Further, following a [[Special:PermanentLink/828861169#RFC: Slight tweak to lengthy inactivity policy|community discussion in March of 2018]], Administrators suspended for inactivity who have not had any logged administrative activity for five years will need to request reinstatement at [[WP:RFA]]. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. <!-- Template:Inactive admin -->—&thinsp;[[User:JJMC89 bot|JJMC89 '''bot''']] 00:01, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

== ArbCom 2018 election voter message ==

{{Ivmbox|Hello, Yamamoto Ichiro. Voting in the '''[[WP:ACE2018|2018 Arbitration Committee elections]]''' is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The [[WP:ARBCOM|Arbitration Committee]] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration|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 [[WP:BAN|site bans]], [[WP:TBAN|topic bans]], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy|arbitration policy]] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2018/Candidates|the candidates]] and submit your choices on the '''[[Special:SecurePoll/vote/710|voting page]]'''. [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
|Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}}
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2018/Coordination/MMS/12&oldid=866998410 -->

== ArbCom 2019 special circular ==

<div class="notice" style="background:#fff1d2; border:1px solid #886644; padding:0.5em; margin:0.5em auto; min-height:40px; line-height:130.7%; font-weight: 130.7%;">
{|
|valign="top" style="padding: 0.5em 1em 0 0.25em;"| [[File:Warning sign font awesome.svg|40px|center|link=|alt=Icon of a white exclamation mark within a black triangle]]
|<span style="font-size: 125%;">'''Administrators [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Security|must]] secure their accounts'''</span>
The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.
* Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email
* [[Special:ChangePassword|Change your password now]] if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, [https://haveibeenpwned.com/Passwords exposed], or weak
* [[Wikipedia:User_account_security#Two-factor authentication (2FA)|Enable two-factor authentication now]] for improved security
|}
<span style="color:#5871C6;cursor:pointer" class="mw-customtoggle-ArbCom_2019_special_circular">{{clickable button|1=View additional information}}</span>
</div><div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="mw-customcollapsible-ArbCom_2019_special_circular" style="display:none">
<div style="border-style: dotted; border-color: #886644; border-width: 0 3px 3px 3px; padding: 0 0.5em 0.5em 0.5em;">

{| style="border-left: 3px solid black; padding-left: 1em;"
|{{null}}
; Why have I received this message?
: All administrators are receiving it.

; What prompted you to send this message?
: Recently, several Wikipedia admin accounts were compromised. The admin accounts were [[WP:LEVEL1|desysopped on an emergency basis]]. In the past, the Committee often resysopped admin accounts as a matter of course once the admin was back in control of their account. The committee has updated its guidelines. Admins may now be required to undergo a fresh [[WP:RFA|Request for Adminship (RfA)]] after losing control of their account.

; What do I need to do?
: Only to follow the instructions in this message.
:# Check that your password is unique (not reused across sites).
:# Check that your password is strong (not simple or guessable).
:# Enable Two-factor authentication (2FA), if you can, to create a second hurdle for attackers.

; How can I find out more about two-factor authentication (2FA)?
: You can find out more about 2FA at [[m:2FA]].
|}</div>
</div>

<small>This message was sent to all administrators following a [[Special:Permalink/891851004#Return of permissions for compromised administrator accounts|recent motion]]. Thank you for your attention. For the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee|Arbitration Committee]], [[User:Cameron11598|Cameron11598]] 02:56, 4 May 2019 (UTC)</small>
<!-- Template:ArbCom 2019 special circular -->
<!-- Message sent by User:Cameron11598@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Bradv/Adminlist-mms&oldid=891852932 -->

== Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular) ==

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Security|required]] to "have strong passwords and [[Wikipedia:Personal security practices|follow appropriate personal security practices]]." We have [[Special:Permalink/891851004#Return of permissions for compromised administrator accounts|updated]] our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, [[WP:2FA|two-factor authentication]] remains an ''optional'' means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -[[User:Cameron11598|Cameron11598]] 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)</small>
<!-- Template:ArbCom 2019 special circular correction -->
<!-- Message sent by User:Cameron11598@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Bradv/Adminlist-mms&oldid=891852932 -->

