User talk:Djm-leighpark/Archives/2020 1

Irish steam locomotives.

Hi. Im looking to see if anyone has any parts of Irish steam locomotives. Im only young but if i can get hold of some parts, i could potentially put them together in the future. Right now im just trying to get parts very cheap/ for free so if anybody knows of somebody trying to get rid of parts please tell me. :) Im looking for parts from 5ft 3" gauge engines. Im also wondering if anyone knows anything about a tender for gs&wr no. 36 (the engine in cork's kent station) if a tender can be constructed then the engine could potentially return to service some day. If anybody knows anything about abandoned broad gauge rail lines that are in the irish republic the please tell me :) Spud 607 (talk) 21:51, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

I'd suggest making contact with an official preservation or record organisation: e.g. Railway Preservation Society of Ireland or Irish Railway Record Society. But this is the wrong site for me to make such suggestions as it is WP:NOTAFORUM. Thankyou and I should have answered earlier. Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:33, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Hold your horses!

I couldn't even get my books about the Western Desert Campaign out to improve the article British capture of Tobruk before you slapped a speedy delete on it. I find that hostile and unproductive. This was the missing article in the series of the four great battles of Operation Compass. Until now this battle was a section in the article about the siege that happened later that year, but with reversed roles. I will work on the article now, but next time, when an editor with 13 years of wiki work creates a new article, give him some time to expand/edit/reference. Thank you. noclador (talk) 20:12, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

An editor with 13 years experience should likely know not to leave a summary when deleting content and when putting the some of same content up at a different article in mainspace that that is a problem. Of course you may actually be able to prove you created the content that was duplicated ... but it looked like an attempt to copy without attribution by my viewpoint. You may complain at WP:ANI if you wish. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 20:25, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Edgeworthstown, really?

Your change of section Header from "Name" to "Toponymy" as a "better section name than name". Your estimate of what proportion of readers are likely to understand what toponymy means? They certainly don't include Microcsoft spellchecker :) Sarah777 (talk) 20:39, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Fair challenge. Well I speaking from a dude in Chi today and he was in Dún Laoghaire for a bit and methinks if the Toponymy is good enough for there it should be good enough for the Monstrim scholars. Now we goes official the guidance I uses is Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements (which is not valid there) or Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Settlements: Article structure which is and says: Etymology methinks. Which @Wikimandia has said previously is wrong. And I don't argue with Sarah777. While the original reference is [1] one really needs [2] for the full background. This like a CIE 121 Class vs IE 22000 Class when the wight gets sort. So there we have it. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:21, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

@@Sarah777 and Wikimandia: I've actually read Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Settlements: Article structure#Etymology rather than pointing people at it. As it says ..."may be titled as Etymology (most common), Toponymy, or Name (least common)" under challenge and reflection I've determined to revert to "Name" at Edgeworthstown as pre-existed on the article. (I'm successful at Dingo-dollar challenge questions so I'll skip the estimation guess .... probably because I could risk putting my foot in it!) Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:05, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

The correct term is toponymy. Look up the word if you are unfamiliar with it. This is after all an encyclopedia and it is here to gain knowledge. Or do a simple search on place names and you will see this word in the title of books. Toponymy is not a weird or big word and it's even fewer syllables than etymology. —Мандичка^YO 😜 22:55, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Discussion too big and too important for the dystopia of my talk page ... taken to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities/Settlements: Article structure#Etymology or toponymy or name as I believe that is the right place for discussion to be had. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 04:22, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

This isn't an issue of any concern to me, btw - I'm happy that we are expanding the vocabulary of the masses! I was basing my "analysis" on the humble assumption that if I had to google the word then most readers would not understand it. 😜

Didn't mean to clutter your page! Sarah777 (talk) 17:21, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

@Sarah777: That's what its here for! It auto-archives after a while anyway .... but I was so sorry lose User talk:Djm-leighpark/Archives/2018 1#Car user and Daily Mail only reader? from it! Back to this debare felt it was actually reasonably placed somewhere more central so I know how to sort Ballysadare; and I wish I could prove it was a clerk typo at the Midland Great Western Railway who originated one of the spellings! Thanks! Djm-leighpark (talk) 19:45, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

December 2019

Please do not add or change content, as you did at SunPCi, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Introducing contents that do not satisfy reliable source criteria, which was very recently added. Special:Diff/931018948 Graywalls (talk) 00:22, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like you to assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not do on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SunPCi. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Special:Diff/930865468. Accusation that my AfD was "frivolous or vexatious" Even though nomination followed a citing related issue, I observed the article had general notability issues. Graywalls (talk) 00:52, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Whatever. Please take me to WP:ANI they who love to waste others contrbutions.Djm-leighpark (talk) 01:42, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Eiretrains, December 2019

Hi Djm-leighpark,

Thank you for posting a message on my talk page. I added an external link from Eiretrains to numerous pages of railway stations, because it was already included on pages such as Maynooth, Leixlip Louisa Bridge, Leixlip Confey, and even Pearse before I did any editing. I thought it was harmless but if Eiretrains is not a suitable external link according to the guidelines, then maybe it should be removed from these pages. Thank you. Scaramanga731 (talk) 22:39, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

• My best understanding is per WP:ELNO this should not be the case. I've raised it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland#External links added to Irish Station articles for confirmation from others. The problem is from once there is one external link to a non-official site this then gets to be followed by others. Using the Eiretrains site in a citation is however acceptable.Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:58, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

G. Nanjundan

Hello. Regarding the change in the talk page for this person: If the sources reporting his death are reliable (for the sake of argument), the problem I see with using WP:BDP is that we know the subject of the article is deceased; wouldn't it be better to put a blpo=y in the banner shell and mark the living parameter in the WP Bio tag as no to more accurately reflect the situation? Otherwise it looks like the person is still living when he isn't; I think the same would be true of Carolyn Konheim who died in November 2019. If I'm on the wrong track, please let me know. Thank you for your consideration. --FeanorStar7 (talk) 17:12, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

I am strongly minded it is not appropriate to have anything. A question for a noticeboard perhaps .... to be raised at Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons perhaps? ( I currently don't have time at least for some hours ....). Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 17:42, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Another reason I meant to mention is that the talk page shows up in the following category: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Biography_articles_without_living_parameter ; this has the following sentence as part of the explanation: "A person known to be dead should be explicitly marked as such." This is why I made the suggestion above. Thank you.--FeanorStar7 (talk) 18:46, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

@FeanorStar7 In essenence, after having got space to look at it, I agree with you. Thankyou for your challenge and have set the appropriate parameters on the article take page. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 10:33, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. I also saw your comment on the noticeboard. I still think the living parameter for the actual WP Biography tag itself should be living=no since we know the person is dead; the blpo=yes in the banner shell I agree with... I hope this is clear--FeanorStar7 (talk) 10:52, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

