User talk:Causa sui/Archive16

Informing you.

This message is to inform you that you came up in a discussion on the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#News. Viewmont Viking (talk) 08:49, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry you thought I was calling you a sockpuppet. I thought the two IP address are the same person 32.142.204.111 & 130.65.109.10based on information in their talk pages, fully disclosing they were the same person. The only reason I brought you up in the Adm section was Viriditas warned you to stop edit warring when you clearly were not edit warring. I wanted people to know that the only reason I had an edit warring warning and therefore the only reason I was on the administrator notice board was Viriditas was going around giving a number of baseless edit warring warnings to a number editors. Viewmont Viking (talk) 16:48, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

In this issue:

Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
Research: The most recent DR data
Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->

--The Olive Branch 18:54, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Template repair

Hi, I noticed an error in a template you created I'm tempted to try to fix it myself, but I am not very familiar with template creation yet so I thought I'd point it out to you and then learn from your edit how to repair such things in the future. Anyway the template is this one. And the error comes when you give it an article name as its first argument. As you can see here on this talk page (of a user I warned), the term "edits on the page" appears as "editson the page". Thanks for looking into this. -Thibbs (talk) 02:34, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MMA

Thanks for helping to make MMA articles on wikipedia better! In September 168 people made a total of 956 edits to MMA articles. I noticed you havn't listed yourself on the WikiProject Mixed martial arts Participants page. Take a look, sign up, and don't forget to say hi on the talk page. Kevlar (talk) 03:24, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Available to help review new article draft?

Hi, last week I posted a request at Paid Editor Help, proposing a draft for a new article, and Silverseren has replied suggesting that I reach out to others from WikiProject Cooperation. As you're listed as one of the WikiProject's participants, I was wondering if you'd are available to help?

For background: the draft I've written is for the lifestyle and design blog Apartment Therapy, which currently doesn't have a Wikipedia article. I wrote the article draft on behalf of and with input from Apartment Therapy's management. Given my COI I'd like to get an independent review of the article and have another editor move it out of my userspace once it's ready, rather than take it live myself. I've submitted the draft at AfC, but there's such a big backlog there, I was hoping that editors from WikiProject Cooperation could assist. If you're interested in taking a look at the draft, you can review it at AfC or in my user space here: User:16912_Rhiannon/Apartment_Therapy I would really appreciate any constructive feedback you have to offer. Thanks, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 17:20, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Causa sui. You have new messages at User talk:16912 Rhiannon/Apartment Therapy.
Message added 14:45, 30 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi again Causa sui, following my reply to you the other day and the edits I made in line with your comments, another editor has reviewed the draft article and taken it live. You can see the live article here: Apartment Therapy.

As it's now in the Wikipedia mainspace, I won't make any further edits but please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 20:45, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ammon

Would you be interested in a compromise? Maybe there's a way to modify the hatnote to make it refer specifically to the Bible. Or maybe there's a different tag that could be used. SamEV (talk) 20:43, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam, thank you for reaching out. I very much welcome your invitation to go over this so that we can work out a revision we're both satisfied with. I suggest we start a discussion on the talk page so that other interested editors can participate. What do you think? causa sui (talk) 20:52, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, except I think we should at least try to resolve this ourselves first. SamEV (talk) 22:58, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What do you suggest? causa sui (talk) 00:15, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would a hatnote along these lines be acceptable to you: "This article's sources include the Bible, which is not an entirely reliable source for historical information"? If not, how would you modify it? SamEV (talk) 19:32, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Judging by your last message to me, it seems you missed my last one to you. Please see, just above this, and RSVP. SamEV (talk) 18:53, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I did miss that somehow. Sorry for the late reply. I have placed some comments on Talk:Ammon as a jumping off point. --causa sui (talk) 20:03, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category Freemasons Proposed Deletion

Hi, as you were a contributor to a previous DRV on the Freemasons category there is another deletion discussion on this. JASpencer (talk) 16:53, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Kudos

Thanks you so much, I also have read those 2009-10 conversations and I just say "wow, did I write like that?". Thank you again . Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 20:13, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tigran Arakelyan deleted page

Hi, The page Tigran Arakelyan was deleted and when I recreated the page it was deleted again. I believe Tigran Arakelyan should have a wikipedia page. Can you please help me recreate the page as it existed for quiet a long time before it got deleted for unknown reasons. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onewithone (talk • contribs) 23:12, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Polmont F.C.