== ArbCom 2019 election voter message ==

<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;">
<tr><td style="vertical-align:middle; padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">[[File:Scale of justice 2.svg|40px]]</td><td>Hello! Voting in the '''[[WP:ACE2019|2019 Arbitration Committee elections]]''' is now open until 23:59 on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2019|end}}-1 day}}. All '''[[Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2019#Election_timeline|eligible users]]''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The [[WP:ARBCOM|Arbitration Committee]] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration|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 [[WP:BAN|site bans]], [[WP:TBAN|topic bans]], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy|arbitration policy]] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2019/Candidates|the candidates]] and submit your choices on the '''[[Special:SecurePoll/vote/{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2019|poll}}|voting page]]'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
</td></tr>
</table>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2019/Coordination/MMS/01&oldid=926750232 -->

== Pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity ==


[[File:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]]
Established [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Procedural removal for inactive administrators|policy]] provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have not made any edits or logged actions in the preceding twelve months. Because you have been inactive, your administrative permissions will be removed&#32;if you do not return to activity within the next month.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to rejoin the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators]]. If you do not intend to rejoin the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard|the bureaucrats' noticeboard]].

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. <!-- Template:Inactive admin -->—&thinsp;[[User:JJMC89 bot|JJMC89 '''bot''']] 00:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
== Nomination for deletion of [[:Template:Rollback granted 2]] ==
[[File:Ambox warning blue.svg|30px|link=]][[:Template:Rollback granted 2]] has been [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion|nominated for deletion]]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 September 2#Template:Rollback granted 2|the entry on the Templates for discussion page]].<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> <span style="color:#AAA"><small>&#123;{u&#124;</small><span style="border-radius:9em;padding:0 5px;background:#088">[[User:Sdkb|<span style="color:#FFF">'''Sdkb'''</span>]]</span><small>}&#125;</small></span> <sup>[[User talk:Sdkb|'''talk''']]</sup> 02:37, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
: Late reply but good call on the xfd. Would have deleted it myself since I felt it was outdated as well. [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 02:05, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2013 Wikipedia Star Trek Into Darkness controversy]] ==

Hi, hope all is well. Could you elaborate on your understanding of the consensus at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2013 Wikipedia Star Trek Into Darkness controversy]], particularly how you found the 'keep' rationales stronger than the 'merge' or 'redirect' ones? I'm struggling to see it. AfD is not a binary 'delete' or 'don't delete', there should be adequate consideration of outcomes like merge, and it feels like unnecessary bureaucracy to force another discussion. Cheers, [[User:Eddie891|Eddie891]] <small>''<sup> [[User talk:Eddie891|Talk]]</sup> <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Eddie891|Work]]</sub>'' </small> 01:47, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
:There wasn't a strong consensus to 'merge' from what I can see, I suppose I could have worded it as 'no consensus defaulting to keep' but I do feel there is a more consensus leaning towards keep than merge. That being said, consensus to merge can change at any time in the future, so I can't really say you can't have this discussion in the future if any situation changes. [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 01:52, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
::What I'm curious to hear is how you actually assessed the strength of the arguments-- I gathered you didn't feel there was a consensus to merge based upon your close, but there isn't that much of a rationale behind it... My read of the discussion is that it was approximately 13 merge/delete/redirect and 13 keep, but the 'keep' arguments were markedly weaker to my eyes, including such gems as {{tq|lso I like it because it made me spit my coffee out, a user who admits to not reading through at least one of the sources the cite, keep because it is {{tq|an encyclopedic and very well sourced example}} (no discussion of ''notability''), {{tq|it's a notable controversy}} (ditto) {{tq|law of holes}} (?), {{tq|I remember this controversy}}. I just don't see the same strength there as in the merge/redirect side, though I'm obviously biased. Could you point out what I'm missing? [[User:Eddie891|Eddie891]] <small>''<sup> [[User talk:Eddie891|Talk]]</sup> <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Eddie891|Work]]</sub>'' </small> 02:14, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