I think that was what it was my intention to say. If you had asked me I would have claimed with some betting odds I have put living=no. In fact my fingers seem to have done/left living=yes. I have put this to living=no and hopefully will avoid more WP:TROUTs. Thankyou again for most appropriately challenging me. thankyou. 19:56, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Djm-leighpark! You created a thread called COI Editing possible issue at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Yes bot. It is done. Thankyou bot. May you be endowed with many blessingings. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 19:58, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

WOWCube

Hello. Regarding one of latest discussions: it was decided to draftify and to salt WOWCube article until it is possible to move it to mainspace. I would like to move any possible drafts of that article to my personal sandbox so I could rework it in the future before the moment comes. However, I can't find any drafts. Could you assist me? Thanks forward. Mark Ekimov (talk) 09:45, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Closer, WP:REFUND or if confused WP:TEAHOUSE.Djm-leighpark (talk) 10:14, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Muscovy

Meat a tough from the old drake you doppleganging puppet? No quack but heavy breathing when excited.86.175.238.154 (talk) 14:26, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Request for COI Guidance

Hi,

You posted comments on this page -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Data_Ladder

I am new to Wikipedia writing. I feel that the COI issues can be repaired. I'm going to edit the content again to ensure it is completely objective while ensuring all COI templates are applied correctly. Would that work?

Is there anything else I need to do?

Appreciate the help!

Thankyou — Preceding unsigned comment added by FarahKim (talk • contribs) 08:37, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

You (as per many in marketing) have a fundamental "camel through the eye of a needle difficulty" insofar as marketing attempts to show something in its best light whereas Wikipeida strives to article neutrality. I will voluntarily repeat my repeat my suggestions to goto the WP:TEAHOUSE and use Wikipedia:Edit requests & Template:Request edit. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:37, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Stop Funding Fake News

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Stop Funding Fake News requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. e^π/💬 21:41, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

? Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:29, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Fry Model Railway

Hi there, I think Fry Model Railway should be moved to Casino Model Railway Museum. Do you agree? Spleodrach (talk) 18:28, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

I toyed with that when I created that redirect ... in fact I toyed with that when a few months ago when I first got the inkling of the new name but there was a risk of re-branding at that time. ... in the end issue that bothered me was the possible loss of curation and therefore google links. I'm have for you to do the move but you'd likely need to call admin assistance for the swap as I dont think a muggle can do it and the admin should be able to re-create it. I can actually Db-author Casino Model Railway Museum then move it but I loses the curation. At best I'd only do that between 23:00UTC to 07:00UTC and maybe not tomorrow as I've overdue a haircut and I have to deal with oldest and contrariest and cheapest barber in Havant.Djm-leighpark (talk) 18:54, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

OK, I'll ask an admin to do it. Your suggestion of a 'cut & paste move' is not a runner because we will lose the history. Spleodrach (talk) 20:48, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

(I wasn't suggesting cut-and-paste, but ask-an-admin is great and increases my chance of a haircut. I am happy to support ... just ask him to ensure NPP-curated thanks ... I've upset too many admins to count .... ).Djm-leighpark (talk) 20:52, 23 January 2020 (UTC) ... You could even get them to sort Dún Laoghaire Harbour while your at it! Djm-leighpark (talk) 20:57, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

@Spleodrach: I've done the G7's in prep for the move so no need to ask an admin. Will execute move after deletion performed. .Djm-leighpark (talk) 04:14, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! Spleodrach (talk) 08:16, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Swiftsure (locomotive class)

Hi, Djm-leighpark. I just encountered your Draft:Swiftsure (locomotive class), and so far so good! Definitely needs more inline citations. Once it's ready for moving let me know if you'd like a reviewer and/or if you're interested to nominate it for DYK. I'm happy to do the legwork. = paul2520 (talk) 01:14, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer of support. It needs those inline cites first (the sources at he bottom of the page are actually actually double what will finally be used but its easier for me to have them ready; Murray 1981 is probably the most used source. Just to add to the fun some sources contradict; Swiftsure itself may be able to stay in or out; Draft:Thomas Fleming Bergin will also need completing as well as about two or three other D&KR locomotive classes as well! Not to mention updates to Hibernia! Or perhaps even sorting the Dalkey Atmospheric! Thanks for the support. .... 03:56, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Djm-leighpark I'm definitely not an expert on trains, by any stretch! But since I chanced upon the article, I figured I'd offer my support. I enjoy nominating articles for DYK. = paul2520 (talk) 04:04, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Okay fair enough. I see your a typo correcter and I always need one of those following me. But getting content here is important. If you see the article in the section above you definitely missed your DYK chance there! Djm-leighpark (talk) 04:16, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

February 2020

Your recent editing history at Stop Funding Fake News shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Yappy2bhere (talk) 01:16, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

@Yappy2bher I think we've had spats before .... so I reckon you've done a great job of disrupting Stop Funding Fake News and it will need neutrals to sort it out. I notice you may have been promoting Oracle with WP:ELNO at Nested SQL and I'd ask you to remove it as if I have to do it it will likely be regarded as edit warring and WP:HOUNDing.Djm-leighpark (talk) 01:33, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

File:StopFundingFakeNewsLogoFinal.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:StopFundingFakeNewsLogoFinal.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Thankyou for that information. Between the bot and and the image by people due to as far as I can make out the claims being made of it the net result is the image is orphaned and will be removed at some point. I've let thinks wind their merry way through but the net result is the image is not functioning correctly and I've really had enough of it. the BOTs are probably doing a great job but I'm tearing my hair out. Thankyou bot. I if I wrongly accuse you bot then I apologise. The bold red is dubious on by colour defectivenss as I sees it like a bull.Djm-leighpark (talk) 02:29, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Oh FastilyBot ... perhaps you are notifying me that the file is up for discussion ... being as it was I who raised by own file for discussion i did toy about notifying myself about it but thought people my view it inappropriate if I did so. Any you have done so however I remain unconvinced yelling at me in read is necesary and I think I may have done something more wrong that I usually do. I'll let WP:FFD run I think.... Djm-leighpark (talk) 02:41, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

February 2020

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha. Thank you. DBigXrayᗙ 05:42, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

@DBigXray: Don't try and pull that one on me given the nom.'s that have been going onb recently. Feel free to report me to WP:ANI for sanctions in necessary. Good faith was lost was lost when there was failure to identify an obvious merge in WP:BEFORE.Djm-leighpark (talk) 08:08, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Djm-leighpark, whatever be your reason. You are not allowed to comment on contributor, other than on user talk or Ani. You have been warned accordingly. DBigXrayᗙ 09:42, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

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

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

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

--DBigXrayᗙ 09:44, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

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

You have shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

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

--DBigXrayᗙ 09:44, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

@DBigXray: Definite WP:HOUND ABUSE AND INAPPROPRIATE USE OF THE TEMPLATE PER NOTICE AT THE TOP THE PAGE. ENOUGH SAID. Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:51, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Djm-leighpark, LoL, Ok. DBigXrayᗙ 10:46, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Superforecaster moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Superforecaster, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CatcherStorm ^talk 21:15, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

