User talk:Mr. Magoo and McBarker

Nomination of Climate Action Plan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Climate Action Plan 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/Climate Action Plan until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. J^♯m (talk | contribs) 16:10, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Since you contributed to the discussion over at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Climate action, I wanted to ping you and let you know that your input would be valued. I am posting this notice on the talk page for every editor who has contributed to that discussion and the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avoiding dangerous climate change, regardless of their vote or apparent viewpoint. 16:16, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Primarily

Magoo, 'primarily' refers to how often it's reported on. That is, the overwhelming number of mentions are about the pejorative usage. That doesn't necessarily mean that's the primary way the word is used. It just means that it's what's reported on. valereee (talk) 19:11, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

• Sorry, but what exactly do you mean? You've lost me. I don't think our sources even mention the word pejorative. What mentions? We have mentions of neither primarily nor pejorative, really. I think in the past I saw a third source for derogatory. --Mr. Magoo (talk) 19:14, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Magoo, what I mean is that while there's at least an OR argument to be made that most of the time when the term "politically correct" pops up in news articles, it's referring to the pejorative or derogatory usage of the word. BUT, that doesn't mean that the word isn't used in other ways just as commonly. It just means that when it's used in other ways, no one is bothering to comment on it. Kind of like no one would comment on 'blue' referring to the color of the sky. It doesn't mean the sky isn't blue; it just means no one feels the need to point it out.

Re: pejorative vs. derogatory -- they're synonyms. http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/pejorative

valereee (talk) 19:20, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

• Can you pinpoint an article where it's used specifically as a pejorative towards somebody and not as a general criticism of some sort of restriction? Because the first article Google gave me was Kareem-Abdul Jabbar defending political correctness. I think it can get very vague. And at the talk page we've been down the synonym road before. I've used your argument. It doesn't work. It apparently has to be the exact word. --Mr. Magoo (talk) 19:26, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

No, it doesn't have the be the exact word. If anyone is telling you that, they're wrong, but I suspect a simple miscommunication. Wikipedia editors are encouraged to paraphrase, as trying to use the exact words often results in copyvio; a bigger problem is too-close paraphrasing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraphrasing_of_copyrighted_material If a word is a close synonym without alternate definitions or connotations that could be confusing as to meaning, it's fine.valereee (talk) 19:42, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Butting in, only to say that no article exists on 'derogatory', therefore, if used, it would probably wiki-link to pejorative anyhow. For wholly trivial reasons (more used in UK and therefore I don't mis-spell it so often), I prefer 'derogatory'. Pincrete (talk) 21:43, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Page China Business Network Weekly is finally removed. What a headache it was! Prof TPMS (talk) 15:43, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Narayani Zone

added links pointing to Bharatpur, Narayangarh, Alau, Jitpur and Rapti River

Surunga

added links pointing to Sarki, Rai, Ilam, Dharan and Magar

Mahakali Zone

added links pointing to Patan, Kanchanpur, Rajghat and Byans

Eastern Development Region, Nepal

added links pointing to Himalayan, Bhojpur and Likhu

Western Development Region, Nepal

added links pointing to Himalayan and Damodar

Far-Western Development Region, Nepal

added a link pointing to Himalayan

Janakpur Zone

added a link pointing to Matihani

Kosi Zone

added a link pointing to Tamar

Mid-Western Development Region, Nepal

added a link pointing to Rapti River

Sagarmatha Zone

added a link pointing to Salleri

Vz. 58

added a link pointing to M16A2

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:17, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Your post to my talk about DRN

Your post to my talk page is, in my opinion, neither civil nor constructive, and this reply is, among other things, a warning about incivility. However, I will try to address it civilly and constructively. You wrote: “You effectively killed a good article, along with Sandstein (AfD is typically one of the most effective cogs of Wikipedia, getting results in a week). It isn’t clear whether you mean Avoiding dangerous climate change or Climate change mitigation or something else. If you disagree with User:Sandstein’s close of the AFD as No Consensus, and you want his close changed, the place to request review is Deletion Review. If you disagree with my conclusion that DRN is not an appropriate venue to review an AFD, discuss at the dispute resolution talk page. You refer to someone as "the changer", and say that they are the only person at the talk page. It isn’t clear who you mean by "the changer". It also isn’t clear why you won’t try to discuss at the talk page. If you disagree with the close of the AFD, take it to DRV (which is not the same as DRN). If you want to discuss with the changer or anyone else, discuss on the talk page. If you merely want to complain, do it somewhere other than on my talk page. If you want advice about something else having to do with Wikipedia, visit the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:46, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