It's not that I don't see a compelling reason this should be merged, keep just happens to be the default result if the consensus to delete or merge isn't overwhelming. Which is why I was debating closing it as no consensus instead. Keep in mind I'm not saying this can't be merged or this discussion can't continue. All this close means it's that the article is not deleted, which is the main purpose of AFD's. [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 02:26, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
:I guess my point is that a consensus does not have to be overwhelming for it to be there when looking at the strength of arguments. - [[User:Eddie891|Eddie891]] <small>''<sup> [[User talk:Eddie891|Talk]]</sup> <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Eddie891|Work]]</sub>'' </small> 03:02, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
::Historically for deletion yes, which is why <s>articles</s> AFD's that don't pass the deletion threshold by much typically gets closed as no consensus. For merge, I'll admit that the line is very blurry between keep and merge. Which is why I personally don't like using AFD's to sort out merge disputes, which article talk page is more suited for. [[User:Yamamoto Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] ([[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro#top|talk]]) 03:09, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adirondack Trust Company]] ==
Hi, like the above, could you elaborate on your understanding of the consensus at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adirondack Trust Company]], particularly how you found the 'keep' rationales stronger than the 'merge' or 'delete' ones? I'm struggling to see it especially when you consider that none of the sources provided were shown to have met the criteria for establishing notability as per [[WP:NCORP]]. Thank you. [[User:HighKing|<b style="font-family: Courier; color: darkgreen;"> HighKing</b>]]<sup>[[User talk:HighKing|<span style="font-family: Courier; color: #da0000;">++ </span>]]</sup> 21:09, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

== List of best-selling manga (someone changes it even though sources say opposite) ==

Hello I read both Naruto & Detective Conan sources in the list. Naruto Shueisha (official publisher) source says it has sold 250 million copies, Detective Conan one says "it has 250 million copies in circulation worldwide (including copies not sold)" Naruto should be above as of now. But User:Yujoong changing the order. He first removed Mangaplus/Shueisha source of (most reliable source) Now both User:Yujoong and Creating User:Cosmo Sentinel changing the order everyday as they want. Can you prevent or warn them ? <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Ruderhymer|Ruderhymer]] ([[User talk:Ruderhymer#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Ruderhymer|contribs]]) 11:42, 27 November 2021 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Administrators will no longer be [[WP:AUTOP|autopatrolled]] ==

A [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/2021_review/Proposals#Passed:_7D_Remove_autopatrolled_from_default_toolkit|recently closed]] Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove [[WP:Autopatrolled|Autopatrolled]] from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with [[WP:EFM|Edit Filter Manager]], choose to [[Special:UserRights/{{BASEPAGENAME}}|self-assign]] this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Administrators_will_no_longer_be_autopatrolled|Administrator's Noticeboard]]. 20:07, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Barkeep49@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators/Message_list&oldid=1058184441 -->

== Merchandise giveaway nomination ==

{| class="barnstar" style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory;"
| [[File:3WMFShopTees.png|100px|alt=A t-shirt!]]
| style="vertical-align:top;" | <div style="text-align: center; font-size: x-large; font-weight: bold; padding: 0; vertical-align: bottom; color: {{{textcolor|black}}}">A token of thanks</div>
----
<div style="color:black; text-align:center;">Hi {{safesubst:<noinclude/>BASEPAGENAME}}! I've '''[[:meta:Merchandise_giveaways/Nominations/English Wikipedia active administrators|nominated you]]''' (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, <span style="color:#AAA"><small>&#123;{u&#124;</small><span style="border-radius:9em;padding:0 5px;background:#088">[[User:Sdkb|<span style="color:#FFF">'''Sdkb'''</span>]]</span><small>}&#125;</small></span> <sup>[[User talk:Sdkb|'''talk''']]</sup> ~~<noinclude/>~<noinclude/>~~</div>
| [[File:O.snow2.png|100px|right|alt=A snowflake!]]
|}<!-- Template:Merchandise giveaway nomination --> [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Nnadigoodluck@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Mass_message_senders/Shell-0105&oldid=1063056307 -->