@Catcherstorm I disagree with your assessment. Pleasae review it. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:18, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

I am immediately made aggressive by that action and the Storm in your username doesn't help and should be changed for someone wishing to become an administrator as it immediately means invokes aggression. Its moved back, AfD if you must but pragmatically the alternative is DRV but I'll need to finish a discussion over 24 hours with you first. You obviously may persuade me, and I am open to that, but I would expect that to be unlikely. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:33, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

@CatcherStorm: Thanks for reviewing that .... I have some appreciation where you are coming from .... Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:43, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

To a degree it is WP:NEOLOGISM that needs more eyes and viewpoints ... there's a chicken-and-egg with me on this one ... there's no point putting in loads of effort for it to go. Its also a possible redirect with history (and maybe possibilities but probably BLP1E at the moment) for an article currently at AfD. The debate at WP:VPP#Rethinking draft space is also interesting .... Anyway thanks for your return to mainspace and good faith tagging .... Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:51, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

@CatcherStorm: NB: Per your To a degree if you are a (pupil) at school then that was an especially good spot of the NEOLOGISM if I may say so. And I may be being unfairly aggressive towards a school person. One thing to watch if you do go for WP:RFA is I would probably question whether a template:more citations needed was helpful or apppropriate. Only the lede and one other section are uncited; and arguably the lede and maybe the etomology don't need citing. In either event Template:fact tagging the individual statements is far more helpful than a WP:VAGUEWAVE over the whole article ... I'd in fact consider asking this as an RfA question! Best regards and keep up the good work.... Djm-leighpark (talk) 00:47, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Henry Booth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Dixon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:01, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Warning

Regarding your comment here you are hereby warned to desist making these kinds of bad faith accusations and violations of WP:ASPERSION. You are accusing editors (who watch Indian AfD list) of connivance simply because you seem to disagree with them since they hold a different opinion than you in an AfD. If you repeat this again I will take this forward for admin intervention and a formal restriction on you to stop this bad mouthing and this ongoing "campaign of taking revenge against DBigXray.--DBigXrayᗙ 13:19, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

@DBigXray Please take it that I am repeating said accusations on a technical so you may take it to admins WP:ANI or whereever for consideration. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 13:30, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Djm-leighpark, I will collect this diff of your comment above as an evidence of WP:BAITING. DBigXrayᗙ 14:45, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

@DBigXray Either put up or shut up or request I self refer myself to WP:ANI. Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:52, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

DBigXray, and I will use the above warning, which has a very flimsy basis, as evidence of baiting by you if you make the very ill-advised move of dragging this to ANI. I think you cited WP:BAITING because you know that's exactly what you are doing. Lepricavark (talk) 16:57, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

@Lepricavark: I don't mind if you take this WP:ANI but the you seems ambiguous in your statement; mainly because I myself not mentioned WP:BAITING unless I've mistaken something up until this entry and my offer was to self refer to WP:ANI if I was requested to which is not exactly the same as me dragging it to WP:ANI. Please rewrite avoid the word you replace by e.g. Djm-leighpark where necessary to avoid ambiguity. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 17:06, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Djm-leighpark, I pinged DBigXray at the beginning of my post, which should make it clear that I was responding to them. To be clear, I was not criticizing your behavior at all. Also, I won't be taking this to ANI, but I will absolutely become involved if DBigXray makes the mistake of doing so. Lepricavark (talk) 17:09, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

@Lepricavark: Thanks for clarifying ... I just kind of didn't spot the first comma or at least not sure of it. Please accept my apologies. I have a habit of missing the obvious sometimes. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 17:28, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Djm-leighpark, no worries. Lepricavark (talk) 17:33, 20 February 2020 (UTC

Nagma

What kind of problems are you talking about here? I can see the link [3] clearly and it says she was made the general secretary of All Indian Mahila Congress. I think we should re-add that. Second, why are you adding archives to live sources? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:22, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk: To check archive validatity which is the issue Linkrot issue I dealt with in the first place, if you want to run the article your way then i've removed it from my watchlist, do what you will with it ive wasted enough time on it toda., Given how it was attacked and not spotted I wasgoing to eyeball it but i can see more trouble than worth. Linkrot rules OK ... when linkrotted content can be deleted. Brilliant! Djm-leighpark (talk) 16:34, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Linkrots can be dealt with if the references are not bare. Now if you want to add archive beforehand, then ... well,, I'm not that much against it. That being said, you didn't reply to my first query. That All Indian Mahila Congress thing, isn't that relevant? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:46, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

I really found in in relation to another article and thought the content might be sweet here. If I recall right the archive wasn't saving for me archive.org so I switched to archive today. The politics section had dead links handled extremely disruptively by an IP and the associated politics content would likely have gone west. Anyway if you think the statements good then you take the responsibility for re-adding it. If you re-add it there is no way I am going to undo that. The link to the congress was mispelt though. thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 16:56, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Railway locomotives introduced in 1833

A tag has been placed on Category:Railway locomotives introduced in 1833 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:01, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

TFB

• Mollan, Charles (1995). Irish National Inventory of Historic Scientific Instruments. Dublin: Blackrock & Co. : Stanton. ISBN 1898706050. OCLC 716410184. 4252 RCS002 & Ex0563.
• See also: £140. [4]

Please respond

Please respond on my talk page instead of continuing to revert. Thanks. --Izno (talk) 15:36, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Giving me a chance would be good. I'm working it. You need to slow down a little too. Djm-leighpark (talk) 15:38, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Mohammad Najeeb Qasmi

Hi, I think that the article has now a lot of third party references which prove that this article qualifies for mainspace under WP:AUTHOR. Can you check it and comment if any other issues are needed? I will added other related information later on. Thanks Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 16:09, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't manage to get round to this but at a first change who have good faith attempt at an improvement. I have a particular foreign language citations should be properly embellished with as many relevant details as possible and I might do that.Djm-leighpark (talk) 20:46, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

@Djm-leighpark: Alright. I have moved it again to mainspace per WP:NAUTHOR and had asked Rosguill for a re-review. There were some issues of copy-editing. Fixed them later-on. I would try to add the translations to the non-English references. - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 23:26, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Can anyone issue warning against vandalism

Hi, I am Irshad. I have a query regarding warning about vandalism.

• Can any user issue warning about alleged vandalism. I think it must be discussed in ANI forum before doing that.

