If you need editing help, visit Wikipedia:How does one edit a page. For format questions, visit our manual of style. You can use the Show preview button before you save, to make sure your edits do what you intended.
You can sign your name on talk pages by using " ~~~ " for your username and " ~~~~ " for your username and a timestamp.
Happy editing, Isomorphic 22:33, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- 1 World Trade Organization accession and membership
- 2 Speedy deletion nomination of Caffarel
- 3 Disambiguation link notification for April 20
- 4 Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!
- 5 Disambiguation link notification for April 30
- 6 Article notability notification
- 7 Bilderberg
- 8 Disambiguation link notification for June 10
- 9 Merge discussion for Discount window
- 10 Seymour Hersh addition on Enhanced Int.
- 11 ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi. You are right that WTO accession needs to be ratified in time by each new entrant. I reverted your edit only because (a) the article already states (above) that "Vanuatu, Russia, Montenegro and Samoa have been admitted, bringing the number of members to 157, subject to those countries' ratification"; and (b) the WTO in its own records lists members at the date of accession, not of formal ratification. If, in the unlikely event that an accepted member failed to ratify, it would be necessary for them to be removed from our list. I hope that you will consider signing on and helping us beef up our little trade project group at the Participants list Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 02:12, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Caffarel
A tag has been placed on Caffarel requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. 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 that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Wkharrisjr (talk) 16:07, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Herman William Quinton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Newfoundland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Royal Academy summer exhibition, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Article notability notification
Hello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote, Siberian Business Union, has been recently tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be merged, redirected, or deleted. Please consider adding reliable, secondary sources to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources: . Thank you for editing Wikipedia! VoxelBot 22:49, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your good work on the 2013 Bilderberg Conference today. I'm expecting it to get busy over the weekend, so feel free to put it on your watchlist! Gareth E Kegg (talk) 20:50, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Peter Clyne, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tenant (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Merge discussion for Discount window
An article that you have been involved in editing, Discount window, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. greenrd (talk) 17:27, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Seymour Hersh addition on Enhanced Int.
Hi Horatio. I wanted to explain reverting a good faith footnoted edit citing Hersh. He was once a great reporter, and we all admire him for his work in the 1970's at the New Yorker. But in advanced age he seems to have let imagination run ahead of his reporting. We had to delete an inflammatory Hersh claim from Enhanced Interrogation already, when it turned out Hersh was just making it up-- and admitted he was just making it up. That discussion is here. So now we have another inflammatory Hersh claim printed in the London Review of Book to tout his new book coming out, that nobody--not one other source--has corroborated. In fact everybody denies key elements, like the notion that the Pakistanis knew where Bin Laden was. Everybody agrees the Pakistanis were furious we did not let them in on what we suspected, acted without informing them (we did so becuase we did not trust them not to tip him off). So. Normally a statement with a footnote would be left in, but a statement from a once great reporter who the evidence suggests may well be losing his self-control, needs corroboration.ElijahBosley (talk ☞) 20:46, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
- He made the claims, and had them published in a recognised source, and they have been widely reported on, so I see no reason not to mention it. It would be better to leave it there and perhaps add that the claims had denied by <whoever>. Horatio (talk) 03:09, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
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) 22:15, 30 November 2015 (UTC)