Speedy deletion nomination of T-280 Space Construction Vehicle
Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.
On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was
true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to
false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer have them marked as minor by default.
Hey, you may want to read wp:SPOILER. Basically the decision was made long ago not to include spoiler tags in wikipedia. It is afterall no more than logical that wikipedia contains spoilers, we are an encyclopedia. Yoenit (talk) 06:42, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- Well that is a stupid decision which should be reversed. People may wish to explore creative material without running the risk of being spoiled. Otherwise there are potentially millions of items which you can't read in "safety" unless you are already 100% conversant with the topic. I was just spoiled on something I where I didn't want to be. And being an encyclopedia has nothing to do with it - nowhere is it defined that an encyclopedia has to be written by jerks who don't care about others. --IceHunter (talk) 12:51, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- Btw, if you YOU read the discussion on wp:SPOILER you can see most want it back - probably yet another example of hysterical minority just pushing through what they want. --IceHunter (talk) 13:08, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- If you can think of specific reasons why that particular spoiler should not be on River Song (Doctor Who), please respond. I am arguing against putting River= Melody in the Lead section. I think Distress is a good argument, but arguments from policies would be useful if you can come up with any.Abigailgem (talk) 12:29, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
A cheeseburger for you!
|Yum! IceHunter (talk) 04:30, 4 November 2011 (UTC)|
A kitten for you!
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)