--Irshadpp (talk) 20:58, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

@Irshadpp The basic answer is yes, and I observe the warning and allegation placed recently on your talk page which I believe is from a user currently at ANI, which I believe you are aware of. I am concerned it may not be justified; which may be of consequence when relating to an article under the discretionary sanctions umbrella. I strongly suggest not taking any action and to moved away from the affected area and articles for a period of up to 24 / 48 hours. While adding it to the current ANI thread is possible at this moment it would probably lead to a side argument. The ANI thread is waiting for a response - when that has stalled for over 48 hours (plus a few hours more, say after approx 20200405T060000Z). But for independent advice I suggest asking at WP:TEAHOUSE as I am now too involved in this area. I am also mulling presenting a general request at WikiProject Islam talk to check out a numbe of articles related to "Grand Mufti" but I'd want to prepare the request first and I am currently stacked and need to keep traction on some articles in livespace I have articles I need to improve, as you may see in my talk above and which I currently have open in another session. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:42, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

@Irshadpp: The ANI thread rolled out to archive presumably as there was no activity on it for a couple of days .... I had half prepared a keep alive response in the morning on a local file in one location but a RL issue came up with a family at lunchtime ... in the end nothing serious ... but it does mean I'm at another location on a lesser device for a day or two. I did an translate article last night as it was self contained and intersting but kicking myself for not fettling the ANI thread ... but it is what it is an RL comes first.Djm-leighpark (talk) 06:45, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

How can we make this discussion again in the ANI main page--Irshadpp (talk) 07:23, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

@Irshadpp I suggest you ask at WP:TEAHOUSE or other neutral help forum. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 07:38, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

I am here again to ask regarding voting on merge discussion. As a nominator, my vote is not necessary there. Looking for your advice--Irshadpp (talk) 07:23, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

In my opinion the merge was raised with a poor (vague) subject header and failure to cleary identify the secion header. it is on a topic you may have negative feelings towards. There is a reasonable objection raised and and I would therefore see the merge as controversial. Probably the best course of action would be to withdraw it. Otherwise wait for at least a month and then request a closure by a neutral. Again ... ask at WP:TEAHOUSE if unsure. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 07:38, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:Under construction

You have had both bots and human editors try to remove the {{under construction}} template from Thomas Fleming Bergin. I honestly do not think anyone is hounding or stalking you, they are just doing exactly what the template says to do - remove the template if the has not been edited in several days. I'm not sure how many people are going to be jumping into your new article in an attempt to edit it, but if you're concerned about people editing it while you are in the physical process of editing it yourself, just use {{in use}} which is much more effective for that sort of thing. Primefac (talk) 13:28, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry about this its really to do with the accuracy and fact check about the content ... it went draft to main before it was ready ... just before I nearly completely walked of Wikipedia at the start of the month. I need to go though a lot of sources ... and its a deep concentration job. I've got another on under construction, Conefrey, and I'd want to POV that if I removed the under construction, its only a small matter. I've also got an under construction on Forrester single as well at section level; its loosely related to Bergin. Yes I'm also involved in some tricky discussions at present and I will prioritise those first. Another option is to draftify Bergin but thats not great idea it I get Covid-19 next week. Remember under construction does not stop anyone else editing it ... In-use does. Removal of an under-construction notready really requires reversion to a known good version or a factual accuracry template or something (I'd accept that for Bergin). In all events I must go. I've said I'd spend 1.5 on WP today and its already 3h. Today is particularly bad for me (tomorrow much better). @K6ka ... sorry I am getting stressed today because I am getting under pressure. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 13:51, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

You should take a longer WikiBreak and just forget about Wikipedia for a while. Edit when you're at your best. Right now you're stressed and under pressure, and that means your temper is going to snap easily and you're not going to be making very sensible decisions (like accusing me of hounding). This is not a good thing. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 14:34, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

@K6ka Your red-misted approach is simply disruptive and increasing my stress level. In fact I will specifically not take a longer WikiBreak because you have suggested it. A top admin would realise working collabarately would not do that. Indeed I am minded it is quite possible you may not have the correct attitude for an admin. You should dream on this. I have experimented with short wikibreaks and wind them quite effective, longer ones simply will cause me to backdoor. No doubt you will persist on having the last word on my talk page with extra advice. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 20:43, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

When someone is giving you advice, it is not appropriate to respond aggressively. If you disagree with the advice, that's perfectly fine, but you word things to be somewhat aggressive, almost as if you take advice to be a personal attack. That's not okay. While you may think short WikiBreaks work for you, they are, from what I am seeing, not helping to curb your temper issues right now, as evidenced by your aggressive response. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 22:02, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

@K6ka: ... you're not helping by temper issues. I didn't see the last word above and I will always stand up to anyone who think they know my mind. Mini-WikiBreaks have been very usefull to me for reasons the K6ka does not seem to understand. This is a quick response to the above and I've other things on my mind. Of course you are welcome to another last word. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:53, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

I prioritised sorting Conefrey but I've had to stall due to a couple of RL stuff thats come up and has put me on the road. People may say that I did the Timothy Burstall article ... Thats because I was comfortable doing it on the road and didn't need to look up too many sources. In terms of Bergin and Forrester I am re-reading sources at the moment but thats not obvious from the moment.Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:53, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Recent discussion

Hello. I responded awhile ago and I am awaiting your reply here [5]. Thanks. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 19:05, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

@Steve Quinn I have been dealing with a vulenerable person who is in danger of losing his leg if he caries on the way he is carrying on and he is a high enpught covid-19 risk to me and mine so you can wait or take whatever action you see fit. If you observe the rest of take page you can see I am pressed by admins to sort other articles. You can wait or you can AfD it and I may attempt a rescue it from there if necessary. Its a rubbish state unless its improved but at a glance it is possibly rescuable with someone with the correct skills. But its behind Conefrey, Forrester (single), Bergin, Lickey Incline, Norris Locomotives and B&GR on my sort priority list at the moment. Conefrey sort of sorted but needs a tewak and that is certainly mymost urgent from a WP viewpoint. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 19:24, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi. With your real life stuff going on don't worry about this. This is Wikipedia, not real life and things can wait or be put off. Also, if you have other Wikipedia stuff to sort through, go ahead and do that. I might do the merge proposal, but I'm not going to do AfD for now. The AfD can wait. if there needs to be one. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 15:59, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Coolavin

Just to let you know I have provided 4 references to "The Prince of Tyrconnell". See page Covert19 (talk) 21:55, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

With reference to your comments

Can you please point out my edits regarding interest Maizbhandariya (talk) 08:14, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Per the standard notices given you have shown interests in or edited WP:BLP articles and India/Pakistan/Afganistan articles; and does not imply any particular problem. That said I usually only advise when problems appear to be arising. If your case I am reasonably certain I have seen attempting to canvas support to get an editor blocked; initiation of a dispute at ANI; and possible disruption of an AfD. I have not crossed checked those things so I may be mistaken; but I have sufficient concerns to ensure you have been issued with discretionary sanction alerts (which dont apply retrospectively). I have other RL things to do first but I strongly recommend you take great care going forward. I may examine the AfD and if it has been overly disrupted I may call for a block on those who have disrupted it .... but I have Real Life considerations to deal with first. My ideal is usually to issue all parties on problem pages with the notice, but I need to avoid double issuing notices and that all takes time (Its sometimes easier to check on newer users, and it is those users who typically are not aware of the sanctions). Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 08:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

ActCAD

HelloDjm-leighpark. Ok, I'll be more precise. Thank you for your constructive attention. I am very pleased. Please review the changes I added to this article. Djm-mobile (talk) 18:57, 2 March 2020 (UTC)ZengaONE (talk) 12:47, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

May 2020

Hello Djm-leighpark,

And thank you for your warm welcoming on wikipedia.