Good evening sir,

I would like to dispute the deletion of article Polmont F.C., which was originally discarded on 19/07/2011 with, citing reference A7.

The club has been operating since June 2011 and as such is coming up for it's second anniversary. As a club serving the local community, I feel that as the football club is developing that it is fair we are regarded as relevant for our own article. Any required citation can be provided.

Indeed, we have faced sides this season whom have their own articles on Wikipedia such as Cambusnethan Talbot A.F.C., West Calder United F.C. and Balgonie Scotia so I believe it to be unfair that we would be deemed too unimportant for mention whereas these other clubs are not.

I appreciate that there have been articles created on Polmont F.C. before the club actually managed to get off the ground, however as this is now the case I would kindly ask that you reconsider the status of this article and that it will be updated with all applicable information as a result.

Many thanks JohnJohnJohnJohn (talk) 20:12, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:Notability. Then you may want to draft a new article incorporating references that meet the above requirements and post it at WP:AFC. There, an experienced editor will review it and approve it for the article space, or let you know what still needs improvement. I cannot help you with this further. Good luck, --causa sui (talk) 00:26, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Money as Debt for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Money as Debt 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/Money as Debt (4th 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. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 09:19, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on an RfC about Living members of deposed royal families and the titles attributed to them on WP

Hello - I have opened an RfC about suggested guidelines in the Manual of Style for articles about living members of families whose ancestors were deposed as monarchs of various countries and the titles and "styles" attributed to these living people, at the moment often in a misleading and inaccurate way in my opinion. Please join in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies "Use of royal "Titles and styles" and honorific prefixes in articles and templates referring to pretenders to abolished royal titles and their families"[1]Regards,Smeat75 (talk) 05:38, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Causa sui. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Text editor support.
Message added 22:58, 29 December 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cheers! —Unforgettableid (talk) 22:58, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Sharon Presley

I recently opened an RFC at Talk:Sharon Presley after a contentious AFD and disagreements about the inclusion of sources. I found your name randomly at WP:FRS and thought I would post here. Thank you in advance! TonyBallioni (talk) 03:26, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Causa sui. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Text editor support.
Message added 08:07, 30 December 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cheers! —Unforgettableid (talk) 08:07, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Elvedin Škrijelj

Dear Causa sui: A couple of years ago you salted the title for the above article because the athlete was not notable, but now the experts at Wikiproject Football say that he is, so would you mind unsalting the title? Here is the discussion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football#Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation.2FElvedin_.C5.A0krijelj —Anne Delong (talk) 22:46, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is there really nothing more to the article than this? The linked draft still does not say anything about the notability of the subject. --causa sui (talk) 23:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I, myself, don't know anything about football, but the Wikiproject Football people (as you can see from the link I added above) believe that he passes WP:NSPORT. If you think that they are wrong, could you please explain to them why? Maybe they can fix the draft so that the notability is more obvious, whereas I can't tell one team or league from another. —Anne Delong (talk) 00:02, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No thanks -- I'm not that invested. :) I did unprotect the article, but stated my reservations for posterity. causa sui (talk) 22:23, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protect page

Hi, can you please protect Rae Sremmurd. It has been object of several vandalism cases. Karlhard ^{(talk to me)} 03:27, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RfC United States same-sex marriage map

I opened up an RfC for the U.S. same-sex marriage map due to the complicated situation of Kansas: RfC: How should we color Kansas? --Prcc27 (talk) 12:25, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Shane's Chess Information Database for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shane's Chess Information Database 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/Shane's Chess Information Database 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. edtiorEهեইдအီးËეεઈדוארई電子ಇអ៊ី전자ഇī😎 20:45, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Biography feedback requested

Your input is requested about an RFC regarding Donald Trump. Here is a link directly to that RFC. The lead of that biography currently says, "Many of his statements in interviews, on Twitter, and at campaign rallies have been controversial." The RFC proposes to insert the words "or false" at the end of that sentence. Thank you in advance for participating. If you have the time, there is a second RFC at that talk page which proposes to instead add the words "or hyperbolic".Anythingyouwant (talk) 00:53, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, Causa sui. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

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 "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following 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, 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 a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that 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 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 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 thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Causa sui.