• I think that line's more "uncouth" (a synonym), but I have to point out I didn't write that you did anything wrong. It describes why before and in that coarse line specifies "effectively". The language is indeed uncouth and I'm working on that aspect of me at the moment. I think it wouldn't have been seen as uncivil if I had just switched the word "killed" to something tame, safe for children? The reaction the last signpost got for using a single curse was similarly bewildering... I've got to get used to different people from different cultures. Lastly I want to point out that instead of responding there you came here to do what I did there, complain... --Mr. Magoo (talk) 04:00, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Sources for "Bear versus bull" (Biology)

Leo1pard (talk) 16:36, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

References

Deletion review for Whirling

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Whirling. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Viapastrengo (talk) 01:40, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

A pie for you!

3.141592 Xx Cool Guy7202 xX (talk) 20:10, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	Thanks keep em coming Xx Cool Guy7202 xX (talk) 20:11, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tiyamiyu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yoruba. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:46, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

What happened?

So I guess you decided to ignore me as well when you couldn't answer the questions I asked? (137.147.132.247 (talk) 11:57, 17 May 2016 (UTC))

Hello, Mr. Magoo and McBarker. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Tiyamiyu (talk)Tiyamiyu

So you decided to ignore me

So you decided to ignore me after I started asking questions @Mr. Magoo and McBarker:, I even asked you "what happened?" back in May as can be seen above. Let me give you some advice, look in the mirror and re-evaluate yourself before pointing fingers at others. You had no right to attack me based on my previous edits which had nothing to do with the issue that was present, I could have reported you if I really wanted to. Clean up your backyard before directing others, you're the one at fault here as can be seen clearly by the way you ignored the ongoing discussion. (110.148.160.218 (talk) 07:06, 25 June 2016 (UTC))

Are you talking about the Korean Wave article? --Mr. Magoo (talk) 14:22, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes I am talking about the Korean Wave article. I only posted this because you never answered the questions I asked you when you were barraging me. (121.214.170.206 (talk) 10:44, 29 June 2016 (UTC))

A cupcake for you!

This is just to say thanks since I've only just read the messages that came out of the Korean Wave talk page discussion. I feel a bit responsible for that, so I'm sorry, but thanks for stepping in and helping me with the article- I appreciate it! Yannaynay (talk) 16:46, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

@Yannaynay: you had nothing to do with it so it's okay, you shouldn't need to apologize. I only took offense at them when they started using my previous edits to bring me down, the discussion should have ended when I fixed the introduction on the back of the instructions Mr. Magoo and McBarker presented. Instead, they decided to vilify me for an unclear reason and you will be able to see that they have failed to answer my questions as to why they were doing that to me. Yannaynay, they were not the victim here, they acted in a way that is considered bullying so there was no need to apologize. (110.149.113.150 (talk) 04:21, 27 July 2016 (UTC))

• I were on holiday for a while, but I'm back now.

The thing is, that when I wrote you have a history of accusing editors of "targeting" you, the plural was a figure of speech and I only knew of one in addition to me.

But then you responded and funnily enough came clean that you've been leaving messages to multiple editors other than me and that they've all began ignoring you. At that point I realized there is no end to this and decided to call it quits. It's better to heed their example.

I hope you now understand where I'm coming from. Our discussion there happened two months (and a half) ago. We haven't interacted between then and now. Let's just walk our separate paths. I wisp into the night, poof. --Mr. Magoo (talk) 11:14, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

You've misinterpreted the information, there was only one user that ignored me and the only reason I can think of is that they knew the information was factually incorrect and it had to be changed whether they wanted to or not. I never said that I had "been leaving messages to multiple editors" other than yourself, it was only one user. Since you misinterpreted the information I do not know where you are coming from especially since you said that I was "the boy who cried wolf", you claimed to "decipher" my ethnic heritage, you never answered my questions, claimed I was editing pages in a "feverous" manner and continued to find fault with me long after the issue had been solved. Like I said, it could have ended after I followed your instructions and that's what any responsible user would have done, but you weren't ready to let it go. You should have let it go, that's what you should have done and none of this would have ever happened. (110.149.113.150 (talk) 11:36, 27 July 2016 (UTC))