I understand your concerns regarding the question of a potential conflict of interest(COI). I hereby assure you that I have no direct link with PragmaDev, despite the fact I had the opportunity to test this product some months ago (as I clearly stated in my contribution). I met the CEO once at a seminar and I did not plan to fake any WP decision making. I just added my own knowledge about this piece of software as requested by the PragmaDev team, I thought it would be helpful.

As explained by --Elmidae in response, it seems I missed the fact that "First the world at large has to take notice, THEN there can be a WP article. It does not work the other way round".

And additionally I know discover that this first contribution may be against the WP rules (WP:Meatpuppetry).

That's it, nothing more to add. I don't know what are the next steps that happens in such a case.Narkoa (talk) 20:42, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Enlightenment DR13

Could we have discussed a little bit before the prompt removal? Text could be improved, I realize "beautiful" is my opinion. but the rest of the text is only a description of the different things on screen. the screenshot is directly native Enlightenment DR13.3 built from source released 1998/02/15

there is no more article showing this work on the internet. We can barely find anything about 14 to 16. The official site restarted the development from scratch at DR17

I think there is historical value adding this information to Wikipedia. I don't know what was version 12 and below, but I would love to hear from anyone who has this information.

can you please edit, or suggest edit instead of simply deleting. I see other people have similar complains on your Talk page.

removal edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Enlightenment_%28software%29&type=revision&diff=957536804&oldid=957529822

— Preceding unsigned comment added by MathieuJobin (talk • contribs) 01:09, 20 May 2020 (UTC)‎

• Content needs to have a verifiable source .... per DB:V; actually the sourcing on the article isn't great and it had to be saved at a WP:AFD which is why it is on my watchlist. Anyway its probably not grumpy me you need to be worried about. If i'd have left what you had there the thing would have probably been tagged Template:Advert or something. Ask at the WP:TEAHOUSE for advice wher you shouldn't get a WP:DONTBITETHENEWBIES. Ideally yes I'd spend time going over things bit by bit but I have resource issues. You have the option of WP:ANI if you consider my behavior unacceptable. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 02:49, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@{u|MathieuJobin}} Well I do note the unsourced and welcome templates do invite you to ask here so I'd better try to do a friendlier answer. Do you have a WP:V source for the content you are seeking to add? Again I'd really suggest going to WP:TEAHOUSE where hopefully helpful editors await; I have a too many balls in the air. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 03:20, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Advertisement for what? a 22 years old version of the WM ? I fetched the release dates for 14 and 15 from archive.org as there are no other trace of it on the internet. This isn't Microsoft Windows. I have the original source code of E13, you want me to ask the author to co-sign my edit?

can we have another opinion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MathieuJobin (talk • contribs) 06:15, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Oh, the E17 screenshot is also from someone's own work, maybe we should remove that too? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlightenment_(software)#/media/File:Shot-2014-12-22_20-47-54.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by MathieuJobin (talk • contribs) 06:26, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

As I have pointed out before if you ask at the WP:TEAHOUSE you will get an independent 2nd opinion. If you wish to continue to place unsigned comments on my page you may do so up to a point. You may even re-add your content to the article and see what happens ... Please review WP:Wikipedia:Signatures, Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. If you feel you are right simply keep editing the article, your right to do so it no different to mine; but beware of Wikipedia:Edit warring. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 07:45, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Some ips

I think some ips do not want it to be as it was on 15 may as most acceptable version please come on to Grand Mufti Of India The cool mew (talk) 20:12, 21 May 2020 (UTC) - Waste of my time.Djm-leighpark (talk) 20:16, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Grand Mufti of India and grand Mufti

There was persistent vandalism at both pages and I have not disturbed you I have just tried to restore the previous. With Pov , there was no such pov there previously so I have removed your tag I am really sorry If I have hurted you ThanksThe cool mew (talk) 20:43, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

You have. I have an in-use present and lost several edits due to edit conflicts with yourself while you wished to impose your viewpoint. That may be correct but I was trying to make a neutral which you have scuppered and delayed having won your edit war, and got your edit count up at the same time. I'd mbe interested to know what accounts you have used previously on WikiPedia if any. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 20:52, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry this was not my intention to disturb you or lessening your edit count. The cool mew (talk) 20:57, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

@The cool mew: My edit count is irrelevant, whereas yours, as you may well know, is; and it has increased very much I note. Congratulations also on winning the edit war on removing the POV notice and having your way on the article.Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:02, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Leaffony River has been accepted

Leaffony River, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Dan arndt (talk) 08:53, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Good catch on copyvio

Yes, Zia ul Mustafa does copy from a source in violation of its license. The source has a Creative Commons license, but it's a non-commercial license, which is incompatible with Wikipedia. —C.Fred (talk) 16:34, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Jamat Raza-e-Mustafa

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Jamat Raza-e-Mustafa requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator.   Kadzi   (talk) 10:43, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

@Dr._Kadzi: I mistakenly created what I intended as the start of a draft in userspace and I've moved it there. Even then it was arguably not WP:A7. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:32, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Akhtar Raza Khan

Assalamualaikum I have seen you just changed the citation for Grand Mufti at the respective article, the citation which you have added is not working thanksSaqib Raza Mustafai (talk) 07:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

If you are referring to [6] the Jstor link to 313161 [7] apears good to me. Anyone can register to get a limited number of jstor views a month (previously 6 but temporarily 100) and I understand it to be one of the better ways of providing access to the resource. The Sfnp harvard referencing is particularly useful for this one as to get down to page level citations. Thanks. Djm-leighpark (talk) 07:25, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Please I am talking about the royal Islamic strategies reference which you have deleted added by ScholarM and put the dead refrence there. Saqib Raza Mustafai (talk) 07:31, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I think I should revert to make you understandSaqib Raza Mustafai (talk) 07:34, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I see [8] as working as it is meant to and clicks through to the same source page. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 07:48, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Hugo Broch

you wrote : stop adding external links of varing degrees of promotionalism. By all means re-introduce sources as citations where appropriate so what exactly do you want me to do ? First quality description from an eyewitness and you dont like that ?Gonzosft (talk) 08:46, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

