User talk:Jarhed/Archive 4
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Jarhed. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:19, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Nomination of John Smelcer for deletion
[[
File:Ambox warning orange.svg|42px|alt=|link=]]A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Smelcer 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/John Smelcer until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:32, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Bologna
Hello, Jarhed. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette assistance regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. P.S. This is in response to your comment in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Bologna. I don't know if it's common for an editor to "police a deletion discussion", but I was left with no choice. ScottyBerg removed my "friendly notice" from his talk page and dumped a few more disruptive comments right after that. Thanks for looking into it. --Fayerman (talk) 23:25, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Gilgamesh in the Outback BLP Noticeboard
Left you some more background information. We really need help from a unbiased editor.98.218.161.68 (talk) 04:11, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
User removing the resolved tag
A user removed the Resolved tag you added, along with another tag. Will you restore these tags and explain to the user (User:Violet Fae) that this discussion is indeed resolved? I also commented there about it.[1] 119.167.225.1 (talk) 00:40, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- There's also this, showing another editor agreeing that the matter is resolved and me thanking him for that. 119.167.225.1 (talk) 00:53, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks
Hey, thanks...that's what I was talking about with the "bibiliography section", I do that on most of my articles. See this one I'm working on: John C. Colt. I was pulled into Moore as I'm coordinator of the firearms project, that was associated with it for some reason. I only had a few gripes there. One, it stated Moore was a "lifelong member", he wasn't. He got a Life Membership after Columbine for other reasons...that has since been cleaned up. The other, involving the cites was his "wanting to be a priest and joining seminary" and it was worded to sound as if he changed his mind the day before ordination. The fact was he dropped out of High School Prep Seminary after a year. The sourcing on that piece is all over the place, but I was being called on the carpet for using a Harvard cite. No biggie, just some time wasted. Thanks again, Jarhed!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 23:07, 6 October 2011 (UTC) PS did you serve? If so "Ooh-Rah!", if not...Oh Well. :) --Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 23:07, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
Consensus of the Heroes in Hell Merge - Did it include all of the Books and Stories?
According to my memory during the Lawyers in Hell AfD discussion about merging the Heroes in Hell articles into one large article, it was decided ALL the articles were to be merged. No mention was made of leaving any of the articles separate.
When I went to merge the one remaining article, one editor got really upset saying that the merge discussion did not include this article, Gilgamesh in the Outback. I believe that the consensus was for all articles. The admin who is currently handling the dispute was not involved at the time, and needs to see a show of hands. If you have any opinion on the issue could you please make your opinion known at Talk:Gilgamesh in the Outback. UrbanTerrorist (talk) 16:19, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Iran Contra Scandal
Hello, I was the translator for the Nicaraguan Contra (ARDE,FDN,RN,UNO,& others)in Costa Rica for several years and especially during the years preceding and during the Iran Contra Scandal. I have a lot of information and even documents that I have never published concerning the drug-trafficking that they were participating in during that time. I would like to hear your advice about how to present this information and maybe scanned documents, on Wikipedia. I still have original documents from the Contra, including signed notes from the Nicaraguan pilots who were being trained by the CIA to fly cocaine to the US in the mid-80's. Please reply to me at: <address redacted>@yahoo.com WHL — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.15.0.216 (talk) 19:45, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Dispute resolution survey
 Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Jarhed. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click HERE to participate. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 22:52, 5 April 2012 (UTC) |
Discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Hatnote#Trivial_hatnote_links
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Hatnote#Trivial_hatnote_links. KarlB (talk) 18:57, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Help with Wiki-Bullies; your opinion would be greatly appreciated!
Hello, I am fighting to try to establish a fair and accurate page for Steven Crowder who is an avid supporter of Americans for Prosperity, but feel I am being Wiki-bullied by editors who have a personal dislike for him and want to include libelous/POV comments about him. I would appreciate anyone taking a look since we've reached a deadlock and the Wikiguide suggests having a 3rd party look at it to try to find a resolution. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! JohnKAndersen (talk) 06:22, 27 February 2013 (UTC)JohnKAndersen
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Jarhed. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Jarhed. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
| Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 |