• I'm sorry, but you did write, and I quote: "I initially left "talkback" notifications and nicely told them that they have a reply waiting for them to read but they ignored me." I also apologize for the time when I wrote there had been "feverous" edits made by the IPs to other articles concerning South Asia. I were wrong to have called the IPs' edits feverous. They obviously weren't. Are you happy now? --Mr. Magoo (talk) 11:48, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

• Yes, but I only posted those "talkback" notifications on one user's page. I never had any problems with any other user except that one, so I don't know how you thought that I had problems with multiple users. When I was reading your reply I thought you were genuine and I was ready to leave on a positive note and clear the slate, but it looks like you aren't and I don't expect you to be since you continued to drag on long after the problem was solved. (121.219.96.169 (talk) 04:56, 28 July 2016 (UTC))

• Ok. Are you happy now? What is it you want from me? --Mr. Magoo (talk) 07:27, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

• I made it pretty clear two months ago, I wanted you to answer my questions but you still haven't to this day. You seem quite annoyed when in reality you shouldn't because after all you were the one who dragged this on. Let's end this here, hopefully our next encounter if it happens will not be like this, otherwise happy editing. (121.214.32.76 (talk) 10:15, 28 July 2016 (UTC))

Disambiguation link notification for August 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited San Francisco Pro Invitational, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page San Jose. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:28, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Eron Gjoni

Although I have to say I think it's a bit myopic to assess the draft or article entirely on the basis of how much it quotes Gjoni, I think you should take a second look at the draft. Whereas the mainspace article makes disparaging allegations about Gjoni, that might require allowing Gjoni a response, the draft simply does not make these allegations in the first place. Furthermore, the draft describes Gjoni's legal challenge, which is not mentioned in the mainspace article at all. Finally, I added a source for Gjoni's statement that he did not intend for harassment to occur. That is a somewhat self-serving statement, which Heat Street does not challenge him at all about. The existing Mary Sue source however does quote him on this, and with a degree of secondary skepticism and analysis that makes it more usable. Rhoark (talk) 14:49, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Jatland

FYI, we have/had an edit filter in place for the jatland wiki that you have mentioned at three or more AfDs recently (eg: here). It is useless, as are the sources that it cites. It probably would be better if you didn't keep referring to it as it just wastes everyone's time having to re-argue the points. We do not use mirrors, nor British Raj sources, nor sources affiliated with castes ... and so on. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 23:06, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Arnold Sports Festival, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Strongman. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:29, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Home page, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Browser. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:31, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Grace VanderWaal

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. A tag has been placed on Grace VanderWaal, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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 removed 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. John from Idegon (talk) 04:58, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

C'mon, Mr. Magoo! (boy oh boy, that's something I would have never thought I'd have occasion to type.) Just two days ago, the community decided the proper thing to do with this article was delete it. I too have a feeling she'll probably win, at which point there will be very little objection to a bio of her. But, no deadline. .... John from Idegon (talk) 05:03, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

That concerned the stub article. Now I'm just redirecting. Later in the AfD a redirect to the competition was suggested, which I thought was the optimal solution but didn't have time to comment on. I don't think anyone would oppose a redirect to the competition she's WP:BLP1E for? I mean there was handidly more than enough sources covering her, but the problem was found to especially be WP:BLP1E. Mr. Magoo (talk) 07:38, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Mr. Magoo and McBarker. 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)

Rozen Maiden Straw Vote

Hi. Thank you for your input at the AFD. If possible, could you drop by for a straw vote to determine if the article should be redirected (linked here)? Thanks. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 08:17, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

August 2017

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Mansplaining. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:32, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Some help

Are you still interested in the Political Correctness article? I know you are an expert on the subject and we could sure use some help. 2600:1012:B05B:3B7D:BD23:CE00:BCD2:9981 (talk) 20:44, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Mr Magoo and McBarker you are two races individual that's out to destroy Mr Grahams Credibility. You two individuals need to get life and stop the races discrimination of others — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrtego (talk • contribs) 16:57, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Trevor Graham

Mr Magoo and McBarker you are two races individual that's out to destroy Mr Grahams Credibility. You two individuals need to get a life and stop the races discrimination of others — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrtego (talk • contribs) 17:05, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Ok Lets do it. When would you like to start?Mrtego (talk) 22:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Trevor Graham's talk page is the best place for talking about additions in that article. Since we're interested in dealing with your suggestions, you should put forth very small paragraphs or just sentences and try to look for sources to support them. If you find statements clearly supported by a source you could just edit it straight in. But the key is short and compact sentences, for sourcing them is easiest. I'll start a section you can suggest things in. You can use Blockquote element for suggestions you'd like to add. Mr. Magoo (talk) 19:01, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