• Not as an external link. Ideally something from the body in the body as Template:AV Media, maybe a quote or something; or possibly fully cited as an interview ... but the external links section was getting out of hand and you tube is generally not regarded as great. Please ask at WP:TEAHOUSE for advice. (apologies for quick reply but I am in a hurry). (As a youtube link it may aslo be subject to WP:LINKROT ). Thankyou. 09:02, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you

		Thank you for your Diplomacy and Peacemaking
		My sincere thanks for being a peacemaker at ANI. Hopefully, I will have the chance to return your goodwill in the future. Best wishes from Los Angeles,   // Timothy :: talk  11:05, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

A copy of Eastern Rail Services article‎

Hello, I saved you a copy of the article here. I think you should be able to keep the article in your own sandbox and work on it - it is a service to our readers that we do such things. I will give you a day to copy it to your own sandbox. Lightburst (talk) 17:51, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Thankyou but no thanks. There are a number of reasons for this. The first is it does not contain versions of contributions to that article that I consider fundamtental and I cannot study them from that snapshot. While such a snapshot around there is a danger of a WP:CWW does to lack of attribution if it returns to mainspace.Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:07, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

It was so you can dissect and perhaps do over. But carry on and pay me no mind. My aim is always to respect the WP:LOCALCONSENSUS (it is policy). The role of an administrator is to protect content and content creators. So I bristle at the thought of an admin deleting content against consensus and then refusing a content creator's request to draftify. It is not what we are supposed to be about here. Cheers Lightburst (talk) 21:26, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

@Lightburst: From my experience of previous DRV's that nomination of yours should have been thrown out straight away and the result heavily endorsed. I'd far preferred to have works on the closer, who I commend for an excellent summing up, even if it seems like I'm buttering him for him to get the draft. No one presented any of the Rail articles as an RS. If the company had begun visible charter operations or created its plannned maintenance depot the chance may have been better, but as it stands its a little WP:TOOSOON and an organisation that works in directly in the leisure trade might be seen a little easier. I could suggest that notabilty would be aided if there were a naked protest atop the carriages; however that would result in an initial outing before a visit inside, so please don't do that. Or you might persuade a Wikipedia Pilot to fly a banner over the site. Regards, Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:49, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Hawk's Well Theatre

The article Hawk's Well Theatre has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This does not seem to be notable

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contributions) 15:56, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Extended test

Hi, just curious about the "extended test" that you mentioned on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WebGUI (2nd nomination). What is the extended test? Thanks — Toughpigs (talk) 21:41, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

• [[ is extended test in the 88 korny shell, though such things can be highly complex with the old licenses and its easier to have a bash. Real men use C shell, or so I way told in the men of Charlotte vs Paddington wars.Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:15, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft:SAOImage DS9 concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:SAOImage DS9, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:22, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Openenergymonitor concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Openenergymonitor, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:22, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Astronomical Data Query Language concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Astronomical Data Query Language, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:23, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

?

You reverted an update which contained a replacement, newer cited source, claiming that it was uncited; in the process restoring something that was inaccurate and had a cite tag on the Luas article. You clamed that it was a reversion to a stable version (when its actually a reversion to inaccurate, aged data), and that it was 'various' anon IPs when it was just one IP.

I really have to ask whether you read the changes at all.

I have returned it to the updated, cited version --213.146.164.195 (talk) 13:39, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

for reference - you reverted one changeset, by one IP, namely this one. And I deliberately edit anonymously because of an incident with a now banned user many years ago - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Luas&diff=968764840&oldid=967216019 --213.146.164.195 (talk) 13:44, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

and that cn tag was not removed in either edit... --213.146.164.195 (talk) 13:58, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

One was ... you've all day and I haven't Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:00, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Clarifying reason for reversion

Hi Djm-leighpark, thanks for your message on my talk page and for your welcome. You wrote: "Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed." I had thought that what I wrote, which is relatively elementary economic/currency history for Ireland, would not be challenged and, as it wasn't a quotation either, I didn't include a source. Just so that I get off to Wikipedia on the right foot, is it the case that if I'd included a (reputable) source, the material would have been left in? Otherwise, I'm somewhat confused as to the reason for the removal of the content, as it is not controversial. Thanks! Pecheneg860 (talk) 08:42, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

In the totality of your contribution history hitting the articles you are hitting making the edit summary comments you are making and possibly inappropriately using WP:MINOR to skip scrutiny then I am not hanging about. Your views may not be universal. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 08:58, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I joined after spotting a Wikipedia article (on Ireland's GNI* measure) that was very inaccurate but had trouble with one particular contributor so am leaving that as there's enough in life to worry about! Instead, I hope to make contributions to pages on Irish academics, in particular living female academics based in Ireland, and thus I want to learn how best to contribute. I made the edit on Irish economy page as I thought the material was somewhat deficient (for example, the punt was pegged to the pound sterling for most of its existence) but appear to have annoyed you by using the minor flag for an edit that was, to my mind, relatively minor. As I'm new to wikipedia, I appear to have got that wrong and will avoid using the minor flag unless it's correcting a typo, or similar. But I am perhaps more confused now than before about why my contribution was removed! Could I ask again: is it the case that, if I'd included a (reputable) source in relation to Irish currency, the material would have been left in? I appreciate that my views may not be universal but included no views in that edit, only facts. Thanks for your time Pecheneg860 (talk) 10:47, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

New users are generally suggested to ask at WP:TEAHOUSE and to steer clear of controversial subjects. There are official rules for red traffic lights in Dublin and there is the practice of the Dublin Bus and most Dubs — mind you I think I've been in Dublin but once or twice in the last 10 years. Every Wikipedia admin knows it is usually hard to get a coherent answer out of me. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 12:54, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks again for your time and thoughts. Good to know about controversial subjects - to my mind, GNI* is not controversial but clearly some Wiki contributors disagree! I am still completely none the wiser as to what I did wrong in relation to the Irish currency edit, though, which is not the least bit controversial so, having read through everything you've said three times now, I am going to go back and make a related change again to improve the section on currency, this time without flagging it as minor and including sources. (I'll be honest: I've no idea what point you're making in relation to traffic lights!) Best wishes, Pecheneg860 (talk) 13:02, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Help me! - Raising Deletion discussion on protected template

Please help me with... Help me action suggested by WP:TFD. Notice on Marcus Rashford but prevalent elsewhere Template:Soccerbase is designed to provide an external link to website owned by the gambling outfit Racing Post with a significant portion of each page devoted to advertising and encouraging gambling. It is thus not suitable for an external link per WP:ELNO. Protection does not allow me to nominate this template for deletion. This is not the sort of external link that should be encouraged, though the site would be suitable for a citation. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 17:58, 27 July 2020 (UTC) Djm-leighpark (talk) 17:58, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