A new user group, 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 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 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. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Causa sui. Voting in the 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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bloomington, Indiana protection

Hi there, Bloomington, Indiana has been move protected for over nine years now. It seems full protection was originally added in 2007 due to libel concerns, and then you reduced the protection level to move protection about a month later citing "enough protection". In that same spirit, and given that moves really never seemed to be an problem for this page in the first place, would you consider removing protection from this page? Brycehughes (talk) 11:26, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've been inactive for some time and so I'm not too confident about this. I can't imagine a legitimate reason someone would want to move the article. You may want to try WP:RFPP? --causa sui (talk) 20:52, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, thanks. Figured I'd try you first. Brycehughes (talk) 21:03, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

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 subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the 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 Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

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. (T34950)
Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Repeatedly deleted article - "Beast 1333" Joel.Sha (talk) 01:05, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the article for "Beast 1333" an American HipHop artist,

I attempted to create an article on a HipHop artist after he released 
an updated biography which happened to release his name

which was previously withheld on former articles, Unfortunately it was locked to prevent

vandalism and only administrators had access to the article. 
newly released news article regarding Beast 1333

has also surfaced on the internet,

along with upcoming tours with fellow American rappers:

KRS-One and Immortal technique (both of which Have existing Encyclopedia pages) The Rapper has also announced 2 upcoming albums with collaborations

with well known HipHop artists.

I am hoping you may consider looking into unlocking this page and I am looking forward to your response Joel.Sha (talk) 01:05, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You might try at WP:RFPP. I'm not active much these days. --causa sui (talk) 17:44, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to Admin confidence survey

Hello,

Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.

The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.

To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.

We really appreciate your input!

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion for Martin A. Armstrong

Hi, I see you've edited this page before, so:

An article that you have been involved in editing—Martin A. Armstrong—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Ratel (talk) 22:58, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Crawley (headmaster)

Hi, I not sure if you remember but you closed this AfD in 2011. Crawley has continued to be a notable as an educationalist and has now retired as a Headmaster. This article in The Australian and this one about his Honorary Doctorate suggests that his notability is now above dispute. Is there a way of having this bio retrieved? I would appreciate your assistance. Castlemate (talk) 13:07, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi causa sui. I've now taken this to DRV, see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2017 October 24. Obviously this is not a reflection on your original close which was perfectly fine, but rather we believe that the new sources merit a new inspection. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 11:33, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Causa sui. Voting in the 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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are you willing to provide copies of my deleted articles?

Hey Causa sui, very nice to meet you. Well my situation is quite messy and odd. Basically, I've been struggling to write articles using one account, so I created new multiple ones to do it instead. The administrators then accused me of creating sock puppets and webhost abuse (the latter is absolutely nonsense, if you care you can do further reading here and here), so they deleted all of my drafts from all of these accounts and I really need them back. I’ve spent more than a year writing them.

In October last year I've asked a member to help me with this situation, but he couldn't do it because he didn't have the time. So I'm asking you for help now, will you help me?

Thank you for reading. Beyoncetan (talk) 07:55, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki-link the deleted pages and I'll take a look at them. Also, I imagine I'm not the only person you've made this request to, so please let me know if someone else has fulfilled your request already so I don't waste my time. --causa sui (talk) 20:44, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the work has been done. But thank you so much for reviewing my request. Beyoncetan (talk) 02:41, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A question about an old cmt of yours on Wikipedia talk:Verifiability

Are you available to discuss? Humanengr (talk) 01:27, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Causa sui. Voting in the 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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:49, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]