== How we will see unregistered users ==

<section begin=content/>
Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin '''will still be able to access the IP'''. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on [[m:IP Editing: Privacy Enhancement and Abuse Mitigation/Improving tools|better tools]] to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can [[m:IP Editing: Privacy Enhancement and Abuse Mitigation|read more on Meta]]. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can [[m:Global message delivery/Targets/Tech ambassadors|subscribe]] to [[m:Tech/News|the weekly technical newsletter]].

We have [[m:IP Editing: Privacy Enhancement and Abuse Mitigation#IP Masking Implementation Approaches (FAQ)|two suggested ways]] this identity could work. '''We would appreciate your feedback''' on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can [[m:Talk:IP Editing: Privacy Enhancement and Abuse Mitigation|let us know on the talk page]]. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you.
/[[m:User:Johan (WMF)|Johan (WMF)]]<section end=content/>

18:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Johan (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Johan_(WMF)/Target_lists/Admins2022(3)&oldid=22532499 -->

== New administrator activity requirement ==

{{ivmbox|The administrator policy has been updated with new [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Procedural_removal_for_inactive_administrators|activity requirements]] following a successful [[Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Request for comment on administrator activity requirements|Request for Comment]].

Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:
#Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
#Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period

Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.
}}
22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Barkeep49@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=All_administrators&oldid=1082922312 -->
== "Double v" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] ==
[[File:Information.svg|30px]]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect [[:Double v]] and has thus listed it [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|for discussion]]. This discussion will occur at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 5#Double v]] until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> [[User:Thryduulf|Thryduulf]] ([[User talk:Thryduulf|talk]]) 20:37, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

== ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message ==

<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px;">[[File:Scale of justice 2.svg|40px]]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the '''[[WP:ACE2022|2022 Arbitration Committee elections]]''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2022|end}}-1 day}}. All '''[[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2022#Election timeline|eligible users]]''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The [[WP:ARBCOM|Arbitration Committee]] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration|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 [[WP:BAN|site bans]], [[WP:TBAN|topic bans]], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy|arbitration policy]] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2022/Candidates|the candidates]] and submit your choices on the '''[[Special:SecurePoll/vote/{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2022|poll}}|voting page]]'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>[[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 00:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2022/Coordination/MM/01&oldid=1124425177 -->

== Administrative permissions and inactivity reminder ==

[[File:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]]This is a reminder that established [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Procedural removal for inactive administrators|policy]] provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. You are receiving this annual reminder since you have averaged less than 50 edits per year over the last 5 years.{{pb}}Inactive administrators are encouraged to reengage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators]]. If you do not intend to be engaged with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard|bureaucrats' noticeboard]].{{pb}}Thank you for your past contributions to the project. —&thinsp;[[User:JJMC89 bot|JJMC89 '''bot''']] 00:27, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

== Pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity ==


[[File:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Established [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Procedural removal for inactive administrators|policy]] provides for the removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. Your administrative permissions will be removed&#32;if you do not return to the required activity level before the beginning of December 2023.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to engage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for re-engaging with the project are available at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators]]. If you do not intend to re-engage with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard|the bureaucrats' noticeboard]].

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. <!-- Template:Inactive admin 2 -->—&thinsp;[[User:JJMC89 bot|JJMC89 '''bot''']] 00:20, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:26, 4 October 2023

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Yamamoto_Ichiro&oldid=1178572302"