You're probably better off putting in a template edit request on the template's talkpage. Leaving the help template in-situ to get a second opinion. -- a ^{they/them | argue | contribs} 19:24, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Nominate the template for deletion using the manual process. Instead of tagging the template directly, open an edit request on the talk page. An administrator or template editor will then copy the tag to the template. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 20:49, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Robert Coey for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert Coey 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/Robert Coey until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.   // Timothy :: talk  20:43, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Unbelievably incompetent nomination in my opinion. Nom. claims the sources do not discuss the subject in detail when one source is about the subject and two of his brothers; the subject being the more prominent of the three. Anyway thats just my opinoin and the AfD is going to show it. Either the Nom. or me are down the WP:TROUT farm. Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:03, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

August 2020

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Implied intent to reveal personal information. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Coey. Thank you. Made per your request on the AfD discussion.   // Timothy :: talk  19:01, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Evildense for JEC C bruvs contents.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Evildense for JEC C bruvs contents.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:30, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks bot. On reflection perhaps best not to use the image. Thanks again. Djm-leighpark (talk) 17:32, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Sectigo

@Djm-leighpark: Hi, I saw you have knowledge/ interest in the certificate authority market from the GeoTrust AfD discussion. I am trying to publish an article on Sectigo (former name Comodo CA). Sectigo is now a separate company with the largest market share currently. I think it deserves its own page. There was a previous draft that was rejected (I was not involved with that draft). I have tried to rewrite it and add meaningful facts to it with secondary sources. Is there a way you can take a look at the draft and give me your opinion when you have time? I appreciate any help/ thoughts. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sectigo_(2) PKIhistory (talk) 13:08, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Certificates and expired certificates do my head in. Likely when the asteroid is heading todays the earch the defences won't fire as the certificate has expired. I'm the wrong guy for this but I did glance at it earlier and anything that looks a tad promotional will be pounced upon. And my reading of a feature will be AFC's reading of an advert. Concentrate far more on history than detailing current capabilities. And ensure problems are exposed. Any COI must be properly declared. Thankyou.Bigdelboy (talk) 22:16, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

There were a couple sentences there that I retained from the old draft I think fall into the feature category that I will rework or just remove. Appreciate the quick thoughts. Another editor assisted in that controversy category. Don't worry - a certificate expiration wont destroy the world but it will put up a warning dialog.PKIhistory (talk) 15:32, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Re: EBCDIC Code page transfer to WikiBooks

Hi! My interest is in the information itself, and stems from my professional life. Some of my colleagues have found the information useful, and (under the impression that I know a bit about Wikipedia) asked me what could be done to preserve it in an accessible form. I understand that they have since scraped the relevant pages as PDFs and put them on a company server. That meets their requirements. I have no wish to take the matter further; I feel happier applying my Wikipedia effort in other areas. Best wishes. Philip Trueman (talk) 15:13, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Fair enough — hopefully with proper attribution! If I drank they'd be owing me a pint for keeping them up for 30/45 days more! If its EBCDIC only their interested in then fair enough, if its other code pages as well they could be gone inside two weeks depending which way things go so they'd better go scraping the barrel. Best regards and thanks for getting back. Djm-leighpark (talk) 15:26, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

EBCDIC transwiki to WikiBooks problems

I don't know if I know how to take the matter further, but there are a couple of problems. The decimal and hexadecimal values do not show in the pages. The Control Code link template is also missing. See here, for example. I think you should ping other users who were active in the deletion discussion. Alexlatham96 (talk) 00:55, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, its pretty unclear to me if I will continue with the project given discussions on the the Closer's talk page but that said I may assist individual transfer requests of non code page pages. Pingig others in the deletion discussion is probably the last think I fancy doing at the moment. Just remember I'm top man at WP:ANI currently and some bot just blew away [9] so I'm pretty grumpy.

On the other hand to help you on this use case please specifically identify the missing template in the form [[:w:Template:''templatename'']]. Its possibly best to do this on a new section on B:WB:Requests for import and ping Bigdeboy (and me if that doesn't work) to assist from there. Someone else may pick it up first also. Once its transwikified anyone can more it into place. Its also the case that that if someone else has got a template organised for across then Bigdelboy can't delete all the templates which Bigdelboy can and may do if they are the only Template transwikifier and installer. Grumpy hint.

Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 01:15, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Alexlatham96: Bigdelboy's installed B:Template:Control code link to wake hisself up but its a pigs ear of stuff so likely won't be running it. Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:41, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Over-promotion of mediocre private schools

Thanks for taking the lead on this. WP:PUFFERY A common problem in the private sector- XXXX Grammar School is a top school because its prep department once made the top hundred in a KeyStage 2 SAT in 2004. Question sample size and check where it came in 2019. Always question double references- I don't have Hewitt so it is probable legit- but is this a reference to the school- or the supposed fact? The other reference appears to be a trade journal- promotional so not RS. In Rochester we are not impressed by schools founded after the Norman Conquest! Keep smiling. --ClemRutter (talk) 21:57, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@ClemRutter: I've seen the Hewitt 2013 book about somewhere ... in fact its in my Local Leigh Park library so I might be able to check it on Thursday (but what my RL is on thursday). slight issue is I have a lost Hants library Card. If I seem to have lost progress on this give me a ping in a couple of weeks. I will say to my personal judgement neither Pompey Grammar nor Pompey High would probably be regarded as "mediocore" so while it may be important to eliminate puffery it is also important to to defame institutions. Overall I'd prefer to use static facts that don't require manual updates every one or two years. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:45, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@ClemRutter: I regained my library access today and have borrows a copy of Hewitt. It is a small ook, maybe 15cm x 10cm, pages 198 to 201 covering centres of learning. Page 200 and half of 201 covers PGS; confirms the founding date of 1732 (but not the first in Portsmouth though it probably was). PGS is described therein as "It has gone on to become one of the top public schools in the UK". (As Hewitt book as about Pompey that may be a tad appreciative. That said as far as I can tell PGS is in the top 100 of 100/1500/2500 independent schools so probably 10%. SJC is given one paragraph, albeit not out of date as bruvvers have left; I think all other secondary schools are listed and the list may be citable citable (though not if they are independent). Hewitt covers John Pounds in pp. 65-67 which probably should be in the education section. St. Luke's coverage is currently undue; but there has been a move to academies from state schools. I might have a go at a re-jig of the section at some point to try to get a sweeter flow. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:10, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Please take action against insane 1234

That guy insane 1234 is causing lot of problems. I also noticed he is abusing other users. He again created the article with another name. Such people are creating a lot of mess for people like me who just want to create the article in a good way Shahoodu (talk) 03:49, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

I am the person who actually made further improvements in the Kerala Blasters article so it might get GA status. But users like insane is making continuos disruptive edits that makes me frustrated. Please take action against him and can you request it to be extended user confirm protected until its review process for GA has been completed. His action will also affect the DRV for the Manjappada article Shahoodu (talk) 04:08, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@Shahoodu: I'm not an admin and I don't care for people egging me on to get other people blocked. It makes me take a look at their history. Can you please confirm you have not edited under other usernames as you appear to have emerged in May 2020 at the same time as a couple of other editors ceased to edit. If you have used multiple you would be best advised to declare it now and promise not to use multiple accounts inappropriately without declaration in future. I'd be a shame if an editor capable for understanding sources a little go blocked. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:49, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