WP:AGF

This is the final straw for me. If you continue to make baseless accusations of harassment, baselessly accuse other editors of trolling & disruption, and baselessly accuse other editors of being part of an imaginary WP:CABAL that's out to get you, I will be posting that diff and a lot more at ANI or AE. Consider this your final warning. Fyddlestix (talk) 05:34, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

I ask you how you found your way to the article. You come here to accuse of accusations but still don't answer. If that is ANI-worthy in your opinion then go ahead, make yourself look silly by taking it there. Mr. Magoo (talk) 05:39, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Mind you, I now visited your talk page and you post stuff like this to other editors on your own talk page: "Go nuts, you're an embarrassment to the project". It was concerning some white nationalist but nonetheless. Mr. Magoo (talk) 05:59, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Mr. Magoo and McBarker. 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)

Input needed

I noticed you have been one of the primary contributors to the political correctness article. As you may or may not be aware, the entry is in poor shape. I was wondering if you would be willing to stop by and give a "fresh set of eyes" to the current state of affairs. While there have been some (civil) disagreeements, everyone agrees that the article is in dire need of improvement. Thanj you kindly in advance. Starcader (talk) 04:57, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Close paraphrasing

Regarding this, you also need to keep WP:Close paraphrasing in mind. With this and this, I further tweaked the content. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 10:15, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Trevor Graham

How can we work together to make the right correction to Trevor Graham page. The information on the page is one sided and very in accurate. Mrtego (talk) 18:18, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Just post your suggestions to the talk page of that article. Your last edit messed up the lead and you didn't really use any sources for the statements you added. We can go through it line by line on the talk page. Mr. Magoo (talk) 10:57, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Talk:List of killed hip hop musicians

Hi there. Regarding this comment, I see the article was renamed again by User:Soetermans. I really liked the "murdered" title. Was there a consensus someplace to call it "murdered"? If so, I think the title should be changed back. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:37, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Magnolia677:,

I'm not too familiar with laws and justice, but I think using "murdered" here is misleading, or at least too narrow. Homicide is the act of killing another human being, but murder is intended. Going through the list, not every article makes it clear what their demise was.

• The suspect in Paul C's killing was released because of lack of evidence
• No conviction in the case of Danny Rodriguez
• Seagram's death is unresolved
• Fat Pat's death is unresolved
• Flabba suffered a fatal stabwound

This might also be that murder in U.S. law has something as "second degree murder". For instance, in England and Wales, there's "murder" and "unlawful killing". In the Netherlands, "moord" ("murder") is intentional and premeditated. Murder is killing, but killing isn't necessarily murder. "Killed" does cover all deaths in these cases. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 16:45, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

@Soetermans: The renaming to "List of murdered hip hop musicians" was done by consensus, with the discussion closed by User:GeoffreyT2000. For this reason, your renaming of the article should have been discussed first, per WP:RMCM. Are you willing to revert your edit? Then, you are welcome to edit the article as you have discussed above. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:19, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Good morning @Magnolia677:,

My apologies, I wasn't aware of those discussions. I edit mostly on my phone nowadays, and I tried undoing my move, but I just crashed Chrome trying to revert it. Could you please do so? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 06:32, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

@Soetermans: No problem. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:08, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Mr. Magoo and McBarker. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

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

WP:MEDRS

A primary source from 1978 is not suitable to say much on Wikipedia.[1]

Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:37, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

The article uses numerous primary sources, and one from 1987. But it doesn't matter, I'll use another source. Mr. Magoo (talk) 18:57, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

What primary source is it currently using for a medical claim? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:26, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Ipratropium nasal spray? Mr. Magoo (talk) 19:35, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Trevor Graham

Here we go again you racist bastard. I am Trevor Graham stop making me out to be someone that I am notMrtego (talk) 22:20, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

It isn't just me... You can't just edit your own Wikipedia page to say whatever you want. That's only logical, right? Mr. Magoo (talk) 11:45, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lalli, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Swedish Crusades (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:06, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The logo of Video System.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The logo of Video System.png. 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) 17:58, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:17, 19 November 2019 (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) 02:46, 24 November 2020 (UTC)