I can confirm after using my account named Shahoodu, I have not used any other accounts. I have read the guidelines against socketpuppetry and I know that I will get blocked if Im doing so.So Im being aware. Believe me its just a coincidence I emerged in May 2020.It doesnt mean I am using multiple accounts. Users that got blocked at that time might be using other accounts and I dont have anything with that. Again Im saying its just a coincidence. My main target is Kerala Blasters which I support and other Indian football related pages on which I m trying my best to do so. I reported the user Insane beacuse his action action might cause some negative impact on the discussion at DRV. Since you were the one who opened the discussion, I just wanted to show you this problem. I am still trying to learn more wiki guidelines so that I can improve myself Shahoodu (talk) 05:29, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Thankyou, I believe I understand fully your response. Also you would generally be advised not to follow my example in discussions or be prepared to spend your life defending yourself at ANI. - Djm-leighpark (talk) 08:49, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

One more thing I would like to say here is that your last comments at DRV were actually the points that I also wanted to say. But I didn't know to bring the guidelines there. Thankyou Shahoodu (talk) 05:37, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Saw your reply to the closing admin

I believe the admin might not have read it carefully. It was really disappointing and Im frustrated. Is there any way to reopen the discussion Shahoodu (talk) 09:32, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

• Not unless a material fact comes to light. (e.g. a new cast iron WP:RS that hasn't been considered before). And its probably not the way the to go. I'm currently tied up in rela life (RL) due to a familiy event in a couple of days time or I'd really like to try to help. The key thing is not to do anything stupid and stay calm. In my opinion The more successful way to get something back into mainspace is not to go for it immediately but let the dust settle for a few weeks before trying again and showing good faith by addressing the points at the discussion. Going down the splitout route is one option but I have a couple of techniques which can help in such a senario .. but they won't work if the ground gets mucked up first. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 10:09, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for that consideration. That's perfectly fine to contact me then. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 13:56, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Thankyou for your advice. I just wanted to make sure nothing unfair is happening here in Wikipedia. You were the first person here actually tried to sott this thing correctly.Have the the time with family. And after that I hope you will suggest a way to solve this issue as this is affecting a whole community (Manjappada fan club). So if I contact you after some days at your tak page will it be a problem for you? Shahoodu (talk) 13:36, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

About the template u added in Kerala Blasters Article

Is there any problem expanding article ? I had mailed shahoodu and as a part of expanding the article he gave me permission to use it.WhiteFalcon1 (talk) 12:52, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

No problem expanding the article. There is ALWAYS a problem when A says to B that C authorised me to do something. There is not a problem when C says to A that B is authorised to do something C has the right to authorise. Actually by simply adding the #(original) content to Wikipedia sSahoodu has already made the authorisation that it can be reused by an appropriate CC-BY-SA license ... This simply means it is necessary to give the attribution in the prescribed manner given by the template links. I'd help more but I am too tied up. Ask at the teahouse of advice ... its likely a one liner I can sort myself next week but until it is the template is best left. I'd strongly advise not publishing the email as that risks WP:OUTING personal information. In fact dealing in off wiki emails is not good practice as some might suspect WP:MEATPUPPETRY is occurring; though here I AGF it is not a problem. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 13:45, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

civilty

wp:npa only applies to how we treat each other, not how we treat non members. wp:blp means I cannot make accusations against anyone, it does not mean I cannot say insult someone. Thus I can call Lundy A know nothing amateur, I cannot say he tells lies.Slatersteven (talk) 10:25, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

It is more worthwhile dealing with manure than some other things. That is a matter one may consider going to bed at night, and a matter to be considered in the morning. It is helpful for growth. Djm-leighpark (talk) 10:40, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

What?Slatersteven (talk) 10:50, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

This [[10]] hoever does fail wp:npa, this is your last warning as you are fully aware of out civility polices, comment on content not users.Slatersteven (talk) 11:17, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Ignoring warning. If an admin is permitted to say the things they say to me then this place is completely beserk anyway! Djm-leighpark (talk) 11:32, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Your choice, next time I report you.Slatersteven (talk) 11:37, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

I can feel myself being goaded and goaded round the gonads. Luvely! Djm-leighpark (talk) 12:03, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Requested move

Hello. I took care of your request at WP:RM/TR, but just wanted you to know, in case you don't already, that you should be able to do these kinds of moves yourself. As long as there is not more than one edit at the redirect that points back to the article to be moved, any autoconfirmed editor should be able to move that article over the redirect. Station1 (talk) 00:02, 21 October 2020 (UTC) @Station1: It seemed to come up with an issue when I tried it (but I may have been mistaken).... but probably better it was actioned through a third party anyway. Thanks. Djm-leighpark (talk) 00:46, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

A template to link to other templates

I've forgotten the colon for template links at times, too. There's a template to make links to other templates, complete with curly brackets: {{tl}}; {{template link}} works as well, and may be easier to remember. Cheers, BlackcurrantTea (talk) 19:02, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks BlackcurrantTea. I'm sure I've seen that 'tl' several times before and am aware of its existance though not its name, though it is not a nmenonic that tickles my brain synapses like a George 3 command like 'cu' might. "Dah Dit Dah Dit Dit" might work for me though. Best Regards Djm-leighpark (talk) 19:42, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Morse would be proud to see his work is still put to good use. Happy editing! BlackcurrantTea (talk) 11:14, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Morse won't be proud when more code pages get nom'd for AfD by Bigdelboy; as might happen to be consistent with other precedents. My father once nearly got put on charge intercepting Wabun code from A to B when he'd taken the same message down 3 time and had thrown or broken his pencil or something after B had asked for the thing to be sent 3 times because B to get it properly. Anyway Wabun Code table needs to go at one point per other precedents! Djm-leighpark (talk) 12:35, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

October 2020

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Stop Funding Fake News. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. If you can, add references that support the claims. Do not restore references that provide no support. Yappy2bhere (talk) 22:22, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I am attempting to recover the usurped url you disruptively removed rather than recovered. The is a delay as IABOT is hanging for me at the moment. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:33, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Please note there will be a delay while I try to get IAbot to work. The link at User:InternetArchiveBot to the management interface at [11] seems broekn/down//hung ... Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:08, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Stop Funding Fake News, you may be blocked from editing. Yappy2bhere (talk) 23:17, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

@Yappy2bhere: I am trying to recover the source. It is yourself who is perhaps being disruptive.Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:30, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

About CWW

Hello Djm-leighpark I have removed tag After I added Copied template in the Manjappada article talk page.Thanks WhiteFalcon1 (talk) 06:32, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:53, 24 November 2020 (UTC)